AGENDA
University of Nevada, Reno
2010-11 Faculty Senate
May 12, 2011, 1:15 p.m.
JCSU- Rita Laden Senate Chambers
All times are approximate
1:15
1.
Roll Call and Introductions
1:20
2.
Budget Discussion
Action
1:50
3.
Academic Standards (ASC
Final Report: Chair Maureen Cronin
Action/Enclosure
2:20
4.
Action/Enclosure
2:50
5.
Division Health Sciences (DHS
Reorganization Review Committee Report: Sharon Brush
Consent Agenda
3:00
6.
Election of the New Executive Board
Action/Enclosure
3:10
7.
Chair’s Report
Information/Discussion
3:30
8.
Outgoing Senator Certificates
Information Discussion
3:45
Action/Enclosure
Break
4:00
1.
Orientation/ New Senate
Information/Discussion
4:30
2.
Welcome from the Interim President Marc Johnson
Information/Discussion
4:45
3.
New Business
Information/Discussion
Adjourn
Future Senate Meetings
UNR Faculty Senate Website
June 9 2011 – JCSU
Rita Laden Senate Chambers
August 25, 2011 JSCU - R. Laden Senate
Chambers
Future Board of Regents Meetings
NSHE Website
May 27, 2011
Video -Special
June 16-17, 2011
UNR
UNR Faculty Senate Meeting
May 12, 2011
Agenda Item # 3
ASC
UNR Faculty Senate 2010-11
Academic Standards Committee
Report
Members
Justin Blum, Libraries
Charles Coronella, Chemical and Metallurgical Engineering
George Danko, Mining Engineering
Maureen Cronin, Associate Registrar (Committee Chair)
Mary Groves, Managerial Sciences
Nancy Markee, Advising Center
Louis Niebur, Music
Alina Solovyova, Teaching and Learning
Kristi Van Gorder, College of Liberal Arts
The following report is a summary of the activities for the 2010-2011 Academic Standards Committee. The
report is divided into four major parts. Section I describes the charges that were given to the committee.
Section II provides the general process that was used to form the recommendations. Sections III to VII provide
the committee’s recommendations to each of the charges. The report also includes three appendices.
Section I:
Summary of Charges
Standing Charges:
1. Review ASC charges over the prior three years, and recommendations adopted by the Faculty Senate.
Report on the implementation status of these recommendations.
2. Make recommendations on the future status, organization, structure, and charges of the ASC. Consider
whether the committee is necessary and effective, and how could it be improved.
3. Upon request by the Executive Board, review any proposals affecting ASC objectives, and report
recommendations to the Executive Board within six weeks after receipt of any request for review.
4. Upon request by the Executive Board, serve as a sounding board for the Executive Board for issues
related to ASC charges and objectives.
5. Appoint a liaison from the ASC to the Core Curriculum Board, and another liaison to the Academic
Advising Advisory Board. Facilitate communication, as appropriate, between these boards and the
Faculty Senate.
Additional Charges – to be completed as soon as possible:
1. Review NSHE’s General Ed and Transfer Policy Proposal. Make recommendations to the Senate
regarding concerns that should be discussed/investigated further or to endorse the proposal as written.
2. Review the request to change the admission policy, requiring a new or transfer student to obtain an
instructor’s signature prior to adding a class after the class has begun. Make recommendations to the
senate regarding concerns that should be discussed/investigated further or to endorse the proposal as
written.
3. As the implementation of PeopleSoft proceeds, the Committee will, at the request of the Executive
Board, review academic policy issues not addressed in our current system and/or policies that require
revision prior to implementation of the new system.
4. Investigate the pros and cons of requiring all undergraduates to declare an academic major by the time
they have completed 60 credits.
Section II:
Process
Standing Charge 1:
2009-2010 Committee Recommendation:
UNR should have a single webpage regarding Academic Integrity (AI) hosted by the Faculty Senate.
Any unit who wants to address academic integrity should link to this single webpage. The website
should contain:
a. A brief Code of Ethics for students;
b. A copy of pp. 72-73 from the 2010-11 UNR General Catalogue “Section IV: “Academic
[Standards] Integrity”;
c. A copy of the NSHE Board of Regents Code: Title 2, Chapter 6;
d. A link to the Office of Student Conduct “Academic Standards for Students” (this part also
contains NSHE policy)
e. The ASUN student “Honor Code”;
f. A link to examples of academic integrity issues (plagiarism) from other University websites
e.g., Purdue, Northwestern, etc.;
g. Student and faculty responsibilities to prevent and reduce academic dishonesty on campus;
and
h. Sample language for use in course syllabuses concerning academic integrity.
Action Taken: The 2010-2011committee took action to develop an academic integrity website. The original
recommendation included the design of a database with a web front end to allow online reporting of instances
of academic dishonesty. That project was rejected by the President and Dr. Zink as not FERPA compliant.
This year’s committee asked for and received permission to proceed with the redesign of the Office of Student
Conduct website (sans the online reporting features) with the goal of making current academic integrity policy
and procedure for reporting of violations readily available to faculty and students. This project is now in the
hands of Sally Morgan, the director of the Office of Student Conduct, and Michael Ekedahl, lecturer in
Accounting and Information Systems.
When Michael Ekedahl learned that Digital Initiatives was moving Student Services websites into a
content management system, he withdrew from the project. Sally will work with DI over the summer.
Further Action Needed? Yes, next year’s committee must verify completion of this charge.
2008-2009 Committee Recommendation:
The revision of Undergraduate Academic Standing to:
Eliminate disqualification,
Redefine probation (any undergraduate student who earns less a 2.0 UNR grade point average
will be placed on probation for the following semester),
Define a dismissal policy (undergraduate students who are on probation for three consecutive
semesters will be dismissed from the university for one calendar year).
Action Taken: The committee drafted catalog copy and a form for a Dismissal Appeal process to follow up on
the 2009-10 committee’s revision of the Academic Standing policy. As the university will be dismissing
students for the first time at the end of the Fall 2011 semester, language regarding an appeal policy must be
included in the 2011 catalog. Both the policy and the form were shared on the advising listserv and revised
based on responses received from faculty advisors and the Associate Provost. Current drafts have been
forwarded to the Executive Board for their review.
Further Action Needed? Yes, the language and form must be approved by the Faculty Senate and
administration in time for inclusion in the 2011 General Catalog.
See Appendix 4 for detail on committee recommendations for the past three years. Appendix 5 contains the
proposed catalog language for dismissal and the dismissal appeal form.
Standing Charge 2:
The Board of Regents is considering the adoption of two new policies:
1. Amend Board policy (Title 4, Chapter 16, Sections 16 and 24, and new Sections 39 and 40) to limit the
number of credits for a bachelor’s degree to 120 and 60 credits for an associate degree with exceptions
for licensure or program accreditation.
2. Approve a new Board policy (Title 4, Chapter 14, new Section 5) requiring the biennial review of
academic programs with respect to the number of graduates produced in the prior three years (See
attached Policy Proposal).
Recommendation:
If, as expected, the Board of Regents approves these new policies, next year’s Academic Standards
Committee should be charged with:
A review of the other graduation requirements related to total credits, such as residency (currently 32
upper-division credits) and upper-division credits (currently 40 upper-division credits).
Research the development of the campus-based portion of the process for exceptions to the 120 credit
limit.
Research the development of a campus-based early warning and support system for programs that are
near the degree production thresholds detailed in the BOR’s proposal.
Standing Charge 3:
Action Taken: At the request of the Executive Board, the committee researched the awarding of academic
recognition at peer institutions. The chair met with Tamara Valentine, the Honors Program Director who feels
that Latin titles should be restricted to Honors students. While some of our peers award Latin titles to students
outside their honors programs, those peers also provide their honors students with many more benefits than
we can provide. Dr. Valentine’s information on the resources those peers dedicate to their Honors Program
has been integrated into the committee’s peer research all of which is available in Appendix 6. Also, see
Appendix 6 for the University’s current standards for the awarding of Latin titles to Honors students and
distinction and high distinction to students outside the Honors program. Only one member of the committee
favored expanding access to Latin titles to all students without some further review and revision of the current
standards. In 2010, 25% of graduates received either a Latin title or distinction.
Recommendation:
Charge next year’s Academic Standards Committee to review and potentially revise our academic recognition
policy.
Further Action Needed? See recommendation above.
Standing Charge 4:
Maureen Cronin served as liaison to the Core Curriculum Board. Nancy Markee was the committee’s liaison to
the Academic Advising Advisory Board.
Additional Charge 1:
Transfer Policy
The policy proposal to the Board of Regents Handbook, Title 4, Chapter 14, Section 13 (see Appendix 1) was
developed by a working group formed from the statewide Transfer Articulation Board.
The committee reviewed the proposal at its October meeting and made the following recommendation for
revision of the system general education requirements contained in the proposal:
Social Sciences or and
Humanities
[3] 9
12[cr.]
[Three] Nine Twelve credits of [an
introductory level] lower division coursework
[course] in either the social sciences or and
humanities to include at least 3 credits in
social science and at least 3 credits in fine
arts.
The proposal was discussed by the Transfer Articulation Board later in October, after it had been reviewed by
the Academic Affairs Council. Nancy and Maureen shared the committee’s concerns with the Board, and they
did make a small revision as a result.
Social Sciences or [3] 9 [cr.]
Humanities/Fine Arts
[Three] Nine credits of [an introductory level]
lower division coursework [course] in either
the social sciences or humanities/fine arts.
The entire proposal was approved by the Board of Regents at its December 2010 meeting and will become
effective in the Fall of 2012.
Further Action Needed? No.
Additional Charge 2.
Late Registration
The committee researched late registration policies at peer institutions (see Appendix 2) and developed a
recommendation that was shared with the Senate in December. The recommendation was amended and
approved by the Senate and later the administration and will implemented for the Fall of 2011.
The amended recommendation:
During the fall and spring semesters, students must obtain written permission from their instructors to enroll
after the fifth day of instruction. During summer sessions and Wintermester, written permission must be
obtained after the second day of instruction.
Further Action Needed? No.
Additional Charge 3: PeopleSoft Implementation/New Academic Policies
As a result of its discussion of the second charge, the committee concluded that some of our current academic
policies may be contributing to last minute applications for admission and/or registration. We discussed our
very liberal stop out and return policies and decided they seem more appropriate for an open admission
institution than a university.
Once admitted and matriculated, a degree-seeking student may stop out after a semester for a semester or a
decade. The student is not required to provide the university with information on the rationale for or planned
duration of breaks in enrollment. Students simply do not register for the next term, and their records are
inactivated at the end of the late registration period for that term. To return, students complete a very short
returning student application that does not require an application fee.
The committee agreed to research how breaks in enrollment are handled at other institutions (See Appendix
3). We found that most of our peer institutions have a leave of absence policy. The benefits of a leave of
absence for the institution and individual students include:
Institutional Benefits
The policy conveys the institutional
expectation for continuous enrollment.
The institution gets data to better
understand students’ reasons for leaving.
The institution has an opportunity to
Individual Student Benefits
Students who cannot meet this expectation
have an incentive to make plans and
communicate them to the institution.
Students are prompted to examine their
reasons for leaving.
Students know the institution cares about
intervene before the student leaves.
The institution has the information
necessary to communicate with the
student while they are away.
The institution can activate the students’
records for the term in which the students
plan to return.
The policy gives students realistic
expectations about how long they can be
away.
The institution collects an application fee
from returning students not on approved
leaves of absence.
their degree progress.
Students have the opportunity to update
the university on any changes to their
plans.
Students can register with their classmates
giving them the best opportunity to get the
classes they need.
The process forces students to commit to a
term in which they will return.
Returning student who must complete a
full application for admission and pay the
application fee are more committed to
returning.
At the request of the Executive Board, the committee looked at returning student data. This data is for Fall
2010.
Counter: student
year
Counter: Prior term
enrollment
10
Applied
for RT,but
took no
credits
565
Applied
for RT,
and took
classes
554
228
1981 to
1989
U02
261
1990 to
1999
24
U03
242
2000 to
2005
69
U04
390
2006-2007
2008
2009
169
178
430
U01
Counter
A few things stand out:



