xt766t0gxh7w https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dipstest/xt766t0gxh7w/data/mets.xml University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate Kentucky University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate 1986-04-14  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, April 14, 1986 text University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, April 14, 1986 1986 1986-04-14 2020 true xt766t0gxh7w section xt766t0gxh7w LNMVERSHY OF KENTUCKY

LEXINGTON. KENTUCKY 40506-0032

UNIVERSITY SENATE COUNCIL

10 ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 2 April 1986

TO: Members, University Senate

The University Senate will meet in regular session on Monday, April
14, 1986, at 3:05 p.m. in ROOM 116 of the THOMAS HUNT MORGAN BIOLOGY
BUILDING.

AGENDA:
Minutes of 10 February 1986 and 10 March 1986.
Resolutions.
Chairman's Announcements.
Nomination of Candidates to Serve on the Joint Board-Faculty
Presidential Search Committee. (An Announcement of the Impending
Vacancy in the Office of President and a Copy of University Senate
Rule I — 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 Which Structure the Procedures for

Selection of the Faculty Members of this Committee was circulated
under date of 2 April 1986.)

ACTION ITEMS:

a. Proposed Addition of Section I — 4.2 to University Senate Rules
Establishing a University Studies Committee and Making Minor
Changes in Other Rules Accordingly. Proposed Recommendation to
the President Relating to the Director of the University
Studies Program. (Circulated under date of 31 March 1986.)

 

Proposed Revision of Section V - 3.1.7 of University Senate
Rules Relating to Individual College Academic Probation and
Suspension Policies. (Circulated under date of 27 March 1986.)

Proposed Revision in University Senate Rule IV — 2.2.1(e)
Relating to Admission of Student Athletes (Circulated under
date of 1 April 1986.)

 

Proposed University of Kentucky Senate Statement of Academics
and Athletics. (Circulated under date of 2 April 1986.)

Proposed Changes in and Additions to University Senate Rule IV
— 2.2.1 (c) Relating to Exceptions to the Pre—College
Curriculum Requirements. (Circulated under date of 2 April
1986.)

 

AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY UNIVERSITY

 

 Page 2
University Senate Agenda
2 April 1986

f. Proposed Recommendation to the Board of Trustees (through the
President) that the University Governing Regulations, Part X -
V a. Relating to Eligibility for Sabbatical Leave be Amended.
(Circulated under date of 28 March 1986).

 

Randall Dahl
Secretary

The nomination process will precede the action items on the

agenda. However, these items will be taken up during the counting
of the two votes. If, as is likely, the Senate cannot consider all
the action items prior to a reasonable hour for adjournment, a

special session of the Senate will be called for late April or
early in May.

 

 MINUTES OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATE, APRIL 14, 1986

The University Senate met in regu1ar session at 3:10 p.m., Monday, Apri1 14,
1986, in room 116 of the Thomas Hunt Morgan Bui1ding.

Brad1ey C. Canon, Chairman of the Senate Counci1, presided.

Members absent: Richard Ange1o, Kath1ene Ashcraft, Brian Bergman, Raymond F.
Betts, Dibaker Bhattacharyya*, Tex Lee Boggs, Peter P. Bosomworth, Ray M. Bowen,
John Cain*, Ching Chow*, Emmett Costich, Richard C. Domek, Herbert N. Drennen,
Anthony Eard1ey, Gera1d Ferretti*, Richard N. Furst, Wi11burt Ham*, Mari1yn D.
Hamann*, S. Zafar Hasan, Leonard E. He11er, Roger w. Hemken, A1ison Hodges*,
Raymond R. Hornback, James G. Houg1and, Jr.*, A1fred S. L. Hu, Susan Johnson, John
J. Just*, Jay T. Kearney, James King, James R. Lang*, Robin Lawson, Edgar D.
Maddox, Pau1 Mande1stam*, Kenneth E. Marino, Sa11y S. MattingTy*, Richard
McDouga11, John Menkhaus, H. Brinton Mi1ward*, Mark Moore, Todd Osborne, Phi1ip C.
Pa1mgreen*, Leonard K. Peters*, Robin D. Powe11*, Madhira D. Ram*, Thomas C.
Robinson, Kirk Rowe, Edgar L. Sagan, Kary11 N. Shaw*, Otis A. Sing1etary*, Marcia
Stanhope, Joseph V. Swintosky, Kenneth R. Thompson, Ke11ie Tow1es, Marc J.
Na11ace, James H. He11s*, Char1es Hethington, Peter Ninograd*, Caro1yn Ni11iams*

