xt73j9608n17 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dipstest/xt73j9608n17/data/mets.xml University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate Kentucky University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate 1972-11-13  minutes 2004ua061 English   Property rights reside with the University of Kentucky. The University of Kentucky holds the copyright for materials created in the course of business by University of Kentucky employees. Copyright for all other materials has not been assigned to the University of Kentucky. For information about permission to reproduce or publish, please contact the Special Collections Research Center. University of Kentucky. University Senate (Faculty Senate) records Minutes (Records) Universities and colleges -- Faculty University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, November 13, 1972 text University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, November 13, 1972 1972 1972-11-13 2020 true xt73j9608n17 section xt73j9608n17  

1,35

W)

MINUTES OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATE, NOVEMBER 13, 1972 3468

The University Senate met in regular session at 3:00 p.m., Monday,
November 13, 1972, in the Court Room of the Law Building. Chairman
Flickinger presided. Members absent: Staley F. Adams*, Arnold D. Albright,
Lawrence A. A11en*, Clifford Amyx*, Kurt Anschel, James W. Archdeacon*,
James R. Barclay*, Charles E. Barnhart, Robert P. Belin*, Thomas C. Berry*,
Juris I. Berzins*, Harold R. Binkley*, Wesley J. Birge*, Robert N. Bostrom*,
Louis L. Boyarsky*, Sally Brown, Herbert Bruce, S. K. Chan*, Dea Cioflica,
David B. Clark*, Lewis W. Cochran, Lewis Colten*, José M. Concon, Glenwood L.
Creech, James E. Criswe11*, William H. Dennen*, Ray H. Dutt*, Anthony Eardley,
William Ecton, Robert 0. Evans*, Juanita F1eming*, Paul G. Forand*,

Lawrence E. Forgy*, Stuart Forth, George H. Gadbois*, Eugene Gallagher*,
John G. Gattozzi*, John V. Haley, Jack B. Hall, Joseph Hamburg, Jesse G.
Harris*, Charles F. Haywood*, Alfred S. L. Hu, Eugene Huff*, Raymon D.
Johnson, James B. Kincheloe*, Robert W. Kiser, Robert G. Lawson, Arthur
Lieber, Leslie L. Martin, William L. Matthews, Wendy McCarty, Michael P.
McQuillen*, James R. Ogletree*, Blaine F. Parker, Paul F. Parker*, J. W.
Patterson, Michael Pease, N. J. Pisacano*, Virginia Rogers, Gerald I. Roth*,
Sheldon Rovin, Robert W. Rudd*, Michael J. Ryan*, John S. Scarborough,
George W. Schwert, Milton Shuffett*, Otis A. Singletary*, Eldon D. Smith*,
Alan Stein, John B. Stephenson, Dennis Stuckey*, Lawrence X. Tarpey*,
Shelby Thompson, Jacinto J. Vazquez*, M. Stanley Wall, David R. Wekstein*,
Harry E. Wheeler, Raymond A. Wilkie, William W. Winternitz, Leon Zolondek.

The minutes of the meeting of October 9, 1972 were approved as
circulated.

The Chairman asked the nine newly elected student Senators to rise and be
recognized.

On behalf of the College of Agriculture Professor George Mitchell presented
Resolutions on the death of Professor Garrett Davis Buckner, retired, formerly
a research professor of Animal Nutrition, and recommended that the memorial be
recorded in the minutes and that his family be informed of the action.

Garrett Davis Buckner died June 22, 1972 at his home in Lexington,
Kentucky. He was 87. He had retired in 1955 from the position of
Research Professor in charge of Animal Nutrition at the Kentucky Agri—
cultural Experiment Station,, Lexington, a position he had held for
28 years.

He was born in Lexington, Kentucky, May 17, 1885. He received
a B.S. degree from the University of Kentucky in 1908 and a Ph.D. degree
from Princeton University in 1912. He studied at the Pasteur Institute
and Alliance Francaise, Paris, France, in 1922 and at the Oceanographic
Institute, Monaco in 1923.

