The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #61 on
February 5, 1996:
MOTION PASSED
==============
The UAF Faculty Senate moves to approve the BFA in Theatre.
EFFECTIVE: Upon Board of Regents' Approval
RATIONALE: See full program proposal on file in the
Governance Office, 312 Signers' Hall.
Signed: Eric Heyne, President, UAF Faculty Senate Date: 2/7/96
APPROVED: Joan Wadlow, Chancellor Date: 2/8/96
***************
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR THE BOARD OF REGENTS
The Bachelor of Fine Arts is a professionally oriented degree
designed to prepare students for careers in theatrical design. This
degree is also the usual prerequisite for graduate studies in theatre.
The B.F.A. in Theatrical Design's main objective is to give a more
thorough and concentrated focus into the various methods, bases,
and applications of all theatrical design.
Theatre UAF has unique opportunities open for our design
students. Our audience counts/house records are steadily growing;
interest is rising and our program is expanding. Through a
portfolio/interview enrollment, the B.F.A. program presented here
will aid in drawing in new students as well as in retaining those we
have due to the larger demand of graduate schools requiring a B.F.A.
of their applicants.
Resources and equipment needs will barely be effected; in
fact, in the long run, design faculty will be able to take on a more
supervisory role in the design process; thereby allowing them more
time to teach more classes.
This program will aid the department's productions better,
will supply a more qualified "labor force" for the mounting of
departmental productions, and will aid the community by offering
them (Fairbanks Drama Association, Fairbanks Light Opera
Theatre,etc.) a variety of better-trained designers willing to work
in exchange for resume credits.
In conclusion, I feel that because all the pieces are already in
place for the B.F.A. program in Theatre, we should take advantage of
it and add the program to attract more students into our already
growing program.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #61 on
February 5, 1996:
MOTION PASSED (w/o opposition)
==============
The UAF Faculty Senate moves to approve the deletion of the M.Ed. in
College Student Personnel Administration.
EFFECTIVE: Upon Board of Regents' Approval
RATIONALE: See full program proposal on file in the
Governance Office, 312 Signers' Hall.
Signed: Eric Heyne, President, UAF Faculty Senate Date: 2/7/96
APPROVED: Joan Wadlow, Chancellor Date: 2/8/96
***************
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR THE BOARD OF REGENTS
Program/Degree:
M.Ed. - College Student Personnel Administration
Identification of Program:
This program is designed to train educators to be able to
function in student service positions in higher education. This
training would include specifically: history, philosophy, and
contemporary issues in higher education; management concepts;
principles of educational psychology, measurement, and research,
and supervised laboratory experiences in college student personnel
agencies.
Reasons for Requesting Deletion of Program:
This program has not been available for several years and has
no students enrolled The people who developed this program
sequence are no longer at the university, and there is no intent to
revive the degree sequence.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #61 on
February 5, 1996:
MOTION PASSED AS AMENDED (unanimous)
==========================
The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the UAF Grade Appeals
Policy as indicated below.
EFFECTIVE: Immediately
RATIONALE: The existing appeals policy defines the letter
grades A, B, C, D, F and Pass as being subject to appeal,
while the I and NB are explicitly exempted. However, as
the NB is a permanent grade, it too must be subject to
appeal. It is recommended that Paragraph II.A. be
revised.
The policy does not provide a course of action for the
case in which an instructor whose grade is being
appealed is no longer an employee of the university but
who is willing to participate in the appeals procedure. It
is recommended that Paragraph III.A.5.c. be inserted.
It appears that grade appeals committees are not always
making certain that the student's request for a review is
valid. The committee recommends that the first
sentence of Paragraph III.B.4.c be revised.
The present policy does not identify a clear course of
action for cases in which the instructor is either the
dean or the department head. It is recommended that the
present Paragraphs III.B.3-6 be renumbered III.B.4-7, and
that a new Paragraph III.B.3 be inserted.
Signed: Eric Heyne, President, UAF Faculty Senate Date: 2/7/96
APPROVED: Joan Wadlow, Chancellor Date: 2/8/96
***************
[[ ]] = Deletions
CAPS = Additions
GRADE APPEALS POLICY
I. Introduction
The University of Alaska is committed to the ideal of academic
freedom and so recognizes that the assignment of grades is a
faculty responsibility. Therefore, the University administration
shall not influence or affect an assigned grade or the review of an
assigned grade.
