October 5, 2005 -- 3:00 pm
Inlow Hall 115
The committee reviewed two suspension appeals. Details are in the Hearings Log.
John Miller was unable to join us to go over the items he would like the ASC to review this academic year. He will be at our next meeting. In the meantime, Dawna will get the academic policies from the catalog printed out so that committee members can take a look. A new catalog will be printed at the end of this year.
Colleen Cascio gave us an update on the Academic Honesty Code. It has been finalized and approved. The code itself is on the Student Affairs website. Colleen would like to be updated on whether faculty “buy-in” to the policy or not.
Mary would like the committee to think about the suspension appeals and how it affects students. She wants us to discuss philosophically about whether we are just allowing students to dig deeper holes or are we actually helping them by allowing them back for one term after they were suspended.
October 26, 2005 -- 3:00 pm
Inlow Hall 115
Present: Mary Koza, Dawna Flanagan, Cory Nelson, Michael Puls, Tom Herrmann, Kathryn Shorts (guest), John Miller (guest)
Absent: April Curtis, Doug Briney, Dan White, Charles Martin
Charles Martin and Dan White are the student members appointed by ASEOU. Neither were present.
Two students requests were reviewed. One student wished to have his suspension appealed for Winter term. It was approved. Another student wanted to have his grading method changed from graded to s/u. It was denied.
John Miller talked about items he would like the committee to review. These included the following:
Student Evaluations of Faculty – the security of the forms; how they are used; off campus vs. on campus evaluation process.
Intact classes – taught by students, so what are implications?
Continuity of degree requirements for on vs. off campus students
Oregon Transfer Module
Board of Higher Education – There is much talk about alignment, which means alignment with high school requirements and college entrance requirements because there are many students in high school taking college classes. Alignment will be a hot item and is forthcoming.
Catalog policies
Kathryn Shorts from the Learning Center spoke to the committee about the academic intervention process.
November 16, 2005 -- 3:00 pm
Zabel Hall Education Conference Room 251
Present: Mary Koza, April Curtis, Michael Puls, Tom Herrmann, Darren Dutto, Dawna Flanagan, Dea Hoffman (guest)
Mary introduced Darren Dutto as a new committee member from the College of Education.
Dawna updated the committee on the Academic Standing issue that Kathryn Shorts brought before the committee last months. Before our current policy, no policy existed about academic standing at all. Apparently, athletes were running into trouble with eligibility and wanted to be able to change their academic standing after grades were changed. John Miller asked Dea Hoffman to research other institutions to see what their academic standing policies were. Our current policy is consistent with other OUS institutions. Basically, it is up to the student to keep track of his/her grades and academic standing. If a grade change exists that helps their standing, then it is up to them to ask for their standing to be updated. Alternatively, students who have a "I" grade and then get an "F" grade usually will not ask that their standing be changed because it would put them into warning or probation, or even suspension. Dawna suggested to Kathryn to alter the letter that students on probation receive so that there is less confusion.
Dea Hoffman suggested several policies that the committee might consider reviewing this year – the drop policy, academic bankruptcy, course challenge, and continuous enrollment. Michael Puls suggested the repeat policy. Dea talked about each policy and which parts of them might need revision.
The drop policy has created a huge workload and a lot of frustration in the part of the students. The new policy was adopted to allow professors to talk students out of dropping their course. Committee members were asked to query their colleagues to see how many try to talk students out of dropping.
The academic bankruptcy policy requires that students must be admitted and enrolled in 12 credits, with a cumulative GPA of 2.000. Some students are caught in an awkward situation because of these requirements.
The challenge policy is discussed in more detail below.
The continuous enrollment policy can sometimes cause problems for some students, so the committee can review it to see if any adjustments need to be made.
Students who want to enroll in 12 credits, and have already received a good grade in the course previously can abuse the repeat policy. The best grade is used, instead of the most recent grade.
This policy can sometimes cause students a problem in the area of Modern Languages, if they wish to challenge the 1st term of a language while they are enrolled in the 2nd term.
It is up to the faculty member to agree to oversee the challenge.
Mary gave a history of off-campus challenges for the past two years.
The committee agreed that students must be admitted to EOU before they can challenge a course. If students are admitted and enrolled will keep us from being a “transcripting” school.
