1998-99 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA (No. 3)
UNIVERSITY SENATE MINUTES
FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
STUDENT SENATE MINUTES

UNIVERSITY SENATE MINUTES
FEBRUARY 18, 1999

The third meeting of the University Senate for 1998-99 was convened in 25 Law Building, Minneapolis campus, on Thursday, February 18, 1999, at 2:35 p.m. Coordinate campuses were linked by telephone. Checking or signing the roll as present were 122 voting faculty/academic professional members, 17 voting student members, 1 ex officio member, and 1 nonmember. President Mark Yudof presided.

I. MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 5, 1998
Action

The Senate minutes are available on the Web at the following URL:

http://www1.umn.edu/usenate/u_senate/98115sen.html

APPROVED

II. CONSTITUTION, BYLAWS, AND RULES AMENDMENTS
Changes to reflect Semester Conversion and Other Housekeeping Matters

[This Item will be considered concurrently with the parallel
Item II of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly docket.]

MOTION:

To approve the following amendments to the University Senate Constitution, Bylaws, and Rules (additions are underlined, deletions are struck out).

A. CONSTITUTION AMENDMENTS (Requires 132 affirmative votes for approval)

. . . .

ARTICLE III. UNIVERSITY SENATE

. . . .

4. Election of University Senate Members

a. . . . .

For the purpose of electing representatives to the Senate, the members of each faculty holding the rank of instructor (including research fellows) and above shall be eligible to vote, providing that they hold regular appointment as defined in the Faculty Tenure Code . Academic professionals eligible to serve in the Senate shall be eligible to vote.

b. . . . .

To be eligible for election to the University Senate, a student must have earned the required number of credits in residence at the University, as described below:

. . . .

e. Elections to the Senate shall be held no later than the 20th 30th day of May April. One third, or as near to one third as arithmetically possible, of the faculty/academic professional representatives of each institute, college, or school shall be elected each year by each institute, college, or school.

. . . .

5. Removal for Neglect of Meetings

a. A member of the University Senate shall be said to have neglected a meeting if the member does not attend and does not provide an alternate and does not notify the clerk, in writing, of the impending absence.

. . . .

6. University Senate and Student Senate Officers

a. The president of the University shall chair the University Senate. A vice chair shall be elected by the Senate at its first meeting in the spring last regularly scheduled meeting in the spring semester of the academic year from among its current members for a term of one year and shall be eligible for re-election. The president, with the consent of the Senate, shall appoint a clerk and a parliamentarian of the Senate (non-members of the Senate), whose duties shall be prescribed in the Senate Bylaws.

b. The officers of the Student Senate shall be a chair and a vice chair.

The chair and vice chair shall be elected at a special spring quarter semester session of the Student Senate attended only by student senators elected for the following year. . .

The duties of the vice chair are (1) to assume the duties of the chair in the event of an absence or incapacity of the chair; (2) to assume responsibilities delegated by the chair; (3) to submit to the Senate Office an annual budget request for the Student Senate and Student Consultative Committee, to be approved by the Student Senate during its fall quarter semester meeting; . . .

c. The president of the University shall chair the Faculty Senate. A vice chair shall be elected by the Faculty Senate in the spring at the last regularly scheduled meeting in the spring semester of the academic year for a term of one year and shall be eligible for re-election. . .

. . . .

8. University Senate Meetings--Call--Quorum

The University Senate shall hold regular meetings, at least once twice in each quarter semester of the academic year, at a time and place determined by the president. Special meetings of the University Senate and meetings of the Faculty or Student Senate may be held upon the call of the president or upon request of the appropriate Consultative Committee, or upon written request of ten members of the Senate in question.

At any regular or special meeting of any Senate, a majority of its membership shall constitute a quorum. Any member of the faculty and any student or academic professional eligible to vote for senators may be admitted to University Senate meetings and shall be entitled to speak at the discretion of the Senate. Only elected Senate members (or their designated alternates), Senate Consultative Committee members, and, in the case of a tie, the presiding officer, shall be entitled to vote. All members of the faculty who hold regular appointment as defined in the Faculty Tenure Code may be present at Faculty Senate meetings and shall be entitled to speak and to offer motions for Faculty Senate action. Only elected faculty members (or designated faculty alternates) shall be entitled to vote.