The Minutes of the meeting of February 10, 1986, were approved as circu1ated.

Chainnan Canon recognized Professor Jesse Harris for a Memoria1 Reso1ution on
Professor Susan Be1more.

MEMORIAL RESOLUTION
Susan Be1more

Susan Be1more passed away at the ear1y age of 38 years on
March 27, 1986, after an i11ness of six months. Susan was an
Associate Professor and Coordinator of the Cognitive Studies
Area in the Department of Psycho1ogy. Through her extensive
activities at the University of Kentucky, she became known to
most of you. Her 1ive1y spirit wi11 be missed in this Univer-
sity far beyond the corridors of Kast1e Ha11.

Susan spent her ear1y years of schoo1ing through high
schoo1 in Houston, Texas. She earned her Bache1or of Arts
degree at Texas Christian University and her Master's degree at
Ca1ifornia State University in San Jose. She received her Ph.D.
in psycho1ogy from Penn State University in 1976 and came to the
University of Kentucky in the same year. During her time at UK,
Susan estab1ished a reputation as a productive researcher, an
enthusiastic teacher, and a responsib1e contributor to the
University community.

Susan adopted an instrumenta1 approach to attaining her
goa15 and she exercised this phi1osophy by her service to the
Department, Co11ege, and University. She took the responsi-
bi1ity of putting her ideas into action without ca11ing

*Absence exp1ained

 

 attention to her contributions. At the time of her death, she
was the Coordinator of the Cognitive Studies Program in the
Psychology Department. She was also serving on the Faculty
Council in the College of Arts and Sciences. She had been a
member of the Senate Council and chaired the Senate Research
Committee as an Assistant Professor. During the academic year
l983—l984, she received an American Council of Education
Administrative Fellowship to study operations and decision-
making in all areas of the University. Through her extensive
involvement in the University community, she earned the atten—
tion and respect of her colleagues.

Susan was a competent and energetic researcher. She was a
member of the American Psychological Association and the Psycho—
nomic Society, in addition to several other professional
research societies. She held grants from UKRF and from the Cen-
ter for Aging. Susan's research interests focused on the nature
of human memory and psycholinguistic processes. Her publica—
tions spanned a range of topics, including the role of imagery
in sentence processing, inferential processes involved in
sentence comprehension, and determinants of person perception
and memory. Her dedication to research was such that she
persisted at her work into the latter stages of her illness.
Shortly before her death, she was very proud to be notified that
two of her papers had been accepted to major psychological jour-
nals.

Susan was a dedicated and gifted teacher. She taught a
wide range of graduate and undergraduate courses and made it a
special point to communicate her enthusiasm for research to her
students. She directed many undergraduates in independent study
projects and served tirelessly on countless thesis and disser-
tation committees, both in the Psychology Department and in the
College of Education. In addition, she was a mentor to many of
the younger faculty in the Psychology Department, giving unsel—
fishly of her time and providing effective counsel and support.
Her devotion to teaching was also evident in the committee work
she chose and in her community service: Susan was a faculty
advisory to Psi Chi, the national honorary society of psychol-
ogy. She chaired the Graduate Student Advisory Committee in the
Psychology Department. She was a primary organizer of the
Psycholinguistics Program. Within the community, Susan's con—
cern with the problem of illiteracy in our State led her to
direct Operation Read.

