ASC Minutes 01-29-16 Page
1
Academic Standards Committee
Policy Subcommittee Meeting
01-29-2016
Minutes
In attendance: Jo Crane, Alyce DeMarais, Suzanne Holland, Elizabeth King, Tanya
Stambuk, Brad Tomhave
Visitor: Ben Tucker
Chair Suzanne Holland called the meeting to order at 2:02 PM.
1. M/S/P (Crane/Holland) approval of minutes from 12-07-15 policy subcommittee
meeting; with the addition of the petitions report from Brad Tomhave.
2. Brad presented the Dec. 3 – Jan. 15 petitions report that included the sanctions for
the Fall 2015 semester (Appendix I). We briefly discussed ASC membership for
spring, confirming that the policy and petition subcommittee membership will
continue as is for the remainder of the 2015-2016 academic year (although Cole may
join the policy subcommittee meetings).
3. Continuation of Common Period Discussion
We reviewed the Plan A common period option (Appendix II). Brad has developed a
useful tool that will show how many classes overlap with the proposed common
period (~40 classes/labs would overlap with a 3:00 PM start time). Science labs and
music lessons would still overlap with this schedule but some adjustments could be
made, for example to start times of labs. Adjusting the schedule for music lessons
and ensemble meetings would be difficult.
Jo asked how this would affect the fall schedule given there are more classes/labs in
the fall. Suzanne asked Brad to determine the overlap of classes/labs for the
common periods proposed in Plan A and Plan B for both fall and spring schedules.
We reviewed the Plan B common period option (Appendix II). Some of us were a bit
concerned about adding another 80 minute block on Monday and Friday (due to
overlap with two existing 50 minute class periods). All agreed that the morning
common period time (Plan B) will have fewer conflicting classes than the afternoon
common period time (Plan A). We agreed that leaving the 9:30 – 10:00 AM slot
open is a good idea. The downside of the Plan B common period is the 8:00 AM
start time and the palatability thereof. Our goal is to allow as many people as
possible to have the ability to attend faculty meetings and participate in faculty
governance; whether individuals decide to participate or not is out of our hands.
ASC Minutes 01-29-16 Page
2
We agreed that Plan B has less impact on classes and presents a overall better
schedule.
We will gather additional data on overlapping classes and present both plans to
chairs/schedulers of departments where the proposed schedules would have the
most effect (music, the sciences, graduate programs). We would like to present the
two options to the full faculty at the March 2016 faculty meeting.
4. Evening Class Consolidation
Elizabeth is the manager of the Sustainability Department and the department
noted that evening class schedule organization is not as efficient as it could be. Brad
noted that they consolidate courses into a few buildings in the summer, so the
concept is familiar and may be applied to academic year classes. Elizabeth noted
that classes in the evenings run in McIntyre and Wyatt Halls. Can we manipulate the
schedule to consolidate where the classes are offered to be more efficient? Brad
noted it may be possible to move classes to a single building, such as Jones Hall
(where Theatre Arts is using the classrooms). Ben asked what the outcome would
be: shutting down buildings after a certain time? Facilities/security could reduce
lighting and/or heat in buildings that are not in use. We could consult with
Technology Services about shutting down computers (for example, in computer labs)
after hours. Some buildings are “in use” during hours when they may be closed to
the public. For example, many students study in Thompson and Harned Halls “after
hours” and the library is cleaned while it is closed to the public. Suzanne
recommended the students bring this issue to the faculty. Ben suggested estimating
the net gain of energy savings prior to bringing this issue to the faculty.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:03 PM.
Action Items:
 Brad will determine how many classes/labs overlap with the Plan A and Plan B
common periods for both fall and spring.
 Suzanne will add final exam start time discussion to the agenda for our next
meeting.
 Suzanne will contact chairs and directors regarding the potential impact of the
potential common period plans.
Respectfully submitted by Alyce DeMarais, Secretary.
ASC Minutes 01-29-16 Page
3
Appendix I
Petitions for the Period 12/03/2015 – 1/15/2016
During the dates covered by this report, the following actions were taken on petitions
submitted to the Academic Standards Committee:
10 Approved Reinstatements or Readmissions from Suspension or Dismissal
7 Denials of Reinstatements or Readmissions from Suspension or Dismissal
2 Approved Re-Enrollments from Medical Withdrawal
1 Denied Re-Enrollment from Medical Withdrawal
1 Denied Registration Change from Credit to Audit
7 Approved Registrations with a Schedule Conflict
6 Approved Medical Withdrawals
3 Approved Waivers of the “Last 8 Units Rule”
1 Approved Second Repeat of a Course
1 Approved Waiver of the Minimum GPA Require for Independent Study
1 Approved Waiver of a Core Requirement
1 Approved Drop without Record
9 Approved Withdrawals with a W Grade
1 Denied Withdrawal with a W Grade
51 Total Petitions
Registrar Approved:
0
Preview Team Approved: 23
Sub-Committee Approved: 28
Total Approved: 41
Sub-Committee Denied:
Total Petitions:
10
51
The student whose re-enrollment petition was denied was able to report an
improvement in health, but had not had enough time to demonstrate an ability to
sustain good health over an extended period of time. The student for whom a core
requirement was waived had a combination of courses and experience the
Committee considered to be a reasonable substitution for an approved core course.
