Agenda Items of Business

1. Approval of Minutes and Treasurer’s Report President Howard called the October 14, 1997 meeting to order at 3:30. The minutes of the September 9, 1997 meeting were approved. The secretary reported that the senate had $5166.16 in its account. Tim Brown, Clyde Stahnke, and Brian Whitecotton were absent.

2. Approval of Committees. A motion passed to approve the recommendations.

3. Proposed changes for Faculty Handbook. Charles Howard explained how hard it is to recruit members for the committees because members must come from College Review Committees. The purpose of the proposed changes is to expand the pool. A motion passed to recommend the proposed changes.

3. Discussion of Merit Plus Application Draft. Holly Lamb explained the thrust of the application. The three-year limitation was discussed. A motion passed to accept the three-year limitations. A second motion passed to accept the application with the following revisions:

(2) List of publications, presentations, and research grants applied for in the past three years.
(4) Indications of improvements and excellence in classroom teaching (maximum one page).
(7) Professional service in the past three years.

4. Discussion of proposed 1998-1999 calendar. Concern was expressed about the scheduling of finals and whether or not Friday night examinations could be rotated so the same courses were not always tested on Friday nights.

5. Discussion of calendar issues. Charles Howard indicated that the university would begin counting weeks rather than minutes to meet Coordinating Board requirements. He stated that this shift would add some flexibility to the calendar. He requested that the senate look at how much instruction time is needed, who should make the decision about how much instruction time is needed, how this shift might affect lab scheduling, and what the senate thought about restricted activities and Dead Day. He requested that senators make their views known at the November meeting. Linda Duncan provided a handout that listed the start/finish dates from several Texas universities.

6. Announcements

• Bookstore Issues. The senate was informed about Wallace’s policy of notifying administrators about "late requisitions" for textbooks.
• Joe Cude distributed a copy of Donna Strohmeyer’s memo to Pat Cude responding to Pat’s concerns about orientation advisors missing Summer II classes.

Academic Honesty Policy. Linda Jones, chair of the committee, offered background on the current draft. She informed the senate that her committee’s charge was to develop a policy, survey the faculty, and develop a conceptual framework for proactive educational measures. She explained that her committee had tried to compose a document that could be used in both faculty and student handbooks and that would divide academic and university sanctions and appeals. The senate had the following kinds of questions for Jones and Craig Clifford, a member of the committee.

• What is the justification for involving Student Services? Jones stated that looking at the history, Student Services have always been participants in this arena. She also stated that Student Services views cheating as a conduct problem. .
• Why shouldn’t academic dishonesty issued be handled in the VPAA’s office? Craig Clifford responded that there was validity to the idea that it could be handled entirely on the academic side if we operated on the assumption that the Dean of Students would be kept involved. The instructor makes decisions within classroom. The Dean of Student’s only function is to act on behalf of the institution. Lots of students cheat in many classes and we need central record keeping if the policy is to have any teeth.

• Who can suspend students? If it’s an academic issue, then the VPAA; conduct issue, the Dean of Students.
• What about collusion? Does this policy deal effectively with this facet of the cheating problem?
• Can you really kick a student out of a class? What about a remedial course?
• Shouldn’t this be an academic-sided issue? Should we get Student Services out of the enforcement business?

• Should students be held responsible for reporting incidents of cheating?
• What about programmable calculators.