In 1908 he was appointed Food Chemist, Kentucky Agricultural
Experiment Station. In 1909 he joined Sterling Sugar Company,
Franklin, Louisiana. He was Assistant Instructor in Chemistry at
Princeton University from 1909 to 1912. In 1912 he returned to the
Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station as Research Chemist. He was
promoted to Research Professor in charge of Animal Nutrition in 1927,
continuing in this position until his retirement in 1955.

*Absence explained

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   
   

  

 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Minutes of the University Senate, November 13, 1972 — cont

Dr. Buckner was author or co-author of 98 journal articles and
13 Experiment Station bulletins. His wide interests are indicated by
titles of his papers. He published 25 papers on mineral metabolism in
the fowl, 11 on nutrition and fat deposition, 18 on bone growth and
calcification, 9 on general growth, 14 on forage for chicks and hens
and 6 on effects of confinement on chickens. He also studied the pH
of the digestive and reproductive tracts.

He was elected a Fellow of the Poultry Science Association in
1958. He was a member of the American Association for the Advancement
of Science, Kentucky Academy of Science, the American Society of Animal
Sicence, the American Society of Biological Chemists, Sigma Xi, Omicron
Delta Kappa and Phi Beta Kappa. In addition to these memberships he
had been president of the Lexington Section of the American Chemical
Society, the Research Club of the University of Kentucky and the
University of Kentucky Alumni Association.

On behalf of the College of Social Professions Dean Ernest F. Witte
presented Resolutions on the death of Professor Evelyn Jones Black and
recommended that the Resolutions be spread upon the minutes and that copies
be sent to her family.

Evelyn Jones Black joined the faculty of the University of Kentucky
as an instructor in social work in 1968 and was promoted to an assistant
professor in the College of Social Professions in 1970. Her brief,
but unusually productive educational career on this campus was abruptly
terminated by her tragic death on October 31, 1972.

Evelyn was born into a Black family of seven children. Her father
was principal of the local elementary—secondary school in Murfreesboro,
Tennessee. She had a happy childhood and this was reflected in her
personality and in the close—knit happy relations which were developed
and maintained by all members of this family. All of her brothers and
sisters entered professional careers in the field of education.

Evelyn received her A.B. degree from North Carolina College and her
M.S.W. degree from Atlanta University. In February, 1946, she married
William D. Black, Jr. and together they developed a mutually satisfying
life.

She had a distinguished professional career in social work, always
moving to positions offering greater opportunity for service as her
competence and human qualities became increasingly recognized. She
taxed herself beyond reasonable limits in meeting the requests made for
her help, both by individuals and for causes she thought important.

As her colleagues on this campus and in this community came to know
of her determination that everyone should have access to educational
opportunities, her concern for the well—being of all people, the depth
of her knowledge and perception, her objectivity coupled with her burning
determination to do all she could to make this a more equitable society,
her ability to be forthright without being unnecessarily abrasive, and
the warmth of her personality, she was called upon to serve on more and

    
  
  
   
   
  
    
  
 
   
   
  
   
 

K
.\

_3)

s)

  

 :3)

3)

)

Minutes of the University Senate, November 13, 1972 — cont 3470

more important committees, commissions, and panels (as the record
of her activities will show), to all of which she gave unstintingly
of her time and talents.

Her services were well recognized also by the many honors
awarded her by her students, both Black and White, her faculty
colleagues, her professional social work colleagues, as well as by
local, state and national professional organizations. She was
certainly also among the most active, devoted, and respected members
of Saint Andrews Episcopal Church.

Despite all of her activities on behalf of others, many of
which have only come to be known since her death, she was a devoted
wife and a loving mother of her two adopted sons.

