MINUTES OF MEETING NUMBER 44
OF The
sENATE OF mICHIGAN tECHNOLOGical university

 19 February 1969

(Senate Minute pages: 395-402)

Meeting No. 44 was called to order at 7:10 p.m., Wednesday February 19, 1969, in the Faculty Lounge of the Memorial Union, with President M.W. Bredekamp presiding.

The roll was taken. 22 members were present. (Quorum 20). Members absent were Barstow (BA), Lucier, PE, Boutilier (AL), Caspary (PS), Freyberger (MY), Johnson (F. For.), Nordeng (GE), Sachs (Hum.), Smith (Admin.)

 

Minutes of Meeting No. 43

A correction was noted on page 388. In Senator Price's amendment No. 1 to Proposal 8-69, the word "actual" should have been recorded as "factual." The minutes of Meeting No. 43 were accepted as corrected.

 

Senate President's Report

1. Senate Proposal Procedures
   
   President Bredekamp requested that all future proposals be clearly stated and written copy be provided if at all possible.
   
   
2. Proposal 8-69, Advanced Placement
   
   President Bredekamp reported that a letter had been sent from the Humanities Department to President Smith concerning 8-69. The Humanities Department unanimously urged President Smith to disapprove Proposal 8-69 on the grounds that:
   
   "Education is not only the accumulation of information. The Humanities Department recognizes that in receiving a degree from Michigan Technological University a student should not only have exhibited knowledge of information to his examiners, but that through association with the institution he should reflect the special characteristics peculiar to education at Michigan Technological University."
   
   President Bredekamp expressed regret that the Humanities Department did not agree with the majority of the Senate members on this proposal.
   
   
3. Senate Committees
   
   A current list of committee assignments was distributed to the Senate. This list is reproduced as Appendix A (Available by Request from the Senate Office).
   
   
   

Old Business

1. Instructional Policy Committee
   
   1. Proposal 4-69, Honors Program
      
      President Bredekamp read the proposal as follows:
      
      "The Instructional Policy Committee moves that an honors program be established within the University and that an Ad Hoc Committee study the details of the program."
      
      Dr. Stebbins moved the adoption of this proposal. The vote was taken by show of hands. 20 Yes, 0 No, 2 Abstain. Proposal 4-69 was adopted by this action.
      
      
      
   2. Proposal 6-69, Evening Examinations
      
      President Bredekamp read the proposal as follows:
      
      

      A.

      1. Evening exams should be used only in courses with large enrollment, in which all students will take the same exam, and in which it is not educationally expedient to give the exam during a regularly scheduled class period.
         
         
      2. Students required to take an evening exam shall be excused from the regularly scheduled class period immediately preceding or following the exam.
         
         
      3. Evening exams may be given only on Wednesday or Thursday evenings. To avoid undue interference with students' preparation for other courses, any two-hour evening exam shall be given in one-hour segments on different evenings.
         
         
      4. An instructor wishing to give an evening exam shall clear the date, time, and room to insure that conflicts are not created. The details of this process will be developed by the cognizant administrative office.
         
         
      5. Special evening examinations should not be scheduled prior to 6:30 p.m.

      B.

      That provided the resolution is amended to include the student body, the Senate endorse Art. 4 Para. B (1) and B (2), page 319 of the Senate Minutes in principle. However, with reference to Para. B (2) once policies are developed in an interaction between the faculty, student body, and University administrators, it is the responsibility of all to function in accordance with the spirit of such policies.
      
      (Secretary's Note: Resolution IV B (1), p. 319, was not amended or considered)
      
      Dr. Stebbins moved the adoption of this Proposal (6-69) as amended. The vote was taken by show of hands. 16 - Yes, 3 - No, 3 - Abstain. Proposal 6-69 (amended) was adopted by this action.
      

   Proposal 7-69, Final Examinations
   
   President Bredekamp read Proposal 7-69 as follows:
   
   

   1. The term "final examination" is defined as an examination to be given during a special examination period at the end of the term regardless of whether it is comprehensive or incremental and no administrative regulation should attempt to govern the content of such an examination. However, if only one examination, either comprehensive or incremental, is to be given during the period covered by the last regularly scheduled week of the term and final examination week, it should be given during the final examination period.
      
      
   2. After consultation with the teaching staff, department heads designate all courses or sections of courses in which final examinations are (to be) given. These examinations are then scheduled for the final week of the term by the Final Examination Committee. In general, a comprehensive final examination designed to measure the student's overall knowledge is considered to be good pedagogic policy.
      
      
   3. The University shall not schedule nor shall the student participate in any official function during the scheduled final examination period. Exemption to this prohibition occurs for those events the date of which the University cannot control.
      