The final, and perhaps the most lasting impression that
Susan left on others was her strength and resolve to carry on
despite the hardships imposed by her illness. One of her
closest friends asked if it would be appropriate to include this
quotation from Susan on the day she died. Those of us who knew
Susan realize that the statement epitomized her spirit. She
said: "Do what needs to be done to get me on my feet again. I
need to teach my class this afternoon.”

 

 Whatever the task, Susan Belmore was always energetic,
optimistic, and determined to see things work in a different and
better way. She was quick in thought, words, and action, and
she was also a person of perspective and good judgment. She was
capable of taking strong stands in support of her convictions,
and her actions were always intended to have positive effects on
other persons. Psychologists as observers are inclined to stick
to tangible behavioral terms in describing human behavior, but
such terms are inadequate to describe Susan. She was a person
of indomitable and unbounded spirit. She was young, attractive,
vivacious, intelligent, interested in the broader issues of
society, and eager to be of service.

Susan had been married for less than a year to Stanley
Feldman, Associate Professor in the Department of Political
Science, and a deeply devoted husband during the hardships of
the past six months. She leaves an indelible impression on her
many students, friends, and acquaintances throughout the Univer-
sity. There has not been a more dedicated member of the faculty
in the Department of Psychology.

Susan asked that no funeral ceremony and no memorial ser-
vices be held in her memory, and that no flowers be offered on
the occasion of her death. We believe that she would not have
objected to the creation of a memorial fund in her memory, and
we invite you to contribute either to the Susan M. Belmore
Memorial Fund, University of Kentucky, or to Operation Read.
She is survived by her husband, Stanley Feldman, and her father
and stepmother, Mr. and Mrs. Richard Dimon of Barker, Texas.

(Prepared by close friends and read by Professor Jesse G. Harris, Jr., Chairman,
Psychology Department)

Professor Harris requested that the Resolution be entered into these minutes
and that copies be sent to the family. Chairman Canon asked the Senators to stand
for a moment of silence in tribute and respect to Professor Susan Belmore.

The Chair again recognized Professor Harris for some remarks on the Susan M.
Belmore Memorial Fund. Professor Harris said that the associates and friends who
admired and loved Susan Belmore are setting up a Memorial Fund. The Fund will
support three purposes: (a) the enhancement of undergraduate student research, (b)
instructional innovation and course developments, and (c) undergraduate scholar-
ships. It will be administered by the University of Kentucky Development Office
on behalf of the College of Arts and Sciences. Professor Harris invited and urged
those who knew and admired Susan to contribute if they wished.

The Chainnan made the following announcements:

”I think the University fared very well in the last legis-
lative session. The appropriations are probably higher than we
would have estimated last fall. The amended House Bill which
would have eliminated the voting rights of the faculty and stu-
dent trustees was defeated in the House after passing the
Senate. All in all, it was a good session for higher education.

 

 Let me tell you something about what the Senate Council is
doing. First, on early retirement: you may recall the Senate
Council had, on the advice of a faculty administrative commit—
tee, recommended to the President the implementation of an early
retirement program which would accommodate those faculty members
who wanted to retire early and might also help the University in
getting new blood in its now aging ranks. The President has
told me that he has approved the report in its basic aspects and
has instructed Paul Sears to draft the appropriate administra-
tive regulations to put the early retirement system into
operation. It probably will be in operation for those who are
otherwise eligible and want to retire next year. The President
will send copies of the proposed administrative regulations to
the Senate Council and after it reacts he will send them to the
Board of Trustees.

Chancellor Bosomworth of the Medical Center has proposed
the establishment of a new faculty title series to be called the
Medical Center Clinical Title Series. It would be a title
series in which no tenure is possible. It was sent to the
Senate Council in January. The Senate Council spent a consider-
able amount of time investigating this proposal and has recom—
mended approval of this Clinical Title Series to be limited to
the Colleges of Medicine and Dentistry and with the proviso that
no more than twenty-five percent of the full-time faculty in
either college could be in this Clinical Title Series category.