For the year to date, 93 petitions have been approved and 12 petitions have been
denied. Among the 105 total petitions, 29 involve a registration with a schedule
conflict, 23 involve reinstatement or readmission, and 15 granted a medical
withdrawal.
For comparison with last year, as of January 15, 2015, 118 petitions had been
approved and 15 denied. Among the 133 total petitions, 28 involved registration
with a schedule conflict, 28 granted a medical withdrawal, and 24 involved
reinstatement or readmission.
ASC Minutes 01-29-16 Page
In addition to petitions, 131 sanctions were placed on undergraduate students in the
following categories:
 50 Academic Warnings for semester GPA below 2.00.
 13 Suspensions for semester GPA below 2.00 in the second consecutive
semester.
 48 Probations for cumulative GPA below 2.00.
 5 Continued Probations for cumulative GPA below 2.00 in the second
consecutive semester, but grades are improving.
 7 Dismissals for new students with a cumulative GPA below 1.00.
 8 Dismissals for continuing students with a cumulative GPA below 2.00 in the
second consecutive semester, and grades are not improving.
Graduate students were also reviewed, and 3 students were sanctioned:
 An Academic Warning was issued to a student whose semester grade point
average was below 3.00.
 An Academic Warning was also issued to a student who did not complete all
courses in the first semester.
 A student was placed on probation for a cumulative grade point average
below 3.00.
4
ASC Minutes 01-29-16 Page
Appendix II
Updated draft common period schedule options (Current, Plan A, and Plan B).
Current Schedule
Monday
8:00
8:30
9:00
9:30
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
1:00
1:30
2:00
2:30
3:00
3:30
4:00
4:30
5:00
Tuesday
12
Wednesday Thursday
3
18
37
56
60
53
34
47
48
38
56
36
44
44
39
15
40
26
36
16
20
55
51
25
47
9
41
53
58
39
12
16
32
56
Friday
11
10
15
Numbers = classes that start at these times.
2
5
ASC Minutes 01-29-16 Page
Plan A: Common period from 3-4:30pm on Wednesday
Monday
8:00
8:30
9:00
9:30
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
1:00
1:30
2:00
2:30
3:00
3:30
4:00
4:30
5:00
Tuesday
A
Wednesday
A
H
B
C
Thursday
A
H
B
I
D
C
B
I
D
J
K
D
E
K
F
F
L
G
F
L
G
Common
Period
M
C
J
E
E
Friday
M
Common period from 3-4:30pm on Wednesday
This plan would create a new 80 minute block option, labeled as as
E, and shift forward in time the current 80 minute block (which
currently is available from 2-3:20pm MWF) to running from 1:303pm MFW.
Block E would be from 12-1:20pm, MFW
Block F would be from 1:30-3pm MFW
Block G would 3-4:20pm MF
As with the current schedule, The current 50 minute blocks starting
on the hour would remain available, i.e. in addition to the 80 minute
MWF classes (blocks E, F and G), 50 minute classes could still be
offered starting on the hour at 12, 1, 2, 3 and 4pm.
6
ASC Minutes 01-29-16 Page
Plan B: Common period from 8-9:30am on Wednesday
Monday
8:00
8:30
9:00
9:30
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
1:00
1:30
2:00
2:30
3:00
3:30
4:00
4:30
5:00
Tuesday
A
H
Wednesday
Common
Period
Thursday
A
H
B
C
Friday
B
I
D
C
I
D
J
E
D
J
E
K
F
E
K
F
L
G
F
L
G
M
C
G
M
Common period from 8-9:30am on Wednesday
This plan would create a new 80 minute block option, labeled as as
E, and shift forward in time the current 80 minute block (which
currently is available from 2-3:20pm MWF) to running from 1:303pm MFW.
Block E would be from 12-1:20pm, MFW
Block F would be from 1:30-3pm MFW
Block G would 3-4:20pm MF
As with the current schedule, The current 50 minute blocks starting
on the hour would remain available, i.e. in addition to the 80 minute
MWF classes (blocks E, F and G), 50 minute classes could still be
offered starting on the hour at 12, 1, 2, 3 and 4pm.
The red block following the common period would be not be
allocated if no other class times are adjusted. This could allow for a
2-hour common hour, or for faculty to have 30 minutes to get ready
for their 10am classes.
Would this allow for or require the option that an 80 minute block
be available on MF?
7