One outstanding attribute, among the many she possessed as
an individual, was her ability not to become embittered or cynical
because of the humiliations she and other Blacks experienced during
her lifetime. In the struggle to gain a measure of equality and
recognition for minorities in which she participated, she recognized
that there had been real progress in this area of her concern, even
though she was often impatient with its slowness and the setbacks
so often encountered.

In retrospect, Evelyn Black will be remembered by those who
knew her best, for her very human qualities; for her ready smile,
her sense of humor; for the quick sympathy she showed and the
practical ways she could find to be helpful; for the indignation
she manifested when she saw injustice; for her never ending concern
to make her classes both meaningful and interesting; for her willing—
ness to go the extra mile if she thought there was any possibility
that this effort might be helpful; for practicing what she asked
others to practice; for her understanding of human shortcomings;
and her never ending confidence that this can become a better and
more just society.

In short, Evelyn Black provided an attainable model for all
social work practitioners everywhere.

The Chairman asked the Senators to stand for a moment of silence in
respect and tribute to Professors Buckner and Black, and in acceptance of
the Resolutions.

Chairman Flickinger reported that the Senate Council election had
been completed and that Professors Stephen Diachun of Plant Pathology,
Roger Eichhorn, Mechanical Engineering, and Joseph Krislov of Economics
had been elected to three year terms; in addition, he reported that he
would be on leave for the 1973 Spring Semester and that Dr. James R.
Ogletree would serve on the Senate Council during his absence.

The Chairman reported that the Action Ballot recommending the following

underlined addition to the Rules of the University Senate, SECTION I,

2.22, page I—Z, had been approved by a vote of 132 to 14 and would become
a part of the Rules.

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

Minutes of the University Senate, November 13, 1972 — cont

2.22 Elected Student Membership —— The elected student mem—
bership shall consist of and represent the members of
the full—time student body in the various colleges of
the University System. Each college shall be allotted
at least one student representative. The remaining student
membership positions shall be apportioned among the colleges
on the basis of relative student populations of those colleges
for the school year in which the student membership elections
are held. Students with no declared major shall be represented
through the College of Arts and Sciences. Yearly adjustments
shall be made to keep apportionment equitable, with the elected
student membership maintained at 25. The enrollment data and
the formula for apportionment of student senators shall be
prepared by Student Government and preSented during the fall
semester to the Rules Committee for apprOVal.

 

 

 

 

 

The Chairman reported that the Action Ballot recommending the
addition of the following paragraph to be numbered (10) in the Rules
of the University Senate, SECTION III, 3.0, page III-5, had been
approved by a vote of 136 to 5 and would become a part of the Rules.

 

 

(10) Where the recommendation of the Undergraduate Council on
a 500—599 level course is in disagreement with the decision
of the Graduate Council and in the case when the Graduate
Council's recommendation of a 400—499 is in disagreement
with the Undergraduate Council the material shall be referred
to the Senate Council for a final decision.

Chairman Flickinger reminded the Senate of the motion presently on
the floor, that of the motion to approve the Report of the ad_th_Committee
on Faculty Responsibilities in connection with the proposed Faculty Code.
He further called attention to the revision of the Code which was printed
in The Kentucky Kernel under date of October 30, 1972 and which was further
circulated to the faculty under date of October 24, 1972. In connection
with the former, Dr. Flickinger advised the Senate that when they receive
a Kernel in their mailbox with their name and address on it, it means that
that edition of the Kernel has official information from the Senate Council
and the faculty is responsible for the information contained in that
Kernel. Further, he called the attention of the Senate to the elimina—
tion of that responsibility concerning ethical standards traditionally
recognized by professional, academic, or scholarly organizations associa—
ted with his or her discipline or profession which was contained in the
former document of September date as being too numerous for implementation.

Dr. Flickinger stated that since he was Chairman of the §d_hgg Committee
on Faculty Responsibilities, he would relinquish the Chair to Dr.
Adelstein, the Chairman—elect of the University Senate, to preside during
further consideration of the Code.

