DATE: May 2, 2001
TO: Faculty Senate
FROM: Robin Foster, Chair, Academic Standards Committee
RE: Academic Standards Committee Annual Report, 2000-2001 Academic Year
Suggested Charges to the 2000-2001 Academic Standards Committee:
1. Review the Pass/Fail system, its uses and implications. A motion to reduce the number of
P/F courses students are allowed to take from four to two, and to limit the number of P/F courses
a student may take per term to one was tabled on March 22, 2001. The committee did not return
to this issue.
Action taken: The motion was tabled, with plans to resume deliberations during the 2001-2002
academic year.
2. Review the use of instructors. The Faculty Senate charged the ASC "to review the use of
instructors with appropriate attention to the Hale report, letters of appointment for various types of
instructor positions, the Thorndike letter signed by chairs of departments that make substantial
use of instructors, departmental evaluation standards, and quantitative information on the
demographics of instructors at UPS" (see Faculty Senate minutes, Novemeber 27, 2000).
Action taken: The ASC reviewed all documents listed in the Senate charge, as well as Appendix
A of the Faculty Code. Following deliberations, the ASC approved a statement which confirmed
its support for the current use of instructors and recommended a review of instructor issues by
the same committees that review such issues for tenure-line faculty (see May 2, 2001 minutes).
Suggested Charges, No Action Taken:
3. Review the course repeat policy.
4. Review the new Emergency Administration Withdrawal policy. No Emergency
Administration Withdrawals were reported in the 2000-2001 academic year.
5. Review 2000-2001 request for distance learning transfer credit.
6. Review the process of approval of courses accepted in transfer. After brief discussion ,
the ASC decided that a review of the process for approving courses for transfer credit was a low
priority agenda item, and might best be addressed in a Chairs meeting.
Other Topics Considered:
7. Academic Honesty and the Web. Members of the ASC expressed concern that the
Academic Honesty policy did not “accommodate the new electronic environment”.
Action taken: The ASC approved revisions to the “Academic Honesty” section of The Logger that
inserted phrases regarding responsible use of the internet and a new paragraph headed “Honest
Use of the Internet and World Wide Web.”(see October 9, 2000 minutes)
8. Academic Probation Restriction. The current policy restricts student who are on academic
probation or who have been sanctioned with conduct probation from participating in “those
University activities that have as a subsidiary aim the requirement that the student serve as a
representative of the University” (Logger, p. 46). Concerns raised about this policy included: (1)
Conduct probation is enforced separately from academic probation, and the Dean of Students
may permit waivers of this restriction; (2) The activities which fall in the category of “representing
the University” are difficult to identify; and (3) The policy is neither implement nor enforced in a
systematic manner across campus.
The ASC concurred that the purpose of probationary restriction is to promote academic success.
To assess whether the current policy worked toward that end, a subcommittee reviewed
transcripts of students who were on probation during their freshman year. The analyses revealed
that, among students on probation, academic success was not correlated with participation in
University activities.
Action taken: The ASC approved changes to the policy on activities in which students on
probation are permitted to engage, and revised phrasing in The Logger accordingly (see February
28, 2000 minutes). The changes included: (1) Removing all reference to both academic and
conduct probation from the section of The Logger on “Eligibility for Student Athletics”; (2) Shifting
comment about restrictions on activities for students on probation to the “Academic Probation”
section; and (3) Adding text to the “Academic Probation” section of The Logger to reflect the new
policy that: “When placed on academic probation, a student is expected to develop a plan for
academic improvement with a counselor from Academic and Career Advising or with the
student’s academic advisor.”
In addition, the ASC approved an “Academic Improvement Plan” document submitted by
Academic Career and Advising, that is intended to assist advisors of students on probation.
Annual Routine Responsibilities:
9. Student Petitions: The Academic Standards Committee has on-going responsibilities for
reviewing student petitions for waiver of academic policies.
Action taken: The Petitions Subcommittee met weekly and reported its decisions at each
biweekly full committee meeting.
10. Academic Dishonesty Hearing Board. A selected Hearing Board of students and faculty
from the ASC is responsible for hearing charges of academic dishonesty. Three charges
appeared before the Hearing Board during the 2000-2001 academic year.
Suggested Charges For the 2001-2002 Academic Year:
1. Continue to review the Pass/Fail system, its uses and implications.
2. Review the "Response to Instances of Plagiarism and Other Acts of Academic Dishonesty"
(Logger 2000-2001, p. 38-39), with particular attention to the role of the faculty and institution
in the detection and management of such cases.
3. Review the course repeat policy.
4. Review the Emergency Administration Withdrawal Policy.
5. Review the 2001-2002 requests for distance learning transfer credit.