This is now ready to go to the Board of Trustees.

At the last Senate Council meeting we discussed liability
insurance or more accurately the lack of it. Most of you have
probably received notification that you are no longer covered
by liability insurance. This has generated more phone calls to
the Senate Council than any other recent problem. It is not
strictly speaking an academic matter, but it is certainly a
matter that affects the faculty, especially those of you who are
sitting on tenure evaluation committees or those of you who are
running laboratories with potentially dangerous chemicals or
what have you. Vice Chancellor Blanton has indicated this is a
nationwide problem. He is hoping to have it solved by the time
we come back in the Fall. Right now the insurance cannot be
purchased; it is simply not for sale. One alternative is to go
into a consortium with other universities and engage in self—
insurance. We will communicate to the Administration our
concern with this problem and urge that it be solved as quickly
as possible.

Finally, the Senate Council has approved a proposed change
in the final examination rule. The gist of the proposal would
be that the rule would prohibit examinations in classes during
the week prior to final exams. If we have a special meeting, we
will bring this up on the agenda. Otherwise, it will be on the
agenda early in the fall. If we have a special meeting it will
be two weeks from today, Monday, April 28.”

 

 The next item on the agenda was the voting for the faculty members of the
joint Board-Faculty Presidential Search Committee. Chairman Canon said, ”This is
the first time this rule has been invoked in eighteen years so this is something
of a historical occasion." All voting members of the Senate who attended the
meeting received an envelope addressed to them containing two smaller envelopes.
One envelope contained four cards and the other one contained six cards. Each
voting member was also given a list of eligible faculty. The Chairman gave the
Senators time to fill out their initial ballot in accordance with the Senate
Rules. No nominations or speeches were allowed. The ad hoc counting committee
consisted of Paul Willis, Chairman, Trudi Bellardo, and Charles Byars.

The Chair recognized Professor Wilbur Frye, Chair—elect of the Senate
Council. Professor Frye, on behalf of the Senate Council, moved approval of the
proposed addition of Section I — 4.2 to the University Senate Rules establishing a
University Studies Committee and changing the composition and functions of the
Undergraduate Council accordingly, and the proposed recommendation to the
President relating to the selection of and duties of the Director of the Univer-
sity Studies Program. This proposed addition was circulated to members of the
Senate under date of March 31, l986.

 

Professor Hans Gesund felt the proposal gave too much power to the adminis—
trators and moved an amendment in the second paragraph I.4.2 the first sentence to
read:

”....shall be appointed or elected in the same manner and at the
the same time as members of the Undergraduate Council."

He felt this would give the faculty the power to appoint the committee in place of
having the administrators making the appointments. The amendment was seconded.
Professor Jesse Heil asked for a clarification on ”appointed or elected.”
Professor Gesund said some of the members of the Undergraduate Council were
elected and others appointed. Professor Robert Hemenway spoke against the amend-
ment. He was fearful that if the committee members were elected, they would
represent certain constituencies. He believed the planning of general education
should not get bogged down in the politics of departmental or college self—
interest. He felt in the election process the faculty would be thinking about its
constituency rather than what is best for the University as a whole. Professor
Gesund, a member of the Graduate Council, did not feel there should be concern
about the constituency. He said his votes on the Graduate Council were not swayed
because he was a member of the College of Engineering, and he did not feel people
elected would be any different.