The odds a student will return greatly diminish after one year away.
Seniors are much more likely to return than other undergraduates.
Just under half of the students who submitted returning student applications registered.
These are all things that a leave of absence policy would help us address. And, since the implementation of
PeopleSoft makes the administration of a leave of absence policy possible, the committee developed a
recommendation and shared it with the Executive Board. The recommendation, revised based on Executive
Board input, follows.
Recommendation:
The University of Nevada, Reno strongly encourages degree seeking students to be continuously enrolled.
But if circumstances dictate a break in enrollment, the University’s leave of absence policy assists and
encourages students to return and graduate after an absence of up to two consecutive semesters from UNR.
(Summer sessions are excluded from the continuous enrollment requirement.) Students who participate in the
Leave of Absence program are not required to reapply for admission or pay a reapplication fee and will have
the opportunity to register/enroll with continuing students for the semester in which they intend to return to the
University. Degree-seeking students who leave the university without a degree or an approved leave of
absence must undergo formal readmission to UNR, to include submission of a new application, application fee
and any necessary transcripts.
Eligibility Requirements:
To be eligible for a Leave of Absence, a student must be eligible to register for classes and meet the following
criteria:
1. Be a degree-seeking undergraduate student.
2. Be registered during the semester immediately prior to the beginning of the Leave of Absence.
a. A student who was admitted as a new first semester freshman or transfer student but did not
attend will not be eligible for a Leave of Absence. Instead, he or she should contact
Undergraduate Admissions Office.
b. A student who was readmitted but did not attend will not be eligible for a Leave of Absence.
Instead, he or she should contact the Undergraduate Admissions Office.
c. A student who is participating in a USAC-sponsored study abroad program need not apply for a
Leave of Absence; however, a student who is participating in a non-USAC-sponsored study
abroad program should take advantage of the LOA policy, if eligible.
3. Be in academic good standing, on probation, or on continuing probation with his or her college.
4. Have no hold (e.g., disciplinary, financial, testing, etc.) which would restrict registration. Note: Students
with financial holds may be given consideration for a Leave of Absence if authorized by the Cashier’s
Office.
5. Have submitted any outstanding high school and/or transfer transcripts, if prior admission and
continued enrollment was contingent upon receipt of those transcripts.
Process for Obtaining a Leave of Absence:
Student:
1. Review the policy and complete the Undergraduate Leave of Absence Request form: The policy
is described at (This section will be updated when the policy has a website home), and the form is
available at (This section will be updated when the policy has a website home) or at the Office of
Admissions and Records. Return the form to the Office of Admissions and Records, unless requesting
an extension beyond two consecutive semesters of a previously approved leave, in which case the
form should be returned to your college advising office.
2. Consider scheduling an appointment with a college/school representative to discuss the
following:
a. Impact on progress toward degree.
b. Catalog year and status after Leave of Absence.
c. Academic good standing issues.
d. Transfer policies, incomplete grades, agency requirements (e.g., state licensing/certification)
and other academic issues, if applicable.
e. If you are considering changing your major, complete the process prior to your LOA.
For more detail on this recommendation, see Appendix 3.
Further Action Needed? Approval by the Senate and the Administration and implementation in the new
system.
Additional Charge 4:
A policy which requires undergraduates to declare a major by the time they have completed 60 credits was
initially thought to target and benefit students who have not selected an academic major. By the time they
have reached the 60 credit milestone, most students have completed the bulk of their university Core
requirements and are taking major and minor courses. Graduation will certainly be delayed for students who
are not admitted to a major program within the 60 credit window.
However, when reviewing the number of students who would be impacted, the committee also looked at
students with more than 60 credits who were in a pre-major status. These numbers were frankly shocking.
Program Juniors
Pre-Bus
288
Pre-Educ
174
Un Engin
6
Pre-Nurs
114
Pre-SW
66
Pre-Jour
33
Pre-Com
12
Seniors
122
101
9
118
34
25
6
Total
410
275
15
232
100
58
18
1108
Recommendation:
Next year’s committee should be charged with an extensive review and revision of our current academic
progress standards.
Appendix 1
BOARD OF REGENTS
BRIEFING PAPER
Handbook Revision, General Education and Transfer
BACKGROUND & POLICY CONTEXT OF ISSUE:
The goal of NSHE transfer associate degrees is for a student who starts at a community college to be
able to complete a bachelor’s degree in the same number of credits as a student who starts at a fouryear institution. In conversations occurring over the past year with the Articulation Board, a group of
faculty charged with reviewing NSHE transfer policies, and the Academic Affairs Council, it became
apparent that the Board requirements for transfer associate degrees create a situation where
students have to take general education courses that result in additional coursework beyond the 2+2
agreements between the colleges and universities/state college.
Current Board policy outlines specifically the degree requirements for all associate degrees, including
transfer degrees (associate of arts, associate of science, and associate of business) by specifying the
general education credits required and providing generally for the minimum number of additional
program requirements (Title 4, Chapter 16, Section 25). Staff, in coordination with the Articulation
Board and Academic Affairs Council, proposes eliminating the specific degree requirements for
transfer associate degrees and making the general education minimum course requirements for the
transferable associate and the bachelor’s degree the same. This does not mean that exact courses
will be the same, only that the minimum requirements within the disciplines will be the same. These
new minimum requirements will not prevent an institution from requiring more general education
requirements, as most institutions do now, and is not anticipated to result in drastic changes in
community college general education programs. Further, it is recommended that transfer
agreements include a year-by-year outline of course requirements, in which the course of study
leading to a baccalaureate degree includes in the first two years coursework that will result in the
completion of requirements for an associate degree. This policy would not go into effect until Fall
2012 to enable the community colleges, the state college, and the universities to work together to
reflect any changes in the 2+2 agreements.
SPECIFIC ACTIONS BEING RECOMMENDED OR REQUESTED:
Amend Board policy to eliminate the specific degree requirements defined for the associate of arts,
associate of science and associate of business and redefining minimum general education
requirements applicable to all transfer and baccalaureate degrees. Further, amend Board policy to
require that transfer agreements include a year-by-year course of study whereby the courses outlined
for the first two years would result in the completion of the requirements for an associate degree.
(See attached Policy Proposal.)
IMPETUS (WHY NOW?):
The proposal is brought forward at this time based on the conversations with and recommendations
of the Articulation Board, a small group of faculty charged with reviewing NSHE transfer policy, and
the Academic Affairs Council in order to improve student success in transferring.
BULLET POINTS TO SUPPORT REQUEST/RECOMMENDATION:
 Minimum general education requirements for transfer and baccalaureate degrees will be the
same, but institutional faculty will have the added flexibility to exceed the minimum;
 Both the 4-year and the 2-year institution will have a voice in establishing 2+2 agreements;
 2+2 agreements will include a year-by-year course of study whereby the first two years must
include the requirements for the completion of an associate degree; and
 System administration through the Articulation Board will track changes and review the impact of
the policy to ensure academic quality and student transfer success are well served by this
change.
POTENTIAL ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE REQUEST/RECOMMENDATION:
Some university faculty fear that the total credits in an individual community college general
education program may not be high enough or match their general education program sufficiently.
ALTERNATIVE(S) TO WHAT IS BEING REQUESTED/RECOMMENDED:
Maintain the current policy whereby the general education requirements for each transfer degree
exceeds the general education requirements for universities and the state college and create
problems for alignment with the bachelor’s degree at a 4-year institution.
COMPLIANCE WITH BOARD POLICY:
 Consistent With Current Board Policy: Title #_____ Chapter #_____
Section #_______
X Amends Current Board Policy:
Title 4, Chapter 14, Sections 13 and 16; and Title 4, Chapter
16, Section 24
 Amends Current Procedures & Guidelines Manual: Chapter #_____ Section #_______
 Other:________________________________________________________________________
X Fiscal Impact:
Yes_____
No__X___
Explain:____________________________________________________________
POLICY PROPOSAL - HANDBOOK
TITLE 4, CHAPTER 14, SECTION 13
Transfer Agreements
Additions appear in boldface italics; deletions are [stricken and bracketed]
Section 13.
NSHE Transfer and Admissions
Transfer students to the state college and universities may be admitted under the following alternatives:
1. Associate of Arts, Associate of Science, and Associate of Business Degree Graduates
The primary basis for admission to upper-division study with full junior status of transfer students from an
NSHE community college to any other NSHE institution shall be the associate of arts, associate of science,
and the associate of business degrees.
a. The completion of the associate of arts, associate of science, and associate of business degree at a
community college automatically fulfills the lower-division general education requirements at any other
NSHE institution.
b. Associate of arts, associate of science, and associate of business graduates will have completed a
minimum of 60 credits of baccalaureate level courses.
c. Baccalaureate students who have completed NSHE associate of arts, associate of science, or
associate of business degree shall complete a minimum number of credits at the accepting NSHE
institution. This minimum number shall be set by the baccalaureate degree granting institution.
d. Baccalaureate level courses included as part of the associate of arts, associate of science, or associate
of business degree will transfer to any other NSHE institution at a minimum as general elective credit.
e. Completion of the associate of arts, associate of science, or the associate of business degree does not
guarantee satisfaction of all state college or university lower-division requirements except for the lowerdivision general education requirements.
f.
All baccalaureate academic majors at a university or college must have current [major-to-major]
transfer agreements with NSHE community colleges. These agreements must provide clear
information for community college students as to those courses that will transfer efficiently to another
NSHE institution within each major. Information on these agreements must be available to all students
on each campus.
g. Transfer agreements shall be developed by both the baccalaureate degree-granting institution
and the associate degree-granting institution. Transfer agreements must include a year-by-year
outline of course requirements, including general education and degree requirements, in which
the course of study leading to a baccalaureate degree includes in the first two years coursework
that will result in completion of the requirements for an associate degree.
h. Transfer agreements shall be updated to reflect any changes made in baccalaureate majors or
associate degree requirements as they occur.
[f]i. The receiving institution will evaluate all university and college parallel courses attempted at the
community college (and any other educational institution attended) and compute an overall admission
grade point average in accordance with the institution’s transfer policies.
[g]j. For associate of arts, associate of science, and associate of business graduates, if the overall transfer
grade point average computed by the receiving institution is less than a 2.0 grade point average, the
student shall be placed on probationary status until such grade point deficiencies are corrected.
2. Other Associate Degrees
Other associate degrees and certificates may be awarded by a community college for programs that have
requirements different from the associate of arts, associate of science, associate of business, or a primary
objective of transfer. A student with an associate degree other than an associate of arts, associate of science,
or associate of business is not guaranteed junior status at a receiving institution.
3. Associate of Applied Science and Bachelor of Applied Science Degrees
The Bachelor of Applied Science degree is a four-year occupationally specific degree that is intended to
respond to the needs of the workforce. A student with an associate of applied science in a program approved
by the Board of Regents seeking a Bachelor of Applied Science degree is guaranteed junior status upon
transfer to another applicable NSHE institution.
4. Non-Associate Degree Admissions
a. Approved baccalaureate level courses shall be transferable to another NSHE institution at a minimum
as general elective credit.
b. Community college students should be strongly encouraged to complete their lower-division programs
and an associate degree before transfer, but qualified students may apply for transfer at their own
discretion.
c. An applicant who does not satisfy university admission requirements upon graduation from high school
must complete the equivalent of 24 semester credits in baccalaureate level courses with an overall
grade point average of at least [2.30] 2.5 at a community college or other accredited institution to
qualify for university admission. [Effective Fall 2008, the minimum required overall grade point average
is 2.50.]
d. An applicant who does not satisfy state college admission requirements upon graduation from high
school must complete the equivalent of 12 semester credits in baccalaureate level courses with an
overall grade point average of at least 2.00 at a community college or other accredited institution to
qualify for state college admission.
e. A course with a “D-” grade or better will be accepted for transfer provided the institution specific overall
grade point average established in subsections c. and d. above is maintained. Transfer courses with a
“D-” grade or better will count towards a bachelor’s degree in the same manner as “D-” grades or better
obtained by students enrolled in the lower-division at a state college or university. Credits from courses
transferred with a “D-” grade or better count towards credit earned for a baccalaureate; however, it is at
the discretion of the department or college offering the major as to whether courses with “D-” grades in
the major satisfy requirements in the major field.
EFFECTIVE FALL 2012.
POLICY PROPOSAL - HANDBOOK
TITLE 4, CHAPTER 14, SECTION 16
General Education Requirements
Additions appear in boldface italics; deletions are [stricken and bracketed]
Section 16.
System [Core] General Education Requirements
1. Associate of arts, associate of science, associate of business, and baccalaureate graduates must complete
a minimum program of [System Core] general education requirements defined as follows:
[Core] General Education
Courses
English
Credits
[6 cr.] 36
Freshman level English Composition
including English 102
[(see catalog for exceptions)]
Mathematics
3 [cr.]
Three credits of [a] lower division
coursework [level course]
Natural Science
[3] 6
[cr.]
[Three] Six credits of [an introductory level]
lower division coursework [course] to
include at least one laboratory experience
Social Sciences or
Humanities/Fine Arts
[3] 9
[cr.]
[Three] Nine credits of [an introductory level]
lower division coursework [course] in either
the social sciences or humanities/fine arts.
[United States and Nevada
Constitutions]
[1-4 cr.]
[Institutional course catalogs shall identify
courses that meet this requirement]
Total
21-24
2. Instruction must be given in the essentials of the Constitution of the United States and the
Constitution of the State of Nevada, including the origin and history of the Constitutions and the
study of and devotion to American institutions and ideals pursuant to Nevada Revised Statutes
396.500 for all associate and baccalaureate degrees. If clearly identified, this content may be
included in coursework defined in subsection 1. Institutional course catalogs must identify
courses that meet this requirement.
3.
Courses taken toward the System [Core] general education requirements shall not be applied to more
than one general education requirement defined in subsection 1 [area in the Core]. Credits earned by
examination may apply toward any of [the Core] the general education requirements defined in
subsections 1 and 2.
[3]4. Students earning a second associate of arts, associate of science, associate of business, or
baccalaureate degree from an NSHE institution are not required to repeat the System [Core] requirements
for general education.
Evidence of completion of U.S. and Nevada Constitutions is required of all second-degree students whose
first degree is not from an NSHE institution.
[4]5. NSHE institutions are encouraged to exchange ideas in the development and improvement of specific
courses to meet NSHE requirements, particularly to increase the likelihood of transfer student
success; however, each institution is responsible for determining the character of its own program.
[5. NSHE community colleges must articulate their respective general education core requirements with at
least one of the NSHE universities selected by the community college.]
EFFECTIVE FALL 2012.
POLICY PROPOSAL - HANDBOOK
TITLE 4, CHAPTER 16, SECTION 24
Community College Graduation Requirements
Additions appear in boldface italics; deletions are [stricken and bracketed]
Section 24.
Community College Requirements for Graduation
The following requirements must be met by a student seeking to graduate from an NSHE community college:
[1. Each associate degree student is required to satisfy the United States and Nevada Constitution
requirement and six semester credits of Communications.]
[2]1. Each associate degree or certificate of achievement student is required to satisfy course requirements
as defined in the college catalog.
[3]2. A student may select the catalog year governing requirements for graduation under the following
circumstances:
a.) the year in which the student enrolled; or
b.) the year the student officially selects a program of study; or
c.) the year in which the student will complete the curriculum requirements for an associate degree or
certificate of achievement.
If a degree is offered for the first time after a student has enrolled, the student may choose the catalog year
in which the degree or major was first offered. The selected catalog may not be more than six years old at
the time of graduation for students receiving an associate degree or certificate of achievement, and not
more than ten years old at the time of graduation for students receiving a baccalaureate degree.
[4]3.
A student must maintain a minimum cumulative grade point average of 2.0.
[5]4.
A student must complete a minimum of 15 semester credit hours within the college.
[6. The required minimum number of semester hours for the associate degree is 60; and for the certificate of
achievement is 30.]
[7]5.
A student must not have a financial or library obligation to the college.
[8]6. A student may earn multiple degrees and certificates of achievement provided all course and
graduation requirements for each degree or certificate are fully satisfied as outlined in the college’s course
catalog.
EFFECTIVE FALL 2012.
POLICY PROPOSAL - HANDBOOK
TITLE 4, CHAPTER 16, SECTION 25
Community College Degree Requirements
Additions appear in boldface italics; deletions are [stricken and bracketed]
Section 25.
Community College Certificate and Degree Requirements
[MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS]
The required minimum number of semester hours for an associate of arts, associate of business, and
associate of science is 60. Specific requirements for all other certificates and degrees are as follows:
CERTIFICATE
Communications
Emphasis
Additional Program Requirements
TOTAL
3
24
3
30
NOTE: Computation & Human
Relations must be included as courses
or be clearly identified as content
[imbedded] included in other required
courses.
ASSOCIATE OF APPLIED SCIENCE
Communications
3
English
3
Constitution
3
Human Relations
3
Social Science*[*]
3
Humanities
Mathematics
3
Science
3
[Total General Education
21]
Emphasis
30
Additional Program Requirements
9
TOTAL
60
[*]*When a Social Science course is
used for Human Relations, the student
must take a humanities class.
[ASSOCIATE OF ARTS*
English
Constitution
Science (Lab Req.)
Mathematics
Social Science
Humanities
Fine Arts
Additional Program Requirements
TOTAL
6
3
3
3
9
6
3
27
60
ASSOCIATE OF GENERAL STUDIES
Communications
6
Constitution
3
Science
3
Mathematics
3
Social Science
3
Humanities
3
Additional Program Requirements
39
TOTAL
60
*A minimum 15 credit optional emphasis may include courses used to fulfill the subject requirements outlined
above.
ASSOCIATE OF SCIENCE*
English
Constitution
Mathematics
Science (Lab Req.)
Social Science
Fine Arts/Humanities
Additional Program Requirements
TOTAL
6
3
6
12
6
6
21
60
*A minimum 15 credit optional emphasis may include courses used to fulfill the subject requirements outlined
above.
ASSOCIATE OF BUSINESS
English
Constitution
Fine Arts/Humanities
Mathematics
Science (Lab Req.)
Social Science
Additional Program Requirements
TOTAL
EFFECTIVE FALL 2012.
6
3
9
6
6
6
24
60]
Appendix 2
Late Registration Policies
Following are the registration calendars of 9 of our aspirant peer institutions, beginning with the first day of
class and continuing until the last day to drop individual courses. Some key dates are summarized in the table
below.
Institution
Instruction
Last Day to Day of
Last Day to Reg
Begins
Reg Online Instruction
w/Instructor
Permission
Univ. of Arizona Aug. 23, 2010
Aug. 29,
Sunday after 5th
Sept. 14, 2010 w/o
2010
day of instruction late registration fee
Arizona State
Aug. 19, 2010
Aug. 25,
5th day of
2010
instruction
Colorado State
Aug. 23, 2010
Aug. 29,
Sunday after 5th
2010
day of instruction
Univ. of
Aug. 23, 2010
Sept. 1,
8th day of
Sept. 10, 2010
Colorado,
2010
instruction
Boulder
UC, Davis
Sept. 23, 2010
Oct. 8, 2010 12th day of
instruction
Iowa State
5th day of
University
instruction
University of
Sept. 27, 2010
Oct. 6, 2010 8th day of
Oregon
instruction
Oregon State
Sept. 27, 2010
Oct. 3, 2010 Sunday after 5th
Oct. 8, 2010
day of instruction
Univ. of
Aug. 23, 2010
Aug. 30,
6th day of
Aug. 30, 2010
Nebraska,
2010
instruction
Lincoln
University of Arizona
August 20,
2010
Fall 2010
August 23,
2010
Fall 2010
Last day to file Undergraduate Leave of Absence
FIRST DAY OF CLASSES


UAccess still available for registration
First day to file Grade Replacement Opportunity (GRO)
August 23,
2010
Fall 2010
Deadline to pay for Fall 2010 without late charge
August 24,
2010
Fall 2010
Begin late payment charge of $50.00
August 29,
2010
Fall 2010
Last day to use UAccess for:


August 30,
2010
Fall 2010
adds, changing classes or sections
changes to or from pass/fail grade
Begin $25.00 course late drop fee for undergraduate students.

There will be a $25 late drop fee assessed for each course dropped
beginning today. For further information please click here.
August 30,
2010
Fall 2010
Change of Schedule form with instructor approval required to ADD or
CHANGE classes
UAccess only available to DROP classes
Registration from zero units requires Change of Schedule form with
Instructor and Dean's permission
September 3,
2010
Fall 2010
The last day to receive a REFUND for a complete withdrawal or any drop in
units.
September 06,
2010
Labor Day - no classes
September 13,
2010
Last day to increase in units without the $250 Late Registration Fee.
September 14, Fall 2010
2010
Registration from zero units requires written statement, Registrar, Instructor,
and Dean's approval, and pre-payment
September 14, Fall 2010
2010
Begin $250.00 Late Registration Charge for additional class units
September 17, Fall 2010
2010
Last day to:




use UAccess to drop
DROP without a grade; classes dropped on or before this date will
remain on your UAccess academic record with a status of dropped,
but will not appear on your transcript
change from pass/fail to regular grade or vice versa with instructor
approval on a Change of Schedule form
file Grade Replacement Opportunity (GRO)
(Note: The last day to receive a REFUND for a complete withdrawal or any
drop in units was September 3, 2010.)
September 20, Fall 2010
2010
Change of Schedule form with instructor's permission is required to drop a
class. A penalty grade of W or E will be awarded and the class will appear
on your transcript
Change of Schedule form with instructor's and dean's permission is required
to change from pass/fail to regular grade or vice versa
September 22, Spring 2011
2010
Schedule of Classes available
October 01,
2010
Enrollment appointments available in UAccess for student viewing
October 08,
2010
Honors Convocation - no classes from 3:00 pm to 5:00 pm (Family
Weekend)
October 11-17, 2010
Spring 2011
Priority registration for athletes and Veterans plus their dependents using GI
Bill benefits
October 15,
2010
Fall 2010
Last day to DROP a class with a grade of W (if passing) or change from
graded course to audit (or vice versa); instructor's signature indicating
permission on a Change of Schedule form is required.
October 18,
Fall 2010
ALL REGISTRATION CHANGES REQUIRE not only the instructor's
2010
signature indicating permission on a Change of Schedule form, but also
the Dean's signature; by policy, permission from the Dean to make a
registration change at this time requires an extraordinary reason. Grade of W
or E will be awarded for dropped classes.
Arizona State University
August 19,
2010*
First Day of Classes*
August 19-25,
2010
Late Registration & Drop/Add Deadline
August 25,
2010
Residency Classification Petition Deadline
August 31,
2010
Tuition/Fee Payment Deadline - for registration from August 9 - 31, 2010
(Students with unpaid tuition charges are automatically enrolled in tuition installment plan on
9/9/10.)
September 1,
2010
Tuition & Fees 100% Refund Deadline
Tuition and certain registration fees are subject to 100% refund through (September 1,
2010) - (applicable to classes held in sessions longer than eight weeks). Tuition and fees
are nonrefundable thereafter and students are required to pay all tuition and fees for drops
and withdrawals occurring on or after September 2, 2010. Certain registration fees are
nonrefundable on or after the first day of the semester. Refer to the Tuition Refund Policy for
additional information.)
September 6,
2010
Labor Day Observed
September 8,
2010
University 21st Day
September 8,
2010
Tuition/Fee Payment Deadline - for registration from September 1 - 8, 2010
(Students with unpaid tuition charges are automatically enrolled in tuition installment plan on
9/9/10.)
September
16-23, 2010
Academic Status Report #1
September
30, 2010
Deadline for Appealing Residency Classification Decision
October 15,
2010
Graduation Filing Deadline
October 2130, 2010
Academic Status Report #2
November 3,
2010
Course Withdrawal Deadline - In Person & Online
Colorado State University
August 22, 2010
Last Day to Cancel Registration (no assessed tuition & fees)
August 23, 2010
$50 Late registration fee for adding first class
August 23, 2010
Classes begin
August 26, 2010
Special B drop period ends
August 29, 2010
Special A add period ends
August 29, 2010
Special B add period ends
September 6,
2010
Labor Day - no classes
September 8,
2010
Special A drop period ends
September 8,
2010
Registration closes/ Census (end of add/drop period)
September 8,
2010
Student Option Pass/Fail and Audit Grading Forms due
September 9,
2010
$50 Late Registration Fee applied for adding any course/credit hour
additions on or after this date
September 17,
2010
Graduation Contract (Undergraduate) due
October 18, 2010
Repeat/Delete Requests due
October 18, 2010
Course withdrawal period ends (Please note that University Withdrawal
ends Dec. 10, 2010)
Late Registration
When is a Late Registration Request needed?
There are four instances when a student needs to submit a Late Registration Request to the Registrar’s Office:




When a student needs to add a course or switch sections of the same course past the add deadline for
that course.
When a student needs to withdraw from a Special B course past the drop deadline for that course and
before the full-term course withdrawal deadline.
When a student needs to increase credits on a variable credit course after the add/drop deadline.
When a student needs to change a course’s level for the same course after the add/drop deadline (i.e.,
PSY 295 – Independent Study to PSY 495 –Independent Study).
When a student wants to drop or withdraw from a course past the drop or withdraw deadline, or when a
student wants to decrease credits on a variable credit course, a Registration Appeal is required instead
of a Late Registration Request. The student should contact the Registrar’s Office for the Appeal form.
Who can complete a Late Registration Request?
The instructor of a course or an authorized staff member in the department through which the course is being
offered may complete and sign a Late Registration Request (obtainable in the department). The student should
only complete the Name and CSUID at the top of the form, as well as the Student Signature line at the bottom
of the form.
Will there be additional charges to the student for submitting a Late Registration Request?


A non-appealable $50 late registration fee will be assessed to any student submitting a Late
Registration Request (except when increasing variable credits).
There may be additional charges for adding a course. These charges are listed on the bottom of the
Late Registration Request form where the student must sign.
Is the late registration process the same for all students?
Graduate students wishing to add courses or change credits on a variable credit course after the add deadline
for the course must contact the Graduate School. Undergraduates and Professional students must bring the
completed Late Registration Request to the Registrar’s Office for processing.
Where can I access the Late Registration Form?
Late Registration Forms can be obtained through ARIESweb. To access the form:




Click on the "ARIES A-Z" link under the ARIES Information Links section.
Click on the "L" in the A-Z Index List.
Click on "Late Registration Request" link.
Click on the "Click Here" button next to the LATE REGISTRATION Request.doc file.
Faculty & Staff can also obtain Late Registration Request Forms from their teaching department office, or by
emailing the Registrar's Office at registrarsoffice@colostate.edu.
University of Colorado, Boulder
August 23
(Mon.)
Classes begin.
August 31
Space-available registration for Senior Citizens Auditors Program, Koenig
Tuesday
Alumni Center, 8:00 a.m. to noon. (See Other Types of Registration)
September 1
(Wed.)
Add Deadline: Deadline to add a course, including independent study and
thesis, without the instructor’s signature. After this date, the instructor’s
signature is required on a enrollment form to add a course (through
September 10). After this date, registration is only available for dropping
courses through September 8, the drop deadline. (See Drop/Add)
Wait List Deadline: Deadline to add name to a course wait list. (See Wait
Lists)
Tuition & Fees Payment Deadline: Deadline to pay full tuition and fees
(or first payment of the two-payment plan). Due by 5:00 p.m. Mountain Time if
paid in person or mailed, or before midnight using CUBill&Pay. No grace
period. See Payments.)
Deadline (before midnight) to sign up for the two-payment plan via
CUConnect. No grace period.
Deadline (5:00 p.m.) to select or waive university sponsored health insurance
at Wardenburg Health Center or by midnight on CUConnect.
Deadline (5:00 p.m.) to turn in Time Off and StayConnected applications to
the registrar’s office and be eligible to purchase university sponsored
insurance. (See Time Off & Stay Connected)
Deadline (5:00 p.m.) for private scholarship checks to be received in the
financial aid Scholarship Office to avoid late and service charges.
September 6
(Mon.)
September 8
(Wed.)
Labor Day holiday. No classes. University closed.
Drop Deadline: Deadline to drop a course without being assessed
tuition and fees for that course and without a W grade appearing on the
transcript. NOTE: After this date, the instructor’s signature is required on an
enrollment form (through October 6) to drop a course. (EXCEPTION: Students
whose only college is Arts and Sciences, Architecture and Planning, as well as
non-degree students, have until October 29 to drop a course without approval
signatures.) No refunds for tuition or fees are given for courses dropped after
September 8. (See Drop/Add)
Deadline (5:00 p.m.) to petition to waive UCSU student fees.
Deadline to request a refund of any student opportunities fees you selected.
(See Student Opportunities Fees)
Deadline (5:00 p.m.) to withdraw from the university and only be assessed a
$200 withdrawal processing fee. After this date, 100 percent of tuition and
fees is due for students who withdraw unless there are extenuating
circumstances. (See Withdrawal)
September
10 (Fri.)
Deadline (5:00 p.m.) to add a course without petitioning your dean.
NOTE: Instructors’ signature is required on an enrollment form to add a
course. In general, instructors only approve an add if students have been
regularly attending and there’s space in the course. (See Drop/Add) (NOTE:
September 10 is also the deadline for undergraduate resident students to add
a course and be eligible for the COF voucher for that course. See COF.)
Deadline to change variable-credit hours, pass/fail, and no-credit status
on courses without petitioning your dean. After the deadline, petitions will
only be accepted if there are extenuating circumstances. (See Credit and
Grading Options)
After this date, registration is on a space-available basis, and a $100 late fee
is charged. (See Late Registration)
September
22 (Wed.)
Deadline (5:00 p.m.) to withdraw from the university and be eligible to petition
to be assessed 40 percent of full tuition and fees (instead of being assessed
100 percent of full tuition and fees). (See Withdrawal)
University of California, Davis
Dates pertaining to registration times, student fee deadlines, and Fall Winter Spring
important term & graduation dates are below:
2010 2011
2011
Application deadline for readmission to undergraduate status
Instruction begins

