April 7, 2004 Minutes
Chair Stone, Senators Sawey, Peeler, Gillis, Conroy, Shah, Rao, Hazlewood, Hindson,
Guests: Dr. Blanda, University Star reporter
I. Developmental Leave Applications
Senate heard and ranked developmental leave applications.
II. Report on Honor Code:
Dr. Gratz notified Chair Stone that this honor code would not be ready to be implemented by Fall 2004.
Senator Hazlewood reported on the draft of the Honor Code policy. Chair Stone suggested that we should have a committee composed of equal representation of students and faculty. The senate discussed the question of a failure to meet a quorum or a tie vote.
3.03 b) 1) says that the student indicates acceptance, which Chair Stone said
was putting the student at a disadvantage. The student may not wish to admit
to having violated the code.
Senator Hindson said that having all of the paperwork would discourage anyone from doing anything in regards to the Honor Code. They will simply find other ways of dealing with the issue.
Chair Stone observed that most faculty already ignore the current reporting policy, because Vince Morton gets only about seven of these per year, on average.
Senator Brennan said that even with the rarity of use, it does help to point up some of the most flagrant violations.
Senator Gillis said that when an honor code is in place it reduces the number of incidents of academic dishonesty because it signals to the students that it is taken seriously.
Senator Hazlewood said that 3.03 b3 has the dean call the council.
The academic dean will not have a record of previous violations.
Senator Hindson asked if there was anything forbidding the Dean of Students from transmitting information to the college deans about previous violations.
Chair Stone did not know whether this would be a violation of privacy rights or not.
The Honor Council makes recommendations to the dean of the appropriate college. Change “render a ruling” to “render a finding” in 3.03 d.
III. Update from CAD
Senator James said this report would be coming to the deans next week. Chairs, with the personnel committee will be establishing the criteria for adjusting equity.
The biggest change at this meeting from last meeting was that Dr. Gratz said there would be latitude and discretion at the departmental level. Equity is not strictly tied to the disparity index. Departments can address other issues in their department.
The step system will be phased out next year. Dr. Gratz wants to do away with performance raises.
IV. Role of the chair
Senator Sawey reported on the role of the chair committee. Discussion on this will be RTA’d to next week’s meeting.
Senator Peeler asked how we would have input on this process, and Chair Stone said it would come back to the senate, or we could react to it now. The dean suggested that if the senate has a recommendation, it should be voiced before the retreat, since Perry Moore will be at the retreat at that time.
V. New business
There were issues on the timing of the applications and the due date for chairs, deans, and the senate.
Hindson moved to approve the decision of the academic computing committee.
Unanimous vote in favor of accepting the vote.
Senator Hazlewood reported on the regents rules and requests.
Subject to amendments, Senator Hazlewood’s report was approved.
Minutes submitted by Rebecca Bell-Metereau