Professor Lester Goldstein wanted to know why the Senate Council was not
designated as the body to appoint the committee. Chaimnan Canon said the Council
had considered the election alternative very briefly. The Council's feeling was
that having an election was almost like playing ”Russian roulette“ so to speak.
He said there was no guarantee of getting people who are interested in the
committee's function. The Senate Council felt the University Studies Committee
had a very particular agenda, and it ought to have people interested in the
general studies curriculum. On Senate Council appointment, he said it would be
awkward to appoint twelve members and evaluate them at one time. Professor Frye,
who was on the Swift Committee for three years, said one of the committee's con—
cern was that the members of the General Studies Committee should represent the

 

 entire University. He felt that would be lost if an election were held, and it
was too important to jeopardize by an election. Professor McMahon felt that any
partisan favor one might have toward a colleague would be the same whether the
members were elected or appointed. He did not see how the appointment process
would remove the ingrained bias. Professor Gesund was dismayed that there was
such a bias against the democratic system in the Senate. He felt the objection
that people elected might not be interested was nonsense. He said every person
nominated in any election was always asked if he/she would be willing to serve.
He felt the discussion was uninformed, undemocratic and anti-democratic.

Professor John Rea said the wording suggested that the Senate Council had to
solicit nominations for that committee. He presumed that would be by a certain
process and would entail a great deal of input. He said the democratic process
included committees that were appointed by democratically elected bodies such as
the Senate Council. He said transferring the process to the Senate Council would
obviate Professor Gesund's objections.

The Gesund amendment, which would have the University Studies Committee
elected or appointed in the same way as the Undergraduate Council, failed in a
hand count of 37 to T5.

Professor Lester Goldstein moved an amendment which stated:
”The faculty members shall be appointed by the Senate Council.”

The amendment was seconded. There was no discussion and the amendment passed
unanimously.

Professor Gesund said he assumed that the Senate Council would also appoint
the Community College member. Chairman Canon replied that the words "Senate
Council" would be substituted for "President“ in the proposal and thus the Council

' would nominally appoint the Community College member and the two students, but
would in fact rely on the recommendations of the Chancellor and the Student
Government Association. In paragraph 2 a, page 2, Professor Gesund wanted to know
if a single course could be cross-disciplinary or did they always have to be pairs
of courses in the cross—disciplinary component. Chairman Canon said there would
always be two courses which tied into each other. On page 4, the first sentence
of the last paragraph, Professor Gesund moved an amendment to substitute ”Senate
Council” for ”Chancellor.“ The sentence would read:

"..recommendation of a search committee appointed by the Senate Council.”

The amendment was seconded. The Chairman said the Governing Regulations indi-
cate that all search committees are appointed by the President or Chancellor. The
Senate Council is consulted. Professor Gesund reworded his motion to recommend to
the Administration that the Director be appointed upon recommendation by a search
committee named by the Senate Council. The amendment failed in a voice vote.

 

Professor Rea questioned the statement on page 2, Section 2, item g. He
wanted to know if the University Studies Committee could approve “temporary”
substitutions. The Chairman said those would come to the Senate Council. He
added the statement was put in because the Senate Council had a fear that when the
University Studies Program goes into operation there may be an element that is not
operable such as the cross-disciplinary courses. For that reason the University

 

 Studies Committee might allow a substitute. Professor Rea suggested adding
"temporary” before substitutions. There was no objection.

Vice Chancellor Don Sands said that on page 4 there were two places which
stated the Director would be a ”non—voting” member of the Undergraduate Council.
He moved to make the Director a voting member. The motion was seconded. There
was no discussion, and the motion unanimously carried.

The proposal and recommendation to the President relating to the Director of
the University Studies Program as amended passed unanimously and reads as follows:

 

I. 4.2 University Studies Committee

l. The University Studies Committee shall be composed of
fifteen voting members, twelve from the faculty, two
students and one member from the Community College
System. It shall be chaired by the Director of the
University Studies Program who shall not have a vote
except in cases of ties. The Vice Chancellor for
Academic Affairs of the Lexington Campus shall be an ex
officio, non voting member of the Committee.