Deadline for filing Planned Educational Leave Program (PELP)
petitions
Registration Fee Deferred Payment Plan (RFDPP) second installment
due
10th day of instruction
Last day to




Oct Jan 10 Apr 11
11
Oct Jan 14 Apr 8
6
Make final late payment of registration fees with penalty;
see here. Students with unpaid balances after the 10th day
of instruction will have their registration administratively
withdrawn, all courses dropped and fees for the first 10
days of instruction will be charged to the student account;
see here
Drop designated 10–day–drop courses (designated by ^ in the
Schedule of Classes)
File petitions to change from full–time to part–time status
File applications with the Dean’s Office for A&ES and L&S
students who plan to complete work for minor program
12th day of instruction
Last day

Jul Oct 29 Jan 31
30
Sep Jan 3 Mar 28
23
For wait lists
Oct Jan 19 Apr 12
8

To add courses
20th day of instruction
Last day to


Oct Jan 31 Apr 22
20
Drop 20–day–drop courses
File for course materials fee waiver
25th day of instruction
Last day to:


Oct
27
Feb 7 Apr 29
Opt for P/NP or S/U grading
Change units of a variable–unit course
Iowa State University
A late registration fee is assessed for registration initiated on or after the first day of classes for fall and spring
terms. This fee is not charged for the summer term. If registration is not completed by the end of the fifth day of
classes, students must obtain written permission from their advisers, the instructors for the courses they plan
to take, as well as approval from the dean of the college in which they are registered. During the summer
session, these approvals must be obtained in order to register after the third day of classes.
University of Oregon
September 27 (Monday)

Fall classes begin

First tuition installment due (one-third of assessed tuition, plus current and
past-due balance)

Last day to: Process a complete drop to receive 90% tuition refund (no "W"
recorded)
Last day to: Reduce credits and receive 100% tuition refund (no "W"
recorded)
October 1 (Friday)
October 3 (Sunday)

October 4 (Monday)

Last day to: Process a complete drop or reduce credits and receive 75%
tuition refund (no "W" recorded; after this date, "W"'s' are recorded for partial
and complete withdrawls)


Last day to: Add a class/process initial registration
Last day to: Change from audit to credit or credit to audit

Last day to: Apply for Fall 2010 graduate degrees (apply on the web)

Last day to: Process a complete withdrawal or reduce credits and receive a
75% tuition refund (mark of "W" is recorded)

Last day to: Process a complete withdrawal or reduce credits and receive a
50% tuition refund (mark of ‘W’ is recorded)

Last day to: Process a complete withdrawl or reduce credits and receive a
25% tuition refund (mark of "W" is recorded)
Last day to: Apply for Fall 2010 undergraduate degrees in DuckWeb
October 6 (Wednesday)
October 8 (Friday)
October 10 (Sunday)
October 17 (Sunday)
October 24 (Sunday)

October 29 (Friday)


Last day to: Submit doctoral final oral defense application to the Graduate
School
Course offerings for Winter 2011 available
November 1 (Monday)

Second tuition installment due (one-third of assessed tuition, plus current and
past-due balance)

Deadline to apply for winter re-enrollment



Last day to: Drop a class (mark of "W" recorded)
Last day to: Change grade options (Graded or P/N)
Last day to: Change variable credits
November 5 (Friday)
November 14 (Sunday)
Oregon State University
Classes begin
Monday, September 27
Late registration begins
($50 late fee assessed)
Monday, September 27
Last day to add a class by Web without
departmental approval
Sunday, October 3
Tuition bills e-mailed to ONID accounts
October 4, due November 1
Second week adds by Web with departmental
approval
Monday–Friday, October 4–8
Audit registration period
(Requires instructor approval; tuition and fees
assessed)
Monday–Friday, October 4–8
Deadline to Apply for Graduation
(Specify term, e.g. fall)
Friday, October 8
Last day to drop a class by Web
11:55 p.m., Friday, October 8
Last day to register or add a class by Web
(Requires instructor and departmental
approval)
5 p.m., Friday, October 8
Late registration fee increases to $100.
Tuesday, October 12 through December 6
Last day to change to or from S/U grading
(Requires approval of academic advisor/dean,
see AR 18)
5 p.m., Friday, November 12
*Last day to withdraw from a course by Web.
(W grade entered on transcript) (Students who
want to withdraw from a course but who have
a hold on their record should contact or go to
the Registrar’s Office for assistance.)
11:55 p.m., Friday, November 12
University of Nebraska, Lincoln
Course Adds
The deadline for adding courses for the Fall Semester is midnight, Monday, August 30, 2010. Any adds after
this point, including mini-courses, require the written permission of the instructor and the dean's office or
advising center of your college. Such transactions must be processed in person at Registration and Records,
107 Canfield Administration Building South. Late course adds are by exception only. There is no guarantee
that such exception will be granted. Financial aid recipients who process late course adds are encouraged to
contact the Office of Scholarships and Financial Aid as this could impact financial aid awards.
“Override Authorization Forms” must be processed at Registration and Records, 107 Canfield Administration
Building South. This form is used to override maximum credit hours, course credit hours, or grade type.
"Schedule Adjustment Forms ” are also processed at Registration and Records. Written permission or a
permission code from the academic department office or instructor is always required to enter a closed course.
Changing Credits
You are free to change the number of credits on a variable credit course for the Fall Semester through MyRED
until midnight, Monday, August 30, 2010. After that date, the change must be processed in person at
Registration and Records, 107 Canfield Administration Building South and may require special permission from
your college.
Course Drops
Drops for the Fall Semester may be processed through midnight, Monday, August 30, 2010 for a full tuition
refund. However, courses dropped August 31- September 3, 2010 will be subject to the 25% tuition charge.
Courses dropped in MyRED through midnight, Friday, September 3, 2010 will be removed from the student's
transcript record, but retained for billing purposes.
INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS: Dropping below full-time status without prior approval of International
Affairs can have serious consequences and may affect your permission to remain in the USA. NOTE:
See Tuition and Fees; Charges for Drops or Withdrawal.
Failure to attend classes does not constitute proper notification of a drop and you will continue to be
responsible for the course or courses on your schedule until you formally drop the class.
A drop becomes effective for tuition and grade purposes on the date the transaction is processed in
MyRED, or the “Schedule Adjustment Form” is processed with Registration and Records.
Students (undergraduate and graduate) may withdraw from individual classes or from all classes for the Fall
Semester, regardless of the circumstances, before the 3/4 point of the term, Friday, November 12, 2010. A
grade of "W" will automatically be noted on the transcript for these courses. Any drops or withdrawals after the
3/4 point of the term are only granted for extraordinary circumstances by petition. Undergraduate students
should contact their college dean's office to obtain the "Petition for Late Withdrawal" form. Graduate students
should contact Graduate Studies, 1100 Seaton Hall, to obtain the petition form.
Deadlines for courses less than a full semester in length (Mini-Session) are prorated. Contact
Registration and Records, 107 Canfield Administration Building South, for specific dates for adding, dropping,
and the withdrawal ("W") periods for mini-courses.
Note: If a student is found to have been academically dishonest in a course and drops the course, the
instructor reserves the right to add the student's name to the Final Grade Roster and submit a final grade. In
this case, the student will be held accountable for the full tuition for the course.
Withdrawals
Dropping all of the classes you are enrolled in for a term after the term begins constitutes a withdrawal. To
withdraw from all courses, access MyRED (myred.unl.edu), drop all of your classes, or process a
“Cancellation/Withdrawal Form” at Registration and Records, 107 Canfield Administration Building South. Law
students wishing to withdraw or drop classes should make their requests to their college dean's office. No
withdrawals are permitted after the three-quarter point of the term. NOTE: See Withdrawal from the University.
If, after the last day to add classes in each term, you decide to drop a course or courses and/or withdraw
from the University, it is recommended that you contact the Office of Scholarships and Financial Aid, 17
Canfield Administration Building South, (402) 472-2030, before you act to discuss the possible need for
repayment of federal aid and your eligibility for subsequent aid in future semesters.
Only in the case of timely notification (within the term the event occurred or immediately thereafter) of your
unexpected hospitalization, the death of a member of your immediate family living in your household, or a
University error, may the effective date of the drop of a course or withdrawal be adjusted to the occurrence of
the event. Proper documentation and explanation in writing will be required to determine the adjusted effective
date.
August 23 (Mon.)
Fall Semester begins
August 30 (Mon.)
Last day for late registrations and adds including adds of
thesis or dissertation credits (Census Date)
August 30 (Mon.)
Last day to drop a full semester course and receive 100%
refund
September 3 (Fri.)
Last day to drop a full semester course and receive 75%
refund
September 3 (Fri.)
Last day to file a drop to remove course from student's
record
September 4 (Sat.) November 12 (Fri.)
All course withdrawals noted with a grade of "W" on
academic record
September 6 (Mon.)
Labor Day (Student and Staff Holiday-UNL offices
closed)
September 10 (Fri.)
Last day to withdraw from a full semester course and
receive 50% refund
September 10 (Fri.)
Last day to apply for residence for Fall Semester
September 17 (Fri.)
Last day to withdraw from a full semester course and
receive 25% refund
September 19 (Sun.)
Tuition and fee payment deadline
September 24 (Fri.)
Final day to apply for a degree in December ($25.00 fee
due with application)
October 15 (Fri.)
Last day to change a course registration to or from
"Pass/No Pass"
October 18 - 19 (Mon. Tues.)
Fall Semester Break (Student Holiday - UNL offices
open)
October 25 (Mon.) November 9 (Tues.)
Priority Registration for Spring Semester 2011
November 10 (Wed.) January 9 (Sun.) 2011
Open Registration for Spring Semester 2011
November 12 (Fri.)
Last day to withdraw from one or more courses for the
term
Appendix 3.
Institutional Policy
University of Arizona
Leave of Absence Policies at Peer Institutions
Key Components
Duration: up to 2 semesters
Undergraduate Leave of Absence Policy (Policy updated:
August 20, 1999)
The Undergraduate Student Leave of Absence assists and
encourages students to return and graduate after a one or
two semester absence from campus. Students with this
status need not apply for or pay readmission fees, and may
register for classes during their priority registration period.
The University grants a Leave of Absence through the
student’s College Dean’s Office, see the current Catalog for
College Contacts for Leave of Absence. Nursing students
must follow the procedure for Leave of Absence in the
College’s Baccalaureate Student Handbook. International
students leaving the University should contact the Center for
Global Student Programs (621-4627). For students
participating in UA-sponsored Study Abroad programs, this
Leave of Absence is unnecessary and, therefore,
unavailable . On the other hand, it is appropriate and
available to students participating in NON-UA-sponsored
study abroad programs.
The deadline for a completed application to be received (not
mailed) in the Administration Building, Room 210, from the
college dean’s office, is by 4:00 p.m. on the last regular
business day before school starts. Final decisions regarding
approval or disapproval of Leave of Absence requests will
not be available until the posting of grades for the semester
immediately preceding the term for which the leave is
requested. Students should note that the timing of the final
decision depends on the timing of the application.
Therefore, students may not receive a decision on the
request for Leave of Absence before the first day of class if
their application is received just before the opening of
classes. Incomplete applications will be sent back to the
colleges. If the deadline is missed by this action, the student
will not be eligible for the leave.
To qualify, students must satisfy the following criteria:
a. be registered during the semester
immediately prior to the beginning of the
leave;
b. have a cumulative GPA of at least 2.0 -- both
at the time of application for leave and
following the posting of grades for the
semester immediately preceding the term of
the requested leave of absence;
c. have their University accounts paid in full,
both at the time of leave application and
Deadline to apply: 4 p.m. on the
last day of business before
school starts, but fees assessed
based on date of receipt of
application
Return: application for
readmission not required
Criteria:
-Registered in the term
preceding the leave
-2.0 cum GPA at the end of the
term preceding the leave
-Accounts paid in full
-No pending disciplinary action
Privileges Retained: na
following the posting of grades for the
semester immediately preceding the term of
the requested leave of absence; and
d. have no pending disciplinary action.
After processing the application, the Registrar’s Office will
mail the student copy to the student and the college copy to
the college.
Students, when they do not return at the end of the
approved leave, must apply for readmission and comply with
readmission rules.
While on Leave of Absence, the University:
a. reports enrollment status to lenders and loan
service entities as "not attending" (students
are advised to contact their lender(s) for
repayment information and grace period
expiration); and
b. suspends student’s insurance and use of
University facilities.
See the current Catalog for College Contacts for Leave of
Absence.
Arizona State University
Leave of Absence (Undergraduate)
No leave appl. required for
absences of two consecutive
semesters, Quick Re-entry
The Undergraduate Leave of Absence (LOA) policy assists
and encourages undergraduate degree-seeking students to
return and graduate after an absence of more than two
semesters from ASU.
Duration: LOA is for leaves
longer than two consecutive
semesters, not longer than 2
years
Note: If you are an undergraduate degree seeking student
who previously attended ASU but have not been enrolled at
ASU for one or two consecutive fall or spring semesters
you may be eligible to return to ASU through the "Quick Reentry". Students are not required to process an LOA for
absences of one or two consecutive fall or spring semesters.
Deadline to apply:
Eligibility Requirements
To be eligible for an Undergraduate Leave of
Absence, students must be eligible to register for classes
and meet the following criteria:
1.
2.
Be a degree-seeking undergraduate student.
Be registered during the semester immediately prior
to the beginning of the Leave of Absence.

Students who were admitted as new first
semester freshmen or transfer students but did not
attend will not be eligible for a Leave of Absence.
Instead, they should contact the Undergraduate
Admissions office.
Return: application for
readmission not required
Criteria:
-Degree-seeking
-Registered in the term
preceding the leave
-in good standing, P1, or P2 at
the end of the term preceding
the leave
-Accounts paid in full
-No pending disciplinary action
-Submit any transcripts due
Privileges Retained: limited
library access, continuing
student access to campus
recreation (for a fee)

Students who were readmitted but did not
attend will not be eligible for a Leave of Absence.
Instead, they should contact the Undergraduate
Admissions office.