. . . .

B. BYLAWS AMENDMENTS (Requires 99 affirmative votes for approval)

ARTICLE I. UNIVERSITY SENATE MEMBERSHIP, ELECTIONS, AND OFFICERS

. . . .

2. Faculty/Academic Professional Elections

The elected representatives of the faculties shall be elected in accordance with the following procedures:

a. Each spring before May April 1, the clerk of the University Senate shall prepare for each faculty/academic professional unit listed in Section 1 of this Article a list of all persons in that unit who, as of March 31 1, are entitled to vote for Senate members, and shall send the appropriate number of copies thereof to the administrative head of each unit.

b. Between May April 1 and May 20 April 30, each unit listed in Section 1 of this Article shall conduct an election for Senate members and alternate members, if any. Each unit shall establish its own procedures for conducting its elections. The results of the elections shall be mailed to the clerk of the Senate not later than May 23 5.

c. The names of the Senate members and alternate members elected for the coming year shall be reported in the minutes of the last first regular meeting of the current year succeeding fall semester.

3. Student Elections

The elected representatives of the students shall be elected in accordance with the following procedures:

a. Between March February 1 and May April 20 of each year, each unit listed in Section 1 of this Article shall conduct an election for University Senate members and alternate members, if any. Each unit shall establish its own procedures, in accordance with the constitution, for conducting its elections and for determining the number of students who are qualified to vote and hold office. The results of the elections shall be mailed to the clerk of the Senate not later than May April 23.

b. The names of the Senate members and alternate members elected for the coming year shall be reported in the minutes of the last first regular meeting of the current year succeeding fall semester.

. . . .

ARTICLE II. RULES FOR COMMITTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATE

. . . .

6. Committees of the Senate shall have a policy of open meetings. Closed or executive sessions may be held only after approval by a two-thirds majority of the committee members present and voting and only when personnel matters are discussed, when quasi-judicial functions are carried out, or when closed sessions are required to protect the right of individuals. Under this rule, all regular sessions of the All-University Honors Committee shall be considered closed or executive sessions. As an exception to this rule, the Senate Consultative Committee, the Faculty Consultative Committee, and the Student Senate Consultative Committee are granted the right to close a portion or all of a given meeting, after approval by two-thirds majority of their respective members present. The chair of each committee shall keep a list of all topics discussed in its closed meetings and incorporate that list in its minutes. , make the list available upon request, and include the list in the annual report to the Senate. Meetings shall normally be listed in the Minnesota Daily.

. . . .

ARTICLE III. SENATE COMMITTEES

. . . .

2. COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES

Senate Committee on Committees

. . . .

Membership

. . . .

Of the undergraduate student members, 3 shall be elected from the Twin Cities campus, and one each from the Crookston, Duluth, and Morris campuses, all elected by the undergraduate Student Senate members from the respective campuses from among their number. The graduate/ professional student shall be elected by the graduate and professional Student Senate members from among their number. Elections shall be held during spring quarter semester. Terms of membership shall be for one year. Any student committee position that cannot be filled by October 31 1 will become a Student Senate at-large position and may be filled by the Student Senate Consultative Committee on an interim basis until the next general election.

. . . .

3. CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEES

. . . .

Faculty Consultative Committee

Membership

. . . .

- Each campus faculty shall submit to the clerk of the campus assembly a slate of twice as many candidates as are to be elected from its numbers. These candidates shall be nominated and certified as available according to procedures set forth by each campus assembly, and shall be announced in the campus assembly docket for the first regular meeting of the winter quarter spring semester. The clerk of the campus assembly shall distribute, by mail, election ballots and slates to all faculty members eligible to vote for members of the Senate and shall receive all returns. The election shall be held and completed during a period commencing February 15 1 and ending March 30 10. In case of a tie, the clerk shall choose the successful candidate by lot.

. . . .

Student Consultative Committee

Membership

The Student Consultative Committee shall be composed of:

- In 1998-99, and every other year thereafter, there shall be three undergraduate students and two graduate/professional students. In 1999-00, and every other year thereafter, there shall be four undergraduate students and one graduate/professional student.

- the chair and vice chair of the Student Senate

. . . .

7. FACULTY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE

. . . .

