Central Connecticut State University
Academic Standards Committee
Committee Minutes
Academic Standards Committee
Minutes 11/05/02
Members Present:
Deans: Rick Roth, Patty Root, Sharon Braverman, Nancy Hoffman (for Susan
Biederman), Len Lema (for Zdzislaw Kremens)
Student Affairs: Jane Higgins
Registrar: Susan Petrosino
Arts and Sciences Faculty: Gloria Caliendo-Reed, Stephen Cox, Susan Gilmore, Mary
Anne Nunn, Matt Warshauer, Barry Westcott
School of Business Faculty: Kathy Czyrnik
Education and Professional Studies Faculty: Carol Williams
Guests: Myrna Garcia-Bowen (Admissions), Francis Keefe (Advising Center), Robert
Wolff (Chair, Grade Appeals Sub-Committee)
Members Absent:
Bob Dunne, English
Gene Baten, Management
Mary Pat Hager, Education and Professional Studies
Peter Baumann, Engineering Technology
The meeting was called to order at 2:37.
MOVED: To approve the minutes from the meeting held on 10/08/02
Barry Westcott/Stephen Cox, Approved: All
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Matt Warshauer, Chair, announced that the Faculty Senate had approved the creation of the NR grade as well as the revised pre-requisites for the Design Graphic Information major.
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
(1) Grade Appeals Policy: The committee, having had the chance to review the subcommittee’s draft of the new grade appeals policy, agreed on several editorial changes.
MOVED: To accept the Grade Appeals Policy proposed by the subcommittee as edited:
Barry Westcott/Stephen Cox, Approved: All
Matt will pursue getting the form and cover sheet posted on the web. The policy as accepted is attached.
(2) Course Repeat Policy: The committee, having had the chance to review the subcommittee’s draft of the new course repeat policy, agreed on several editorial changes.
MOVED: To accept the Course Repeat Policy proposed by the subcommittee as edited:
Stephen Cox/Barry Westcott, Approved: All
In the matter of courses audited to renew prerequisites that have expired, it was agreed that any student signed on to audit a course who did not fulfill the requirements of that audit would be issued a “W.” It was also agreed that departments wishing to prevent students from repeating classes involving professional or pre-professional placements (such as internships) could establish departmental permission as a requirement for repeating that course. The policy as accepted is attached.
MOVED: To thank the members of these subcommittees—Barry Westcott (chair), Sharon Braverman, Mary Pat Hager, Nancy Hoffman, Carol Jones, Susan Petrosino, Chris Pudlinski (ex officio), Matt Warshauer, Robert Wolff (ex officio)—for their hard work:
Susan Gilmore/Barry Westcott, In Favor: All
OLD BUSINESS:
Matt reported that his review of the present committee by-laws does indeed specify that the committee is empowered to address pre-requisite requirements for undergraduate programs.
He also noted that there is still a subcommittee working on the Student Leave of Absence Policy. In subsequent meetings the committee will address this policy as well as pre-requisites for other undergraduate majors, the problems of students who withdraw from classes after faculty members have caught them cheating, and the question of whether or not Deans should have vote as well as voice on the Academic Standards committee.
NEW BUSINESS:
There was none.
The next meeting will be on 12/10/02 at 2:30 in the Blue and White Room.
At 3:37, MOVED: To adjourn: Barry Westcott/Susan Gilmore, In favor, All.
Respectfully submitted,
Mary Anne Nunn
Academic grading reflects careful and deliberate judgment of a faculty member instructing a course. Academic evaluation of student performance requires expert consideration of cumulative information. Such decision-making by its nature is judgmental and evaluative. The evaluative process is not and should not be likened to the adversarial process involved in disciplinary matters, for academic grade determination is unadaptable to the methods of judicial or administrative decision-making. The education process, moreover, is not by nature adversarial, but rather centers upon a continuing relationship between faculty and student. Administrative interposition, except in the most extreme instances, is to be avoided. The University recognizes that in rare instances there may be errors, or “palpable injustice(s)” in determination of a final grade. A student alleging such error or palpable injustice, i.e., a clear showing of arbitrary or capricious action, may appeal as provided below:
1.
Initial Meeting with Instructor: A student who believes a grade
involved an error or a palpable injustice shall first confer with the instructor
who awarded the grade in the next regular semester no later than the
end of the fourth week of the following semester. the first Monday of
either October or March. Either the student or the faculty member may request
that the initial meeting occur in the presence of the department chair. Should
a student be unable to contact the instructor or not receive a decision within 2
weeks the student should make an appeal to
the department chairperson.
2. Appeal to the Department Chairperson: If the student is not satisfied with the outcome of step one, the student may next present the case, in writing, to the appropriate department chairperson, who may effect a settlement upon written agreement of the instructor. The student’s written appeal must be clear and complete. The department chairperson must provide the student and instructor a written decision within 2 weeks of receiving an appeal. If the chairperson upholds the instructor’s grade, and the student wishes to further pursue the appeal, the chairperson shall then forward the appeal (including a copy of the written decision) to the appropriate dean. If the chairperson finds that the appeal has merit, the chairperson shall then forward the appeal and written decision to the appropriate dean.
3.
Appeal to the Dean: If the student is not satisfied with the
decision made by the chairperson, Further appeal by the student shall be
in writing to the dean of the school concerned. A grade change shall be made
only with the written consent of the instructor and the department chairperson.