Students who are participating in an ASUsponsored study abroad program need not apply for
a Leave of Absence; however, students who
are participating in a non-ASU-sponsored study
abroad program should take advantage of the LOA
policy, if eligible.
3.
Be in academic good standing, on probation, or on
continuing probation with their college.
4.
Have no hold (e.g., disciplinary, financial, testing,
etc.) which would restrict registration. Note: Students
with financial holds may be given consideration for a
Leave of Absence if authorized by the Collections Office.
5.
Have submitted any outstanding high school and/or
transfer transcripts, if prior admission/readmission and
continued enrollment was contingent upon receipt of
those transcripts.
Undergraduate students considering taking an absence from
ASU should carefully review the policies and procedures for
submitting an Undergraduate Leave of Absence Request.
Leave of Absence Duration:
A Leave of Absence will be granted for more than two
consecutive regular semesters. (A regular semester is
defined as a fall or spring semester and excludes winter and
summer sessions; for example, Leave of Absence is granted
for fall and spring or spring through fall.)
If the student does not return at the agreed semester, he or
she would need to undergo formal readmission to ASU, to
include submission of a new application, fee and any
necessary transcripts.
1. A student may request a Leave of Absence more
than once; however, the cumulative total of such
requests may not exceed two years.
2. A student may request an extension longer than
three consecutive regular semesters. Approval
consideration will be at the college’s discretion,
based on the worthiness of the request. (For
example, appropriate extensions may result from
students leaving for active military duty or religious
missions).
3. A student may return earlier than the original agreed
return date but should provide notice as soon as
possible, keeping in mind applicable deadlines, such
as advising, registration, financial aid, etc.
Student Status during the Leave of Absence:
A student granted a Leave of Absence retains his/her
admitted student status. However, he/she is not registered
and, therefore, does not have all the rights and privileges of
a registered student and should be aware of the following
consequences:
1. Student Financial Assistance Office – A student is
not eligible for any financial aid disbursements during
the semesters while on LOA. A student on a LOA
will be reported to lenders and loan service agencies
as “non-attending” and will need to contact his/her
lenders for information on possible repayment
requirements.
2. Enrollment verification requests – Enrollment
verifications for other entities, such as parents’ health
or auto insurance companies, will also be reported as
“non-attending.”
3. Facilities Access:
a. Library – A student on a LOA will have
limited access to library resources. He/she
may access library resources, including use
of electronic databases and journals, while
physically present in any campus library. No
remote access to proprietary databases and
electronic resources is available. Normal
borrowing privileges are not retained, but
restricted privileges may be available for a
fee; a student interested in checking out ASU
library material should contact any library
circulation services.
b. Campus Health – A student on a LOA for a
particular semester is not registered for any
credit hours and, therefore, not eligible to use
Campus Health services.
c. Computing resources – A student on a LOA
will not have access to computing resources,
including computing labs. Students will be
able to maintain their ASU Gmail accounts.
d. Campus recreation – A student on a LOA
may provide documentation and purchase a
“continuing student” membership for access
privileges.
Steps for Returning from a Leave of Absence:
1. At the time of return, a student must continue to be
eligible to register (i.e., have no enrollment
restrictions, such as an account delinquency,
disciplinary hold, or academic disqualification).
2. A student returning earlier than the original agreed
return date should provide notice to the University
Registrar’s Office (URO) as soon as possible,
keeping in mind applicable deadlines, such as
advising, registration, financial aid, etc.
3. A student must meet all financial aid requirements
and deadlines for the academic year of his/her
return.
4. The URO will identify concerns, if any, arising during
the student’s Leave of Absence which may make the
student ineligible for registration and work with the
college to resolve, if possible.
Contact Information:
Records & Enrollment Services
University Registrar’s Office
Arizona State University
Student Services Building, Room 140
Monday through Friday, 8:00AM – 5:00PM
480-965-3124
Fax: 480-965-7722
E-mail: registrar@asu.edu
University of Colorado, Boulder
Stay Connected program
Stay Connected (for Undergraduate Students Only) -
Duration: up to four semesters
Beginning fall semester 2010, undergraduate students who
withdraw and then wish to return to the university will have
up to four semesters, including summer, to return to the
university without having to reapply for admission. See
information and exclusions under “Readmit Students” or visit
registrar.colorado.edu.
Deadline to apply: sign up and
pay $50 fee
Stay Connected students may purchase a package of
services to use while on leave (if eligible). These services
include Wardenburg Student Health Insurance, access to
the Recreation Center, early application for scholarships,
etc. Students wanting this package of services must first
sign up for the Stay Connected Program and pay a $50
administrative fee at the Office of the Registrar. Some of the
services available to these students are only available for an
additional fee.
Withdrawal Procedures Students may officially withdraw from the university by filling
out a withdrawal form in the Office of the Registrar, Regent
Administrative Center 105, by sending a letter of withdrawal
to Office of the Registrar, University of Colorado at Boulder,
20 UCB, Boulder, CO 80309-0020, by faxing a letter to 303492-8748, or by e-mailing withdraw@colorado.edu from the
student’s CU e-mail account.
In all terms, students are not permitted to withdraw after the
last day of classes.
Failure to withdraw will result in a failing grade being
recorded for every course taken in a term and makes a
student liable for the full amount of tuition and fees for that
term. For refund stipulations, see the withdrawal policy
regarding tuition and fees, in this catalog.
Rules for withdrawing may vary with each college and
school. Students anticipating a withdrawal should consult
with their dean’s office and read the withdrawal information
Return: application for
readmission not required
Criteria: have earned Colorado
credits in the past, be in good
academic standing
Privileges Retained: purchase a
package of services including:
student health insurance, access
to recreation, career services,
and multicultural centers, early
scholarship application, retain
non-work study student
employee status, etc.
on the registrar’s website at
registrar.colorado.edu/students/withdraw.html or in the
Summer Session Catalog for specific withdrawal
procedures. More information is available in the Office of the
Registrar, Regent Administrative Center 105, 303-492-6970,
on the Web at registrar.colorado.edu, or by e-mailing
withdraw@colorado.edu.
Withdrawing students (including students applying for the
Time Off Programs) with Federal Perkins/NDSL loans must
complete a loan exit interview before leaving the university.
Failure to do so will result in a “hold” on your record. This
hold will prevent you from receiving a diploma or an
academic transcript from the university and from registering
for future terms. In order to complete a loan exit interview,
contact the university Student Loans department in the
Bursar’s Office at 303-492-5571, or 1-800-925-9844.
Beginning fall semester 2010, students who withdraw and
then wish to return to the university will have up to four
semesters, including summer, to return to the university
without having to reapply for admission. See information and
exclusions under “Readmit Students” or visit
registrar.colorado.edu
University of California, Davis
Leave of Absence: Planned Educational Leave
Program (PELP)
The Planned Educational Leave Program allows any
registered student-undergraduate or graduate-to temporarily
suspend academic work at UC Davis. Undergraduates may
take one such leave during their academic career at UC
Davis and that leave is limited to one quarter in duration. For
graduate students the maximum leave is up to one year.
Undergraduates apply for PELP at the Office of the
University Registrar. Graduate students apply through
theirdepartments and professional students apply through
their Dean’s office.
Applications for PELP may be filed as late as the tenth day
of instruction during the quarter for which the student is
requesting a leave. However, approved applications
submitted after the first day of instruction will entitle you to
only a partial retraction of fees assessed, which may provide
a refund in accordance with the Schedule of Refunds. The
Schedule of Refunds refers to calendar days beginning with
the first day of instruction. The effective date for determining
a refund of fees is the date the completed and approved
PELP form is returned to the Office of the University
Registrar; see the Fees, Expenses and Financial Aid
chapter.
An application fee of $60 is charged to your account when
you enroll in the PELP program. While students may receive
academic credit at other institutions and transfer this credit
to UC Davis (subject to rules concerning transfer credit),
participants are reminded that the intent of the program is to
“suspend academic work.” Therefore, students are urged to
Duration: one, one-quarter
leave, students who do not
return in agreed upon term are
automatically withdrawn from the
university
Deadline to apply: 10th day of
instruction, fees refunded based
on the registration calendar
Return: guaranteed if you return
for mutually agreed upon term
Criteria:
-complete PELP application and
pay $60 fee
-be in good academic standing
-accounts paid
Privileges Retained: placement
and students employment
services, counseling, faculty
advising,
for a fee: student health
services, library privileges.
carefully evaluate the desirability of taking academic work
while away from the campus during PELP. Students enrolled
in PELP are not eligible to enroll in Open Campus
(concurrent) courses at the UC Davis campus, or to
otherwise earn academic credit at UC Davis during the
PELP leave.
Readmission is guaranteed assuming you resume academic
work by enrolling in courses, satisfying any holds that may
have been placed on your registration and paying your
registration fees by the established deadlines for the quarter
specified for return on your approved PELP application.
Students who do not return by the specified quarter will be
automatically withdrawn from the university.
You will not be eligible to receive normal university services
during the planned leave. Certain limited services, however,
such as placement and student employment services,
counseling, and faculty advising are available. Students on
PELP may purchase a health care card from the Student
Health Service and may retain library privileges by
purchasing a library card. International students should
consult Services for International Students and Scholars to
find out how the PELP will affect their status. Grants and
other financial aids will be discontinued for the period of the
leave, but effort will be made, where legally possible, to
allow you to renegotiate loan payment schedules and to
ensure the availability of financial aid upon your return.
Related Policy
COURSE LOAD
Expected Progress. Undergraduate students are expected to
graduate in 12 quarters (four years). To do so, students
should plan to complete an average of 15 units per quarter
(15 units per quarter for 12 quarters totals 180 units).
Because occasions arise which prevent students from
achieving expected progress towards the degree, the
campus has established minimum progress requirements, to
which students must adhere.
Minimum Progress Requirements. To meet minimum
progress, a full-time regular undergraduate is required to
maintain an average of at least 13 units passed over all
quarters of enrollment. Minimum progress is calculated at
the end of every Spring Quarter for the preceding three
quarters (Fall, Winter, Spring) comprising the academic
year. Undergraduate students falling below this requirement
are not in good academic standing and may be disqualified
from further enrollment at the University. Quarters for which
a student was officially approved for part-time status are
omitted from the minimum progress calculation. For more
information, see Probation and Dismissal, on page 80.
Certification of Full-Time Status. Undergraduate students
must carry a study load of at least 12 units (including
workload units) each quarter in order to be certified as fulltime students for insurance and financial aid purposes or to
compete in intercollegiate athletics. Graduate students must
carry a study load of at least 12 units each quarter in order
to be certified as full-time students.
Iowa State University
Duration: less than 12 months
Returning/Reentry to the
University
U.S. students who have been absent from Iowa State
University less than 12 months may be admitted as a
returning student. If more than 12 months have elapsed
since last enrolled, a U.S. student must apply for reentry to
the university. All international students must apply for
reentry regardless of the time away from the university.
Returning Students
U.S. undergraduate and non-degree undergraduate students
planning to return to Iowa State University after an absence
of less than 12 months do not complete a reentry form;
however, international undergraduate and non-degree
undergraduate students planning to return to Iowa State
University after an absence of less than 12 months must
complete a reentry form. Returning U.S. students and
graduate students should contact the Office of the Registrar
to have their records updated and registration access
created. Students should contact their advisers or major
professor to select courses and begin the registration
process. Returning students who want to change their
curricula should follow the same procedure as in-school
students. Students who were dropped from enrollment at
Iowa State University must obtain reinstatement by the
Academic Standards Committee of the college that initiated
the drop. (See below for policies that apply to requests for
reinstatement.)
Reentry Students
Undergraduate and non-degree undergraduate (special)
students who plan to attend Iowa State University after an
absence of twelve months or more must complete a reentry
form. Forms are available from
www.iastate.edu/~registrar/info/reentry.html.
Students with a bachelor’s degree who plan to take
supporting graduate level coursework prior to applying for
graduate degree admission should request a non-degree
graduate admission application.
Students who have previously attended Iowa State
University only as non-degree (special) students and who
now seek to earn an undergraduate degree should request
an undergraduate application.
International students must complete a reentry form. Forms
are available from
www.iastate.edu/~registrar/info/reentry.html. Financial
certification of ability to cover all educational and living
expenses will be required.
The reentry form should be completed and returned to the
Office of the Registrar, 0460 Beardshear Hall, well in
advance of the term of reentry. Students who have attended
another college or university since enrollment at Iowa State
University must have an official transcript(s) of all course
work attempted sent to the Office of Admissions, 100
Enrollment Services Center. Reentering students must also
contact their departmental office/adviser to prepare a class
Deadline to apply: no notice
required for leaves of less than
12 months
Return: contact the Registrar’s
office to return; application for
readmission not required
Criteria:
-U.S. undergraduate
-In good standing
-Accounts paid in full
-No pending disciplinary action
-Submit any transcripts due
Privileges Retained: na
schedule. Reentry must be approved prior to registration.
Iowa State University requests the information on the reentry
form for the purpose of making a reentry decision. The
university reserves the right not to approve reentry if the
student fails to provide the required information.
Reentry Approval Process
Generally, a request to reenter Iowa State University will be
approved within the Office of the Registrar. However, the
Office of the Registrar will refer the reentry form to the
college to which a student plans to return if the student: (a)
desires to change curriculum; (b) has a previous Iowa State
University cumulative grade point average below 2.00; (c)
was dropped from the university for unsatisfactory academic
progress or was not otherwise in good standing; or (d) since
leaving Iowa State University, has completed additional
college study with less than a 2.00 grade point average.
See Index, Reinstatement.
University of Oregon
Reenrollment
Admitted undergraduate students planning to register
any time during an academic year after an absence of four
or more terms
must notify the Office of the Registrar by filing a reenrollment
form,
available on the registrar’s website.
Reenrollment procedures for graduate students are
described in the Graduate School section of this catalog.
University of Nebraska, Lincoln
Former Students. Former UNL students who have not been
in attendance for three or more consecutive semesters (the
summer sessions count as one semester) must apply for
readmission in order to be eligible to register for classes.
They can do this by completing a Returning UNL Student
Application for Admission and providing official transcripts
from any other colleges or universities they have attended
since their last enrollment at UNL.
Readmission to the University of Nebraska– Lincoln is not
automatic for students who have been academically
dismissed or failed to clear all admission deficiencies. Before
seeking readmission to the University, these students must
clear all admission deficiencies. Once all admission
deficiencies are cleared, students who were not
academically dismissed may immediately apply for
readmission. Students who have been academically
dismissed, may only apply for readmission after they have
removed all admission deficiencies and the mandatory
period of two consecutive semesters of non-enrollment has
been met. (Summer Sessions, collectively, count as one
semester.) Following this period of non-enrollment, students
must complete a Returning UNL Student Application for
Duration: 2 consecutive
semesters (summer counts as
one semester)
Deadline to apply: no notice
required for leaves of two
semesters
Return: contact the Registrar’s
office to return; application for
readmission not required. New
catalog year may be assigned
upon readmission.
Criteria:
-In good standing
-No pending disciplinary action
-Submit any transcripts due
Privileges Retained: catalog
year
Admission, a Readmission Questionnaire and present an
official transcript showing removal of admission deficiencies.
The forms are available at the Office of Admissions.
Application materials, including transcripts from institutions
attended since being dismissed, must be submitted by the
admission deadlines. For more information about
readmission to the University, see “Academic Standards” on
page 14.
College of Business Administration
Readmitted Students
Students readmitted to the College of Business
Administration who previously left the College in good
standing (including a minimum 2.5 cumulative GPA) may
return to the College. Students will, however, be required to
follow current requirement guidelines of the College.
Instructions to request an appeal of this policy are available
in the
Dean’s Office for Undergraduate Programs. Students who
left the College with a cumulative GPA below 2.5 may not
return to the College until they have achieved a minimum 2.5
cumulative GPA at UNL. At that time, they may transfer back
to the College, but must meet the requirements of the
College enforced at the time of their new entrance to the
College of Business Administration. No waivers to follow old
curriculum requirements are permitted for students who
leave the College with less than a 2.5 cumulative GPA.
Appendix 4:
2009-2010 Committee Recommendations
Relating to catalog language regarding statute of
limitations on courses
Recommendation: Based on the analysis of policies from
peer institutions and the issues raised by the “NonTraditional No More” program, we recommend that the
following language be included in the UNR General Catalog:
In areas of study in which the subject matter
changes rapidly, material in courses taken
long before graduation may become obsolete.
Courses which are more than ten years old
are applicable toward completion of specific
major or minor requirements at the discretion
of the student's major or minor department.
Departments may approve, disapprove, or
request that the students revalidate the
substance of such courses. Students whose
major or minor programs include courses that
will be more than 10 years old at the
expected time of graduation should consult
with their major or minor department at the
earliest possible time to determine
acceptability of such courses. Courses older
than 10 years will apply to general elective
requirements. Departments may adopt a
more restrictive policy where accreditation
and/or licensure requirements limit the
applicability of courses to less than 10 years.
Adopted, and implemented in
the 2010 catalog.
Rationale: The language above provides students with fair
warning that coursework older than 10 years may be subject
to review by their department and, where necessary, allows
departments to establish higher standards. We recommend
that department chairs be made aware of this language and
that program curriculum committees be encouraged to
establish clear guidelines for their individual degree
programs.
Relating to the Final Exam Schedule
[Pending consideration of student input, adopt the new final
exam schedule.] The schedule presented in Appendix 4
(see below) as the “Recommended Final Week Class
Schedule” be modified to an 8:00am start time daily,
bumping all times by ½ hour. [ and presented to
students and faculty for additional discussion, if
needed, to be implemented.] We realize that this new
schedule will have an impact on administrative
practices and that some faculty and students may
object to extending the exam period, since the current
schedule helps most students and faculty complete
exams early within exam week.
Adopted, and implemented for
the fall of 2011.
Rationale: The committee believes that overall learning and
performance may be enhanced by modifying the schedule
for final exams and suggest a schedule that provides better
balance among classes and attempts to keep final exams on
the same day as the scheduled class. With this schedule
there would be more final exams closer to the grade due
date, but the grade due date would change so that grades
would be due on the following Monday. The exams for
classes with the largest enrollment were at the top of the
schedule and exams were spread more evenly.
Regarding Residency Requirements
The committee and senate recommend that there should be
a residency requirement for both major and minor degree
programs. Departments/programs should have the flexibility
to establish residency requirements that are most applicable
for specific degree programs, however, while we prefer that
individual programs establish their own guidelines, we
recommend the following general policies to help drive those
guidelines:
Approved by the Faculty Senate;
awaiting approval of the
President and Provost.
Approved for implementation
for Fall 2011.
1. Students must complete at least 15 upper division
credits in residence and in the major to earn an
undergraduate major from UNR.
2.Students must complete at least 6 upper division
credits in residence and in the minor to earn an
undergraduate minor from UNR.
Rationale: The current residency requirement could result in
a student earning a major or minor from UNR without taking
any classes from UNR faculty in the major or minor area.
*The proposed recommendation does not replace the
current requirement of 32 upper division credits in residence,
instead, the recommendation further specifies what students
must take with respect to individual major and minor
programs.
Regarding the Grade Appeal Process
Recommendation and Rationale: The new proposed
process, described in Appendix 5, (see below) relies on a
single combined department and college-level appeal
committee, eliminating the possibility of using two separate
appeal committees. By eliminating the second appeal
committee, and tightening the required response times
between steps in the process, we were able to shorten the
maximum time for a grade appeal to about 12 weeks.
The new proposed process also requires a meeting between
department chair and student, optionally including the faculty
member as preferred by the participants in the process. We
anticipate that grade appeals may be resolved more quickly
if department chairs participate early and fully in the process.
We also hope that full participation will help department
chairs to identify potential misunderstandings that might
contribute to grade appeals and then guide faculty in the
Approved by the Faculty Senate;
awaiting approval of the
President and Provost.
Approved for implementation
for Fall 2011.
development of grade assessment methods.
Regarding Academic Dishonesty
In order to standardize UNR terminology, we propose that
the term Academic Integrity encompass all issues related to
academic misconduct such as plagiarism and cheating. We
propose that “Section IV: Academic Standards” pp. 72-73 of
the 2010-11 UNR General Catalogue be entitled “Academic
Integrity” instead of “Academic Standards.”
UNR should have a single webpage regarding Academic
Integrity (AI) hosted by the Faculty Senate. Any unit who
wants to address academic integrity should link to this single
webpage. The website should contain:
a. A brief Code of Ethics for students;
b. A copy of pp. 72-73 from the 2010-11 UNR
General Catalogue “Section IV: “Academic
[Standards] Integrity”;
c. A copy of the NSHE Board of Regents Code: Title
2, Chapter 6;
d. A link to the Office of Student Conduct “Academic
Standards for Students” (this part also contains
NSHE policy)
e. The ASUN student “Honor Code”;
f. A link to examples of academic integrity issues
(plagiarism) from other University websites e.g.,
Purdue, Northwestern, etc.;
g. Student and faculty responsibilities to prevent and
reduce academic dishonesty on campus; and
h. Sample language for use in course syllabuses
concerning academic integrity.
Work with New Student Initiatives to distribute ASUN “Honor
Code” to entering students as part of New Student
Orientation. We propose that all entering students sign a
statement that they have read and agreed to uphold the
“Honor Code.” This proposal may prove to be cost
prohibitive because there may be no way to enforce or store
the signed statements. Even digital signatures could prove
problematic. If this recommendation is cost prohibitive, then
we recommend that that Honor Code be distributed with no
signatures required.
Develop an on-line WebCampus module on AI. The module
should reference the AI website and be used as an
interactive learning assignment. We recommend that this
module on AI be completed by all undergraduates and
graduate students during their first sem ester at the
University. Work with the Knowledge Center and
Instructional Technology to develop this module. The
Committee discussed implementation with Instructional
Technology staff and they believed that it would be relatively
little cost to implement this type of module. They also
indicated a willingness to take on this task for the university.
Make faculty aware of the AI website and its contents,
academic policy procedures, and sanctions, i.e., reporting.
Suggestions to increase awareness include discussion at
New Faculty Orientation; an annual email reminder from the
Provost; and a “zero-tolerance” campaign initiated by ASUN.
This topic should also be a required component of graduate
assistant and adjunct/LOA faculty training/orientation.
There was some confusion on
this one. The Senate and
President initially approved the
proposal.
But after Michelle Hritz, Sally
Morgan, Michael Ekedahl and
Dana Edberg met, Michelle
made some inquiries with I/T
regarding the web and database
design. Those inquiries, which
raised FERPA concerns, led the
President to withdraw his
support from the project.
The 2010-11committee asked to
have the project revived with the
limited objective of revising the
Student Conduct Office’s
website to make it easier for
students and faculty to locate
the policies and forms to report
incidents of academic
dishonesty. With the Executive
Board’s approval the project was
revived. Mike Ekedahl
contacted Sally Morgan who
promised to provide content for
the site. Sally has not yet done
so.
The project is now on hold
pending the implementation of
a content management
system for Student Services
websites.
Standardize and simplify the current reporting system.
Develop a streamlined, web-based system for reporting AI
violations. We recommend using a one-page alleged AI
violation form that contains a brief discussion of the violation
and information on the sanction.
We recommend that all instances including warnings of
alleged AI violations be reported on this form.
The alleged AI violation form is submitted to the Office of
Student Conduct, the Chair of the alleged violating student,
the accusing faculty, and the student (and other units if
necessary). Several example forms are available to choose
from various university websites. We suggest adopting a
simple-to-use version for UNR using input about form design
provided from faculty and students.
Recommend that faculty use “Safe-Assign” WebCampus
tool for writing assignments in courses taught at UNR.
“Safe-Assign” is available free-of-charge for courses taught
at UNR
Rationale/Funding: Dana has offered to use an IS class to
develop a comprehensive single web site and database to
collect data about incidences. The maintenance would fall to
IT. Sally Morgan was not being eliminated out of the
process; the recommendation would allow faculty a choice of
whether or not to report Academic Integrity to Sally Morgan.
There was really no way to force faculty to report Academic
Dishonesty so the requirement was not effective. Some
faulty prefer not to report because the burden of proof is on
the faculty member, not the students. There was a concern
that as the university grew that Sally Morgan’s Office would
not be able to keep up with the larger number of students.
There would be a link and the database would be housed on
Sally Morgan’s website.
Regarding Interdisciplinary Program Administration
Further and more sustained study should occur if the
Provost believes it should occur. A campus-wide ad-hoc
committee, rather than the Academic Standards Committee,
might be better able to address the issues raised by this
study as well as other pertinent issues.
No action to date.
VPR is reviewing
interdisciplinary grad.
Program operations;
recommendations are
forthcoming.
Rationale: The committee did not have a recommendation
as they felt that this is not an academic standards issue.
There is information on the provost website that should be
followed for comprehensive administrative guidelines. The
report represents a preliminary investigation of a complex
topic. Not sure this is a faculty issue, or if it should be a
senate issue, because it is not a faculty rights or governance
issue.
Committee recommendation: The dual degree policy
requiring 32 additional credits should be changed so that no
additional credits be required for the completion of a dual
degree beyond the course requirements of each degree.
2008-2009 Committee Recommendations
DROP/WITHDRAWAL POLICY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Adopted, and implemented in
the 2010 catalog.
Adopted, and implemented in
the 2009 catalog.
1. The withdrawal date should be extended to the end of the
9th week of the semester or, in the case of sessions of
shorter length (wintermester; summer session) at a point
60% into the term. This will provide more time for faculty to
provide meaningful feedback regarding grades to students
and, in some instances, provide students with an opportunity
to alter their study strategies in a class and see if such
changes result in improved academic performance.