The following procedures are designed to provide a means for
students to seek review of final course grades alleged to be
arbitrary and capricious. Before taking formal action, a student
must attempt to resolve the issue informally with the instructor of
the course. A student who files a written request for review under
the following procedures shall be expected to abide by the final
disposition of the review, as provided below, and may not seek
further review of the matter under any other procedure within the
university.
II. Definitions
A. A "grade" refers to FINAL letter grades A, B, C, D, F, NB
and Pass. The [[NB (no basis) and]] I (incomplete)
[[designators are not grades and, therefore, are]]
DESIGNATES A TEMPORARY GRADE, NOT A FINAL GRADE,
SO IT IS not subject to appeal.
B. For the purpose of this procedure, "arbitrary and
capricious" grading means:
1. the assignment of a course grade to a student on
some basis other than performance in the course, or
2. the assignment of a course grade to a student by
resorting to standards different from those which were
applied to other students in that course, or
3. the assignment of a course grade by a substantial,
unreasonable and unannounced departure from the
instructor's previously articulated standards.
C. "Grading errors" denotes errors in the calculation of
grades rather than errors in judgment.
D. All references to duration in "days" refers to university
working days, which exclude weekends, holidays and days
in which the university is officially closed.
E. "Department head" for the purposes of this policy denotes
the administrative head of the academic unit offering the
course (e.g., head, chair or coordinator of an academic
department, OR THE CAMPUS DIRECTOR IF THE FACULTY
MEMBER IS IN THE COLLEGE OF RURAL ALASKA).
III. Procedures
A. Errors by an instructor in determining and recording a
grade or by the university staff in transcribing the grade
are sources of error that can be readily corrected
through the student's prompt attention following the
normal change of grade procedure.
1. It is a student's obligation to notify the instructor
of any possible error immediately by the most direct
means available. If this is through an oral conversation
and/or the issue is not immediately resolved, it is the
student's responsibility to provide the instructor with a
signed, written request for review of the grade, with a
copy to the unit department head and the dean of the
college or school in which the course was offered.
2. Notification must be received by the instructor
and/or department head within 20 days from the first
day of instruction of the next regular semester (i.e., fall
semester for grade issued at the end of the previous
spring semester or summer session; spring semester for
grade issued at the end of the previous fall semester).
3. The instructor is responsible for notifying the
student in writing of his or her final judgment
concerning the grade in question within 10 days of
receipt of the request, and for promptly submitting the
appropriate change of grade form to the Director of
Admissions and Records if an error occurred.
4. If the student does not receive a response from the
instructor or the unit department head by the required
deadline, the student must seek the assistance of the
dean of the college or school in which the course was
offered.
5. If the instructor is no longer an employee of the
university or is otherwise unavailable, the student must
bring the matter to the attention of the unit department
head who will make every effort to contact the
instructor.
a. If the instructor can not be contacted but
course records are available, the department head
may correct a grading error through the regular
change of grade process on behalf of the instructor.
b. If the instructor can not be contacted and
course records are either unavailable or indecisive,
the student may request a review following the
procedure outlined below.
C. IF THE INSTRUCTOR CAN BE CONTACTED AND
ELECTS TO PARTICIPATE, THEN A CONSTRUCTIVE
PARTICIPATION IS TO BE WELCOMED BY THE REVIEW
COMMITTEE. THE PROCEDURES OF PARAGRAPH
III.A.5.a OR PARAGRAPH III.A.5.b WILL BE
INSTITUTED IF THE INSTRUCTOR WITHDRAWS FROM
PARTICIPATION.
6. There may be extenuating circumstances when the
deadlines cannot be met due to illness, mail disruption,
or other situations over which the student may have no
control. In such a case, upon request from the student,
the dean of students, after review of supporting
documentation provided by the student, may recommend
to the grade appeals committee that the deadlines be
adjusted accordingly. An extension of the deadline will
be limited to one semester but every effort should be
made to complete the appeal process within the current
semester.
B. If no such error occurred, the remaining option is by
review for alleged arbitrary and capricious grading, or
for instances where the course instructor is unavailable
and satisfaction is not forthcoming from the appropriate
department head.