Duties and Responsibilities

. . . .

b. To recommend to the Faculty Senate additions to and modifications and interpretations of the Faculty Tenure Code .

. . . .

8. FINANCE AND PLANNING COMMITTEE

. . . .

Membership

The Finance and Planning Committee shall be composed of 8 faculty/academic professional members, 4 students, 2 civil service staff members, and ex officio representation as specified by vote of the Senate. Faculty/academic professional and student members shall be nominated by the Committee on Committees with the approval of the Senate. Civil service members shall be appointed by the president in consultation with the Civil Service Committee. All terms (except student terms) shall be for four years. (The representatives from the Facilities Management Subcommittee may be included in the preceding numbers in this paragraph, or may be appointed to the committee in addition to those individuals.)

. . . .

10. JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

. . . .

Duties and Responsibilities

a. The powers, duties, and procedures of the Judicial Committee are set forth in the Faculty Tenure Code and in the Judicial Committee's Rules of Procedure.

. . . .

C. RULES AMENDMENTS (Requires a simple majority for approval)

ARTICLE I. THE SENATE

. . . .

2. Meetings

Meetings of the University Senate shall be held at least quarterly twice each semester during the academic year to consider University-wide policies and issues...

. . . .

ARTICLE III. RULES FOR COMMITTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATE

. . . .

2. Ex Officio Members of Senate Committees

Ex officio members shall be appointed from each of the offices listed below and are non-voting positions unless otherwise noted.

. . . .

- Faculty Affairs--Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost; Office office of the Senior Vice President, Finance and Operations chief financial officer (one from Asset Management and one from Employee Benefits); Chair (or his/her designee) of the Equal Employment Opportunity for Women Committee; representative of the Retirees Association

. . . .

- Finance and Planning--Office office of the Senior Vice President, Finance and Operations chief financial officer (two representatives); Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost (two representatives, including one from the Office of Planning and Analysis

- Information Technologies--Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost; Office office of the Senior Vice President, Finance and Operations chief financial officer

. . . .

- Research--Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost; Office office of the Senior Vice President, Finance and Operations chief financial officer; Office of the Senior Vice President, Health Sciences; Dean, Graduate School; Director, Agricultural Experiment Stations

. . . .

- Social Concerns--Office of the Vice President, Student Development and Athletics; Office office of the Senior Vice President, Finance and Operations chief financial officer; Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action

. . . .

3. Terms of Membership, Chairing of Committees, and Removal of Members for neglect of Meetings

. . . .

Student appointments to committees of the Senate shall be made for terms of one year. Student members of committees must be registered for at least six credits for three of the four quarters each semester in the academic year (both summer sessions considered as one quarter). University College students must be registered for at least one course for three of the four quarters in each major term in the academic year. Graduate students who have completed course work and are not required to maintain continuous registration during interim periods of study in preparation for written and oral examinations must be certified by the individual department director of graduate studies.

. . . .

COMMENT:

At the request of the chair and vice chair of the Faculty Consultative Committee, the Senate staff went through the Senate and Assembly constitution, bylaws, and rules and identified all the changes that would be needed in order to accommodate the change to semesters. In addition, the Business and Rules Committee identified a number of additional housekeeping amendments that would clean up processes and bring the language up to date. It is believed that all of these changes are non-controversial, and each set should be voted on as a package. A separate vote will be taken on any of the proposed changes if any Senator requests it.

SARA EVANS, Chair
SENATE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE

DISCUSSION:

Professor Sara Evans, chair of the Senate Consultative Committee (SCC), said that these amendments are housekeeping in nature since they deal with the change from quarters to semesters.

The floor was then opened for questions.

A senator made a motion to amend the Bylaws, Article I, 3 a., to have student elections end on April 30 and the Senate Office notified by May 5.

This was accepted as a friendly amendment.

Professor Evans made a friendly amendment to add the Office of the Vice President for Human Resources as an ex officio member of the Faculty Affairs Committee.

A vote was taken and the motion received 119 in favor and 4 opposed. The changes to the Constitution failed to receive the required votes necessary for approval, while the changes to the Bylaws and Rules were approved.