Currently, students are allowed to withdraw from individual
classes up until the end of the 8th week of the semester.
This recommendation is consistent with UNLV’s drop date
policy.
2. Devise a series of pop-up messages on ePAWS that are
initiated when a student attempts to withdraw from a course.
The messages would inform the student of possible
ramifications if they withdraw from a course (i.e., loss of
financial aid and/or scholarships; loss of full-time student
status; progress towards degree, etc.) and urge students to
consult with an academic advisor prior to withdrawing from
individual courses. The committee realizes this may not be
feasible with our current registration system, but
recommends its implementation as soon as possible.
GRADE REPLACEMENT POLICY
Adopted, and implemented in
RECOMMENDATIONS:
the 2009 catalog.
The following recommendations for changes in the current
policy are supported both by the majority of responses
received from advisors and the committee:
1. Extend the number of semesters a student has to repeat a
course and use the grade replacement option from “the next
regular semester in which the course is offered and the
student is enrolled” to “within the next two regular semesters
in which the student is enrolled. If the course is not offered
within the next two regular semesters, the must take the
course the next time it is offered.” Students should still be
encouraged to repeat a required class as soon as possible,
but this would provide more flexibility in planning and not
require students to adjust their next semester schedule if
they have already enrolled in classes and/or a class they
need to repeat is full.
2. Change the current restriction on the repeat policy to “a
maximum of four lower-division courses not to exceed15
credits.” The current policy states that “students may repeat
a maximum of 12 lower-division credits to replace original
UNR grades.” This will assist students who wish to replace
the grade in one or more 4 or 5 credit courses.
The purpose of the grade replacement policy is to give
students the opportunity to improve their academic
performance in one or more courses in which they have
done poorly. The committee discussed in length the idea of
restricting grade replacement to include only courses in
which a student has received a grade of C- or lower.
We concluded, however, that students may differ in their
definitions/perceptions of poor academic performance
and that all students should be given the same chance to
improve their GPA’s through the use of the grade
replacement policy.
PROBATION, DISQUALIFICATION, SUSPENSION AND
DISMISSAL POLICIES
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The committee’s recommendations still result in three
level/actions, but terminology and actions taken differ from
current policy.
1. Academic Warning: GPA cut offs would continue to be
based on the number of credits earned at UNR:
i. 0-29 credits – when cumulative UNR GPA is 1.6 or above
but below 2.0
ii. 30-59 credits – when UNR GPA is 1.8 or above but below
2.0
iii. 60 or more credits – when UNR GPA is 1.9 or above but
below 2.0
iv. Action:
a) Allowed to remain in major
b) Receives letter from college and e-mail from Admissions
and Records
c) Registration hold on student’s record; mandatory advising
prior to next semester’s registration
d) Still allowed to use ePAWS for registration transactions
2. Academic Probation (University): Student falls below the
above GPA thresholds which continue to be based on the
number of credits earned at UNR.
i. 0-29 credits – cumulative UNR GPA is below 1.6
ii. 30-59 credits – cumulative UNR GPA is below 1.8
iii. 60 or more credits – cumulative UNR GPA is below 1.9
iv. Action:
a) Removed from major; can stay in college or switch to
undecided
b) Receives letter from college and e-mail from Admissions
Adopted with changes, and
implemented in the 2009
catalog. The 2010-11
committee proposed catalog
language and a form for a
dismissal appeal process. The
university will dismiss students
for the first time at the end of the
Fall 2011 semester.
ACADEMIC PROBATION
Undergraduate students are
placed on academic probation
when a student's cumulative
University of Nevada GPA is
below 2.0.
Students who are placed on
Academic Probation will receive
a letter notifying them of their
academic status. Admissions
and Records will place a
registration/advisement hold on
each probationary student's
record.
Release from University
Probation: Undergraduate
students are removed from
Probation when their University
and Records
c) Registration hold on student’s record; mandatory advising
d) Student limited to 12 credits/semester with approval of
advisor; access to ePAWS denied; must register in person
with advisor signed advisement sheet. With the
implementation of the new registration system it is hoped
that electronic registration could be “authorized” thus
eliminating the need for registration to be done in person but
still allowing advisors to maintain control with respect to the
student’s enrollment. Until such point in time, it is suggested
that a standardized form be developed and used by all
advisors to authorize enrollment in approved courses.
1. Student will be subject to dismissal if still on academic
probation after attempting 24 additional UNR credits
2. A school or college may still place a student on program
probation whenever satisfactory progress toward degree
objectives is not maintained.
3. Dismissal: Occurs if the student, after attempting 24
additional UNR credits beyond being placed on probation, a
student is still on academic probation.
i. Action:
a. Receives letter from college and e-mail from Admissions
and Records.
b. Student will be immediately withdrawn from any classes
for which the student has registered; any tuition paid will be
refunded.
c. Student cannot attend as a non-degree student and is not
eligible to attend summer session or enroll in courses
through extended studies/independent learning.
d. Student is required to remain out for at least two
academic years.
e. Students seeking readmission must receive approval from
the dean of the college the student wishes to enter prior to
readmission.
f. Students should be prepared to provide as part of the
readmission process, documentation that demonstrates
improved academic performance or a readiness for
academic success.
g. Students who are reinstated will be on academic
probation. The college into which the student is readmitted
may develop a prescribed program of study to which the
student must adhere.
h. If a student is dismissed a second time, subsequent
readmission will be allowed only with the approval of the
Special Admissions Committee
GRADE APPEAL POLICY AND PROCEDURE
The current grade appeals policy is reasonable, but it has
been clarified. A table has been developed to assist
students, faculty and grade appeal committee members (see
Appendix 1). The revised policy has slightly different time
frame.
B. Clarify that the grade appeal policy should not be used
when the grade appeal results from academic dishonesty.
C. New policy is as follows:
A course grade assigned by an instructor is only subject to
the appeals procedure if:
of Nevada cumulative GPA rises
above 2.0.
Rejected by the administration—
this recommendation was
modified the following year.
• The instructor based this student’s grade on factors other
than the student’s performance in the course and/or
completion of course requirements, or
• The instructor based this student’s grade on a more
demanding standard than was applied to other students in
the same section of the course.
The burden of proof that one of these two conditions holds
rests on the student, but a grade appeal committee may
request information from the instructor. If a student wishes to
appeal a grade received
as a sanction for an instance of academic dishonesty, the
student must follow the Academic Dishonesty procedure.
There are four steps in the appeal process:
1. Consultation with instructor before filing Grade Appeal
Form
2. Filing a Grade Appeal Form with Department Chair,
3. Review by a Departmental Grade Appeal Committee,
4. Review by a College Grade Appeal Board.
ACADEMIC DISHONESTY
Rejected, revised and
RECOMMENDATIONS:
resubmitted the following year.
A. Previous recommendations that have already been
implemented
1. Faculty workshops to help discourage dishonesty should
be available on a voluntary basis. This is now available from
the Office of Student Conduct.
2. Standard language regarding the UNR Academic
Dishonesty policy should be made available for inclusion on
course syllabi. The Courses and Curriculum website
provides several examples of Academic
Dishonesty statements for syllabi.
3. Change grade replacement policy such that poor grades
due to Academic Dishonesty cannot be replaced through
Grade Replacement procedures. Implemented.
B. Previous Recommendations, already approved by the
Faculty Senate in May 2006, that we are carrying forward
and recommending for immediate implementation.
1. Faculty and student web sites on ADH issues, resources,
and online tutorial defining plagiarism.
Additional resources and assistance should be provided to
the Office of Student Conduct (OSC) to improve its online
content and format, to provide more information (including
links to other websites)
that is in a form more accessible to students. By way of
example, the UNLV website provides a useful model
regarding a user-friendly outline of that institution’s academic
dishonesty administrative procedures. The Online Writing
Center at Purdue University provides an example of an
excellent online tutorial defining plagiarism.
2. Students should be made aware of University policies on
ADH & available resources at New Student
Orientation. An existing Ethics Workshop should be
mandatory for students as part of New Student Orientation.
3. Modules on plagiarism, academic dishonesty and proper
citation should be developed for core classes.
We recommend that such modules be developed by Office
of Student Conduct but taught by regular core class
instructors.
4. Faculty should be made aware of the policy requirement
to report all cases of ADH to the Office of Student Conduct.
This issue should be emphasized during New Faculty
Orientation, and an annual email reminder sent to Chairs
and Deans to remind their instructors (including LOA’s) of
this requirement. This requirement should also be
emphasized in the mandatory course that Graduate
Teaching Assistants are required to take.
5. Development of a streamlined, web-based reporting
system for instructors to report ADH to Office of Student
Conduct. We recommend that the OSC provides an easy-touse form or template letter for faculty
to alert report ADH, including cases where faculty members
wish to deal with the matter informally. An example of such a
form can be found on the UNLV website,
http://studentlife.unlv.edu/judicial/misconductPolicy.html.
6. A student’s home department, major and college should
be informed of incidents of ADH. This can be tied to use of
the web-based form, described above.
7. Development of sanctioning guidelines for faculty to refer
to when deciding how to address ADH in their courses. Such
recommendations for faculty should be provided as part of a
revised OSC website. The
OSC should be tasked with coming up with such
recommendations in consultation with the Academic
Standards committee. It should be emphasized that these
are only guidelines, and that such academic sanctions will
remain a matter of faculty discretion.
8. The University Code of Conduct and Policies (section IV,
Academic Standards) should in separate sections lay out
explicitly the nature of possible academic and administrative
sanctions, and distinguish these two types of sanctions
clearly. This is implemented in our recommended textual
changes to the Code of Conduct (see attached).
9. The time frame for reporting ADH should be extended to
15 working days. This is implemented in our recommended
textual changes to the Code of Conduct (see attached). We
have also changed the policy
language from “…10 days from the alleged action” to “…15
working days from when the incident was identified or
discovered.”
10. An Honor Code should be drafted for the University.
Such an honor code was drafted and agreed to on April 11,
2007 by the ASUN (document RC-0607-9). We recommend
implementation of the honor code that has already been
drafted.
C. Previous recommendations, approved by the Faculty
Senate in May 2006, for which we recommend modification
or reconsideration
1. UNR should purchase a license to Turnitin.com (antiplagiarism software). The committee recommends
evaluation of two alternatives: Turnitin.com and the
SafeAssign program that is already included within WebCT.
We further recommend that a future committee evaluate the
question in greater detail by polling a group of potential
users (e.g. instructors of core English classes) as to whether
use of Turnitin.com
would be a desirable, cost-effective solution.
2. Instructors should have the right to request additional
sanctions beyond an F in the course, such as the right to
refuse re-admission to the course section. The committee
overwhelmingly voted against this
recommendation, feeling it was too unforgiving and could
create a situation where students might be locked out of
taking courses that are necessary for their major
requirements.
3. Adoption of the Q grade for cases of ADH, to appear on
the transcript until a non-credit course on ADH is
successfully completed. Although the Q grade is not feasible
without BOR approval, it would be possible to implement a
transcript notation of “academic dishonesty” within the
current system. UNLV currently implements such a policy
(http://studentlife.unlv.edu/judicial/misconductPolicy.html pp.
1213). The committee recommends an identical policy at UNR,
see the UNLV policy below with minor modifications.
A. In instances where it is determined that the academic
misconduct is of both an intentional and egregious nature,
the conduct sanction shall be recorded on the student’s
official and unofficial transcript with a transcript notation. The
transcript of the student shall be marked “Disciplinary
Notation due to Academic Dishonesty in (class) during
(semester).” The transcript notation shall occur only upon
completion of the student conduct proceedings. The conduct
sanction notation shall not affect the grade point average,
course repeatability or determination of academic standing.
This conduct sanction notation is intended to denote a failure
to accept and exhibit the fundamental value of academic
honesty.
B. Once a conduct sanction notation is made, the student
may file a written petition to the Academic Integrity Appeal
Board to have the notation removed. The decision to remove
the conduct sanction
notation shall rest in the discretion and judgment of a
majority of a quorum of the Board; provided that:
1. At the time the petition is received, at least 180 calendar
days shall have elapsed since the conduct sanction notation
was recorded; and,
2. At the time the petition is received, the student shall have
successfully completed the designated noncredit Academic
Integrity Seminar, as administered by the Office of Student
Conduct; or, for the person
no longer enrolled at the University, an equivalent activity as
determined by the Office of Student Conduct; and,
3. The Office of Student Conduct certifies that to the best of
its knowledge the student has not been found responsible
for any other act of academic misconduct or similar
disciplinary offense at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Reno or another institution.
C. Prior to deciding a petition, the Academic Integrity Appeal
Board will review the record of the case and consult with the
Office of Student Conduct and responsible instructor or
appropriate chair / director
/ supervisor. The decision of the Appeal Board shall not be
subject to subsequent Appeal Board reconsideration for at
least 180 calendar days, unless the Appeal Board specifies
an earlier date on which the petition may be reconsidered.
Subsequent Appeal Board determinations pertaining to the
removal of the conduct sanction notation may be appealed
to the Vice President for Student LifeProvost. If the Vice
President Provost removes the conduct sanction notation
from the
student’s transcript, the Vice PresidentProvost shall provide
a written rationale to the Appeal Board.
D. No student with a student conduct notation on the
student’s transcript shall be permitted to represent the
University in any extracurricular activity, or run for or hold an
executive office in any student organization which is allowed
to use University facilities, or which receives University
funds.
Note that appropriate implementation of the transcript
notation measure would require a course in place,
presumably offered by the Office of Student Conduct (OSC),
allowing students the opportunity to have the transcript
notation removed.
REDUCE THE TIME TO COMPLETION OF DEGREES
1. Do not recommend increasing the number of credits of a
course as a way to increase completion rates.
i. There are 99 four-credit undergraduate courses offered; 11
five-credit courses, and 16 variable credit courses in which
students can earn more than 3 credits.
ii. Courses with greater than 3 credits are often difficult to fit
into a full schedule. In addition, creating new courses is a
time consuming process.
2. Encouraging more courses in the summer semester
i. Having more summer semester and wintermester courses
would be advantages to students. Certain types of courses
can be successful in an accelerated format. A long-term goal
would be for summer to be supported by the state and seen
as a third semester.
3. Reduce the Board of Regents (BOR) minimum credit
hours requirement from 124 to 120 credits. The committee
respects the right of individual programs to determine
appropriate credit requirements for their degrees.
The BOR Handbook establishes a minimum of 124 semester
credits. Most UNR degrees require at least 128 credits (See
Appendix 3). Table 1 is a summary of the information in
Appendix 3.
Table 1: UNR Total Degree Credits
Total Credits Number of Degrees
124 2
126 2
128 81
129 4
130 1
131 3
133 2
120 minimum adopted by the
BOR.
A number of UNR programs
have reduced their credit
requirements accordingly.
138 1
While 124 credits is the minimum at UNR, few programs are
at the minimum. In multiple casual conversations, people
indicated that they thought the minimum was 128.
ii. We compared UNR graduation requirements to those of
our peers. Most of our peers have a minimum total credits
requirement of 120 semester credits for undergraduate
degrees. (see Table 2)
iii. The University Courses and Curricula Committee
discussed a draft of the proposal on February 2nd. The
following concerns were expressed:
a. The timing of the change, in the midst of a grave budget
crisis, might give the public the impression that the
University was relaxing its academic standards to save
money.
b. Though the Academic Standards Committee Chair
assured the group that changes to total credits requirements
would be made only at the request of
departments/programs, UCCC members were leery of
pressure from above to reduce total credit requirements.
Table 2: Total Credit Comparison
Institution Minimum Number of Credits
University of Nevada, Reno 124
University of Arizona 120
Arizona State 120
University of California, Davis 180 quarter credits = 120
semester
University of Colorado, Boulder 120 credits
Colorado State University 120
Iowa State University 122
University of Nebraska-Lincoln College of Arts & Science
125
University of Oregon 180 quarter credits = 120 semester
Oregon State University 180 quarter credits = 120 semester
University of Utah 122
Utah State University 120
Washington State University 120
RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS FOR MAJORS AND
MINORS
RECOMMENDATION:
The basic residency requirement for UNR is that 32 upper
division credits must be earned at UNR. The committee
recommends that at least 1/3rd of those credits must apply
to the degree. It is recommended that the same 1/3rd
requirement be applied to minors as well. Therefore 1/3rd of
all minor requirements must be earned at
UNR.
FUTURE ACTIONS ITEMS FOR THE ACADEMIC
STANDARDS COMMITTEE
A. The 2008-2009 committee recommends that next year’s
committee investigate the need to have a “statute of
limitations” on courses. For example, can upper division
courses from 20-years ago be applied to a degree today?
B. It is important that a follow-up and assessment
mechanism be put in place for recommendations. The
first objective would be to verify implementation of the
Rejected and resubmitted the
following year.
recommendations that are approved. The second
objective would be to determine if a recommendation
accomplished its purpose. A good example of this
would be the recommendations for academic
warning/probation/dismissal. It would be good to
evaluate the effectiveness in several years.
2007-2008 Committee Recommendations
Pertaining to Charge 1: Review existing policies at UNR
that relate to fostering a “culture of completion” (including
disqualification policy, drop policy and grade replacement
policy) with a view to reducing student attrition rates and
reducing the mean time required for students to obtain a
degree. Develop a midterm progress reporting tool. Review
similar policies at peer institutions. Develop
recommendations for change if necessary.
1. The existing catalog language regarding the policy for
dropping a course should be changed to state that
students who wish to withdraw from individual classes must
obtain their instructor’s signature on a form stating that they
have discussed their intention to withdraw with the instructor.
2. The existing catalog language regarding the grade
replacement policy should be changed as follows:
2a. Students may repeat a course anytime before
graduation, instead of only during the next semester a
course is offered.
2b. Students may not repeat a course for which a
grade of C or better is earned (except where specific degree
programs require higher grades).
2c. Repeating a course withdrawn from does not
count as a grade replacement attempt.
2d. The number of allowable grade replacement
attempts should be increased to 4 courses.
2e. Only one grade replacement attempt should be
allowed per course, although more are permissible with
approval from the Dean/Chair and academic advisor.
Repeating a course more than once requires a plan for
improvement, drafted and signed by both student and
advisor, which may include tutoring and other forms of
academic support.
3. Regarding probation, disqualification, suspension
and dismissal, the committee recommends as follows:
3a. Students under academic warning and probation
should avail themselves of progressively more advisement
and assistance as a condition of continued enrollment. This
should take the form of a written agreement specifying the
assistance the student will obtain (e.g., help with study skills,
tutoring in specific subjects). The contract would be
developed and signed by the student and his/her academic
advisor, then signed by the student’s department chair and
the dean. UNR Admissions and Records would receive a
copy of the contract. Course registration would be blocked
until approval of the contract.
None of this committee’s
recommendations were
adopted. Many of the charges
were reformulated for the next
year’s committee.
3b. Students not raising their GPA above the
threshold for disqualification after two semesters should be
suspended from UNR and not readmitted until they can
present a record of 15 semester credits of transferable credit
at a community college or other accredited institution, with a
minimum GPA of 2.5.
4. Regarding midterm progress reporting, the committee
recommended that faculty teaching lower-division courses
be strongly encouraged to use the midterm grade reporting
functionality in CAIS, or some other means, to report grades
of C-, D and F to students prior to the drop date. A general
e-mail should be sent to alert faculty to the existence of this
tool.
Pertaining to Charge 2: Start a faculty-wide conversation
about ensuring that faculty follow ethical rules on academic
integrity. Develop a faculty honor code.
5. The Nevada Faculty Alliance should be involved in future
discussions with the Faculty Senate about the formulation of
a code of ethical conduct for faculty at UNR.
6. The “faculty-wide discussion” should not begin with a
campus-wide survey of all faculty, but be conducted within
the Colleges. As a first step towards this, the matter should
be brought before the Academic Leadership Council.
Pertaining to Charge 3: Review the recommendations of
the 2006-2007 Academic Standards Committee concerning
student academic dishonesty. Determine which of those
recommendations have been implemented and which have
not. Develop an implementation plan for the
recommendations that have not been implemented.
7. Regarding methods of addressing academic
dishonesty by students (reporting and sanctions):
7a. The OSC web site should put online the
standard format of the letter to be sent to students, or
several different sample letters; and should include a link for
faculty which would include all the information faculty need
to report, verify, and learn about penalties for academic
dishonesty.
7b. The curriculum of the voluntary course in ethical
decision-making for students currently being offered through
the Office of Student Conduct (see pp. 31-32 below) should
be evaluated by the committee. The committee should work
with Sally Morgan, bearing in mind our specific curricular
recommendations of several years ago, to design a course
that fits both her and our needs.
7c. The committee should propose specific
language to be added to the conduct code related to
retaking of courses. The Graduate School should be made
aware of and take steps to implement our committee’s
earlier recommendations regarding the Q course and
implement this policy as soon as the grade has been
approved for use. The committee should discuss whether,
with these changes, the current policy is adequate. If there
are other issues not addressed by the current policy or by
our other recommendations, the committee should identify
them and make specific recommendations for Graduate
Council consideration.
7d. A mechanism should be developed for noting on
the student’s transcript actions taken regarding academic
dishonesty that does not involve a specific course (e.g.,
research projects, TA work, etc.). The permanence of this
notation should be treated in the same way as the Q grade
for in-class dishonesty. The Graduate Council should look
into this issue and make sure that a consistent policy is in
place.
7e. The Office of Student Conduct should put in
place a mechanism for notifying the home department of
students involved in incidents of academic dishonesty.
7f. Sally Morgan should be asked to follow up with
the Provost to ensure that changes recommended by the
committee in the past (regarding the development of
sanctioning guidelines to guide faculty in the academic
sanction area) are in fact implemented into the Code.
8. Regarding ways of discouraging academic dishonesty
among students:
8a. The committee should discuss the importance of
having the Provost’s or President’s office address publicly
the issue of academic dishonesty, and of establishing how
the administration will promote the importance of the issue.
8b. As regards the modality of conducting faculty
workshops, face-to-face workshops should be scheduled
regularly and online options be made available.
8c. As regards faculty and student websites on
academic dishonesty issues and resources, UNR’s webpage
should be revised to include links to other web pages (as
indicated in Appendix A, p. 35 below).
9. Regarding policy clarity and future directions:
9a. Based on the help and facilities available to Sally
Morgan, a definite timetable should be set up to ensure the
implementation of the committee’s earlier recommendation
that the University Code of Conduct and Policies should, in
separate sections, lay out explicitly the nature of possible
academic and administrative sanctions, and distinguish
these two types of sanctions clearly.
9b. Policy language should include the instruction
that the committee should revisit the policy three years after
it was enacted to determine how well or ill it has functioned.
Appendix 5
CATALOG LANGUAGE FOR APPEAL OF DISMISSAL
Students who are on Probation for three consecutive regular semesters and fail to raise their cumulative
University of Nevada GPA above the Academic Probation threshold will be dismissed from the University.
Students will receive an email notifying them to access updated information on their academic status at
MyNEVADA. Once dismissed, the student is not allowed UNR enrollment for a period of one calendar year.
Release from University Dismissal: An undergraduate student who has been dismissed may return to the
University only on the basis of evidence that underlying conditions have materially improved and that he or she
is now capable of academic success. Dismissed students seeking readmission must receive approval from the
dean of the college they wish to enter prior to readmission. Students returning from dismissal must raise their
cumulative GPA to at least 2.0 within two regular semesters, or they will again be dismissed.
Appeal of Dismissal: Ten business days after students are notified that they have been dismissed, their
registration for the next regular semester will be cancelled. Students will receive an email notifying them to
access updated information on their academic status at MyNEVADA. Students who could be in good standing
at the end of one additional semester may appeal to be reinstated by submitting the “Appeal Undergraduate
Dismissal” form available at the Office of Admissions and Records. Students must submit their appeal to the
Office of Admissions and Records within 10 business days of notification of dismissal to hold their registration
pending the outcome of their appeal. The appropriate college must return a decision on appeal by the last
business day prior to the beginning of the next regular term. Appeals will be processed only if it is
mathematically possible to reach good-standing at the end of one additional semester. Late registration fees
will be assessed according to the regular registration calendar.
Office of Admissions and Records
Appeal Undergraduate Dismissal
Students who could be in good standing at the end of one additional semester may appeal. Students must
submit their appeal to the Office of Admissions and Records on this form within 10 business days of notification
of dismissal to hold their registration pending the outcome of their appeal. The appropriate college must return
a decision on appeal by the last business day prior to the beginning of the next regular term. Appeals will be
processed only if it is mathematically possible to reach good-standing at the end of one additional semester.
Late registration fees will be assessed according to the regular registration calendar.
I request to be reinstated:
Name:
NSHE ID:
Signature:
Date:
Current UNR grade point average:
Total credits earned at the UNR:
Planned enrollment for the next term: (Courses included here must satisfy specific Core, Major, or Minor
requirements.)
Subject
Number
Title
Credits
Anticipated Grade
Describe in detail the extenuating circumstances justifying this appeal. Attach additional page(s) and/or
documentation if necessary:
Approved:
Advisor’s Name and
Signature:
Dean’s Name and
Signature:
Denied:
Date:
Date:
The Dean’s Office must return this form to the Office of Admissions and Records for implementation of
the appeal decision no later than the last business day prior to the term for which the appeal is being
processed.
Appendix 6: Academic Recognition
Latin Titles at Graduation
Institution
Latin
Titles
University of
Nevada,
Reno
Yes
Restricted
to Honors
Program
Yes
University of
Arizona
Yes
No
Arizona
State
Yes
No
Colorado
State
Yes
No
University of
Colorado,
Boulder
Yes
Yes
Non-Latin
Academic
Recognition
High Distinction, High
Distinction for
students outside the
honors program
With Distinction for
students outside the
honors program
Honors Resources
Honors Program; 500 Honors students; 2.5
staff; located in Jot Travis; Honors advising;
Honors classes, Honors sections and Honors
contracts; two-semester thesis; seminar room,
Office of Nationally Competitive Scholarships,
two partial Honors floors in Res Life; library
privileges; priority class registration; faculty
lecture series; Phi Kappa Phi
Honors College; 4,000 Honors students; 18
staff; located in Slonaker House; Honors
curriculum within Honors and through College
and as contracts; two semester thesis;
academic advising, computer lab, seminar
room, Office of Nationally Competitive
Scholarships, meeting space, Honors Civic
Engagement Teams, wireless network; two