Dr. Adelstein assumed the Chair and turned it over to Dr. Flickinger who
wished to comment on the changes that had been made in the Faculty Code
following the October Senate meeting. Dr. Flickinger's remarks follow.

 

 
  
    
  
    
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
    
   
   
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
    
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
   

.3‘)

r

M,

a

   

 Minutes of the University Senate, November 13, 1972 — cont 3472

Reference is made to the underlined material. What we did
essentially was to categorize responsibilities in terms of their
primary relationship, that is, student relations, administrative
relations, and what we call, general relations. We have also
tried to incorporate in the Preamble the obvious intention of this
body that the search for excellence in teaching, research, and ser—
vice is definitely one of the responsibilities of every faculty
member. This Code is essentially a Code of ethical responsibilities
which is somewhat less than the basic responsibility of every faculty
member in teaching, research and service, a matter which is covered
in promotion, tenure and merit increase evaluations.

In the Sanctions we have tried to rewrite the statement regarding
the forfeiture of pay to make it clear that it applies only to actual
monetary damage suffered by the University through unauthorized use
of University property. Legally, that is the only damage payment that
could be subtracted from your pay.

There is an editorial change that we missed on page 6 that
refers to the Statute of Limitations. There is a reference to
University or Academic Responsibilities. That came from a previous
draft of the Code. Instead of ". . . alleged violation of the
University or Academic Responsibilities. . ." it should read
". . . alleged violation of any of the listed Responsibilities as
stated herein. . ."

As to the last page, it was determined that we ought to make
this body an advisory body to the Senate so as to make sure that
annual reports would be made which would give the Senate some in—
formation as to their interpretations of various parts of the Code.

Apparently, I owe the junior faculty members an apology be—
cause I inadvertantly insulted them. I did not intend to do so.
It was not my feeling that the junior faculty could not be trusted
not to collapse under pressure from senior colleagues or adminis—
trators. Quite the reverse. The attitude generally of junior
faculty is quite the opposite; to react rather strongly against any
attempt to put pressure on them. But they are vulnerable. This may
be a loco parentis type of attitude, but it was our intent to pro—
tect them.

I read with quite a bit of interest Professor Craver's article,
though I cannot quite agree. It has been a tradition that certain
committees, the Academic Area Committees, the Committee on Promotion
and Tenure, and the Committee on Privilege and Tenure, for example,
have consistently consisted of tenured members of the faculty. If
it is a question of being judged by one's peers, I think the students
can rather quickly suggest to the junior faculty that they have dis—
covered that when they go down town to be tried in a court of law,
they cannot insist that they be tried by other students. The concept
of trial by one's peers is, in a sense, a trial by one who understands
something about it —- that is, of the same basic class —— and that
means any citizen. You are not entitled to be judged by people of

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

Minutes of the University Senate, November 13, 1972 — cont

 
  
   
 
 
    
 
 
   
    
  
  
   
 
 
  
  
    
   
  
 
    
  
 
 
  
  
   
    
 

the same age, nor necessarily by people of the same race, creed or
color, as long as no particular race, creed, or color has been

arbitrarily discriminated against in the selection process. Students,
both graduate and undergraduate, have a separate panel included for g!”
them because even though they may have certain faculty responsibilities, »ffl

they are still students, and, in that dual capacity have special
problems. And we thought it would be helpful to have a panel that would
have access to that expertise.

Finally, I would point out that under the rights of the accused
there is the right to challenge any member for cause; that is, if he
can prove to the satisfaction of the Chairman of the Committee that any
member of the panel has a discriminatory attitude toward the accused,
he may be completely removed. And then there are two automatic challenges
that do not need cause, two which any faculty member or any accused can
challenge, without cause, off the panel. We thought this would assist
the junior faculty if they felt any of the senior faculty members there
would be prejudiced against them.

Thank you. w

Chairman Adelstein opened the floor for discussion.