CONSTITUTION AMENDMENTS NOT APPROVED
BYLAWS AND RULES AMENDMENTS APPROVED

III. SENATE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
Business and Rules Committee
Information

FOR INFORMATION:

The Business and Rules Committee shall consist of the Clerk of the Senate, the Vice Chair of the FCC, the Vice Chair of the Senate, the Chair of the Student Senate Consultative Committee, plus one additional faculty member and one additional student member to be approved by the Senate Consultative Committee. The Chair of SCC shall designate the chair of the Business and Rules Committee.

The Business and Rules Committee shall be responsible for drafting the docket of the University Senate. The faculty members of the Business and Rules Committee shall be responsible for drafting the docket of the Faculty Senate. The Twin Cities members of the Business and Rules Committee shall be responsible for drafting the docket of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly.

Staffing will be provided by the Senate Office.

COMMENT:

The Senate Consultative Committee, in the exercise of its responsibility for setting the docket of the University Senate, has created a Business and Rules Committee to handle the work of structuring the agenda, including recommendations on the placing and timing of agenda items.

SARA EVANS, Chair
SENATE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE

IV. SENATE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
Protocol on Committee Resolutions
Information

FOR INFORMATION:

All resolutions adopted by a Senate committee1 shall be forwarded to the Chair of the Senate Consultative Committee and the Senate office (for information) and to the Clerk of the Senate for distribution at the next Senate meeting for information.

"Resolution" means any statement of the committee, however identified, the wording of which has been agreed upon by the committee and upon which a vote (formal or otherwise) has been taken. A resolution is not a policy document; it expresses the sense of the committee on the matter at hand, it may or may not seek further action, and it does not require Senate approval nor does it require the approval of the Senate Consultative Committee to be distributed at a Senate meeting.

The reporting of a resolution adopted by a committee, and its distribution at a Senate meeting, will not imply Senate endorsement. It will provide information to the University and its governance system about actions being taken by its committees.

All resolutions to be reported shall be provided to the Senate office at least three working days before the Senate meeting at which the resolution will be distributed, and the resolutions will appear in Senate minutes labeled "for information only."

Adopted unanimously 12/3/98 by the Senate Consultative Committee

SARA EVANS, Chair
SENATE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE

V. SENATE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
Protocol for Senate Committee Involvement in Central Administrator Searches
Action

MOTION:

Amend the "Protocol for Senate Committee Involvement In Central Administrator Searches," as follows (additions are underlined, deletions are struck out; section titles following Roman Numerals are underlined in the original protocol):

Protocol for Senate Committee Involvement In Central Administrator Searches

I. Formation of Search Committees

Search committees are typically established to fill major University central administrative positions. The positions to which this section of the protocol is addressed include the following:2

Members of search committees for these positions, and their chairs, shall be chosen by the appointing authority after consultation with appropriate Senate committees, as follows.

The appointing authority shall ask the Faculty Consultative Committee and Student Senate Consultative Committee, or other appropriate committee (as set out in Section III of this protocol) to submit, by a specified date, names of the faculty and students who should serve on the search committee. The number of individuals nominated should be greater than the number who will serve on the search committee (perhaps twice as large), in order to allow for those who decline to serve and to provide the appointing authority some flexibility in the choices. The appointing authority will select the search committee from among those individuals or will explain to the Senate committee why the search committee membership deviated from the list of individuals nominated. The Faculty and Student Senate Consultative Committees may also identify the names of other individuals (who are not faculty or students) who the appointing authority may wish to consider selecting for search committee membership.

If the Senate committees are unable to provide names to the appointing authority by the date specified, he or she may proceed to appoint the search committee without Senate committee consultation. It is assumed the Senate committee would be given at least two weeks notice of the need for nominees to the search committee.

The Faculty Consultative Committee and the President or other administrator may agree that identification of faculty members for other administrator search committees is appropriate; this protocol should also be followed in such instances. The same is true for the Student Senate Consultative Committee.

II. Committee Responsibility for Interviews

The following Senate4 committees will be given the opportunity to participate in interviews of candidates for the positions noted, in accord with the provisions of Section III of this protocol. Interviews with committees will be scheduled irrespective of the scope of the search (full, limited, or non-competitive appointment); in the case of non-competitive appointments, the committee will be given the opportunity to interview the candidate before the position has been offered to the candidate. [NOTE: "before" is underlined in the original protocol; this is not a change.]