Honors Residence Halls; scholarships and
grants for 1st year and transfer students and
faculty; Honors General Education; Honors
Professors; library privileges; priority class
registration; forum luncheons, Honors players;
Phi Beta Kappa
Barrett, The Honors College (and complex);
four locations; 3500+ students; great website;
Honors courses and enrichment contracts: over
100 seminars each semester; senior thesis;
philosophy, politics and law certificate;
partnership with Law School; Honors
opportunities in the majors; research funding;
internship program; scholarships and
fellowships; study abroad programs; writing
center; Honors-specific organizations; student
publications, art displays; 38 Honors staff; 26
Honors faculty; 100s of faculty honors advisors;
and much more
University Honors Program; 1,140 students;
Academic Village: Honors office, faculty offices,
seminar rooms, fireside lounge; Two halls of
Honors Residential Learning Communities; 5
staff and 6 student assts; early registration;
Honors scholarships for all students; Honors
enrichment awards; two tracks of Honors
curricula, Honors thesis
Honors Program; Honors Residential Academic
Program; Engineering Honors Program; 6
Honors faculty; Honors curriculum (15
enrollees max); thesis; Honors Journal; lecture
series, cultural events, social outings, cocurricular activities; (not a well-developed
UC, Davis
No
Yes
Iowa State
University
Yes
No
University of
Oregon
Yes
No
Oregon
State
Yes
No
Univ. of
Nebraska,
Lincoln
No
No
Highest Honors, High
Honors, Honors f
High Scholarship,
Superior Scholarship,
Chancellor’s
Scholars for all
students who meet
the criteria
website)
University Honors Program (UHP); Davis
Honors Challenge; Integrated Studies Honors
Program; Chemical Engineering and
Biochemical Engineering Honors Program;
living learning community; Service Learning
Program; National Fellowships office; Phi Beta
Kappa; Honors curriculum; research seminars;
library privileges, career and software
workshops; Honors advising; five staff; annual
banquet, socials, etc.; (not a well-developed
website)
University Honors Program; Jischke Honors
Building; computer facilities; lunch with a
professor; First Year Honors Program; priority
scheduling; Honors curriculum; Honors
seminars (15 enrollees max); Wingspread
Conference fellows; Honors sponsored events;
Honors Housing; capstone project; Honors
poster presentations; Honors Leadership
Opportunities; National Fellowships; Honors
Awards for Excellence; Honors
Commendations; 15 staff
Robt D Clark Honors College; 700 students;
located in Chapman Hall, computer lab, Robt D
Clark Library, printing privileges, lounge with
kitchen; Honors core curriculum; thesis; thesis
awards; 17+ Honors faculty; 14 staff; colloquia;
various Honors scholarships; speakers, author
readings, student conferences, and
performances; Phi Beta Kappa; Honors
Creative Arts Journal
University Honors College; degree granting
college; Honors Baccalaureate degree; 500
students; Academic advising from UHC
advisors; Priority living in McNary Hall (the
Honors themed Residence Hall) or The GEM
(an off-campus apartment complex; Two
Student Learning Centers; study lounges;
conference room, seminar room, classroom,
faculty offices; computer lab with free printing;
free candy; trips; and events; Leadership
involvement; thesis; Honors curriculum (12-20
enrollees max); Honors students awards;
Honors financial and merit scholarships;
academic advising; 11 staff; 45 Honors College
faculty
University Honors Program; Neihardt
Residence Center (4 Honors halls); 7 staff;
advising; textbook scholarships; National
fellowships; Phi Beta Kappa; thesis library;
computer lab; learning community; Honors
curriculum, seminars, and contracts; thesis;
Honors overnights, colloquia, undergraduate
assts;
University of Nevada, Reno
Academic Recognition
Distinction at Graduation: Students who graduate with a GPA of at least 3.75 receive the bachelor's degree
with high distinction, or with distinction if the GPA is between 3.50 and 3.74, provided these additional
requirements are satisfied:
1. At least ninety-six (96) semester credits are earned in courses graded "A" through "F."
2. At least sixty-four (64) semester credits are earned in residence at the university in courses graded "A"
through "F."
3. Transfer students must satisfy the GPA requirement at the university and have a combined, transferuniversity GPA of at least 3.75 for high distinction, or 3.50 to 3.74 for distinction.
Distinction is recognized at graduation ceremonies when the student has fulfilled all the requirements in the
most recent prior semester.
Honors at Graduation: The requirements to graduate in the honors program are:
Cum laude, magna cum laude or summa cum laude is awarded to a graduating bachelor's degree student
who completes the honors program (having completed 30 honors credits or points) and all university, college
and major requirements with the specified GPA (both in the major program and overall), based upon at least
96 credits in courses graded "A" through "F":
cum laude: GPA of 3.50 to 3.69 with a completed thesis;
magna cum laude: GPA of 3.70 to 3.89 with grade of "A" on senior honor thesis;
summa cum laude: GPA of at least 3.9 with grade of "A" on senior honors thesis.
At least 64 semester credits must be earned in residence at the university in courses graded "A" through "F."
Each transfer student must satisfy the university requirements and have a combined transfer-university GPA
that satisfies the minimum, specified total.
Cum laude, magna cum laude and summa cum laude are recognized at graduation ceremonies when the
student has fulfilled all the requirements in the most recent prior semester.
Students completing the thirty (30) Honors credits with a GPA of at least 3.25 but less than 3.5 shall have a
"Completed Honors Program" designation. Those with 30 Honors credits but less than a 3.25 GPA or those
with fewer than thirty (30) credits shall have an "Honors Program Participant" designation.
For additional information, refer to the "Honors Program'' description in the Interdisciplinary and Special
Programs section of this catalog.
University of Arizona
Graduation with Academic Distinction
Three categories are awarded for superior scholarship in work leading to the bachelor's degree. This honor,
based upon graduation grade-point-average, becomes part of the official record, is awarded upon graduation
and appears on the transcript and diploma of the recipient.
4. Summa Cum Laude -- is awarded to candidates whose grade-point-average is 3.900 or higher.
5. Magna Cum Laude -- is awarded to candidates whose grade-point-average is 3.700-3.899.
6. Cum Laude -- is awarded to candidates whose grade-point-average is 3.5000-3.699.
To be eligible for distinction at graduation, bachelor's degree candidates must have completed at least 45
graded units with letter grades that carry the required grade-point-average. Also, in computing the above
grade-point-averages, only University Credit is considered. This policy applies to all students graduating in
December 1998 or later.
Graduation with Honors
Graduation with Honors is bestowed on students who have completed all requirements of the University-wide
Honors Program. This academic recognition becomes part of the official record and is noted on the transcript
and diploma of the recipient. Honors students also wear a special cord and medallion at graduation.
Arizona State University
graduation with academic recognition
An undergraduate student must have completed at least 56 credit hours of resident credit at ASU to qualify for
graduation with academic recognition for a baccalaureate degree. Note: West campus students following a
catalog year prior to fall 2007 are required to have completed at least 50 credit hours of resident credit at ASU.
The cumulative GPA determines the designation, as shown in the Academic Recognition table below.
academic recognition
Cumulative GPA
Designation
3.40–3.59
cum laude
3.60–3.79
magna cum laude
3.80–4.00
summa cum laude
The cumulative GPA for these designations is based on only ASU resident course work. For example, ASU
independent learning course grades are not calculated in the honors GPA. All designations of graduation with
academic recognition are indicated on the diploma and the ASU transcript. Graduation with academic
recognition applies only to undergraduate degrees.
A student who has a baccalaureate degree from ASU and is pursuing a second baccalaureate degree at ASU
(with a minimum of 30 hours of resident credit) is granted academic recognition on the second degree based
on the credit hours earned subsequent to the posting of the first degree. If fewer than 56 credit hours are
completed at ASU subsequent to completion of the first ASU degree, the level of academic recognition can be
no higher than that obtained on the first degree. If 56 or more credit hours are completed at ASU after
completion of the first ASU degree, the level of academic recognition is based on the GPA earned for the
second ASU degree. Inquiries about graduation with academic recognition may be directed to the Graduation
Section, 480-965-3256.
Colorado State University
GRADUATION WITH DISTINCTION
Colorado State recognizes outstanding scholarship by granting the baccalaureate degree “Cum Laude,”
“Magna Cum Laude,” and “Summa Cum Laude” to those students in each college who have achieved
unusually high academic excellence in their undergraduate programs. To be eligible for graduation with
distinction, students must meet the following requirements:
Minimum grade point average required for graduation with distinction.
To qualify for graduation with distinction, a minimum of 60 credits completed at Colorado State University is
required. Students who have been granted Fresh Start must have completed 60 credits after the Fresh Start
designation to qualify for graduation with distinction.
Transfer credits are not considered when determining a) candidacy for graduation with distinction or b)
graduation with distinction.
The Current Breakdown of Acceptable GPA’s for a Distinction Designation:
Summa
Magna
College
Cum Laude Cum Laude Cum Laude
Agricultural Sciences
3.980
3.850
3.710
Applied Human Sci.
3.960
3.840
3.660
Business
3.960
3.850
3.720
Engineering
3.960
3.910
3.700
Liberal Arts
3.960
3.870
3.700
Natural Resources
3.980
3.850
3.740
Natural Sciences
3.980
3.900
3.760
Veterinary Medicine &
Biomedical Sciences
3.990
3.950
3.890
These minimum cumulative grade point averages will be reviewed every four years and may be changed if
needed to maintain appropriate academic standards. Such changes will become effective the semester
following approval by Faculty Council and publication in the General Catalog. Each of the minimum grade point
averages needed to graduate with distinction will be adjusted at the end of each four year period only if the
percentage of students graduating with distinction in a distinction category and college have shown a
statistically verifiable deviation from the target percentages of:
Summa Cum Laude 1%
Magna Cum Laude 3%
Cum Laude
6%
Candidates for graduation with distinction are recognized at the time of commencement. A student’s candidacy
is determined by their cumulative grade point average through the semester preceding graduation.
“Candidacy” for graduation with distinction does not guarantee graduation with distinction. Graduation with
distinction is based on the student’s cumulative grade point average at the time of graduation.
Students seeking a second bachelor’s degree are eligible for distinction designation. To qualify for graduation
with distinction, a minimum of 60 credits completed at Colorado State is required after the first degree. In
determining the grade point average of the student, only grades earned after the first degree are considered.
GRADUATION AS A UNIVERSITY AND/OR DISCIPLINE HONORS SCHOLAR
Students who complete the University Honors Program academic requirements and achieve at least a
cumulative 3.5 grade point average earn the designation of University Honors Scholar and/or Discipline Honors
Scholar. Scholars are recognized at graduation by the Honors Program and during the colleges’
commencement ceremonies. The Honors Scholar designation appears on diplomas and transcripts.
For information about admission to the University Honors Program, visit or contact the Honors Program Office,
Academic Village, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1025; (970) 491-5679 or visit on-line at www.honors.colostate.edu.
Also see the chapter: Broadening Your Horizons.
University of Colorado
GRADUATION WITH DISTINCTION OR HONORS
Outstanding accomplishment by undergraduates at UCB is recognized in two ways: Graduation with Distinction
and Graduation with Honors.
Graduation with Distinction is based solely on academic performance and is automatically conferred on all
students graduating with a grade point average (GPA) of 3.75 or better, both at UCB and in all collegiate work
completed.
Graduation with Honors requires a GPA of at least 3.3 plus active participation in an Honors program. Two
types of Honors programs are available, General Honors and Departmental Honors.
The General Honors Program is operated solely by the Honors Department and emphasizes a broad liberal
arts education rather than specialization. Candidates for General Honors must participate in at least four
Honors Department courses and must take a series of written and oral examinations as specified by the
Honors Department. Students who wish to participate should contact the Honors Department.
The Departmental Honors Program is organized around a student research project undertaken in an individual
department. It is not necessary to take Honors Department courses to qualify. Candidates for Departmental
Honors must satisfy GPA requirements, complete a research project, prepare an Honors thesis describing the
research project in a scholarly fashion and pass an oral examination as described below. MCDB Honors
information is available at the Student Affairs Office MCDB A1B48 or download from MCDB Departmental
Honors Program. Deadlines and applications are also available from the Student Affairs Office A1B48 or
www.colorado.edu/honors/graduation.
Frequently Asked Questions from the UCB Honors Program Page
http://www.colorado.edu/honors/faq.html
10. What are the GPA requirements for graduating Cum Laude, Magna cum Laude, and Summa cum
Laude?
All students should understand that grades do not singularly determine the levels of honors you are awarded.
There are, however, guidelines as follows:
7. Students with a minimum cumulative GPA of 3.3 are qualified to be considered for Honors, Cum Laude (with
honors)
Students with a minimum cumulative GPA of 3.5 are qualified to be considered for Honors, Magna cum
Laude (with high honors)
Students with a minimum cumulative GPA of 3.8 are qualified to be considered for Honors, Summa cum
Laude (highest honors)
While the above guidelines qualify you for consideration for a given level of honors, the level you earn is based
on the quality of your thesis and thesis defense. Grades do not solely determine your level of honors. If
warranted by the quality of the theses and thesis defense, a committee may recommend you for an honors
designation one level higher than the guidelines suggest.
13. Can I graduate with Honors without doing a thesis?
No, you can't graduate with Honors without a thesis. However, you may be able to graduate with Distinction,
which is based on GPA. Check with the College of Arts and Sciences for more details.
14. How are designations decided?
There are several different steps to deciding the level of Honors (if any) a candidate will receive. The first step,
of course, is maintaining a good GPA (generally 3.3 or better). The second step is writing a quality Honors
thesis and doing an oral defense of your thesis. While you may turn in a final copy of your thesis, with
corrections, to the Honors Program office after you defend, the copy of the thesis that the committee sees on
your defense day is the copy on which they will base their recommendation.
After you have done your oral defense, your committee makes its recommendation to the Honors Council. The
Honors Council then considers each candidate individually (strongly considering the recommendation of the
defense committee, although they may grant a different designation). The Honors Council, which is made up of
representatives from each department that participates in the Honors Program (in other words, all departments
in the College of Arts and Sciences, plus the School of Engineering and the School of Business). Also see
question 10.
University of California, Davis
Graduation Honors
Honors at graduation are awarded to students who have a grade point average in the top percent of their
college as shown in the table below. The College of Letters and Science requires that additional criteria be met
for high and highest honors; see the sections below for more information.
Total Quarter
Units Completed at UC
Highest Honors
High Honors Honors
Total
45-89
2%
next 2%
next 4%
8%
90-134
3%
next 3%
next 6%
12%
135+
4%
next 4%
next 8%
16%
Grade point averages from the winter quarter prior to graduation are used to determine the averages that will
earn an honors designation. Following are the averages for winter quarter 2010. These averages will be used
through winter quarter 2011.
An honors notation is made on students’ diplomas and on their permanent records in the Office of the
University Registrar.
Grade Point Average by College
Percent
Determining
Cut-Off Point Agricultural & Biological
Engineering Letters and
Environmental
Sciences
Sciences
Sciences
2%
3.902
3.948
3.923
3.894
3%
3.869
3.925
3.887
3.850
4%
3.822
3.900
3.854
3.814
6%
8%
12%
16%
3.769
3.694
3.595
3.517
3.833
3.773
3.668
3.588
3.770
3.700
3.594
3.494
3.750
3.705
3.620
3.540
College of Letters and Science: Graduation with “honors” requires that a student meet the appropriate grade
point requirement described in the above table for all UC courses completed.
Students who meet the grade point requirement for graduation with honors, and who complete the Honors
Program of the College of Letters and Science, may be recommended by their departments for graduation with
high honors or highest honors on the basis of an evaluation of their academic achievements in the major and in
the honors project in particular. Graduating students will not be awarded honors with the bachelor's degree if
more than eight units of grade I (Incomplete) appear on their transcripts. The College Committee on Honors
may consider exceptions to this condition. Petitions for this purpose should be submitted to the deans' office.
The Honors Program of the College of Letters and Science
The Honors Program in the College of Letters and Science permits students to pursue a program of study in
their major at a level significantly beyond that defined by the normal curriculum. It represents an opportunity for
the qualified student to experience aspects of the major that are representative of advanced study in the field.
Successful completion of the College Honors Program is a necessary prerequisite to consideration for the
awarding of high or highest honors at graduation.
Entrance into the honors program requires that a student have completed at least 135 units with a minimum
grade point average of 3.500 in courses counted toward the major. Other prerequisites for entrance into the
program are defined by the major. The program consists of a project whose specific nature is determined by
consultation with the student’s major adviser. It may involve completion of a research project, a scholarly
paper, a senior thesis, or some comparable assignment depending on the major. The project will have a
minimum duration of two quarters and will be noted on the student’s record by a variable unit course number or
special honors course designation. Successful completion of the honors program requires that a minimum of
six units of credit be earned in course work for the project.
Iowa State University
Graduation with Distinction. Undergraduates who have a cumulative grade point average of 3.50 or higher at
the beginning of their final term are eligible to graduate “with distinction” provided they have completed 60
semester credits of coursework at Iowa State University at the time they graduate, including a minimum of 50
graded credits. Students who graduate with a cumulative grade point average of 3.90 or higher will graduate
Summa Cum Laude; those who graduate with a cumulative grade point average of 3.70 to 3.89 will graduate
Magna Cum Laude; and those who graduate with a cumulative grade point average of 3.50 to 3.69 will
graduate Cum Laude. This recognition appears on the student’s official transcript and diploma and in the
commencement program.
Candidates for the bachelor of liberal studies degree may be graduated with distinction providing that they (a)
have completed 45 semester credits of coursework at the three Iowa Regent universities at the time of
graduation, (b) have earned at least a 3.50 cumulative grade point average at ISU, and (c) their combined
grade point average for coursework taken at the three Iowa Regent universities meets the honors cutoff
specified above.
University of Oregon
Latin Honors
Graduating seniors who have earned at least 90 credits in residence at the University of Oregon and have
successfully completed all other university degree requirements are eligible for graduation with Latin honors.
These distinctions are based on students’ percentile rankings in their respective graduating classes, as follows:
Top 10 percent cum laude
Top 5 percent magna cum laude
Top 2 percent summa cum laude
Post-baccalaureate students are not eligible for Latin honors. The Office of the Registrar computes Latin
honors upon graduation.
Oregon State University
Degrees With Distinction
Grade point averages are computed on the basis of all work attempted at OSU. Graduates who have been in
attendance at OSU for at least two years are awarded degrees with distinction as follows:
Academic Distinction
OSU GPA Range
Cum Laude
3.50–3.69
Magna Cum Laude
3.70–3.84
Summa Cum Laude
3.85–4.00
These distinctions are noted on diplomas.
Graduation
Honor Cord Color
Orange
Gold
White
University of Nebraska, Lincoln
Honors Convocation Recognition Requirements
Honors Convocation recognition requirements for students entering the University after the Spring
Semester 2004 require that those eligible for recognition be in the top ten percent of their college class based
on their cumulative grade point average (but with a cumulative GPA no lower than 3.6) and meet the additional
requirements stated below.
Students whose first college matriculation at UNL (after high school graduation) occurred before June 2004
will be recognized on the basis of recognition requirements in force at that time. This policy will also apply to
transfer students from UNO and UNK whose first college matriculation at those institutions preceded the June
2004 implementation of the recognition criteria.
Honors Convocation criteria for students entering the University in the 2004-05 academic year and after
are listed below. Students will be recognized only for the highest award for which they qualify.
High Scholarship. Students must be in the top ten percent of their college class based on their cumulative
grade point average and meet the following specific requirements:
1. Required semesters in residence at UNL: juniors and seniors must have completed at least 3
semesters or 42 credit hours at UNL; sophomores must have completed at least 2 semesters or 28
credit hours; freshmen must have completed at least 1 semester or 12 credit hours.
2. Hours completed first semester: seniors must complete a minimum of 9 hours, of which 6 must be
graded A through F. (Student teachers in the College of Education and Human Sciences may be
exceptions.) Students graduating in December may take only those hours needed for graduation.
Juniors, sophomores, and freshmen must complete a minimum of 12 hours first (fall) semester, at least
9 of which are graded A through F.
Superior Scholarship. Superior scholarship students are seniors graduating between December and August
who:
1. meet the requirements for high scholarship for seniors, and
2. are in the upper three percent of the senior class of their college or have been on the UNL Honors
Convocation list each year since matriculation as a freshman.
Chancellor’s Scholars. Seniors graduating between December and August qualify for this award if they meet
the following criteria.
1. Graduating seniors must have earned the grade of A in all graded collegiate work at UNL and at
other institutions and a grade of P for all classes taken in the Pass/No Pass grading option (excluding
foreign study and collegiate work taken prior to the student’s graduation from high school. The student
must request the exclusion of a grade taken prior to graduation from high school and the re-calculation
of the GPA in writing to the University Honors Program, 118 NRC, 0659, by March 1). At least 42
graded semester hours must have been earned at UNL by the end of first (fall) semester of the
academic year of graduation.
2. During first semester, a student must complete a minimum of 9 total hours with no more than 3 hours
of Pass/No Pass course work. (Student teachers in the College of Education and Human Sciences may
be exceptions.) Students graduating in December may take only those hours needed for graduation.
General Information for Honors. Students with grade changes or students finishing incompletes after
January 1 should contact the Office of the University Honors Program to see that these changes have been
recorded.
All grades are averaged in figuring cumulative GPA. Students repeating a class to remove C-, D, or F
grades will have both the original and the repeat grade used to calculate GPA.
Only those seniors recognized as Superior Scholars and Chancellor’s Scholars (see above) need to order
caps and gowns for the Honors Convocation ceremonies. The Honors Convocation invitation will give
appropriate instructions.
NOTE: Only University of Nebraska system grades are used to compute the GPA for Honors. For computing
the GPA for Honors, a student may request the exclusion of a University of Nebraska system grade earned in
a course taken prior to graduation from high school. This request for a re-calculation of the GPA must be made
in writing to the University Honors Program, 118 NRC, 0659, prior to March 1. UNL, UNO, UNK, and UNMC
students are considered resident students.
NOTE: Each college also has their own recognition.
Recognition of Outstanding Academic Achievement
In addition to providing qualified students with an opportunity to enrich their academic programs by taking
honors courses, the University and its colleges recognize the academic achievements of all their talented and
dedicated students.
The Honors Convocation: University and Chancellor’s Scholars
In April of each year, the Chancellor hosts the All-University Honors Convocation at which students who meet
recognition requirements are honored as University Scholars. Special recognition is given to Chancellor’s
Scholars, graduating seniors who have maintained a perfect 4.0 grade point in all their collegiate work.
UNR Faculty Senate Meeting
May 12, 2011
Agenda Item # 4
DHS
Report of the Three-Year Review Committee on Reorganization of Health and Human Sciences
April 2011
Committee Members:
Sharon Brush, Liberal Arts
Scott Clark, Biology
Kerry Lewis, Speech Pathology and Audiology
Ronald Phaneuf, Physics (chair)
Stephen Rock, Educational Specialties
Kerry Seymour, Cooperative Extension
James Sundali, Managerial Sciences
Purpose:
To provide faculty input on issues related to the 2008 decision to reorganize the Health and
Human Sciences at the University of Nevada.
Charges to the Committee:
1. Meet with current and former faculty and administrators in the affected units, and if possible
identify potential problems with the reorganization.
2. Consider how the decision was made, and make recommendations for whether this could have
been done in a timely manner while still getting appropriate faculty input and review.
3. Determine the goals of the reorganization and indicate progress toward accomplishing them.
Background:
Presumably in response to the first round of budget cuts to the University, a health sciences
reorganization plan containing very little detail was presented to the Board of Regents for approval
in January 2008 and approved. In May 2008, an announcement was made by President Glick of a
significant reorganization to take effect July 1, 2008 that would result in the dissolution of the
College of Health and Human Sciences and formation of a new Division of Health Sciences. Dr.
John McDonald, formerly Dean of the Nevada School of Medicine, was chosen to serve in the
newly created position of Vice-President for Health Sciences and Dr. Ole Thienhaus was
appointed interim dean of the School of Medicine. According to an announcement in Nevada
News in May 2008 quoting President Glick, the reorganization was
“. . . driven by the recognition that optimal health care is provided by multidisciplinary teams — nurses,
public health professionals, social workers, pharmacists, therapists, physicians and others — who train
and work together focusing on meeting the healthcare needs of the state. This integrative approach will
best serve University students seeking health-related careers by leveraging the talents and expertise
found in these health science disciplines.”
The Faculty Senate was neither informed in advance nor consulted about the decision to
reorganize the health and human sciences, and no rationale or justification for this administrative
decision was given. For such a major organizational change, this was unprecedented in modern
history and raised legitimate concerns by senators about the future role of faculty governance at
UNR. As a response, following normal protocol, the Faculty Senate formed an ad hoc committee
in 2008 to review the reorganization. Despite several requests, that committee was not provided
and was unable to locate any proposal or similar document associated with the reorganization to
guide such a review. Vice Provost Dr. Jannet Vreeland indicated that Dr. Charles Bullock had
been asked to develop such a proposal after the fact, a somewhat unusual request since he was
acting dean of the College of Health and Human Sciences in 2008 and the reorganization
eliminated his position. According to Dr. Vreeland, no such report was ever submitted by Dr.
Bullock, who subsequently left the University. The review committee concluded that insufficient
information was available to produce a meaningful report and recommended reconvening such a
review committee in three years.
Structure of the Division of Health Sciences:
The New Division of Health Sciences encompasses all of the academic units of the former
College of Human and Health Sciences, except the Department of Human Development and
Family Studies, which joined the College of Education, and the Department of Criminal Justice,
which joined the College of Liberal Arts. Figure 1 presents the organizational chart of the
Division of Health Sciences that was issued at the time of the reorganization.
Figure 1. Organizational Chart of the Division of Health Sciences (2008).
Included among smaller units are the Nevada School of Medicine and the Orvis School of
Nursing. One significant management change is that the Dean of the School of Medicine now
reports to the Vice-President for Health Sciences, rather than to the President of the University.
When Dr. Thienhaus retired in June, 2010, Dr. Cheryl Hug-English was appointed Interim Dean of
the School of Medicine. Following the retirement of Dr. McDonald in September, 2010, Dr. Denise
Montcalm was appointed Interim Dean of Health Sciences. That the title of the interim position
was changed from vice president to dean is noteworthy. Although the arrangement is temporary, a
management structure in which one dean reports to another is at best unconventional.
An apparent re-evaluation of the initial management structure for the Division has resulted in a
search for an individual who would serve as both Vice-President for Health Sciences and Dean of
the School of Medicine. An announcement was made in February 2011 that the search was
successful and that Dr. Thomas L. Schwenk will join the University in July 2011. There is no
evidence to indicate that such a structural change was planned at the time of the reorganization,
but the current period of fiscal uncertainty and shrinking budgets provides motivation and
justification for consolidating the two management positions. Another factor may have been a
perceived likelihood that stronger candidates would be attracted by the combined leadership
position and that fundraising opportunities might be enhanced.
According to the website, the Division of Health Sciences is at present composed of four schools:

