Academic Standard Committee Meeting
March 31, 2011
Present: Bill Barry, Tim Beyer, Debbie Chee, Duane Hulbert, Robin Jacobson, Betsy
Kirkpatrick, Emily Levandowski, Gary McCall, Sarah Moore, Amy Odegard, Kali Odell,
Jack Roundy, Brad Tomhave, Alexa Tullis, Paula Wilson
Organization. The meeting convened at 9:00 am in the Murray Board Room.
Business
Emily Levandowski made a motion to approve the minutes from the 02/17/2011 ASC
meeting; Betsy Kirkpatrick seconded the motion. The minutes from the 03/03/2011 had
not been distributed.
Petitions Report
Brad Tomhave reported on the petitions for the period of 02/26/2011 – 03/25/2011
The Petitions Sub-Committee met on March 4, 2011, and on March 25, 2011. Although
the Sub-Committee did not meet during spring break, a decision was reached on a
petition via e-mail correspondence. The following results were achieved:
1 Approved Late Registrations
1 Denied Registration Change from Pass/Fail to Graded
1 Approved Registration Change from Audit to Credit
1 Approved Registration for Classes Despite a Schedule Conflict
1 Approved Medical Withdrawal
2 Approved Waivers of the “Last 8 Units Rule”
1 Approved Waiver of the “6-Year Rule”
1 Denied Petition to Disqualify a Student from University Honors
9 Total Petitions
Registrar Approved: 2
Preview Team Approved: 4
Sub-Committee Approved: 1
Total Approved: 7
Sub-Committee Denied: 2
Total Petitions: 9
For the year to date, 134 petitions have been acted upon with 107 approved and 27
denied. (For comparison, by March 24, 2010, 160 petitions had been acted upon with
136 approved and 24 denied.
Of particular note, the late registration and the audit-to-graded petitions were approved
for the benefit of a student who had planned to study in Japan this semester and, instead,
will remain at Puget Sound with a less-than-fulltime schedule.
Also of interest was the petition submitted by a member of the faculty regarding a student
who had compromised her academic integrity to the extent that the faculty member asked
that the student be disqualified from receiving University Honors. Although the petition
was not approved, the Sub-Committee would like the Academic Standards Committee to
consider the policy question of whether to disqualify a student from University Honors
based on dishonorable behavior.
General Announcements
The new ASC student representative, Kali Odell, was introduced.
News from the Senate.
Barry reported that there is no news from the Senate.
Registration and Attendance/Participation
A handout was distributed drafting possible changes to the attendance policy (attached
as Appendix 1). The changes in the policy would allow faculty members to drop a student
from a class if the student does not complete the work, even if the student has regular
attendance. The policy change is intended to withdraw a student prior to a mandatory WF
grade if they are not going to pass the class based on their lack of performance.
Bill Barry questioned whether it is appropriate to drop someone from a class; if they are
paying the tuition, shouldn’t they have a right to earn a failing grade? Robin Jacobson
asked if there is a benefit to leaving the choice in the student’s hands.
Amy Odegard commented that it might be beneficial to remove a student to improve the
class dynamic. McCall added that it might be a better use of faculty members’ time to
deal with the active students rather than the ones who are not participating.
McCall pointed out that it wouldn’t be a surprise to the students; the process would still go
through the student alert system. Debbie Chee asked how many students are going to
class, but not turning in work. Jack Roundy said this case would only apply to a small
number of students. It was decided that this issue would be presented to the Senate to
get a sense of their opinion of the issue before the ASC spent additional time drafting
language.
Discussion of honors in cases of academic misconduct
Recently, a faculty member petitioned to deny honors to a student who, two years ago,
had committed a violation of severe academic misconduct. At that time, it was the
student’s first violation, so a hearing board was not convened. The faculty member
sanctioned the student and the student was referred to student affairs so that the case
could be handled via their conduct system. Now, two years later, the student is
graduating and eligible for university honors. The faculty member did not want the
student to be awarded honors and petitioned the ASC to deny the student honors. The
petition committee did not vote in favor of the faculty member’s request, in large measure
because they reasoned that the current policy language does not permit other academic
considerations to be part of the award decision. Thus, the policy issue was brought to the
full ASC on behalf of the faculty member.
The petitions subcommittee had the general sentiment that there should be a mechanism
to deny honors when a student has committed a particularly egregious violation, but there
is not a policy to do so. Emily Levandowski commented that the student was already be
punished for academic misconduct; by taking away honors, the student is being punished
twice for the same crime. Brad Tomhave added that a student can still qualify for honors
even with documented academic dishonesty, including a first or second offense. McCall
suggested that it might be possible to include denied honors as a sanction during the
original punishment.
A handout was distributed drafting possible changes to the honors policy (attached as
Appendix 2). Jack Roundy suggested that the additional paragraph was too long and the
lengthy description of why student may be denied honors puts a negative spin on the
idea of honors. It was clarified that this policy would only deny students honors for
particularly egregious academic violations, not first offenses “small” violations or nonacademic incidents.