Faculty Consultative: President; all vice presidencies (executive, senior, and those without preceding adjective) and provosts, (including the General Counsel); Director of EEO; Chancellors; Directors of Athletics [Twin Cities campus]; others as the President may request

Student Senate Consultative: President; all vice presidencies (executive, senior, and those without preceding adjective) and provosts, (including the General Counsel); Chancellors; Directors of Athletics [Twin Cities campus]; others as the President may request

Computing and Info Systems
Information Technologies:		 Associate/assistant vice president/vice provost for computing and information systems; Chief Information Officer; University Librarian

Educational Policy: Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs Executive Vice President and Provost; provosts; Vice President for Undergraduate Education and Student Affairs Development and Athletics Vice President for Arts, Sciences, and Engineering

Faculty Affairs: Associate/assistant Vice president for human resources

Finance and Planning: Senior Vice President for Finance and Operations; whomever serves as chief financial officer of the University; associate/assistant vice presidents in Finance and Operations;

Intercollegiate Athletics: Director of Athletics

Judicial Committee: General Counsel

Library: University Librarian; Chief Information Officer

Research: Vice President for Research and Dean of the Graduate School; Assistant/associate vice president, ORTTA

Student Affairs: Vice President for Student Affairs Development and Athletics

Note: The Faculty Consultative Committee may draw on former FCC members to participate in the interviewing process. The Student Senate Consultative Committee may designate student representatives (other than members of the SSCC) to participate in the interview process.

III. Interviewing Protocol, Candidates for Administrative Positions with Senate Committees

It is understood that committee interviews, especially during the summer or when scheduled on short notice, may not involve a majority of committee members or consistent representation for several candidates. It is not the intent of this protocol that the hiring process be slowed or hindered by the possible unavailability of committee members. The committee interviews are scheduled to give committee members the opportunity [underlined in original] to participate in the search process; if they are unavailable or do not attend, the hiring process should nonetheless go forward.

  1. The committee will be supplied, in advance of the interview, copies of the position description and the curriculum vitae of each candidate.

  2. The committee will assemble and discuss, in advance of the arrival of the candidate, how it wishes to conduct the interview.

  3. The candidate will meet with the committee.

  4. The candidate will depart; the committee will then meet in closed session to discuss the candidate(s) and to decide upon its comments or recommendation to the appointing authority. These comments or recommendation, including any minority or dissenting views, will be submitted as quickly as possible to the appointing authority.

  5. The Faculty Consultative Committee and the President or other administrators may determine that faculty participation in interviews with candidates for other positions is desirable; FCC may delegate responsibility for participating in such interviews to other committees of the Senate or the Assembly. FCC may also designate additional committees or individual faculty members to participate in any interviews. The same is true for the Student Senate Consultative Committee.

  6. When more than one committee is appropriately involved in candidate interviews, the committees may schedule a joint session.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

The protocol was adopted by the Senate on February 18, 1993, as part of a consent package, without debate, and approved by the administration on April 26, 1993.

Revised Fall, 1999, to reflect changes in the University's administrative organization and titles of senior officers.

COMMENT:

The Senate Consultative Committee recommends changes in the search protocol to recognize changes in the structure of the administration. The protocol also now would permit flexibility to FCC and to SSCC in identifying individuals to participate in interviews, in that participants could include faculty and students who are not members of the committees.

SARA EVANS, Chair
SENATE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE

DISCUSSION:

Professor Sara Evans, chair of the Senate Consultative Committee (SCC), said that most of these changes are housekeeping in nature, while guaranteeing that the faculty voice is present in administrator searches.

The floor was then opened for questions.

With no questions, a vote was taken and the motion was approved.

APPROVED

VI. SENATE EDUCATIONAL POLICY COMMITTEE
Semester Conversion Standards
Action

MOTION:

To amend Section IA of the Semester Conversion Standards, as follows (new language is underlined).

Final examinations normally shall be two (clock) hours long; instructors may schedule longer examinations with the approval of their department. Instructors and departments must decide in advance of scheduling a course if the examination is to exceed two. Any examinations which exceed two hours must be noted in the class schedule, in order that students are informed and can accommodate the longer examination in their schedule of final examinations.