We don’t want to have seniors challenging freshmen level courses to get elective credit.
It was agreed that we should change and update the language. The committee was asked to talk to their colleagues and send suggestions for new/changed verbiage before the next meeting.
December 7, 2005
3:00 pm
Course Challenge Policy
After discussing the Course Challenge policy, no changes were recommended. There were not enough students adversely affected by the current policy to justify changing it.
The Committee looked at the repeat policy. There have been instances of abuse with this policy in receiving Financial Aid and with students who wish to remain eligible to stay in the country. It was suggested that we change the policy to read “The most recent grade earned” instead of “The highest grade earned.” The rationale is because the most recent grade is a better measure of a student’s current competency in the subject. Another rationale is that the most recent grade will motivate and create incentive for the student to do better and improve the grade. The Committee will continue to consider this change.
It is important that everyone understand the Drop policy versus the Withdrawal policy. The Committee discussed the reasoning for the current drop policy, which is that faculty were to attempt to persuade students to remain in their classes. Many faculty simply sign the form without talking to the student, because if a student wants out of the class, faculty are happy to allow them to get out. The Committee also discussed the generous add policy.
After Committee members take a look at both the Drop and Withdrawal policy, we will decide what we want to change (if anything) during our meeting in January.
The Committee decided to meet for suspension hearings on January 6, which is the Friday before classes begin. Dawna will inform everyone of the time and place after students call for appointments.
A student appeal was approved for Winter 2006.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 pm.
January 25, 2006
3:00 pm
Zabel Hall 116
After some discussion, the committee decided to change the Repeated Coursework policy as follows. The change is in bold italics.
REPEATED COURSEWORK
Students may repeat a course for the purpose of improving a grade and increased mastery of the subject, although the credit hours earned for that course count only once. The highest most recent grade earned will be used in computing the GPA and credit toward graduation. Grades of U, Y and W are not considered to be higher grades than D or F. All grades will remain on the transcript. Students are responsible for notifying the Registrar's Office that a course is being repeated so that their GPA can be recalculated and their credit hour total reduced.
The rationale is that the most recent grade is a better measure of a student’s competency. In addition, the most recent grade will provide incentive for the student to achieve a better grade. The faculty members on the committee will take the policy to their respective Colleges.
The committee discussed the add policy after some discussion regarding student abuses of the current policy (which is tightened from the previous policy). The general feeling was to not allow students to add courses after the 4th week. Mary Koza felt some research into what the other OUS institutions’ policies are would be of benefit to us. Michael Puls and Cory Nelson will research the other institutions. The findings will be distributed via email so that we can formulate our policy before the next meeting in February.
John Miller has asked the committee to discuss taking roll in classes. The committee members discussed their own policies for class attendance, which are often in the syllabus. They feel it should be up to instructors to monitor their own classes. The hope is that by tightening the add policy, students will need to be registered for the classes they are attending. The committee does not feel that they can come up with a policy for taking roll in classes.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 pm.
February 15, 2006
3:00 pm
Zabel Hall 116
The Course Repeat policy as revised will be presented to the three Colleges in the next few weeks and then will be presented at Assembly on March 7. The following is a copy of the draft that will be presented to the Colleges and Assembly.
REPEATED COURSEWORK
Students may repeat a course to improve a grade or to increase mastery of a subject for the purpose of improving a grade and increased mastery of the subject, although the credit hours earned for that course count only once. The highest most recent grade earned will be used in computing the GPA and credit toward graduation. Grades of U and W are not considered to be higher grades than D or F. All grades will remain on the transcript. Students are responsible for notifying the Registrar's Office that a course is being repeated so that their GPA can be recalculated and their credit hour total reduced.
The following rationales were considered.
1) The most recent grade is a better measure of a student’s competency.
2) The most recent grade will provide incentive for the student to achieve a better grade.
3) This policy will deter potential repeat coursework abuse.
If faculty have input, please be sure that Mary Koza or Dawna Flanagan gets the information. There was discussion regarding another university averaging the repeated grades for the courses, and discussion regarding the number of times that a student could repeat a course. It was noted that averaging the grades was not feasible at EOU and that we do not have very many students who repeat a course multiple times. If they can afford it, they can do it.
We looked at add and drop policies of SOU, OIT, and WOU.