The faculty members shall be appointed by the Senate
Council. The Senate Council shall solicit nominations
from the faculty prior to making appointments. The
composition of the faculty membership shall parallel
that of the Undergraduate Council, with nine members
representing various undergraduate colleges as described
in Rule I — 3.3.2 and with three being appointed at
large. Faculty members shall serve for staggered
threeiyear terms. (The initial appointees shall be
divided by lot into three groups, one to serve two
years, another to serve three years, and the last to
serve four years, in order to get the staggered turnover
started.) Faculty members may not succeed themselves,
nor may they serve on the Committee again for a period
of three years, except for a faculty member who is
appointed to fill out a vacant term of one year or less.

The two student members shall be appointed by the Senate
Council from names recommended by the President of the
Student Government Association. The Community College
System member shall be appointed by the Senate Council
upon the recommendation of the Chancellor of the
Community College System.

. The University Studies Committee shall exercise the
following functions:

a. It shall select all courses (or pairs of courses in
the cross-disciplinary component) which are proposed
to fulfill the program requirements.

 

 . Upon the recommendation of the Director or on its own
initiative, and upon sufficient investigation, it may
delete courses (or pairs of courses) from their
status of fulfilling the program requirements.

It shall review periodically (at least every six
years) the teaching and content of all courses
selected to fulfill the program requirements. It
shall delete courses (or pairs of courses) from the
program that no longer seem appropriate to the
program and recommend to colleges or departments,
through the Director, such changes as it deems
necessary or appropriate.

It shall determine the general policies for the
teaching and content of the Freshman Seminars.

It shall consider and propose methods which will
enhance the University Studies Program and assert its
centrality to the undergraduate curriculum.

. Upon the recommendation of the Director or upon its
own initiative, it shall develop and propose changes
in the structure of the program or in the
requirements necessary to complete it.

It shall approve or disapprove recommendations of the
Director for temporary waivers of or temporary
substitutions for program requirements for particular
categories of students.

It shall set policies for the granting of credit to
transfer students for courses taken which are
equivalent to those in the program and it shall
communicate these policies to all undergraduate
colleges on campus.

. All Committee selections of courses (or pairs of
courses) to fulfill the program requirements or
deletions of same, all approvals of temporary waivers of
or substitutions for program requirements for particular
categories of students, and all recommendations for
changes in the nature of the program or the structure of
its requirements shall be submitted to the Senate
Council for its approval. The Senate Council, if it
approves the selection or deletion of particular
courses, shall circulate the same to the Senate as
provided in Rule I - 3.l.l (f). The Senate Council's
approval of temporary waivers of or substitutions for
program requirements for particular categories of
students shall be final. If it approves, the Senate
Council shall put all proposals to make any significant
changes in the nature of the University Studies program

 

 or in the structure of the program's requirements on the
Senate agenda for approval. (However, the initial
proposal(s) of courses developed by the Committee to
fulfill the program requirements shall be circulated to
the faculty prior to being forwarded to the Senate
Council. The Committee shall give the faculty time to
send written comments about the proposal(s) or to
suggest additional courses. The Committee also shall
hold one or more public meetings to hear comments and
suggestions about the proposal(s) and may revise or add
to the proposal(s) in light of the comments. After the
Senate Council approves the initial proposal(s) of
courses to fulfill program requirements, the Council
shall circulate the proposal(s) with a thirty day period
for objection rather than the normal ten day period.

3.3 Undergraduate Council
The Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, Lexington Campus,
(or another person designated by the Chancellor) shall
chair the Undergraduate Council and report its
recommendations to the Senate Council in accordance with
the Rules of the University Senate.

 

 

3.3.1 Functions--The Undergraduate Council's
responSibilities relative to courses and programs
shall be as follows:

(b) Program Procedures-—It shall consider all
proposed new undergraduate and/or professional
programs, changes in undergraduate and/or
professional programs, including degree titles, from
all colleges offering a baccalaureate degree.
Further, it shall consider all changes in the
University requirements [or General Studies
component] except for the University Studies Program,
recommending on all of the above to the Senate
Council where a final decision will be made. In
addition, it shall review all baccalaureate programs.
(See Section III, 2.0.)

