AAAS - Admissions, Awards and Academic Standing Committee

Minutes of October 14, 1998

  

Present: Chair Kurt Fosso, Kevin Holloway, Barbara Balko, Alicia Gilbert, Deborah Lycan, Michael Ford, Michael Sexton, Dell Smith, Glendi Gaddis, Ashley Schmitt (invited), Sharon Barnes (secretary)

Absent: Shannon Benfield-Blankenship, Greg Caldwell, Kristi Williams, Dale Holloway

Chair Kurt Fosso opened the meeting at 3:10. The minutes of September 9, 1998 were approved.
  

Subcommittee Reports

The Academic Standing Subcommittee will meet the first week of January. Barbara Balko reported that the membership of Petitions and Waivers is Tatiana Osipovich, Bill Kinsella, Alicia Gilbert and Dell Smith. Deborah Lycan asked for clarification of the process to get subcommittee members for Honors and Awards. The process is to ask the Divisional Deans for recommendations to the committee.
 

Changes Recommended in Academic Policy

Ashley Smith, chair of the College Honor Board addressed the AAAS Committee. She said the College Honor Board would like a change in the academic integrity policy to have all academic integrity cases come before the board. Currently some come before the board and some are handled directly by the professor. There is no consistency in the manner in which the cases are resolved. Ashley said that having all cases treated consistently by having them come before the College Honor Board would create a fundamental fairness in that all cases would be treated equally. Michael Ford pointed out that the college is given additional sanction for action by having all cases go to a College Honor Board hearing. He also said that students who are accused of cheating would be embarrassed by coming before a board of their peers to be judged, and thus would not be inclined to cheat again. The experience of going before the Honor Board is a traumatic but fair experience.
 
Kurt Fosso opened up the discussion to the committee. Deborah said there are three factors to take under consideration: 1) the seriousness of the offense, 2) faculty time, and 3) burden of proof.
 
Michael Sexton asked how many were repeat offenders of the 21 cases that went before the Honor Board? Michael Ford replied that there were none. There is no breakdown on the report distributed to the AAAS committee on what the offense or action for the 21 cases, i.e., plagiarism, forging signatures.
 
Kevin is concerned about the classroom dynamics in bringing forward an academic integrity case -- does the class get involved? Kevin also wanted to know how does one determine the point at which paraphrasing too closely is an offense.

Ashley said this is proposed to become a College-wide policy. By appearing before the Board, the seriousness of the offense is reinforced.
 
Michael Ford said there are huge differences between how people interpret the academic integrity policy statement. Academic integrity is treated in very different ways for similar offenses. Faculty use their own discretion to act -- similar to civil court procedure by the preponderance of evidence. In class, academic integrity policy should be given the first day and/or printed on the syllabus. This is being done by some and not by other faculty members.

Barbara Balko asked, how to prove academic dishonesty without a preponderance of evidence? Deborah Lycan said many times we can't prove it, but it is obvious. Kevin Holloway questions integrity when there is a radial improvement. What does one do? Pull entire class before Honor Board?
 
How do members get on the board? Names are submitted by the CAS Dean to SAAB who appoints students to the board.

Registrar Dell Smith asked, how are records kept for sanction on students. Ashley said they do go through the Dean of Students. Kevin said this is a good proposal; that it increases the consistency of punishment.
 
Deborah Lycan asked, as the AAAS Committee, what is our role? Ashley Schmitt replied that with this committee's approval along with the SAAB recommendation gives additional credence to the proposal with the faculty at the faculty meeting. Jane Atkinson told Ashley that the AAAS Committee was the proper place to start getting approval for this change.
 
Some wording changes were recommended for the proposal. Alicia Gilbert commented that this proposal gives the professor no choice of whether or not to bring up a case of academic dishonesty. Michael Ford said that by adopting this policy as a college-wide policy, it holds students accountable for their actions and gives sanction to faculty for giving failing grades in cases of academic dishonesty. He also said that procedural changes will be made to the policy.

Michael Ford said that the Registrar will be notified when an F grade is for the class, not just on an assignment. Kevin Holloway said that in all cases, faculty will determine the extent of the grade penalty, then will notify the Registrar. The Registrar will record NG pending the Honor Board hearing. The Honor Board can recommend a penalty grade, but the faculty member still makes the decision for a grade.
 

MOTION PASSED to recommend and support proposed changes to Academic Policy to have all academic integrity cases go before the Honor Board.
 

Academic Honors

The following have been adopted for Latin Honors:

3.9-4.0 summa cum laude
3.8-3.899 magna cum laude
3.7-3.799 cum laude

Registrar Dell Smith said that timing factors still need to be considered in order to implement Latin Honors. How are they announced? Do they get announced at Commencement before grades are submitted?

Some ways Latin Honors are done in other institutions:

  1. Have senior grades calculated early - Wednesday before commencement. All seniors graded are early.
  2. Don't announce honors at Commencement - wait and put on student's diploma.
  3. Guess - best estimate. Approximately 60 students will be receiving Latin Honors. This puts pressure on faculty to get grades in early. This method can be inaccurate.
  4. Go by fall term grades. Announce at Commencement Latin Honors determined by results from fall. Then put correct information on the transcript and diploma. Dell asked, do we as a College want to publish inaccurate information?
  5. Do not announce honors. We miss a great opportunity to recognize good work.

 
Dell could print up an addendum. The AAAS Committee recommends putting a disclaimer on the printed material for Latin Honors. Dell will outline and bring the issues back to AAAS Committee at the November meeting.

MOTION PASSED to place only Departmental Honors and Latin Honors on the diploma.

 

Phi Beta Kappa and Phi Kappa Phi are external honors and will not be placed on diplomas but will be on transcripts. Department honors will be placed on diplomas and transcripts along with Latin Honors because the College bestows both of these honors.

Kevin Holloway expressed concern that the attendance portion on the advising pads could put the professor and school at risk for not taking attendance. Glenda Gaddis said that actually this cuts down on the college risk by compelling professors to report when students stop attending classes. Financial Aid and the Cashier are legally involved. They need to know when students stopped going to class -- a date affects Financial Aid and the Cashier in a major way. This is the softest way not to put the college in jeopardy.

Kurt Fosso said future agenda items will include 1) Latin Honors, 2) what happens when students don't meet standards. 3) Glenda and Dell said to look at matriculation in respect to matriculation, to review the college's admission procedures. 4) advising --what and how needs to be evaluated. What role does advising plan in faculty evaluation?

Meeting adjourned at 4:50. Next AAAS meeting is November 11, 1998 at 3:00 in Thaxter 3.


Created by: barnes@lclark.edu
Updated: 10-DEC-98