School of Community Health Sciences

School of Medicine

Orvis School of Nursing

School of Social Work
and three centers:

Sanford Center for Aging

Center for the Application of Substance Abuse Technologies

Campus Wellness and Recreation.
Bylaws were developed for the Division and approved by the faculty on March 11, 2011. The
Division of Health Sciences offers the following degrees: Bachelor of Science, Master of Science
and Doctoral degrees in Speech Pathology and Audiology; Bachelor of Science with majors in
Community Health Sciences; Bachelor of Science in Nursing; Bachelor of Social Work; Master of
Public Health (M.P.H.); Master of Social Work; Master of Science in Nursing (M.S.N.), dual
M.S.N./M.P.H.. The division also participates in the interdisciplinary Ph.D. program in Social
Psychology; and the School of Medicine confers the Doctor of Medicine (M.D.), the Ph.D. in
Pharmacology and Physiology, Biochemistry and Cell and Molecular Biology, as well as the
combined M.D/Ph.D. and M.D./P.P.H.. Undergraduate Minors in Addiction Treatment Services;
Health Care Ethics; Community Health Science; Gerontology; and Substance Abuse Prevention
Services. The division also offers Graduate Certificate Programs in Bioethics, Clinical Nurse
Specialist, and Family Nurse.
In the absence of a proposal, the goals for the reorganization listed below were identified by this
committee from three principal sources: Nevada News articles from May 8, 2008 and May 30,
2008, the Opportunity and Challenge Profile for the Search for the Vice President of the Division
of Health Sciences and Dean of the University of Nevada School of Medicine, and the website of
the Division of Health Sciences.
Goals of the Reorganization:

Grow and better align the University’s health science programs by creating a stand-alone
academic division.

Develop a vision for the State’s comprehensive health care campus and allopathic medical
school.

Develop coordinated approaches to improve medical education, research, and the quality and
accessibility of health care in Nevada.

Promote expansion of Nevada’s health-science training and research capacity to address
Nevada’s acute shortage of health care professionals.

Work with clinical partners to provide excellent care to Nevadans in both urban and rural
areas.

Develop a new education facility in Reno that will serve as a hub for the health-sciences
programs.

Expand the class size at the School of Medicine from 62 to 100 students.

Expand the class size of the Orvis School of Nursing to 200 students.

Establish a Center for Molecular Medicine in Reno that will house portions of the microbiology,
pharmacology and physiology departments and serve as the headquarters for the Whittemore
Peterson Institute for Neuro-Immune Disease.

Create a synergistic environment for scientists to work together at the Center for Molecular
Medicine to conduct cutting-edge research that leads to better treatments for patients, increase
research productivity, funding and graduate student programs.

Expand and consolidate SOM facilities in Las Vegas to create a focal point for health science
and care activity to serve the city and region.

Develop an integrated academic health center, aligning the energies and accomplishments of
schools and centers in ways that enable each to contribute as highly effective, integrated
elements of the Division of Health Sciences.

Create a hub for globally significant health-science research, an engine for economic growth,
and a source of world-class medical practitioners to serve the state’s growing health-care
needs.

Drive and expand research excellence and productivity across the division and develop critical
relationships among key partners.

Recruit, hire, develop, and retain the next generation of world-class health-science faculty.

Promote development of multidisciplinary teams — nurses, public health professionals, social
workers, pharmacists, therapists, physicians, and others — that train and work together.

Provide a clear, compelling framework to inspire the various units to strive for individual
excellence while approaching their work in a collaborative, holistic manner, oriented toward a
shared goal of tackling the significant health-related challenges facing the State.

Provide support to all the Division’s programs to improve their teaching, research, outreach
and clinical services, and how they can leverage their existing strengths to shape a new model
for community-oriented health-science education.

Promote closer programmatic integration between the Las Vegas clinical and educational
programs and the activities in Reno.

Develop effective platforms for communication and foster a culture in which members are
encouraged to share stories from patients or celebrate research successes.
Review Protocol:
There was considerable discussion by this committee of the relative merits of different operational
approaches to the conduct of this review in the absence of a proposal for the reorganization, and
of their likelihood to provide accurate or useful information. To obtain a faculty perspective on the
reorganization process and impacts, the committee elected to conduct an online survey of those
academic, administrative and clinical faculty who were directly affected. The survey was drafted
by the review committee and reviewed by the Faculty Senate Executive Board. The faculty
members surveyed included those in the two departments of the former College of Health and
Human Sciences that joined other colleges as a result of the reorganization. The online survey
was distributed via e-mail by the Faculty Senate office to 377 academic, administrative and clinical
faculty members on February 15, 2011 with the following accompanying message.
Faculty Survey: Review of the Reorganization of Health and Human Sciences
Dear Faculty Member,
In November 2010, the Executive Board of the Faculty Senate charged an Ad-Hoc Committee to review the 2008
reorganization of the Health and Human Sciences. You are being asked to participate in a brief survey regarding
the effects of the reorganization, which will benefit the committee in completing their charge, and in reporting their
findings to the Faculty Senate by May, 2011. The input of faculty members is particularly valued by the
committee. Your survey responses will be kept confidential, according to the University of Nevada, Reno's privacy
guidelines found at this link: https://www.cisweb1.unr.edu/survey/. Should you wish to meet with a member or
members of this review committee, please contact Linda Kuchenbecker in the Faculty Senate Office by calling
(775) 784-4025 or via email lindak@unr.edu. Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
Eric Herzik
Chair, Faculty Senate
A reminder message was sent by e-mail on February 23, 2011, just before the survey was closed.
In addition to or in lieu of responding to the survey, faculty members were provided an option to
contact the Faculty Senate office by e-mail or telephone to arrange a face-to-face meeting with the
committee or a member. No such requests were received and no face-to-face meetings with
faculty or administrators were conducted by the committee.
Survey Results:
The survey questions and a quantitative analysis of the responses are presented in Figure 2. The
survey was divided into two sections. The first group of questions (1 – 6) dealt with the
reorganization process itself and the second group (7 – 17) addressed the impacts of
reorganization. The review committee was gratified to receive 138 responses, of which 124
addressed the second group of questions. This may have been due to survey fatigue, or those
respondents may not have noticed the second group of questions prior to exiting the survey.
A 35% response rate is considered exceptionally high for a survey of this nature, and is attributed
in part to faculty interest in the subject of the review and in part to an assurance of anonymity
because of its distribution by the Faculty Senate. In addition to the responses to specific
questions, numerous supplemental comments were received in response to questions numbered
6 and 17. Academic faculty comprised 62% of the respondents who identified themselves by
category of appointment, 31% were administrative faculty and 7% were clinical faculty. No sorting
of the responses by category of appointment was made.
Figure 2. Faculty Survey and Numerical Analysis
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
The reasons for the reorganization were fully explained.
The rationale for the reorganization was readily understandable.
I had an opportunity to give input concerning the reorganization.
My input to the reorganization was reasonably considered.
The reorganization process was handled professionally.
Please provide any comments about the reorganization process.
The reorganization has had a positive effect on the functioning of my unit.
The reorganization has had a positive effect on the organizational strategy of my unit.
The reorganization has had a positive effect on the organizational structure and reporting
relationships within my unit.
10. The reorganization has had a positive effect on individual and group incentives.
11. My perception is that the reorganization has had a positive effect on students.
12. The reorganization has had a positive effect on interdisciplinary engagement and research.
13. The reorganization has had a positive effect on my ability to secure external funding.
14. The reorganization has had a positive effect on funding for research conducted in my unit.
15. The reorganization has had a positive effect on the services provided by my unit.
16. The reorganization has had a positive effect on community outreach and program visibility.
17. Please provide any comments about the impacts of the reorganization.
Questions 1 - 4 concerning communication of the rationale and goals for the reorganization by the
administration and the opportunity for faculty input drew significant fractions of negative compared
to positive responses. Question 10 on individual and group incentives also indicated that
significantly fewer faculty members perceived a positive impact due to reorganization. Questions
13 and 14 concerning the impact on research and funding also drew more negative than positive
responses, as did question 15 concerning services provided by a unit. Only question 5
addressing whether the reorganization was handled professionally and question 12 addressing
interdisciplinary engagement and research drew more positive than negative responses. Opinions
on the remaining questions were distributed more uniformly across the spectrum, indicating less
significant polarization of faculty viewpoints on those issues.
Faculty Comments:
Responses to questions eliciting comments from the faculty are listed below in the order that they
were received.
The Reorganization Process:
Please provide any comments about the reorganization process below:

It was presented as a "done deal." No reasons were really offered, other than "we're going to have Dr.
McDonald earn that VP salary/title."

The reorganization was announced over the holiday break where little input would be available. No faculty
input was requested...very heavy-handed and sad. Morale was affected in a very negative way. Also
decisions were made that faculty could migrate to new units without an assessment of what that would do to
existing programs.

It seemed to be about saving money but could not explain where, or maybe some hidden agenda related to
specific personnel.

I didn't know about reorganization.

I had a strong feeling that there was a predetermined plan, which was not shared, and that what my
colleagues and I wanted did not matter in the least. We were going to have to do what someone else had
decided, although we were told that the final "decision" about our department's future was up to us. That was
a lie!

Although I support and see positive aspects of the reorganization, the president and provost announced the
reorganization without consideration of the units.

I remember that the process was initiated, but do not remember discussion related to the reason why or the
necessity of combining the departments.

The overall rationale was not well clarified, but faculty input appeared to be considered and incorporated.

There was no opportunity for input from anyone; it was simply announced that this would be done.

The reorganization was not data driven, or not explained to faculty on the basis of best-practices or efficiency.
This gives the impression that reorganization was initiated by an individual for subjective reasons.

From the point of view of a "non-medicine" health sciences School, the reorganization to combine Medicine,
Social Work, Nursing and the various Centers was long overdue. We finally had higher administration making
a decision for the good of many, rather than cow-towing to the "Hell no, we won't go" attitude that existed in
the former College of Human and Community Sciences and then the College of Health and Human Sciences.
The power struggle that went on prior to the decision to reorganize was detrimental and any growth of the
School of Nursing in particular. Higher administration (NOT those involved in the College administration)
listened to our needs and sought our input, and that was greatly appreciated!

Although the rationale was explained, it was clear that this created an additional level of bureaucracy that was
not in the best interest of the medical school nor financially sound. It appeared to be a "golden parachute".
There was also confusion as to the administrative nature of the "Dean" of this unit, being responsible to
himself as the Dean of the medical school and the Dean of the Health Sciences Division.

What reorganization?

The reason that we were told that a VP for Health Sciences was needed was for recruiting purposes - we
would have a chance of getting a better candidate if that was a part of the duties - mainly because they would
be able to sit in on the VP meetings that the President holds.

There was no preamble to the email for this survey so it is impossible to know what you are requesting unless
I spend some time to search for it, which I don't have.

I have no idea what these questions refer to.

This survey is difficult to respond to because it is not at all clear what organization you are referring to. Also,
the choices in the first question ask my status: I am both academic and clinical so it is unclear how to even
answer this question.

Sorry but I am not aware of this reorganization. It's possible that I did not pay attention to emails or other
announcements regarding it. I would not pay much attention because I do not know the significance of it and
no-one in my dept alerted me to it.

It is unclear if this survey relates to DHS since I do not recognize "health and human science" as part the
university.

It felt as though the reorganization process was predetermined!

I started after the reorganization occurred, so many of my answers are based on information I received after
my hiring.

I just joined UNR.

I realize this is to be anonymous, but I think the reason for my responses above is that I am based on the Las
Vegas campus for the School of Medicine. I'm not sure how much of this was communicated on a statewide
basis. Many in the Division of Health Sciences aren't aware that the Medical School has a campus in Las
Vegas at all, so it just may be a case of information not making its way to this part of the Medical School.

Communication could have been much better. Also, it felt like the decision to reorganize was made before
asking what we thought about it. It didn't feel like our opinions about it had any impact. That was frustrating.

It should not be done only by few at the top level and it is unjustified at all.