SOU |
Add freely during first week of term. Instructor’s signature starting second week of term through Friday of fourth week of term. From fourth week to end of term, must have instructor and dean’s signature. |
OIT |
Add or drop with no record till end of week two. Instructor and advisor permission required beginning on the 3rd day of class. Classes dropped after 10th day appear as W on transcript. After 7th week, instructor can assign a letter grade. Withdrawal deadline is end of 10th week of term.
|
WOU |
Add until 5:00 pm on 10th academic day of term. Drop until 5:00 pm on 30th academic day of term. Drop before end of 6th week without responsibility for a grade. After sixth week, students cannot withdraw from a class unless by medical emergency or catastrophic event. |
After some discussion, the committee members decided they would like to see several options. Dawna will forward the options mentioned to committee members to discuss at the March meeting. The options are adding for 3 days, 1 week, or leave the policy as is; options for dropping are 2 weeks via Webster or leaving as is.
Our next meeting will be March 8 where we will discuss the add/drop policy, continuous enrollment, graduation with distinction (Latin honors), and the suspension appeal deadline.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 pm.
March 8, 2006
3:00 – 4:00 pm
Zabel Hall 116
Mary Koza updated the committee on the repeat policy as presented to the Assembly. Two issues brought up were 1) the grades of U and W counting or not counting as repeated grades and 2) continuity with the policies at other OUS institutions. The motion to accept the policy was tabled at Assembly. Dawna Flanagan researched the other OUS institutions and presented the policies from their current catalogs. The committee members discussed the issues and revised the policy.
The Academic Standards Committee is proposing to change the Repeated Coursework policy as follows. The change is in bold italics.
REPEATED COURSEWORK
Students may repeat a course to improve a grade or to increase mastery of a subject for the purpose of improving a grade and increased mastery of the subject, although the credit hours and grade points earned for that course count only once. The highest most recent grade earned will be used in computing the GPA and credit toward graduation. Grades of U and W are not used to replace A – F grades to be higher grades than D or F. All grades will remain on the transcript. Students are responsible for notifying the Registrar's Office that a course is being repeated so that their GPA can be recalculated and their credit hour total reduced.
The following rationales were considered.
1) The most recent grade is a better measure of a student’s competency.
2) The most recent grade will provide incentive for the student to achieve a better grade.
3) This policy will deter potential repeat coursework abuse.
4) All other OUS institutions were researched, and this policy coincides with their policies.
Committee members were asked to present this revised policy to their respective colleges and students and provide feedback before we present it to the Assembly again.
Add and Drop Policy
The committee considered the options discussed last meeting for changing the add and drop policies. The following were chosen to forward to the Colleges for discussion and approval.
Adding a Class
Option 1:
Students may add on-line via web registration (Webster) for the first three days of class. Beginning the fourth day of class, students may add classes at the discretion of the instructor, who must provide a signature on an add form.
No class may be added after the end of the fourth week. Thereafter, only the School Dean may approve exceptions, along with the Dean of Distance Education when appropriate. Requests for exceptions may be brought to the Deans only upon prior approval of the instructor to approve the request.
Add/drop fees will be assessed in accordance with the fee policies stated in the Schedule of Classes.
Dropping a Class
Option 2:
During the first five weeks of on-campus classes (or 50% of the duration of an on-campus class) a student may drop a class via Webster without being held responsible for a grade. Thereafter, the student must withdraw from the class. See withdrawal policy below.
Committee members were asked to provide rationales to Dawna via email, which she will compile.
Mary asked committee members to think about the deadline for suspension appeal letters. Currently, students have until the Tuesday of classes to petition the ASC for reinstatement. This means that some students are not attending the first two or three days of class depending on the results of their hearing. Dawna will draft something from the committee to look at.
April 13, 2006
11:00 am
Zabel Hall 251
The Committee agreed to take the revised policy to the next Assembly in May. Each College has reviewed the policy and there were no comments from anyone. The students prefer the repeat policy as it is now. The faculty listed the reasons why they felt the new policy should be passed so that Charlie Johnson could take it to the students. As an informational item, the Registrar’s Office reported that between 15 and 20 students who repeated a course received a lower grade.