COMMENT:

The Senate Committee on Educational Policy (SCEP) recently received inquiries about the permissibility of conducting final examinations which exceed two hours in length. The Semester Conversion Standards, approved by the Senate in April, 1996, already contained a proviso permitting longer exams, with departmental approval.

In reflecting on the possibility of these longer exams, SCEP concluded that in fairness to students, such exams should be noted in the class schedule, and so recommends a change in the standards.

SCEP wishes the Senate to be informed that a revised version of the Semester Conversion Standards will be presented at one of the first Senate meetings of the 1999-2000 academic year. Inasmuch as the University will no longer be converting to semesters -- it already will have done so -- the standards will be reformatted as University academic standards. SCEP does not expect to introduce changes in the standards at that time.

JUDITH MARTIN, Chair
EDUCATIONAL POLICY COMMITTEE

DISCUSSION:

Professor Judith Martin, chair of the Educational Policy Committee (SCEP), said that departments would be permitted to hold a three hour final examination, provided that notification is marked in the class schedule.

The floor was opened for questions.

With no questions, a vote was taken and the motion was approved.

APPROVED

VII. SENATE EDUCATIONAL POLICY COMMITTEE
Policy on Reorganization
Action

MOTION:

To approve the Policy on Reorganization.

Policy on Reorganization

Preamble

Because the structure and organization of the University's academic units can have a profound effect on the financing and delivery of educational programs, the Senate adopts the following policy with respect to reorganization of academic units. In general, both the Senate and its committees should be involved in any organizational or structural decision affecting an academic unit made at the level of the campus or college or within or across colleges. The provisions of this policy calling for reporting information are also intended to provide the Senate a broad overview of the changes in academic programs that are occurring in the various colleges and campuses.

It is the position of the Senate that program changes within colleges should be subject to appropriate consultation with faculty and students from the beginning of planning for such changes. The primary focus of consultation should be the impact that the changes will have on the delivery of education to students. If actions leading to change are conducted in a reasonable manner, with consultation, the Senate has no interest in second-guessing academic decisions made by the colleges.

For the purposes of this policy, "academic unit" is defined as any unit which offers programs leading to a degree.

I. Reorganization of Campuses and Collegiate Units

1. The establishment of new collegiate units, the merger or elimination of existing collegiate units, or the addition to an existing campus of a major new mission with institutional, campus-wide, or intercollegiate impact or ramifications, shall be subject to review and discussion by the Senate.

2. The campus assembly of an affected campus shall review, and may make recommendations on, any proposal that is covered by section I(1) of this policy. Recommendations from a campus assembly shall be forwarded to the Committee on Educational Policy and the Committee on Finance and Planning, each of which shall conduct their own reviews, taking into account the recommendations, if any, from the campus assembly, and shall make recommendations to the Senate. These recommendations from the two committees may be made jointly or separately.

3. To ensure that this procedure does not delay significantly the implementation of proposed changes, it is understood that any such item received by the campus assembly and Senate committees no less than 60 days prior to a regularly scheduled meeting of the Senate will be referred to the Senate at that meeting.

II. Reorganization Within and Across Colleges and Campuses

1. Items for review and comment

2. Items for information

III. Administrative Reorganization

1. The organization and selection of officers is appropriately at the discretion of the appointing authority. The president should have considerable discretion in setting the structure of the central administration of the University and to select and direct the officers who report to him or her; other senior academic officers (e.g., vice presidents, provosts, chancellors, deans) should have similar discretion.

2. When the president contemplates (a) the establishment or elimination of senior administrative position(s) of high rank (e.g., vice president, provost, chancellor), or (b) a major reorganization of the central administration, he or she shall present a proposal to the Senate Consultative Committee (or separately to the Faculty Consultative Committee and Student Consultative Committee) for information and discussion. Approval of the committee(s) for such proposals is not required.

When a campus executive officer contemplates the establishment or elimination of senior administrative positions for a campus, the provost or chancellor shall present a proposal to the appropriate consultative body (assembly executive committee or its faculty-student equivalent) for information and discussion. Approval of that consultative body for the proposals is not required.