It was questioned whether it is fair to investigate only students who are brought to our
attention. Other students are not held to the same standards. McCall asked whether it
would be possible to review all students eligible for honors. Roundy and Moore
responded that there are not that many students and it could be possible to review all of
them. Bill Barry asked whether consistency would be an issue. Jack Roundy added that
the student has due process to try to overturn a decision.
It was decided that the issue would be presented to the Senate before drafting any policy
changes to see whether they think academic integrity be a consideration in the
designation of honors.
Jack Roundy moved to adjourn the meeting and Debbie Chee seconded the motion.
Notes taken by Amy Odegard
Appendix 1: Registration and Attendance/Participation
Non-Attendance
As described in the “Preregistration” section above, if a student fails to attend the first
class session or to notify the instructor in advance of a first-day absence, the instructor
may ask the Registrar to drop the student form the course, thereby freeing a place for
another student.
Regular class attendance is expected of all students. Absence from class for any
reason does not excuse the student from completing all course assignments and
requirements.
An instructor who notes a significant pattern of absence on the part of a student
should submit a Student Alert to the Office of Academic Advising, who will contact and
inform the student of the instructor’s concerns. When non-attendance is in the
instructor’s judgment excessive, the instructor may levy a grade penalty or may direct the
Registrar to drop the student form the course. If a student is dropped for non-attendance
after the sixth week of class, a WF grade is automatically assigned.
Moreover, when non-attendance is excessive, as described in the preceding
paragraph, in all of a student’s academic courses, the student is considered to have
voluntarily withdrawn from the University. The Registrar will then officially drop the
student from all registered courses and will so inform the student. Once dropped from all
courses, the student is required to leave campus. If a student is dropped from all
registered courses after the sixth week of class, a WF grade is automatically assigned.
Non-Attendance/Non-Participation (DRAFT)
As described in the “Preregistration” section above, if a student fails to attend the first
class session or to notify the instructor in advance of a first-day absence, the instructor
may ask the Registrar to drop the student form the course, thereby freeing a place for
another student.
Regular class attendance and participation are expected of all students. Absence
from class for any reason does not excuse the student from completing all course
assignments and requirements.
An instructor who notes a significant pattern of absence or a significant failure to
submit assignments on the part of a student should submit a Student Alert to the Office of
Academic Advising, who will contact and inform the student of the instructor’s concerns.
If, after the Student Alert, a student’s continued absence or a student’s continued failure
to submit an assignment is, in the instructor’s judgment, excessive, the instructor may
levy a severe grade penalty or may direct the Registrar to drop the student from the
course. If a student is dropped for non-attendance or non-participation after the sixth
week of class, a WF grade is automatically assigned.
Moreover, when non-attendance, or non-participation is excessive, as described in
the preceding paragraph, in all of a student’s academic courses, the student is
considered to have voluntarily withdrawn from the University. The Registrar will then
officially drop the student from all registered courses and will so inform the student. Once
dropped from all courses, the student is required to leave campus. If a student is
dropped from all registered courses after the sixth week of class, a WF grade is
automatically assigned.
Appendix 2: Honors
A student receiving a first baccalaureate degree may receive University Honors and/or
Honors in the Major.
University Honors (Cum Laude, Magna Cum Laude, Summa Cum Laude) are awarded to
those first baccalaureate degree candidates who have exhibited academic excellence
and breadth of scholarly achievement. To qualify, a student must have at least 16
graded units taken on the Puget Sound campus and a minimum cumulative grade
average from the University of Puget Sound of 3.70, 3.80, or 3.90 respectively.
Additionally, the faculty’s Academic Standards Committee reserves the authority
to disqualify a student from receiving University Honors if that student has been
the subject of a documented violation of the Honor Code, the Academic Integrity
Policy, or the Student Integrity Code. In such a case, a student who otherwise
qualifies for University Honors will be informed that University Honors have been
withheld and will be granted the option of challenging that decision through a
petition to the Academic Standards Committee.
Honors in the Major are awarded to those first baccalaureate degree candidates who
have been recommended by their major department in recognition of outstanding
achievement in the area of the major. Only ten percent of a department’s graduates will
receive Honors in the Major. Students graduating with a Special Interdisciplinary Major
(SIM) will receive Honors in the Major if they earn a grade average of 3.70 or higher in
courses required for the SIM.
The citation of Coolidge Otis Chapman Honors Scholar is awarded at graduation to
provide recognition for outstanding work done through the University’s Honors Program.
The citation, named in memory of a former distinguished member of the faculty, is
awarded for completion of all requirements of the Honors Program, including a bachelor’s
thesis.
Honor Code
I am a member of the community of the University of Puget Sound, which is dedicated to
developing in its members’ academic abilities and personal integrity. I accept the
responsibilities of my membership in this community and acknowledge that the purposed
of this community demands that I conduct myself in accordance with Puget Sound’s
policies of Academic and Student Integrity. As a student at the University of Puget
Sound, I hereby pledge to conduct myself responsibly and honorably in my academic
activities, to be fair, civil, and honest will all members of the Puget Sound community ,
and to respect their safety, rights, privileges, ad property.