EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES

Present: Alexander, Alloway, Beck, Bradford, Flowers, Hachtmann, Ledder, Moeller, Scholz, Stock, Zimmers

Absent: Bolin, Rapkin

Date: Wednesday, August 30, 2006

Location: Academic Senate Office, 420 University Terrace

Note: These are not verbatim minutes. They are a summary of the discussions at the Executive Committee meeting as corrected by those participating.

______________________________________________________________________

1.0 Call to Order

Moeller called the meeting to order at 3:02 p.m.

2.0 Announcements

2.1 Faculty at 5

Moeller reported that the Senate will once again co-sponsor the Faculty at 5 receptions this year. She noted that the events will be held on the following dates: October 26^th, November 13^th, February 23^rd, and March 15^th. She stated that the Faculty at 5 receptions will be held at the Sheldon Art Gallery. Faculty members can purchase a drink and have hors d’oeuvres for $5.

2.2 Retirement Reception for Professor Robert “Mac” Sawyer

Griffin reported that there will be a retirement reception for Professor Sawyer, Teaching, Learning, and Teacher Education, on September 13^th from 4:00 – 7:00 p.m. at the Wick Alumni Center. Griffin noted that Professor Sawyer served on the Senate and is a former member of the Executive Committee.

3.0 Approval of 8/23/06 Minutes

Flowers moved and Alexander seconded approval of the minutes as amended. Motion approved.

4.0 Unfinished Business

4.1 Status of Survey on the Institutional Objectives of the General Education Program

Griffin reported that members of the General Education Planning Team sent some comments and suggestions on the survey. The Committee reviewed the suggestions and revised the survey. The Committee agreed to have the survey sent out the week of September 4^th.

5.0 New Business

5.1 Academic Dishonesty Grade

Moeller noted that the Committee recently read an article on the awarding of an “XF” grade to indicate a student who failed a course due to academic dishonesty. She stated that several universities are now using this grade. She reported that she checked with these universities and they are pleased with the policy on academic dishonesty.

Bradford suggested that the Committee should meet with Dr. Hawkey, Director of Registration and Records, to discuss this issue. The Committee agreed to set up a meeting with Dr. Hawkey.

Ledder stated that invoking the grade would be contingent on having a good definition of academic dishonesty. Bradford asked if it would strictly be up to the instructor to decide if the grade should be invoked. Ledder stated that he did not feel that one person should make this decision. Stock agreed and stated that there should be some kind of formal review process to insure that academic dishonesty did occur. Beck pointed out that Dr. Hecker, Director of Student Judicial Affairs, has the authority to make decisions on student judicial decisions. She noted that Dr. Hecker could refer a case of academic dishonesty to the Judicial Board.

Stock noted that the professor should have to provide evidence to Dr. Hecker in order to invoke the grade. He noted that many instructors might be unwilling to invoke the grade because the type of plagiarism may not be that bad. Ledder pointed out that the evidence would need to be substantial in order to give the grade. Flowers stated that the other alternative is to give a failing grade in a course but not convert it to an XF grade which would indicate that the student failed the course due to academic dishonesty.

Alloway asked what would happen if all other requirements of a course were passed successfully by the student except for the one requirement where academic dishonesty was discovered. Stock suggested that the instructor might want to pass the student but might give it a stigma to indicate the student was caught plagiarizing or cheating. Ledder agreed and noted that there are many different kinds of courses with different requirements. He noted that the dishonesty might not be bad enough to fail a course but enough so the student should be penalized.

Bradford stated that the mechanism for giving the grade should not be so complicated or time consuming that it would discourage someone from reporting academic dishonesty. Flowers noted that in the past Judicial Affairs would save information if a case of academic dishonesty was reported. He pointed out that if it is not reported then a student could continue cheating without other instructors knowing it.

Alloway asked if the grade would be removed after two years if the student has no further incidents of academic dishonesty. Ledder suggested that if a student graduates with only one X on their record, they could appeal to have it removed. He pointed out that if a freshman received an X it could be removed in two years and the student could do it again as a senior. Alloway asked if keeping it on the record would affect the time table for students applying to graduate school.

Stock noted that this is a complicated issue to discuss. The Committee agreed to have further discussions about it with Dr. Hecker.

5.2 10 Reasons to Become a Husker

Moeller stated that she received an email message with an attachment consisting of a brochure designed to recruit students. The brochure/postcard lists 10 good reasons to become a Husker. An email correspondence is occurring among recipients of the email to provide input regarding this postcard/brochure mailing. Ledder stated that the piece should indicate more clearly that the subject is the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:25 p.m. The next meeting of the Executive Committee will be on Wednesday, September 6^th at 3:00 pm. The meeting will be held in 201 Canfield Administration Building. The minutes are respectfully submitted by Karen Griffin, Coordinator and Rick Alloway, Secretary.