COMMENT:

The Senate Committee on Educational Policy has been reviewing existing policies for the last several years; this proposal represents one more presentation of a consolidated and clarified policy, this one relating to the reorganization of the University at various levels. This particular policy has been under review for almost two years, has been circulated to the deans for their comment, and has also been endorsed by the Senate Committee on Finance and Planning.

The following are EXISTING policies on reorganization (with dates of adoption in parentheses):

1) That SCEP will study proposals for transfer of programs from one unit to another, and report its findings to the Senate for recommendations to be made. (1956)

2) That the Senate may specify the educational impact of intercollege transfers in recommendations to the President; that the administration (and college administrations) will scrutinize proposed course or staff additions in light of total University functions. (1956)

3) Proposals for new college units must be made to SCEP, and if approved, also approved by the Senate, by the State Higher Ed Board, and by the Regents. (1970)

4) All matters of collegiate reorganization, including addition/deletion of majors, must be reported to SCEP for discussion; SCEP will forward it recommendation to the Senate; then on to the Regents (this was repealing the existing procedure of reporting such things through the Senior VP to the HECC prior to the Regents). Proposals would now go to SCEP and HECC simultaneously.

Creation of new colleges, and the addition/deletion of missions on existing campuses, must be recommended by the affected campus Assembly, and reported for information/discussion to the Senate through SCEP and SCRP.

SCC should be consulted about proposals for new campuses, and direct issues to appropriate other committees for discussion. (1971)

JUDITH MARTIN, Chair
EDUCATIONAL POLICY COMMITTEE

DISCUSSION:

Professor Judith Martin, chair of the Educational Policy Committee (SCEP), explained that the University has had policies in place that do not work together. In the last few years, SCEP has reviewed these policies and revised versions have been approved by the Senate. This policy is one of last to be revised. It states what should happen if certain changes occur at the collegiate level between colleges and the University administration. It clearly dictates the channels of discussion, who should be informed, and who should be able to review these processes. Some of the deans and the provost have asked for more time to review this, so the motion will be tabled.

TABLED

VIII. SENATE EDUCATIONAL POLICY COMMITTEE
Report and Recommendations of the Grading Subcommittee
Information and Action

Part I. For Information

Report and Recommendations
Subcommittee on Grading
Senate Committee on Educational Policy

The Senate Committee on Educational Policy appointed the Subcommittee on Grading during 1996-97 to investigate whether or not grade inflation had occurred and, if so, what steps should be taken as a result. The Subcommittee was unable to begin its work during 1996-97, but met a number of times during the later part of the 1997-98 academic year, gathered data on grade inflation from studies going back to 1955, and deliberated at length about what recommendations would best serve the University and its students.

Although conclusive data and research are difficult to come by, the Subcommittee is concerned that the dual factors of IMG (leading departments and faculty to seek to attract as many students as possible to courses) and reliance on teaching evaluations in promotion and tenure discussions could lead to increased pressures on faculty members to inflate grades. The Subcommittee recommends that SCEP carefully monitor the situation for the next several years.

The Subcommittee presents data with this report: graphs of average grade points by college over the last 35 years, including by course level for recent years and also including the University-wide trend (the thinner black line running from 1963 to 1997) (Appendix A), Grade Point Averages and Proportion of As by Designator and Level and average grades and percent A's awarded by designator and course level (Appendix B), and grade point averages of graduates for the period 1987-1995 (Appendix C).

The Subcommittee also examined data on the characteristics of incoming students; information about them is attached (Appendix D).

Finally, the Subcommittee has noted a study recently issued entitled Unraveling the Complexity of The Increase in College Grades From the Mid-1980s to the Mid 1990s. The authors of the study, national in scope and based on student self-reports, concluded that "the average grades . . . rose from 3.09 in the mid-1980s to 3.35 in the mid-1990s" and that "at the same time, there was a drop in the number of hours students devoted to school work." They reported that the beneficiaries of higher grades tended to be Whites and females, and that while the grades at research universities were lower than those of students at doctoral universities in the 1980s, they were higher in the 1990s. Student effort was positively related to grades awarded. The increase in grades at research universities was only partly due to "grade inflation," however; more was due to changes in institutional grading structures. The authors conclude also that "students in the 1990s who devoted greater quantity and quality of effort were not systematically disadvantaged by receiving the same or lower grades than students who put forth less effort. This suggests that grades still reliably distinguish among students in terms of academic effort and performance. Moreover, grade inflation per se has not . . . reached the level where grading practices have devalued student effort." 5

The Subcommittee makes the following observations about the data it assembled.

