Undergraduate Academic Council Minutes
Meeting: Wednesday, November 7, 2012 from 2:30 pm to 4:00 pm
Room: LC 31 J.
Present: Nathaniel Cady, Sue Faerman, Rick Fogarty, Sue Freed, Karen Chico Hurst,
Trudi Jacobson, Terence Johnson, Linda Krzykowski, JoAnne Malatesta, Sandra
Vergari, Kathie Winchester, James Zetka
Review of the minutes: Approved
Chair’s Report: The Writing Program Proposal Bill was approved in the Senate
Executive Committee to go the floor of the Senate at the next meeting November 19.
The presumption is that the bill will be voted on in that meeting. The SEC gave some
feedback on the proposal itself in the form of asking things such as how to handle
students who don’t pass, and how to enforce that students take it their first year. Sue
Faerman reported that in the event that the bill passes, she has discussed with the
Provost the need to form a logistics committee to address concerns such as those
raised by the SEC, in addition to a second committee to conduct a search for a
director of the program.
New Business:
Standards of Academic Integrity Policy
Prior to the meeting, the Chair distributed Undergraduate Bulletin text with some
proposed changes to the policy. Sue Faerman provided some background on the
current routing of Violation of Academic Integrity Reports (VAIR) and what happens
when a student who has a second offense is referred by Undergraduate Education for a
hearing, or when a faculty member wishes to refer a case directly for a hearing. The
Office of Conflict Resolution and Civic Responsibility adjudicates such hearings. The
proposed changes would clarify that office’s role in the process. The second goal for
the proposed changes is to streamline the processes so that ALL referrals come from
either the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education or the Vice Provost for Graduate
Studies. This will help foster consistency between graduate and undergraduate
procedures across the university. The Committee on Academic Standing seems like the
appropriate governance body to review such recommendations.
Discussions about changes to the policy have been held in prior years in UAC. Sue
Faerman said that previously a grid of violations and possible sanctions was developed
as a guide for faculty. She will locate it for this continued discussion. It was noted that
there are differences in language and discrepancies between the Undergraduate and
Graduate Bulletins’ sections on Standards of Academic Integrity. Undergraduate
Education will pursue this to ensure the Undergraduate Bulletin is correct by checking
the May 2006 legislation. There was also a discussion of how long Violation of
Academic Integrity Reports are maintained and under what circumstances their
existence must be disclosed to outside parties. There is apparently confusion and lack
of consistency. Faculty can be reluctant to file a VAIR, particularly when there was no
sanction imposed and the student was only given a warning, if the existence of the
VAIR must be reported to, for example, graduate and professional schools for an
indefinite period of time. On the other hand, if a VAIR is never filed, the student could
be a repeat offender who remains undetected. There are SUNY requirements as to
how long records must be kept. The Registrar, Karen Chico Hurst, will provide some
supplemental information about these requirements to inform further discussion of
some of these issues. How long records must be kept is not the same issue as for how
long a record must be reported and to whom.
The goal of the proposal before UAC is to clarify the procedure of exactly what
happens when a faculty member files a VAIR and where it is reported. Defining the
official mechanisms will help insure a fair system and more consistently applied
sanctions, record keeping, and both internal and external reporting.
Meeting adjourned at 3:45pm