 

Composition——It shall consist of [fifteen (l5)]
sixteen l6) members. Nine of the members shall be
elected by the faculty of colleges, groups of
colleges or parts of colleges as follows:
(US:lO/l2/8l) (US 4/9/84)

 

 0f the [six] seven remaining members, one sha11 be
the Director of University Studies, one sha1i be
appointed by the Senate Counci1. One member sha11 be
appointed by the Vice Chance11or for Academic Affairs
for the Community C011ege System to represent the
needs and prob1ems of the Community Co11ege System.
Four members sha11 be appointed by the Associate Vice
Chance11or for Academic Affairs with the advice and
consent of the Undergraduate Counci1. Of these four,
two sha11 be facu1ty members from co11eges e1igib1e
to have representation on the Undergraduate Counci1,
and the remaining two sha11 be undergraduate students
from e1igib1e co11eges. (US: 10/12/81) (US: 4/9/84)

 

4.0 Committees of the Senate

 

4.3 Ad Hoc Committees
Ether—than their temporary nature ad hoc committees have
the same status and responsibi1ities'as_a11 other
committees of the Senate. They sha11 be appointed by the
Senate Counci1 to address academic prob1ems and issues
facing the University. For examp1e, such committees cou1d
dea1 with prob1ems or issues as they arise in the areas of
teaching and advising, students affairs, [Genera1 Studies,]

computer resources, continuing education, specia1 teaching
techno1ogies and so forth. (US:1D/12/81)

Recommendation to the President:

The University Senate recommends to the President that the
fo11owing procedures and duties re1ating to the Director of the
University Studies Program be adopted:

 

The Director of the University Studies Program sha11 be
appointed by the Chance11or of the Lexington Campus upon the
recommendation of a search committee appointed by the
Chance11or. The Chance11or sha11 consu1t with the Senate
Counci1 about the membership of the search committee prior to
its appointment. The Director sha11 come from the ranks of the
active facu1ty and sha11 serve a four year term. He or she
sha11 report to the Vice Chance11or for Academic Affairs,
Lexington Campus. The Director sha11 serve as Chair of the
University Studies Committee and as an ex officio, non-voting
member of the Undergraduate Counci1.

The Director sha11:
Recommend to the University Studies Committee (a) se1ection

and de1etion of courses (or pairs of courses) which may fu1fi11
the program requirements, (b) changes in the structure or

 

 requirements of the program, and (c) temporary waivers of or
substitutions for the program requirements for particular
categories of students in those situations where it seems
necessary or appropriate.

Arrange or negotiate with colleges, departments, and other
academic units concerning the teaching of courses selected to
fulfill program requirements, particularly the cross-cultural
courses and the pairs or related interdisciplinary courses.

Oversee and coordinate the Freshman Seminar courses.

Insure that undergraduate colleges apply the University
Studies Committee's policies regarding credit for transfer
students of equivalent courses taken elsewhere consistently and
uniformly.

Oversee the program generally with a charge of maintaining
its integrity, and to bring to the attention of the University
Studies Committee and the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs,
Lexington Campus, any problems or deficiencies, along with
recommendations for their correction or improvement.

Rationale:

When the Senate Council put the Swift Committee Report on
the Senate agenda last December, no provisions for adminis—
tering the new University Studies Program were included. The
Swift Committee had concentrated on the substance of the Pro—
gram and its report contained little in the way of an
administrative structure. Likewise, the Senate Council focused
its effort on the substantive aspects of the Program and
sketched only a broad outline of how the Program would be
administered in its November 25, l985, circulation of the
agenda item. The Senate Council, however, did assure the
Senate that it would offer a detailed structure for adminis—
tering the University Studies Program in the spring of l986.

Following the Senate's adoption of the University Studies
Program in February, the Senate Council, after consultation
with President Otis Singletary, Chancellor Art Gallaher and