The Committee discussed the options they chose for the add and drop policies. After reviewing the deadlines from the other OUS institutions, the Committee decided to change the policy to allow students to register via Webster for the first week of the term and to have instructor’s signatures beginning the second week of the term. The drop language will be changed to reflect that students can drop via Webster for five weeks into the term, rather than 50% of an on-campus class. All the rationale centered around the convenience to the students and faculty instructors.
Mary asked the committee about changing the deadline for suspension appeal letters. Currently the wording is “Petitions must be received by 5 p.m. on the first Tuesday of classes for the term in which the suspended student seeks reinstatement.” The ASC has been meeting for the past few terms on the Friday before classes begin so that students have no obstacles to attending classes from the first day. The current statement allows students to not even begin to appeal until the 2nd day of classes. Changing the wording to the Friday before classes begin would force students to appeal their suspensions earlier and to take care of their business before classes begin. The Committee agreed and decided to take the new wording to the Colleges, and then forward it as an information item at the next Assembly.
Dawna asked the committee to decide the GPA range appropriate for the President’s Scholar selection. The Committee chose the Summa Cum Laude range of 3.85 to 4.00.
Mary asked that the committee consider upcoming items for future discussion. Continuous enrollment policy and review of academic intervention are two subjects she would like to see discussed.
May 4, 2006
11:00 am
Zabel Hall 251
The ASC members took the repeat policy and the add/drop policy to their respective Colleges.
Repeat Policy: Doug reported that while Business faculty did not feel the new policy was in the best interests of the students, overall they supported the policy. Darren indicated that the Education faculty had no comment regarding the policy. Arts & Sciences faculty had issues with repeating a course versus a repeatable course. They wanted to add a statement regarding repeatable courses. After discussion, the committee decided it would be too confusing. Their rationale was that adding language distinguishing between enrolling in repeatable courses and repeating a course would confuse the two and could preclude students from legitimately repeating a course.
Add/Drop Policy: Mary indicated that Distance Ed felt strongly that wording should be added to the policy regarding DDE courses. She shared the statement that Les Balsiger wanted to include. Arts and Sciences will be meeting on May 18 so we will try to get on the agenda. Dawna will forward the policies to the faculty listserves so that they can be discussed before we take them to Assembly again.
Mary reported to the committee on her meeting with John Miller. She updated him on the policies we have been working on this year, and where we are at this point. He was pleased with the progress we have been making.
Dawna updated the committee on the search for the President’s Scholar. The letters were sent out on April 28 and the deadline to apply is May 12. Approximately 80 letters were sent out.
The committee considered a suspension appeal letter from a student who wishes to return Fall term. They approved the appeal.
Our last meeting of the year will be on May 25, 2006.
May 25, 2006
11:00 am - - Zabel Hall 235
Kathryn Shorts and Anna Marie Dill presented information on the academic intervention process for the 2005/2006 year. While there is no comparative data, the numbers for students who are on either academic warning or probation is around 922. The total is for both on and off campus students, although this term DDE has been sending their own letters regarding academic intervention. According to Kathryn, even though there is a hold on the students’ accounts, there is not enough incentive for students to go through the academic intervention process. Apparently Title IV does not allow EOU to withhold financial aid after a certain amount of time, which eliminates a very important leverage tool to persuade students to go through the intervention. In addition, the recent budget cuts have affected the personnel needed for the intervention process. Mary will take the information presented to the Provost.
Dawna reported that the President’s Scholar for 2006 is Anna Bacon. She will get in touch with Anna and set up a meeting with April and/or Mary.
The committee considered a suspension appeal letter from a student who wishes to return for Summer term. After looking at the transcript, the committee decided that the student should finish the five incomplete grades before coming back to EOU. If the student received at least a B in each class, she would no longer be on suspension.
The committee reported very little feedback from their respective Colleges on the policies. Brian Sather did respond to Darren Dutto via email, indicating that the changes were initiated in 03/04 in order to encourage student retention in classes. He reported that his own classes have less drops and are more stable from start to finish. While the committee understood this, the reality is that few faculty encourage their students to stay in class when they want to drop, and students who want to drop a class are going to drop, no matter what. The policies will be forwarded to Molly Burke to place on the agenda for the next Assembly meeting.
Most of the members of the committee this year will be on the committee again next year. Mary Koza was unanimously elected as the chairperson.
Our next meeting will be the Friday before classes start in September.