My complaints stem from the process and HOW the reorganization was done (top down decision making).
Impacts of the Reorganization:
Please provide any comments about the impacts of the reorganization below:

I don't notice anything different from before the reorganization, except for a website.

I still do not understand why medical school dean job was dropped.

It sounds like a lot of effort went into this, but, as usual, it was just cosmetic, because UNR has no or limited
financial resources to do anything really substantial.

It seemed to me to be MORE administration at MORE cost.

Confusing at best. Overall idea was intriguing but outcome seems counter productive.

Despite how the organizational change was rolled out, the impact on faculty, staff and students has been
remarkably positive. We're beginning to see the benefits/synergies possible. With a new VP/Dean on the
horizon, our outlook is quite positive.

If there have been benefits, they should be explained to the faculty. There may be improved relationships
with the Medical School and the old CHHS units.

As far as I can see, the impact was nil and the cost was high, over $0.5M per year.

Promote interdisciplinary collaboration to improve patient care.

We were moved into a unit that was less strong than ours had been. We have had to work harder to maintain
our productivity.

The reorganization seems to be in name only so that someone can have a big title. The School of Medicine
does not seem to be fully integrated into this new division in spirit or in actions.

The "reorganization" allowed for more interdisciplinary interaction, but took a toll on our dept. - left us reduced
in numbers, impacting workload and the ability to address student issues appropriately (e.g. teaching larger
classes, teaching more classes).

Dr. McDonald's leadership was phenomenal in assisting our organization through this reorganization.

I don't think there was any harm in the reorganization. I think though there were more
opportunities/mechanisms in the college of HHS that brought us together for collaboration. Building a Health
NV was a logical and helpful initiative to bring folks together. We had meetings that weren't tied to funding
and those were helpful for networking. Now even the Division Newsletter is helpful to get ideas of what other
units are doing. Richelle ODriscoll does a great job. I think she had more opportunities with the college
framework to bring folks together. We need to get rid of silos and work more together--like one of the provosts
says.

The leadership that took place for Health Science after the reorganization was a breath of fresh air. We were
encouraged to grow and be successful. This was a welcome change from the former philosophy of "Nursing
can't be successful because if Social Work and Community Health Sciences aren't as successful, they will
feel bad and we will alienate them." Every unit in DHS should be rewarded for their success, not retaliated
against. Success of any unit in Health Sciences should only serve as incentive and role modeling for others'
success!

Cutting an entire college and shuffling its units has not had any positive effect except possible monetary
savings for the administration. It has negatively impacted morale and has made our jobs more challenging.

Stop having so many surveys and meetings and just get it done.

As far as I can tell this unit has not accomplished its primary task of developing significant "funded"
interdisciplinary research and education. The only observable success is the newsletter.

There was little difference in operation of the Las Vegas departments as a result of the reorganization.

The Division meets monthly but without leadership we are going nowhere, It is difficult to give time to
something that is currently not recognized by central administration ( there is none).

Leadership (and absent leadership) has not created incentives or opportunities--everything is still rewarded by
individual accomplishments.

Has led to a number of inter-professional educational and research opportunities. Much closer relationships
especially with the medical school.

During very difficult economic times the decision to create a Vice President of the division separate from the
UNSOM Dean position without any clear way of funding such a position was a poor decision. This created
two large salaried positions that resulted in increased overhead for clinical faculty when we were already
struggling.

We have been directly affected. Due to the reorganization and length of time needed to secure someone
foolish enough to do both VP and Dean of Medicine, our own search has been put on hold, so we're on hold.
Not good!

One of the reasons given for the reorganization was that it would be more cost efficient (i.e., save money) ...
not sure this has been the case.

Overall the impacts of the reorganization are not readily apparent; however, hope springs eternal and I hope
that an outcome of the reorganization include the development of interdisciplinary/cross-discipline research
teams.

Little can happen that is positive until the new VP is in place.

Positive effect on fund raising.

Paperwork takes much too long now that things have to go through so many channels. Having to have our
fiscal stuff approved up at the med school takes much too long. Even internally in the VP office the turnaround
time for paperwork is much too slow. It seems like we are having to conform more to med school methods.

This seems to apply to Reno more than Las Vegas. Only medical school faculty are here. There is no
research infrastructure, no one to collaborate with, no connection to the other disciplines in Health Science
and more work for the Medical School dean.
Recommendations for Future Reorganizations:
Please provide any recommendations concerning how to most effectively conduct future
reorganizations:

Engage the political and business community so they can help direct and align educational and faculty efforts
to better serve their workforce needs and maybe they will feel more inclined to support us during the biennial
farce of putting together a State budget.

Involve the parties impacted/involved from the beginning.

We should look at what might actually save money---like having nursing students sit for lectures with medical
students as is commonly done at other institutions.

Need faculty input with a rationale as to why reorganizations are needed and what the potential positive
outcomes could be. As budget cuts loom yet again, I'm hoping central administration can learn from their
mistakes and seek more faculty and stakeholder input in developing plans; fiats from central administration
are counter-productive and deflating for morale.

Perhaps doing cost-benefit analyses, in terms of teaching (Is there any REAL impact on student academic
life?), faculty or other human time [who benefits and who loses (to me it was a slight loss -- more unnecessary
emails, more events to skip)], and dollars (who benefits and who loses).

Honesty up front! We spent a lot of time trying to make decisions that would be in our best interest. But in the
end, we ended up being put into a unit that was not our choice. If other units are to be reorganized, the
ground rules should be transparent at the outset.

Ask those affected to be part of a solution or have opportunity to voice concerns before it is determined.

Perhaps consider (and listen to) the students and their issues more.

Continually reorganizing does not benefit anyone. Once a reorganization is complete, it needs to be given
time to truly assess the impact. It takes several years for units to make necessary adjustments.

There wasn't much transparency behind why McDonald was let go. Would be helpful to have transparency. I
don't think it is realistic for the new VP to be both the chair of med school and the VP for the division. We
were told during the first reorganization that wouldn't happen--then it suddenly changed. Heard that the newly
hired person negotiated a different structure--that indicates he is realistic and probably a good hire and
assertive leader. One recommendation for future reorganizations is that all the units will be seen as equals
and that no one unit will trump the others. It seems that we are equals now and I hope that continues.

I believe faculty input is very important, but administration should be able to make administrative decisions for
the good of the University. This reorganization took way too long beginning with a totally ineffective Health
Sciences task force in 2004/05.

Do something with the creative faculty ideas that are brought forth. Solicit faculty input at the outset. Be open
with the reasoning and rationale behind any decisions that are made. Tell it like it is rather than operating
under guises. And please actively avoid being condescending. We can understand decisions that need to be
made for fiscal reasons. We'd like to be part of the discussion rather than the recipients of a decision from
above- but if the latter is necessary, at least let us know in an honest and non-disparaging way.

Don't take so long.

The concept is a good one. How it was carried out is the issue. A Department of Health Sciences would best
be served by having a skilled "administrative" individual as the chair of this unit and work on developing
collaborative relationships with the deans or chairs of health sciences programs meet on a regular basis to
discuss potential projects. The individual units/programs should remain independent of each other and not be
responsible to the "Dean of Health Sciences".

The VP should have a visionary, obtainable goal for the division. One of these should be to network with like
institutions. We need to accomplish something.

Rewards = action - there needs to be an infrastructure of incentives and rewards to get people to work
together this way...space/distance of all HS areas is still a problem...I understand the why Sanford has to
move to Pennington but it was not the best collaborative solution to encourage interdisciplinary...and what's
happening with Savitt and the space vacated by the folks who went to CMM? UNSOM still holding onto
space when it could be used for more HS to move up to the "HS Campus."

It is not at all clear if this survey should have been sent to medical faculty in the south. The questionnaire
does not appear to have been applicable.

Reorganization should occur at the college and department level. They know best how to handle cuts.

More written communication to faculty.

More thought, discussion and research before deciding to combine such important functions. I understand
fiscal issues, but in the long run, this is not good for the division and, I don't think, will save any money.

Remember Las Vegas.

Remain open to faulty and student input.

Reward system for faculty needs to be in line with overall vision and mission of department. There needs to
be a way to motivate those involved to get fired up and support reorganizations - leadership needs to be fired
up about reorganizing too!

Don't fire the VP because Glick doesn't like the treatment of a donor as ordered by Harvey Whittemore.

Do not put a person in charge who has "ties" to a previous person in charge.

I know the medical school is a challenging component of any university and of the Division of Health Sciences
but I think efforts to help the LV Campus feel a part of the larger UNR and Division would be helpful.

Tell the staff first before the news media.
Summary and Recommendations:
There was no proposal for the Faculty Senate to review prior to the announcement of a major
reorganization that involved dissolution of an existing college. This is unprecedented at the
University of Nevada and a legitimate cause for concern about the future role of faculty
governance. The motivation of the central administration to move decisively on such critical
decisions is understandable and reasonable, especially during a period when budgetary
constraints are imminent. The Faculty Senate recognizes and accepts a responsibility to respond
expeditiously in such situations, if given the opportunity.
Some benefits and some specific concerns were expressed by the affected faculty about both the
reorganization process that was followed and the outcomes of that reorganization, and some
thoughtful suggestions were offered. The range of viewpoints is consistent with what would be
expected from a group of academic, administrative and clinical faculty with a diverse range of
activities and responsibilities. A recurring theme in the responses to the survey questions and
specific comments is that the goals and objectives of this reorganization could have been better
communicated to the affected faculty, and more faculty input to the process could have been
solicited. There appears to be significant variation in opinions among different subunits, which
may be as much a reflection on the leadership of and communication within those subunits as on
the approach taken by the upper administration to implement the reorganization. One must
recognize that human nature tends to foster apprehension and inertia with regard to change,
which is often unsettling and perceived as threatening to some, especially during a budgetary
crisis when many faculty positions are being eliminated and a declaration of financial exigency is
being considered.
Overall, the reorganization appears to have been well-intentioned and based on sound and
reasonable objectives for consolidation of the health and human sciences within the university.
There is a perception among those involved that the process was conducted in a professional
manner. Prior to the reorganization, Vice Provost, Dr. Jannet Vreeland met separately with faculty
groups from each of the affected departments or units to explain the rationale and objectives, and
to receive faculty perspectives. Except for the Schools of Medicine and Nursing, units were given
an option of joining the new Division of Health Sciences or of relocating to another College.
Whether any financial savings have been realized as a result of the restructuring or any new
sources identified for private funding are unclear at what must be considered a very early stage in
the evolution of the Division of Health Sciences. The imminent consolidation of the positions of
Vice President for Health Sciences and Dean of the School of Medicine should in principle provide
some reduction in administrative costs in the longer term, although filling the position will result in
a major increase in current expenditures.
A perception exists among some members of the faculty that enhanced communication among
academics and health professionals and some new opportunities for inter-disciplinary and intradisciplinary collaborations in research and services have been facilitated by the restructuring.
These connections may have facilitated or are expected to lead to some new funding
opportunities.
The arrival of Dr. Thomas Schwenk in July 2011 to serve as Vice President for Health Sciences
and Dean of the Nevada School of Medicine will mark a significant milestone for the health and
human sciences at the University of Nevada, and should serve as a starting point for a formal and
comprehensive review of the Division of Health Sciences in five years. Similar to the regular
process for periodic evaluation of academic units and programs, such a review should be
conducted by an external committee of nationally recognized experts based on a self-assessment
report prepared by the Division and made available to the committee prior to the review.
Acknowledgment:
The committee is grateful to Michelle Hritz and Linda Kuchenbecker of the Faculty Senate staff for
implementing the faculty survey, and to Eric Herzik for reviewing and endorsing it as Faculty
Senate chair.
UNR Faculty Senate Meeting
May 12, 2011
Agenda Item # 5
Link to the Consent Agenda Packet:
http://www.unr.edu/facultysenate/meetings/10-11/Agendas/5-12-11consentpkt.doc
May 4, 2011 Meeting Minutes
UAM Revision
Amended FSCRC Report
UNR Faculty Senate Meeting
May 12, 2011
Agenda Item # 7
Candidates for the Executive Board Election
Chair Elect Candidates:
vote for one (1)
Glenn Miller
David Zeh
Parliamentarian Candidates:
Rafik Beekun
Amy Mc Farland
At Large Candidates:
Donica Mensing
vote for one (1)
vote for two (2)
Chuck Price
Maggie Ressel
Bios for Candidates:
Name:
Glenn Miller
Title:
Professor
Department: Natural Resources and Environmental Science
Number of years at UNR: 33
Brief Educational background: BS Chemistry, UC Santa Barbara; Ph.D. Agricultural Chemistry,
UC Davis
Past committee leadership roles: Several departmental, college and university committees,
including various curriculum committees; Departmental, College and UNR Tenure and Promotion
Committees; Environmental Studies Board/Center for Environmental Science and Engineering;
Washoe County Science Advisory Board; Chair of the Great Basin Institute Board, plus several local
and national environmental NGO boards; National Academy of Science Panels; the current UNR
Budget Priority Committee; UNR Nevada Faculty Alliance- current Chair; Faculty Senate Executive
Committee 2010-present.
Brief summary of other service or experiences that support your nomination: The Faculty
Senate is the primary mode for faculty involvement in governance of the University of Nevada.
Particularly during these very stressful times, involvement of the Faculty Senate in funding issues is
critical and will help to ensure that the University of Nevada will be able to rebound from these
funding cuts. My 33 years on the UNR faculty, as well as my involvement in the Nevada Faculty
Alliance and the Faculty Senate have provided a base understanding of how the University works,
how the NSHE works, as well as how it should be interacting with the public and the Legislature.
Name:
David W. Zeh
Title:
Professor of Biology
Department: Biology
Number of years at UNR:
13
Brief Educational background:
B.S. in Biology and Biological Oceanography, Long Island University; Ph.D. in Ecology & Evolutionary Biology,
University of Arizona; Postdoctoral Fellow, Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Republic of Panamá;
NATO Postdoctoral Fellow, Nottingham, England
Past committee leadership roles: Chair Elect, Department of Biology, Member of the current Faculty
Senate Curricular Review Committee; Chair of the College of Science Personnel Committee (3 years), Chair of
the Department of Biology Curriculum Committee; Chair of several search committees for recruiting new
faculty; Chair of the EECB Comprehensive Exam Committee; Member of the UNR Appeals Committee
Brief summary of other service or experiences that support your nomination:
Over my academic
career, I have taught approximately 80 formal and specialty courses involving more than 4,000 undergraduate
and graduate students. I have also been very active in mentoring students in my laboratory, and participate in
an extensive outreach program to AP Biology students at Carson High School. In addition to my service,
teaching and outreach activities, I maintain an active research program supported by the National Science
Foundation (NSF). I am an editor of the international journal Ethology, an author of more than 50 refereed
scientific publications, and have served on several NSF proposal review panels. Although my expertise lies
primarily in the sciences, I consider myself a strong advocate for college athletics and the importance of a
liberal arts education. My son, Adrian Zeh, graduated from UNR in 2008 as the “Outstanding Graduate in
Humanities.” I believe that my breadth of experience in teaching, research, outreach and service makes me
well suited to represent the best interests of the UNR faculty, and look forward to the possibility of serving as a
the Faculty Senate Chair.
Name:
Rafik Beekun
Title: Professor of Management and Strategy
Department: Managerial Sciences
Number of years at UNR: 22
Brief Educational background: B.A. (Economics and French) and M.A. (French) (Columbia); MBA
and Ph.D. (Business Administration)(University of Texas at Austin)
Past committee leadership roles:
 Chair, Assessment Committee, College of Business (2008-2010); The role of this committee
was critical in winning the re-accreditation of COB, and was recognized by the visiting team.
 Committee Chair and member, Managerial Sciences Curriculum Committee, (2001 - 2007).
 Committee Chair, Bylaws Committee, Managerial Sciences Department, Other. (1996).
Brief summary of other service or experiences that support your nomination:

Co-Director, Center for Corporate Governance and Business Ethics (2007 to present.)





Chair, Managerial Sciences Department, 1996-1999. MGRS is the largest department in the
College of Business and I oversaw the management, finance, marketing and supply chain
area.
College Personnel Committee. (2007 - 2008). As a member of this committee, I needed to be
able to gauge performance across a number of very different departments, and have
developed an understanding of the great diverse contributions that faculty members from other
areas put forth.
At the University level, I have broad university experience from serving in many key
committees:
o Member, Search Committee, IRB Director (2011);
o Member, Northern Nevada Assessment Conference Planning Committee. (2009 2010).
o Committee Member, Ethics Council. (2007 - 2008).
o Committee Member, University Technology Committee, Member. (2001 - 2005).
o Committee Member, WebCT technical position search committee, Member. (2004).
o University Curriculum Committee, (2003 - 2004).
o University Senate Liaison, Graduate Research Council. (2001).
o Committee Member, University Faculty Senator, (2001).
Though serving in several policy committees, I understand the need to rise about my own
area’s focus through the COBA committees listed below.
o Committee Member, COBA Research Productivity Group, Member. (2004 - 2005).
o Committee Member, COBA Curriculum Committee, Member. (2001 - 2004).
o Committee Member, COBA Strategic Planning Committee, Member. (1998).
o Committee Member, COBA Computer Policy committee, Member. (1993).
Externally, I have a wealth of service experiences that demonstrate my desire to serve:
o Senior Fulbright Scholar to Mauritius in Sub-Saharan Africa (1999-2000). The need to
negotiate empathetically across different cultures (both national and organizational) was
an important lesson that I learned during my Fulbright stay.
o I have also helped both the NSHE Board of Regents and the State of Nevada in
strategic planning.
o I also was part of the Rotary Club of Reno where we were involved in many
philanthropic activities in Northern Nevada.
o National President, AMSS—a national group of social scientists in the USA and Canada
(2004-2007)
Name: Amy McFarland
Title: Education Coordinator, Division of Interdisciplinary Medical Education, UNSOM
Department: Office of Medical Education
Number of years at UNR: Education Coordinator/Course Coordinator- 5 years/ 3 years as
Research and Graduate Assistant
Brief Educational background: Alum of the University- I graduated with a master’s in public health
in 2004 and a bachelor’s degree in health ecology in 2002.
Past committee leadership roles: I have had the honor to serve a shortened term as the At Large
position of the Executive Board. I have truly enjoyed my time working with the Board and Faculty
Senate Office. From this experience I know the amount of time and work that must be invested in this
position.
I have served on many committees but I wouldn’t classify any of my roles as a leadership position;
however I am aware of the importance of effective communication and transparency in leadership. A
few examples of committees that I have served on- Liaison for UNSOM Faculty Council, Statewide
Secretary for Nevada Public Health Association, Member of the Work and Family Taskforce.
Brief summary of other service or experiences that support your nomination: I feel it is a
privilege to be nominated. I take great responsibility in serving on the Faculty Senate to represent my
University, School and Division.
Name:
Donica Mensing
Title:
Associate Professor
Department: Journalism
Number of years at UNR: 12 years
Brief Educational background: B.S. Political Economy of Natural Resources, University of
California, Berkeley; M.A. Science, Technology and Public Policy, George
Washington University, Washington DC; Ph.D. Political Science,
University of Nevada, Reno
Past committee leadership roles: Chaired search committees and college curriculum committee,
chair Graduate Council, 2007-2008
Brief summary of other service or experiences that support your nomination:
Served on reconsideration committee (2010), curricular review committee (2011)
Name:
Chuck Price
Title:
Director, Joe Crowley Student Union
Department: Joe Crowley Student Union
Number of years at UNR: 17
Brief Educational background:
MBA from Columbia University with an emphasis on Finance and
Strategic Planning,
MS in Higher Education Administration from State University of New York
(SUNY) Brockport,
BS in Business Administration from SUNY Brockport.
Past committee leadership roles: Faculty Senate 1999-2002, Faculty Senate Executive Board
2000-2002, University Planning Council 2001-2002, Numerous Faculty Senate committees, Student
Services committees.
Brief summary of other service or experiences that support your nomination:
I have been actively involved with faculty concerns since I started at Nevada in 1994. My previous
experience on the Faculty Senate and Faculty Senate Executive Board provided me the opportunity
to work with academic faculty on mutual concerns and challenges.
My style is to listen and gain insight before collaborating with others on solutions. I worked with
faculty, students and others to plan, design, build and open the Joe Crowley Student Union; it was a
valuable experience in listening to the needs of others before making decisions.
I consider it a privilege to serve on the Executive Board.
Name:
Maggie Ressel
Title:
Librarian
Department: Library- Information Services
Number of years at UNR: 18
Brief Educational background:
B.A. CSU Long Beach, Political Science, 1989; MLS UCLA, 1992
Past committee leadership roles:
Parliamentarian, Faculty Senate 2009-10, 2010-11; Chair and co-founder of the Work and Family
Task Force; Morale Task Force member, and many other committees.
Brief summary of other service or experiences that support your nomination:
I have a wide depth and breadth of experience with committees and other work at UNR over the last
18 years. I am committed to the university and faculty governance and feel I can contribute to the
senate by my participation on the Executive Board.