Minutes of Academic Standards Committee
February 10, 2010
Present: Sarah Apple, James Bernhard, Debbie Chee, Ken Clark, Betsy Kirkpatrick,
Heidi Kreiss, Ben Lewin, Martins Linauts, Sarah Moore, Jack Roundy, Maria Sampen,
Seth Weinberger, Carolyn Weisz, Linda Williams
The meeting was called to order by Chair Weinberger at 3:30 pm.
M/S/P approval of the revised minutes from January 27 after discussion of wording
regarding the length of leaves for Veteran’s.
Announcements: Weinberger announce that the Faculty Senate had taken up discussion
of the pass-fail policy and recommended that this was an issue that should be discussed
by the full faculty. The Senate will discuss the issue of what materials should be
distributed to faculty prior to such a meeting. Seth suggested the ASC should work on a
drafting a comprehensive option (specifying conditions in which pass-fail might be
allowed) so that the faculty in its discussion could consider two different written options
(i.e., a complete ban and an option that allowed pass-fail under only certain conditions).
Seth indicated that the ASC will take that up at the next meeting. He also noted that at
least some Senators indicated a preference for pass-fail to be at the discretion of the
professor.
Petitions Sub-Committee report: Petitions for the period 01/22/2010 – 02/03/2010
The Petitions Sub-Committee met on January 27 and February 3, 2010, and the following
actions were taken on petitions:
8 Late Adds approved
1 Late Add denied
1 Approved Reinstatement or Readmission from Suspension or Dismissal
1 Denied Registration Change from Credit to Audit
1 Approved Registration Change from Credit to Audit
4 Approved Time Conflicts
1 Denied Medical Withdrawals
2 Approved Waivers of the “Last 8 Units Rule”
1 Denied Appeal of a Transfer Credit Ruling
20 Total Petitions
Registrar Approved: 4
Preview Team Approved: 8
Sub-Committee Approved: 4
Total Approved: 16
Sub-Committee Denied: 4
Total Petitions: 20
For the year to date, 148 petitions have been acted upon, 126 of which were approved and
22 of which were denied. About 1/3 of the total petitions are either Time Conflicts (29)
or Late Adds (26).
Additionally, Academic Probation was revoked for a student based on the correction of a
WF grade to W.
Discussion of Incomplete Policy:
Weinberger summarized several questions central to Jack Roundy’s proposal to change
the Incomplete Policy: 1) How long should students have to complete the work (e.g., 1st
or 2nd week of the subsequent semester)?; and 2) Who grants the incomplete (instructor or
ASC)?; 3) Who grants the standing to extend the incomplete deadline (e.g., ASC petitions
sub-committee)?; and 4) Who asks for the extension (e.g., student and/or faculty
member)?
The proposal currently indicates that the Incomplete deadline should be the Friday of the
first week of the term and that faculty should submit grades for incompletes 5 days later.
Sampen noted that in music, final exams often require a juried performance with at least
three faculty members and that extensions may be needed in order to schedule this sort of
final. Weisz asked whether the kinds of issues that create the need for an original
extension (e.g., mental health problems) might also function as a disability that prevents a
student from successfully requesting an extension if the problem is still in place in the
first week of the next term (particularly for incompletes from the fall term where there is
a relatively short turn around). The issue of whether there was an underlying willingness
to grant longer extensions, and if so, in what cases, was raised. Similarly, the question of
how long any extension should ever be, even for good reason, was raised. Tomhave
suggested that both faculty and staff should have the ability to request an extension to the
deadline. It was noted that in the current policy, an instructor can refuse a students’
request for an extension of an incomplete, and it was agreed that requests from students
should also require the consent or approval of the instructor.
Weisz asked whether or not the ASC would entertain requests for extensions that were
submitted after the incomplete deadline, again expressing concern about students unable
to function well at the time of the first deadline. Tomhave explained the Registrar’s
practice of contacting a professor when a deadline such as this had passed to find out
what was going on. Weisz expressed concern that neither the student nor the petitions
committee might be aware that this sort of “checking” was standard procedure, and might
assume that there was not the possibility for a successful petition once the deadline had
passed. Weisz also asked whether something like a doctor’s note would justify a late
request for an extension. Weinberger noted that students can easily get a note from a
doctor, perhaps too easily.
To provide some information about the number of incompletes and petitions one might
expect under the new policy, Tomhave said that there were about 100 incompletes per
semester and that about six of these might request extensions on the incomplete deadline.