The dean must provide the student, instructor, and chairperson with a written
decision within one month of receiving an appeal. If the dean upholds the
instructor’s grade, and the student wishes to further pursue the appeal, the
dean shall then forward the appeal (including copies of the written decisions)
to the Grade Appeals Review Board. If the dean finds that the appeal has merit,
the dean shall then forward the appeal and written decision to the Grade Appeals
Review Board.
4.
Instructor Deceased or Cannot Be Contacted: If the instructor is
deceased or cannot be contacted by the student and department chairperson in
the next regular semester by the end of the fourth week of the
following semester before either the first Monday of October or March
the student may confer with the chairperson.
a. Upon evidence of error, the chairperson may make the appropriate grade change after consultation with and approval of the dean of the school. The instructor shall be notified of the change if notice subsequently can be delivered. The chairperson shall make a determination and provide written notification to the student within one month of the appeal.
b.
If the chairperson finds Upon evidence of palpable injustice, the
case shall be referred to the Grade Appeals Review Board for action as described
in Step 6 below. Written notification of the decision shall be made to the
student within one month of the appeal.
5.
Appeal of Grade from Student’s Final Semester: When an appeal for
grade change is made at the end of a student’s final semester and if the
instructor is deceased or cannot be contacted by the student and the
department chairperson, the student may appeal to the department
chairperson. If the instructor cannot be contacted before the grade deadline for
graduation and where there is evidence of error, the chairperson may make the
appropriate grade change after consultation with and approval by the dean of the
school. The instructor shall be notified of the change if notice subsequently
can be delivered. If the chairperson finds evidence of a palpable injustice,
the case shall be referred immediately to the appropriate dean. In consultation
with the chair and instructor, the dean shall make every attempt to resolve the
appeal before graduation. If the appeal cannot be resolved before graduation,
the dean shall proceed according to step three above.
a. Following an investigation, the Grade Appeals Review Board may deny the appeal, in which case the matter shall be closed.
b.
If the Grade Appeals Review Board makes a finding that the grading
involved a palpable injustice, the case shall be remanded to the instructor and
the dean of the instructor’s school for reconsideration. The instructor may make
the appropriate change in the grade with the written agreement of the dean. If
the instructor disagrees or if the instructor’s whereabouts are unknown, the
Grade Appeals Review Board may recommend a change to the Vice President for
Academic Affairs. The Vice President may make the appropriate grade change or
issue a “W” (withdrawal) with the written agreement of the dean. The
instructor, and the department chairperson, and the dean
shall be notified in writing of such change.
c. The Grade Appeals Review Board will endeavor to resolve all cases within the semester in which they are filed. When this is not possible, the chairperson of the Grade Appeals Review Board shall provide the Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs, as well as the student, with written notification
d. In no case shall a grade be lowered as a result of the appeal to the Grade Appeals Review Board.
7. The Student’s Rights and Responsibilities:
a. Student’s shall receive timely notification during all steps of the appeals process.
b. When appealing a grade, students must provide a full written account, attaching all corresponding documentation, in step two above. Students will not have the opportunity to supplement an appeal once it has been filed.
8. Faculty and Administration’s Rights and Responsibilities:
a. The Grade Appeals Review Board shall notify in writing faculty, chairpersons, and deans of any board actions and requests.
b. Faculty shall return all graded student work or retain it until the end of the following regular academic semester. In no case shall faculty discard the graded work of a student who has filed an appeal.
c. Chairpersons and deans must meet required deadlines as outlined in the Appeals for Grade Change Policy.
a.
That
The Grade Appeals Review Board shall be made up of six five
instructional faculty members, elected under procedures determined by the
Faculty Senate. that nominations be solicited of the whole faculty, and
that the Faculty Senate elect six from among those nominated. That three
members shall serve a term of two years. be elected each year for
two-year terms, and that three more be elected for one-year terms for the first
year. That the Grade Appeals Review Board function under procedures
established by the Committee on Academic Standards.
Adopted by the Faculty Senate
April 16, 1979
Revised by the Faculty Senate
Course Repeat Policy:
A course in which a grade of C- or
lower has been received may be repeated, although
Students may repeat any course during their tenure at CCSU. The total number
of credits that students may repeat, however, is limited to 17 credits, and
no course may be repeated more than once without approval of the chair of the
department offering the course. The most recent course grade and credit will be
applied to the GPA and degree requirements. All grades will appear on the
student’s transcript. This policy applies only to undergraduate students
and only just to courses taken at CCSU and only to courses
repeated beginning with the Fall 1994 2003 semester.
(This policy is applicable only to undergraduate students.)
Some academic departments may require students to retake certain prerequisite courses if there is an extended time lapse between the completion of that prerequisite course and enrollment in subsequent courses. Students should check with the individual departments for time limits on prerequisite courses. Students who must retake prerequisite courses have two options:
1) Students may retake the course and replace their previous grade. Credits for the retake will be applied against the limit of 17 authorized repeat credits.
2) Students may audit the course and retain the existing grade. The 17 authorized repeat credits will not be affected. Students taking this option should be aware that individual academic departments might place special requirements on the auditing of courses. Students must complete an audit request form with in the required time frame at the beginning of the semester in which a course is audited.
Note: Repeating courses taken in a previous semester may affect certain federal and state benefits, various financial aid programs, loans, scholarships and social security benefits, in addition to athletic eligibility and veteran’s benefits. Satisfactory Academic Progress requirements must be met for continued financial aid eligibility. See catalogue for Satisfactory Academic Progress Policy.
Note: Education majors and post baccalaureate certification students should refer to the course repeat policy listed in the School of Education and Professional Studies section of the catalog.