Academic Standards Committee Meeting
April 24, 2013
In Attendance: Debbie Chee, Ken Clark, Duane Hulbert, Danny Laesch, Jan
Leuchtenberger, Sarah Moore, Jill Nealey-Moore, Don Share, Brad Tomhave, and
Landon Wade
Approval of Minutes
The April 10 minutes were approved.
Petitions for the Period 4/4/2013 to 4/17/2013
The Petitions Sub-Committee held a meeting on April 17; the meeting scheduled for
April 10 was cancelled for lack of petitions. Petitions work yielded the following results:
3 Denied Late Registrations
1 Approved Registration with a Schedule Conflict
1 Denied Registration with a Schedule Conflict
1 Approved Medical Withdrawal
1 Approved Waiver of “Last 8 Units Rule”
1 Approved Application of Alternative Courses to Foreign Language Requirement
1 Approved Exception to Second Degree Policy
9 Total Petitions
Registrar Approved:
Preview Team Approved:
Sub-Committee Approved:
Total Approved:
0
5
0
5
Sub-Committee Denied:
Total Petitions:
4
9
For the year to date, 209 petitions have been acted upon with 36 involving late
registration and 65 involving registration with a schedule conflict. (For comparison, by
April 17, 2012, 186 petitions had been acted upon with 50 involving late registration and
36 involving registration with a schedule conflict.)
Of the 209 total petitions to date, 182 have been approved and 27 have been denied.
Warnings for Academic Performance
Reviewed draft language prepared by Brad Tomhave on allowing academic
warnings regardless of quality point deficits for students earning a term GPA of less
than 2.0. Language approved and will be forwarded to Faculty Senate for explicit
approval or denial to combat 30-day timeframe running out by end of this semester.
See Addendum A for approved language.
Reviewed Draft of Year-End Report
Discussion of status on charge to investigate Academic Integrity Code policy. Earlier
in the semester, the committee reviewed data from Spring 2012 survey but no
action taken for two reasons – data seemed to support that students are aware of
academic integrity concerns and unclear as to the actions the committee could take
to address charge. This charge has been ongoing for the past few years; the ASC ,
but will suggest to the Faculty Senate for more clear direction if they wish to
forward this charge next year.
Discussed possible charges for 2013-2014 ASC. Review of Weeks 7-12 Withdraw
policy as regard to faculty support for changing WF to W based upon extraordinary
circumstance and intersection of faculty discretion, Disability Services, FERPA, and
HIPAA.
Share will update Year-End Report and circulate amongst committee members for
any final concerns prior to submission to Faculty Senate.
The meeting was adjourned at 4 pm.
Minutes submitted by Landon Wade
ADDENDUM: Draft text for Change to Academic Warning Sanction effective Fall 2013
Academic Warning
A student whose cumulative grade point average is 2.00 or higher but whose term
average is below 2.00 by one or more quality points may receive an academic warning
letter. Academic warning is not recorded on the student’s academic transcript.
Example: Consider a hypothetical student who finishes three semesters with a
cumulative GPA of 2.33. Because the cumulative GPA is above 2.00, the student is
technically in good academic standing. But in the third semester the student earns three
“C” grades and one “D” grade, yielding a total of 7.00 quality points (2.00 + 2.00 + 2.00 +
1.00 = 7.00). The student’s semester GPA is 1.75, the quotient of 7.00 quality points
divided by 4.00 graded units. Because the student needed to earn 8.00 quality points in
order to have a semester GPA of 2.00, the student’s GPA is deficient by 1.00 quality point
and the student is subject to an Academic Warning from the Academic Standards
Committee.
When placed on academic warning, a student is expected to develop a plan for
academic improvement with a counselor from the Academic Advising Office or with the
student’s academic advisor. Compliance with this plan will be considered by the
Academic Standards Committee in deciding whether to continue a student who is
placed on academic warning for a second term (and is therefore eligible for suspension).
Academic Suspension
A student subject to academic warning for two consecutive terms may be suspended by
the Academic Standards Committee for the next term. If the cumulative grade point
average for a student who is subject to suspension drops below 2.00, then that student
is also subject to the provisions outlined under “Academic Probation.” The student may
petition the Academic Standards Committee for reinstatement at the end of the
suspension period provided the student can present a reasonable plan for academic
improvement. The student also has the option to petition for immediate reinstatement
and the Committee expects such a student to present a compelling argument and a
compelling plan for academic improvement. The guidelines for submitting a
reinstatement petition are provided to a student upon notification of suspension.
Academic suspension is not recorded on the student’s academic transcript.
Example: Consider again the hypothetical student who received an academic
warning letter following the third semester. At the end of the fourth semester, the
student has a cumulative GPA of 2.16, so that the student is still in good academic
standing. However, the fourth semester grades were: “B,” “C,” “C-,” and “FD.” The
student has earned 67.67 more quality points (3.00 + 2.00 + 1.67 + 01.00) = 67.67) so the
student’s semester GPA is 1.9267, the quotient of 67.67 quality points divided by 4.00
graded units. Because the student needed to earn 8.00 quality points to have a 2.00 term
GPA, the student’s GPA is deficient by 1.33 quality points (8.00 - 67.67). Because the
student’s term GPA is below 2.00 by 1.00 or more quality points for a second consecutive
semester, the student is may be academically suspended for one semester.