Question was raised concerning the meaning of the term "ethical" in II. B. 3.
Following discussion Dr. Flickinger, on behalf of the Committee, agreed to
strike the word "ethical" from that sentence. He further stated that that
sentence should have been placed under II. A, General Relations.

Question was raised concerning the word "ethical" in the second line of the
second paragraph of the Preamble, and in the first paragraph under II. On
behalf of the Committee Dr. Flickinger agreed to replace the word "ethical"
with the word "enforceable" in paragraph II. Following further discussion

it was agreed that the word "ethical" would be removed in the second paragraph
of the Preamble and that the phrase "which can be enforced" would be added to
that sentence where it is grammatically correct to be added.

A Senator referred to II. B. 2. which covers compliance with the Governing E!”
Regulations, the Administrative Regulations, and the rules and regulations '
promulgated and approved by the University Senate and stated that such

compliance necessitated each faculty member being furnished with a copy of

these documents. The Chairman stated that the Governing Regulations and the
Administrative Regulations had been circulated to the Department Chairmen

and are available at that level; that the Senate Council would determine

if the budget was adequate to give a copy to each member of the Senate; that

he knew it was not large enough to furnish a copy to every faculty member;

that the Administrative Regulations and the Governing Regulations were avail—

able in his office and would be available to any who requested them.

Dr. Sears announced that the Governing Regulations and the Administrative

Regulations were available through each departmental office on the campus,

plus the Libraries, and that those who had received these two documents were

obligated to make them available to their respective educational units. ga‘
’ V

Question was raised by a Senator that IV. 3. should become a part of II. B.
1. Through discussion it was resolved that this should remain where it is.

Question was raised of what constitutes "improper disclosure" of the student's

  

 i»:4n!
9

Minutes of the University Senate, November 13, 1972 — cont 3474

social or political views or activities in paragraph 8 of Section II, C.
Student Relations. In discussion which followed suggestion was made, and
the Chairman of the Committee agreed, to include the following parenthetical
statement in paragraph 8 of Section II, C:

(It is not improper for a faculty member to make a dis—
closure upon request of a person entitled to such infor-
mation.)

Chairman Adelstein opened the floor to motions, with the restriction

that they be confined to deletions in view of the fact that the document

was built in cooperation with the Administration which meant that additions
would have to go back to the Administration for approval. He suggested that

if there are additions to be made that they be made in the form of changes

in the Rules after the document is acted on and codified by the Rules Committee
for incorporation into the Rules of the University Senate.

 

On question of whether or not any thought was given to paragraph 8. of

Section II, C, with respect to the right of the faculty, Dr. Flickinger agreed
informally to the deletion of the word ”the student" in the first line and the
substitution of the phrase "any member of the University community"; further,
he agreed to insert the words "or false" between the words "improper" and
"disclosure" so that paragraph 8 of Section II would then read:

8. to respect the right of any member of the University
community to privacy, ineluding privacy of desk, carrel,
and office space, as well as refraining from improper or
false disclosure of such member's social or political
views or activities. (It is not improper for a faculty
member to make a disclosure upon request of a person en—
titled to such information.)

Chairman Flickinger also reported that item 8 in Section II, C. would be moved
to be added to Section II. A. General Relations.

Motion was made to appeal Chairman Adelstein's ruling that motions be re—
stricted to deletions. The Senate defeated this motion.

Amendment was presented to delete the word "ethical" in paragraph 2, line 2
of the Preamble, in the first paragraph under II. Faculty Responsibilities,
and in paragraph 3. under II. B. Administrative Relations. Chairman
Flickinger stated that a motion was not necessary; that he had agreed to
these informal changes, namely,

to change the first sentence of the second paragraph of the Preamble to read:
We therefore affirm and adopt to our colleagues, our insti—
tution and our students, the following statement of those specific
responsibilities which can be enforced.
to change the word "ethical" to "enforceable" in the first paragraph under II; and

to add paragraph 3 under II B. to Section II. A.