1. This review is initiated by the student through a
signed, written request to the department head with a
copy to the dean of the college or school in which the
course was offered.
a. The student's request for review may be
submitted using university forms specifically
designed for this purpose and available at the
Admissions and Records Office.
b. By submitting a request for a review, the
student acknowledges that no additional
mechanisms exist within the university for the
review of the grade, and that the university's
administration can not influence or affect the
outcome of the review.
c. The request for a review must be received no
later than 45 days after the first day of instruction
in the next regular semester (i.e., fall semester for
grade issued at the end of the previous spring
semester or summer session; spring semester for
grade issued at the end of the previous fall
semester).
d. The request must detail the basis for the
allegation that a grade was improper and the result
of arbitrary and capricious grading and must
present the relevant evidence.
2. It is the responsibility of the department head to
formally notify both the instructor who issued the grade
and the dean of the unit's college or school that a request
for a review of grade has been received.
3. IF THE INSTRUCTOR OF THE COURSE IS ALSO THE
DEPARTMENT HEAD, THE DEAN OF THE COLLEGE WILL
DESIGNATE ANOTHER DEPARTMENT HEAD WITHIN THE
COLLEGE TO ACT AS THE DEPARTMENT'S REPRESENTATIVE
FOR ALL PROCEEDINGS. IF THE INSTRUCTOR OF THE
COURSE IS ALSO THE DEAN OF THE COLLEGE, THE PROVOST
WILL DESIGNATE ANOTHER DEAN WITHIN THE UNIVERSITY
TO ACT AS THE COLLEGE'S MONITOR OF ALL PROCEEDINGS.
4.[[3.]] The dean will appoint a 5 member review
committee composed of the following:
a. One tenure-track faculty member from the
academic unit in which the course was offered
(other than the instructor of the course).
b. Two tenure-track faculty members from
within the college or school but outside of the unit
in which the course was offered.
c. One tenure track faculty member from
outside the college or school in which the course
was offered.
d. At the option of the student whose grade is
being reviewed, the fifth member to be appointed
by the dean will be a student or another tenure
track faculty member outside the college or school
in which the course was offered.
e. The campus judicial officer or his/her
designee shall serve as a nonvoting facilitator for
grade appeals hearings. This individual shall serve
in an advisory role to help preserve consistent
hearing protocol and records.
5.[[4.]] The committee must meet within 10 days of
receipt of the student's request.
a. During this and any subsequent meetings, all
parties involved shall protect the confidentiality
of the matter according to the provisions of the
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)
and any other applicable federal, state or
university policies.
b. Throughout the proceedings, the committee
will encourage a mutually agreeable resolution.
c. THE MANDATORY FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS At
this meeting[[,]] IS FOR the committee [[will]] TO
rule on the validity of the student's request.
Grounds for dismissal of the request for review
are:
1) This is not the first properly prepared
request for appeal of the particular grade.
2) The actions of the instructor do not
constitute arbitrary and capricious grading,
as defined herein.
3) The request was not made within the
policy deadlines.
4) The student has not taken prior action
to resolve the grade conflict with the
instructor, as described under section III, A.
d. In the event that the committee votes to
dismiss the request, a written notice of dismissal
must be forwarded to the student, instructor,
department head and dean within five days of the
decision, and will state clearly the reasoning for
the dismissal of the request.
6.[[5.]] Acceptance for consideration of the student's
request will result in the following:
a. A request for and receipt of a formal
response from the instructor to the student's
allegation.
b. A second meeting scheduled to meet within
10 days of the decision to review the request.
1) The student and instructor will be
invited to attend the meeting.
2) The meeting will be closed to outside
participation, and neither the student nor
instructor may be accompanied by an
advocate or representative. Other matters of
format will be announced in advance.
3) The proceedings will be tape recorded
and the tapes will be stored with the campus
Judicial Officer.
4) The meeting must be informal, non-
confrontational and fact-finding, where both
the student and instructor may provide
additional relevant and useful information
and can provide clarification of facts for
materials previously submitted.
7.[[6.]] The final decision of the committee will be
made in private by a majority vote.
a. The committee is not authorized to award a
grade (letter or pass/fail) or take any action with
regard to the instructor.
b. Actions which the committee can take if it
accepts the student's allegation of arbitrary and
capricious grading must be directed towards a fair
and just resolution, and may include, but are not
limited to, the following:
1) direct the instructor to grade again the
student's work under the supervision of the
department head,
2) direct the instructor to administer a
new final examination and/or paper in the
course,
3) direct a change of the student's
registration status (i.e., withdrawn, audit,
dropped) in the course.
c. A formal, written report of the decision must
be forwarded to the student, instructor,
department head, dean and Director of Admissions
and Records within five days of the meeting.
d. The decision of the committee is final.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #61 on
February 5, 1996:
MOTION PASSED AS AMENDED (w/o objection)
==========================
The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the UAF Grade Appeals
Policy III. B. 3. as indicated below.