      
   4. No regular instruction is to be continued during the final examination period except that the final examination period assigned each course can be used for instruction at the instructor's discretion.
      
      
   5. Recognizing the need of the student to prepare for final examinations, no final examination will be given earlier than the regular final examination week. Special final examinations necessitated by illness, storms, hockey games, etc. will not be given at an earlier time than that scheduled for the final examination in that course.
      
      
   6. The question of exemption from final examinations for seniors in their last quarter of work shall be decided by the degree granting department and the specific instructor involved in each course, the concurrence of both being necessary to support an excuse from taking a final examination.
      
      
   7. No student shall be required to take more than three final examinations per day.

   (Item 7 is interpreted to be the meaning of amendment no. 2, page 386. This substitution was made by unanimous approval of the Senate.)
   
   Senator Hennessy moved the adoption of Proposal 7-69 as amended. The vote was taken by show of hands. 16 Yes, 3 No, 3 Abstain. Proposal 7-69 (amended) was adopted by this action.

2. Curricular Policy Committee
   
   Senator Erbisch responded for the Curricular Policy Committee and requested "Emergency Submission Status" to be given to Proposal 9-69, titled "Changes in Senate Policy 1-59 (p. 37).
   
   Senator Price moved that proposal 9-69 be admitted to the floor as an Emergency Submission. Vote by show of hands: 15 Yes, 2 No, 5 Abstain. Proposal admitted.
   
   Proposal 9-69, Changes in Senate Policy 1-59
   
   1. Senate Policy 1-59 shall be revoked and be replaced by a new policy statement as follows:
      
   2. Students enrolled in all curricula leading to a baccalaureate degree, except in Liberal Arts, are required to take a minimum of fifteen (15) credits of electives in the humanities and social sciences. These courses must be selected in defined areas as listed in the catalog.
      
   3. Courses approved as electives for the completion of the requirements stated in paragraph II shall be listed by area in the University catalog. Departments offering these courses shall be consulted annually to bring their course listings in the catalog up to date. These listings shall be approved by mutual agreements between the departments involved and the Senate or its delegated representative.
      
   4. Students shall choose electives from the approved list. At least six (6) credits, not necessarily in sequence, shall be chosen in one area from courses offered by the Department of Humanities and listed in the catalog as HU courses. At least six (6) other credits, not necessarily in sequence, shall be chosen in one area from all other courses listed in the catalog as approved electives in the humanities and social sciences.
      
   5. It is recommended that this policy be implemented beginning with the academic year 1970-71.

   Senator Bayer moved that the proposal be amended by deleting the last sentence of paragraph III as underlined above. Vote by show of hands: 2 Yes, 16 No, 4 Abstain. Motion defeated.
   
   Senator Erbisch moved the adoption of Proposal 9-69. Vote by show of hands: 10 Yes, 11 No, 1 Abstain. Motion defeated.
   

3. Grievance Committee - Procedures
   
   Senator Keeling reported that the committee had a prepared proposal for the creation of the "Office of the Ombudsman" at Michigan Technological University. This proposal was not admitted as an Emergency Proposal but was received as information and approved by voice vote for the agenda of the next meeting of the Senate.
   
   The proposal, numbered 1-69 and titled Office of the Ombudsman is contained in Appendix B. (Available by Request from the Senate Office or online in the minutes of meeting #45)
   
   
4. Student - Faculty - Senate Relations Committee
   
   Senator Halkola reported that the student representatives for this committee had been selected and that the committee would be meeting in the near future.
   
   
5. Honors Program Committee
   
   On page 391 of the Senate minutes, an Ad Hoc Committee was established and charged with a dual task relative to Honors Programs. Since there was some uncertainty regarding the duties of the committee, President Bredekamp invited action from the floor which would either change or reaffirm the Committee's charge.
   
   Senator Hamilton moved that the Senate create another Ad Hoc Committee for the purpose of studying the feasibility of an accommodation program for the students who need special help. This committee is to be separate from the Honors Committee. Vote by show of hands: 19 Yes, 2 No, 1 Abstain.
   
   President Bredekamp appointed the following committee members: Price, Chairman, Nordeng, Oswald.
   
   
6. Distribution of Senate Minutes
   
   On page 391 of the Senate Minutes, the Senate approved the following procedure:
   
   "Accepted proposals of the Senate that have been passed by the Faculty Senate will be made available to the Editor of the Lode for publication in the student paper. The Editor of the Lode will be informed merely by adding them to the distribution list for minutes of the Senate."
   
   Senator Hennessy moved that the word "merely" be deleted from the wording of this procedure. The motion was approved by voice vote.
   
   

New Business

Senator Price requested that a representative of the Humanities Department be recognized. Mr. Liba then read a communication from Mr. Sachs.

The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.

G.P. Krueger
Senate Secretary