Reference was made to Section V, item 2. (c) in which request was made of
Chairman Flickinger to change (c) to read:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

3475 Minutes of the University Senate, November 13, 1972 - cont

(c) to challenge the impartiality of anyone sitting on the Committee
and to have any two members of the Committee replaced.

There was no objection to this change. ۤ;}
Reference was further made to Section V, item 2 (d) to change it to read: I

(d) to refuse to give testimony which might tend to be detrimental to
him or her, such refusal not to be used by the Committee in reaching I
a decision.

Chairman Adelstein suggested that it might be revised to read: "The accused
may refuse to give testimony and it will not be held against him.” Chairman
Flickinger agreed to this phraseology.

Further suggestion was made to reword item 3. under II. C. Student Relations,
as it related to absences caused by illness, emergencies. Chairman Flickinger
stated that it would be reworded.

.39,
Question was called and the Senate voted by the required two-thirds' majority «‘5‘
to close debate on the question on the floor.

The senate then approved the Faculty Code as circulated under date of October 24,
1972 and including the editorial changes which were made in this meeting. The
vote was 88 to 25.

The Code, as circulated, and corrected editorially in this meeting, reads as
follows:

FACULTY CODE

The Faculty of the University System of the University of Kentucky
has long subscribed to the principles of academic freedom, which recog—
nize and confirm a faculty member's freedom in research and teaching,
and in his activities as a private person. As a concomitant to these
freedoms, we in turn acknowledge our responsibilities as a faculty to u
provide an atmosphere of free inquiry and expression for our colleagues «£255
and students, and to foster learning and maintain a climate conducive
to the transmission, exploration, generation and preservation of know—
ledge. Furthermore, we recognize our collective obligation to the pur—
suit of excellence in teaching, research, and service, and also our in-
dividual duty in our specific University assignment to contribute to
human knowledge, understanding, and betterment.

We therefore affirm and adopt the following statement of those
specific responsibilities to our colleagues, our institution, and our ?
students which we believe can and should be enforceable. We do so at
this time not because an atmosphere of abuse or violation exists, but
because we wish to express our commitment to the community of scholars
and the advancement of learning.

I . APPLICABILITY: M
——————— x .

This Code shall apply to all faculty members associated with
the University System of the University of Kentucky and to all graduate
students or other personnel having teaching or research assignments in

that System.

 «I»

m

Minutes of the University Senate, November 13, 1972 — cont 3476

II. FACULTY RESPONSIBILITIES:

 

The faculty of the University System of the University of
Kentucky hereby subscribe to the following enforceable responsibilities:

A. General Relations

To respect the rights of all campus members to pursue
their academic and administrative activities;

to respect the rights of all campus members to free and
orderly expression;

to act with propriety in all dealings with members of the
University community;

to respect the right of any member of the University
community to privacy, including privacy of desk, carrel,
and office space, as well as refraining from improper

or false disclosure of such member's social or political
views or activities. (It is not improper for a faculty
member to make a disclosure upon request of a person en—
titled to such information.)

B. Administrative Relations

 

To utilize the property of the University in accordance

with the rules governing its use which have been duly
promulgated;

to comply with the Governing Regulations, the Administrative
Regulations, and the rules and regulations promulgated and
approved by the University Senate;

to engage in consulting outside the University assignment
only in accordance with the provisions promulgated for
same;

to indicate that he or she does not speak for the University
of Kentucky when speaking as a private person if the insti-
tutional affiliation is mentioned.

C. Student Relations

To uphold the student academic rights as set forth in the
Rules 2: the University Senate;

 

to present the subject matter of a course as announced and
approved by the faculty in accordance with the procedures
set forth by the University Senate for this and to avoid the
persistent intrusion of material which has no relation to
the subject;

to meet classes as scheduled in accordance with University
Regulations; (absences caused by illness or emergencies are
clearly excusable and attendance at scholarly meetings,

 

 

 

 

   
 
  
  
 
  
  
   
  
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
  
  
  
   
   
 
 
 
 
  
   
  
 
 
  
  

3477

 

 

l.