EFFECTIVE: Immediately
RATIONALE: Currently, the UAF Grade Appeals Policy does
not specify how the faculty members of grade appeals
review committees will be selected. The Faculty
Appeals and Oversight Committee functions as an appeal
body for issues of faculty prerogative, and thus grade
appeals are included in its mandate. This motion
requires that the unit dean select two of the four faculty
members appointed to any grade appeals review
committee from among the members of the Faculty
Appeals and Oversight Committee. If the student
requests that the fifth member be a faculty member, the
unit dean will also select that faculty member from the
Faculty Appeals and Oversight Committee. The unit dean
will appoint the other two faculty members on a
committee at his or her discretion.
Signed: Eric Heyne, President, UAF Faculty Senate Date: 2/7/96
APPROVED: Joan Wadlow, Chancellor Date: 2/8/96
***************
CAPS = addition
GRADE APPEALS POLICY
III. Procedures
B. 3. The dean will appoint a 5 member review committee composed
of the following:
a. One tenure-track faculty member from the academic unit
in which the course was offered (other than the instructor of
the course).
b. Two tenure-track faculty members from within the
college or school but outside of the unit in which the course
was offered. IF AVAILABLE, ONE OF THESE TWO MEMBERS WILL
BE SELECTED FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE UAF FACULTY APPEALS
AND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE.
c. One tenure track faculty member from outside the
college or school in which the course was offered. IF
AVAILABLE, THIS MEMBER IS TO BE SELECTED FROM THE
MEMBERS OF THE UAF FACULTY APPEALS AND OVERSIGHT
COMMITTEE.
d. At the option of the student whose grade is being
reviewed, the fifth member to be appointed by the dean will be
a student or another tenure track faculty member outside the
college or school in which the course was offered. IF THE FIFTH
MEMBER IS A FACULTY MEMBER, THIS MEMBER WILL BE SELECTED
FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE UAF FACULTY APPEALS AND
OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE IF ONE IS AVAILABLE.
e. The campus judicial officer or his/her designee shall
serve as a nonvoting facilitator for grade appeals hearings.
This individual shall serve in an advisory role to help preserve
consistent hearing protocol and records.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #61 on
February 5, 1996:
MOTION TABLED (unanimous)
==============
The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the guidelines for Faculty
Role in the Evaluation of Administrators endorsed at the Faculty
Senate Meeting #23 on December 17, 1990 as indicated below.
EFFECTIVE: Immediately
RATIONALE: These amendments delete from the list of
administrators to be evaluated those administrative
positions that no longer exist and add existing
administrative positions.
Signed: Eric Heyne, President, UAF Faculty Senate Date: 2/7/96
***************
[[ ]] = Deletion
CAPS = Addition
GUIDELINES FOR FACULTY ROLE IN THE
EVALUATION OF ADMINISTRATORS
1. All faculty in a given administrative unit will have the
opportunity to provide anonymous written input into the evaluation
of their EXECUTIVE DEAN, dean or director, associate dean or
director, deputy director, and department head. In small units,
interviews with individual faculty members may also be appropriate.
2. A representative sample of faculty will be asked to provide
written input into the evaluation of the [[Vice Chancellor for
Academic Affairs and the Vice Chancellor for Research]] PROVOST.
The Faculty Senate and its leadership will be included in this
sample, as well as any ad hoc groups and individuals who have
worked closely with the administrators during the time covered by
the evaluation.
3. In each evaluation cycle, a uniform procedure will be used in
all academic units to obtain faculty input.
4. The procedure for evaluation of the Chancellor is codified in
Board of Regents' policy. The Faculty Senate urges the Regents and
the President to consult with faculty as a crucial part of this
evaluation.
5. The administrative characteristics that faculty will have the
opportunity to comment upon will include at least the following:
Administrative Tasks
Building and maintaining excellence
Resource allocation
Leadership
Maintenance of strong faculty morale
Problem resolution
Delegation of duties to appropriate colleagues
Building a team
Providing a means to involve department heads and other
faculty in decisionmaking
Skills as a mediator between faculty and
administration/community/legislature
General leadership abilities
Academic Contributions
General Comments
ⓒ UA