---

agenda status: not approved

Agenda:
University Committee on Academic Policy

Meeting of Thursday, November 29, 2001
10:15 a.m., Board Room, Administration Building

1. Approval of Agenda

2. Approval of Minutes of the November 8, 2001 meeting (Attachment)

3. Comments from the Chairperson

4. Comments from the Assistant Provost

5. Brief Introduction to Use of Sub-Committee Discussion Area Jon Sticklen

6. Request for Minimum Grades in Courses: Family Community Services
Family and Consumer Sciences
(materials distributed for Nov. 8 meeting) .....................


7. Group Work Sub-Committee Draft (materials distributed for Nov. 8 meeting) ...................................... Celia Wills


8. SOCT Follow-Up

9. Roundtable

---

---

minutes status: approved

approved at meeting of

UCAP Minutes for meeting held on 11/29/2001

Members Present: Bridget Behe, Howard Bossen, George Cornell, James Gallagher,
Rodney Phillips, Shaun Phillips, Latonya Riddle, Jon Sticklen, Juli Wade, Winston
Wilkinson, Celia Wills, Cameron Wooley, Maija Zile

Others Present: Barbara Steidle (Assistant Provost), Alice Whiren (Family & Child Ecology)

1. Approval of Agenda: The agenda was approved as presented.

2. Approval of Minutes of the November 8, 2001 Meeting: The minutes were approved as presented.

3. Comments from the Chairperson: The Chairperson deferred comments at this time.

4. Comments from the Assistant Provost:

a. The upcoming commencement ceremonies on December 7 and 8 were noted.
b. Steidle also recalled UCAP’s affirmation of the University policy on final examinations, which states that all final examinations shall be given according to the printed schedule during finals week and that faculty who are not administering exams at those times should be available in their offices for consultation.
c. She also called the group’s attention to a memorandum recently sent to academic units by the Registrar’s Office on the use of the I, DF, ET and NGR grade markers. The assistant provost explained that an ‘I’ is to be used when a student is unable to complete the course work during the semester, but has completed the work through the 12th week of classes and is passing the course, and the faculty member believes that the work can be completed. The ‘I’ remains on transcripts. A ‘DF’ is used for graduate students when grading is deferred. ‘ET’ is used for courses in which the work cannot be completed by the semester deadline and the UC&C has approved that marker for the course. NGR (no grade reported) is to be used when faculty members do not report grades on time; it should be assigned rather than the ‘I’ so it is clear that the faculty member, and not the student, is responsible for the delay.

The issue of why/whether the ‘I’ should remain on transcripts will be discussed further at a roundtable. Dr. Steidle indicated that Registrar’s Office practices generally follow national standards.

5. Request for Minimum Grades in Courses: Family and Consumer Resources Family Community Services: The agenda was altered to move this item, due to the time constraints of its presenter. Dr. Alice Whiren from Family and Child Ecology explained the request to require a minimum grade of 2.0 in Family Community Services and Family and Consumer Services courses. The rationale for this requirement is that individuals (children) could be put in danger when students take their capstone practicum, and later as graduates begin their careers, if they do not have the skills and knowledge to perform at a reasonable level. She noted the ethical considerations involved in sending out under-prepared students and the difficulties the program could face in sustaining their placements for such students.

UCAP members suggested that it might be more appropriate to specify criteria such that minimum standards in each of these areas are met for passing courses, so that a 1.0 and above signified that that those standards had been achieved. Whiren explained that it was difficult to get faculty to set the standards in that way. Several other mechanisms for achieving the goal were mentioned. Whiren then left the meeting and the discussion proceeded.

A motion was made to accept the proposal for requiring the minimum GPA of 2.0 in the courses. There was some discussion about whether setting minimum grade requirements would induce grade inflation or ‘deflation’, that is, the likely impact on the grading scale. It was suggested that an alternative would be to set a minimum grade of 2.0 in lower level courses as a pre-requisite for the practicum, rather than as a requirement for continuation in the major. UCAP members felt that the effect would be essentially the same. The motion was unanimously defeated. However, UCAP members were sympathetic to the problem, particularly since there are not special standards for admission to the major, and therefore suggested that Dr. Steidle communicate some suggestions to help the department achieve its goal. These included:

a. Consulting with other units (Education, Nursing, Social Work), and using some of their procedures as a model
b. Developing a set of professional standards that must be met prior to the practicum
c. Disseminating standards throughout the courses in the curriculum and developing an explicit plan for counseling students as they progress through the degree program

6. Introduction to Use of Sub-Committee Discussion Area: Jon Sticklen demonstrated how to use the website for group work, which requires selecting the header at the top of the UCAP website and then logging in.

7. Group Work Sub-Committee Draft: Discussion was regretfully postponed until the next meeting (January 10, 2002).

8. SOCT Follow-Up: Discussion was postponed. Steidle distributed a copy of the memo she had sent to Associate Deans, with the instructions for unit choices of formats.

The meeting was adjourned at noon.

Respectfully Submitted,
Juli Wade

---