  

 

 

 

 

 

«
x
)

Minutes of the University Senate, November 13, 1972 — cont

     

occasional professional service, pedagogical experi-
mentation, and the like, are exceptions but these should

be approved by the department chairman and in any event a,»
substitutions or reschedulings should be arranged.)

to be available to students for advising and other con— [
ferences, preferably by posting office hours and/or by

allowing students to arrange for appointments at other

mutually convenient times;

to arrange for appropriate interaction and communication
with graduate students in the direction of their theses;

to return to, discuss with, or make available to students

all papers, quizzes and examinations within a reasonable

period of time, unless the confidentiality of the examina—

tion precludes; and to give final examinations in accord- ,
ance with procedures approved in the Rules 9£_the University 4M!‘
Senate; "

 

to inform students when their individual or collective efforts k
may be used for professional or personal advancement of the

faculty member, or when the student(s) are to be used as re—

search subjects, and in either case, to ensure that the student

may elect not to participate without prejudice to his or her

academic standing; and to recognize appropriately any signi—

ficant contribution by the student(s);

to keep himself or herself well informed of the academic ?
requirements of the University affecting students whom he
or she advises.

III. ENFORCEMENT:

Any member of the University community (faculty, staff member,

or student) with a complaint about an alleged violation of egg!
these responsibilities shall process it through normal channels.
Accordingly, the process should begin with discussion with the

person accused of the violation. If a satisfactory solution

between the parties cannot be accomplished then the accused's
immediate supervisor or, if the complainant is a student, the

Academic Ombudsman should be asked to mediate. If such mediation
proves unsuccessful then the matter should be forwarded to the

next Administrative level by the supervisor or Academic Ombudsman
together with a written report concerning the matter with copies

of the report to the parties involved. This process of mediation

and report should follow normal channels up to and including the

dean of the College to which the person accused of a violation ‘
is assigned.

In the event that after the appropriate processing through €gfi‘
these channels the dean is unable to mediate satisfactorily '
between the parties, or in the event that the dean is himself
the complaining party and is unable to accomplish a satis-

factory solution with the accused, he shall make a written re—

a

 m

m

2:

Minutes of the

3.

IV. SANCTIONS:
l.

2.

*4.

University Senate, November 13, 1972 — cont 3478

port containing his recommendations and findings and
forward it to the appropriate academic vice president
through the University Senate Committee on Faculty
Responsibilities with copies to the accused and the
complainant. Upon receipt of the report from the dean,
the committee shall set a date for a hearing which must

be within thirty (30) days of receipt of the Dean's report.
The committee shall then determine whether to hold closed
or open hearing(s) after consultation with the parties

in dispute. After the completion of the hearing(s), the
committee shall forward its recommendations to the appro—
priate vice president with respect to (1) whether or not
the accused has violated the Code, and, if so (2) the type
of sanction, if any, which should be imposed.

The vice president shall make a final decision after review
of the report of the committee. In any event, however, the
accused shall have the normal right of appeal to the Presi—
dent and the Board of Trustees in accordance with established
procedures.

A warning that conduct violates the Code as interpreted;

a reprimand:
(a) Informal (to accused only);
(b) Formal (to accused with notice to his adminis—
trative superior);

forfeiture of pay from present salary for actual monetary
damage suffered by the University through unauthorized
use of University property;

recommendation for proceeding under KRS 164.230 (dismissal
for reasons of "incompetency, neglect of or refusal to

perform his duty, or of immoral conduct").

 

*Nothing in this document is intended to inhibit in any way the right of the
appropriate academic vice president to initiate charges against a faculty
member under KRS 164.230 in accordance with the procedures established by
the Governing Regulations so long as no written report has yet been re—
ceived by the Committee from the dean.