Weisz asked whether the information about the incomplete deadline and process for
requesting an extension would or could be provided to the student at the time the
incomplete grade is assigned. She noted this some sort of safety net might be needed
because of the short window between the assignment of the incomplete grade and the
new, earlier deadline (especially for Fall incompletes). Kirkpatrick asked whether the
academic advisor sees a highlighted history for advisees who receive an incomplete.
Roundy agreed that both suggestions (e-mail to student and highlighting for the advisor)
could be easily implemented. Apple asked whether faculty could require an earlier
deadline than the one in the policy and it was noted that this would still be the case.
Tomhave indicated that an earlier deadline indicated by the instructor could be put into
the notification e-mail to students. There followed some discussion about the importance
of a student knowing whether an incomplete had become a failing or passing grade before
the end of the add period. Roundy indicated that in some cases, if necessary, the add
deadline could be extended for a student attending a class and waiting to find out about a
grade (i.e., when the incomplete course was a pre-requisite for a current course that
would then need to be dropped). It was noted that it is hard to anticipate every situation
that might arise and that sometimes students need to live with the consequences of their
choices. Weinberger reviewed the proposed policy following the discussion (changes in
italics):
Incomplete Grades
An incomplete grade (I) indicates that, although the work accomplished in a course is of
passing quality, some limited portion of the coursework remains unfinished because of
illness or other unforeseen circumstances. It is the student’s responsibility to request an
Incomplete from the instructor prior to the last class session or the final examination
period and to explain the unforeseen circumstances. If the instructor decides that the
request is not consistent with faculty grading policy or that the circumstances do not
warrant an extension of time, the instructor will assign the appropriate permanent
grade rather than an Incomplete. When an incomplete grade is awarded, the instructor
is encouraged to use the “Incomplete Grade Notice to the Registrar of Remaining Work”
form available in the Office of the Registrar. The form is a contract clearly stating the
balance of work remaining and the date the work is due to the instructor (the due date
may not be later than the first Friday of the next regular semester).
In order to receive credit for a course in which a student has received an Incomplete, it
is the student’s responsibility to complete the work by the Friday of the first week of the
next regular semester or by an earlier deadline set by the instructor, to submit the work
to the instructor (or, if the instructor is on leave, to the chair of the department, or to
the Dean of the University), and to request a permanent grade. It is the responsibility of
the instructor to grade the work and to submit a permanent grade no later than the end
of the Add period of the regular semester following the class in which the Incomplete
was given.
The instructor must not accept work later than the deadline established above unless an
extension has been approved by petition to the Academic Standards Committee. The
extension may be requested by either the faculty member or by the student with the
approval of the faculty member. The faculty member must provide the registrar with
official notification of the completion of the course by means of a Grade Correction
Request form. If no grade is submitted by the end of the Add period (and if no petition
for an extension has been received), the Registrar records a grade of F on the permanent
academic record.
When an Incomplete is assigned in the last term of study prior to graduation, the degree
will not be awarded until the next regular degree granting date after submission of a
satisfactory grade by the instructor.
An Incomplete may not be changed to W, WF, or AU. The Incomplete should not be
assigned initially when the W or WF would be the correct grade. The Incomplete is also
not to be used to collect fees or equipment for which the student is obligated.
An Incomplete grade may not be completed by attending the course when it is offered
at a later date.
M/S/P to alter the Incomplete policy to include the new language above.
Discussion of Extending the Final Exam Period from 2 to 3 Hours:
Weinberger summarized the arguments for and against the change. The primary
argument for the change is that two hours is not adequate to test a semester of mastery in
a comprehensive manner for some courses. The primary objection is that students would
find 3 hour exams particularly difficult if they had three exams in a single day and/or if
they only had one hour of rest between exams.
Apple said she had polled some students and got negative responses to the proposed
change from all of them. She said that the sentiment was that 3 hours was daunting and
that students need time to recover physically and eat after a final exam.
It was noted that the change might require expanding the exam week in order to allow
only two exams per day with a 2 hour break between. Tomhave noted that this could not
be done in 5 days.
Kreiss agreed that it was hard to move from one exam to another with only one hour
between.
Bernhard noted that many other institutions had 3 hour exams and we should explore how
they did it. Williams asked if we had any idea how many faculty would use the 3 hours.
A straw poll was conducted, and most faculty present indicated they would not need
more than two hours. Two faculty members indicated that they did need 3 hours, and one
noted that he does not give comprehensive exams currently because of the shorter exam
period.
Weinberger observed that we had collectively thought about the proposal.
M/S/P meeting adjourned at 4:30.
Respectfully submitted,
Carolyn Weisz, Scribe of the day