1. Fairly dramatic "grade inflation" occurred in the late 1960s and early 1970s in almost all units. Following that period, grades appear to have remained relatively stable, although markedly higher than before the period of inflation. Since the late 1980s/early 1990s, grades appear to have been rising in some colleges and fluctuating in others. Table 1 reports the results of a simple regression of GPA against a trend variable for the period 1985 through 1997. Results for all but three units showed a coefficient on the trend variable that was greater than zero. A large coefficient is indicative of a strong trend in GPA increases. Ten of the 15 coefficients were statistically significant at the .05 level, and 8 were significant at the .01 level. The Subcommittee notes that there may be legitimate reasons for the increases in some colleges. Colleges with trends of increases of 0.02 grade points per year or greater included the Carlson School of Management, General College, the School of Nursing, Dental Hygiene, the College of Liberal Arts, and the College of Education and Human Development. (For comparison, the trend from 1963 to 1970 for the campus as a whole was an increase of 0.0556 grade points per year.)

2. The grade point averages of graduating students appear to be on the rise. In the case of the four Twin Cities colleges with the largest number of graduates, all are graduating larger numbers of students with higher GPAs.

3. Recent data on incoming students show encouraging trends (Appendix D). The "Average ACT Composite Score" appears in general to have increased since 1992. The average high school rank for incoming students has dipped and then risen over the last 20 years, and risen since the 1980s. The percentage of Twin Cities new high school students in the top quartile of their high school class has fluctuated.

Other considerations could come into play. It appears that grades began to rise before the apparent increase in the academic preparedness of students. Some also wonder if University class requirements are being diluted, if students are working less at their class work, or if high schools are demanding less. In the last case, characteristics of incoming students would be unrelated to rising grades.

To the extent that course grades are based on performance, and to the extent that the quality of students at the University has been increasing since the imposition of higher preparation standards in the late 1980s, then we would expect that average grades would be increasing somewhat. Not only did the University increase preparation standards, in the mid-1990s it also increased entrance standards, so that incoming first-year students are expected to have better credentials from high school.

To the extent that course grades are norm-referenced, we would expect to see no or very little increase in the average grade awarded (because the "competition" for grades on a scale remains, no matter the credentials of the group), and that there would be only random annual fluctuations around a fairly steady mean.

Subcommittee members had varied views on whether inflation of grades is occurring at present. There is no doubt in our minds that it occurred 25-30 years ago, and there was no subsequent deflation; grades rose and stayed high. The question is whether they are now going even higher. The graphs depict considerable variation: in some colleges, there appears to be a noticeable trend upwards in grades, in others there is no such trend, and in others the direction of grades appears to vary with course level (including some downward trends). In some instances, it appears that the vast majority of students in the field are close to achieving academic perfection. In our view, the judgment about the meaning of the grades, and the trends, must be made by the faculty in the departments and colleges.

The Subcommittee is firmly convinced that faculties in the departments and colleges need to consider what the grading standards mean for their courses and programs and majors. The wide variations in the average grades awarded by the different disciplines makes it clear that either standards and expectations are quite different or, we suspect, little or no thought has been given by the collective faculty within fields or departments to what grades should mean.

In order to promote what we believe to be the appropriate judgment and discussion, both within the departments and across the University community, the Subcommittee makes the following recommendations:

II. For Action:

1. The Uniform Grading and Transcript Policy shall be amended to provide that every course syllabus shall include the grading standards set forth in the Uniform Grading Policy adopted by the University Senate (Appendix E) and the Senate policy on amount of academic work expected per credit (Appendix F).

2. Each college, department and program should discuss what the standards of the Uniform Grading Policy mean for its courses and programs, and what expectations the faculty have of students in their field of knowledge in order to achieve those standards. The Subcommittee believes that having such discussions would be a service especially for new faculty.

3. Data on the mean grade point average by designator and course level, on the percentage of As awarded by course level, and overall collegiate grade point averages should be prepared for grades awarded each Fall Semester. Data should be reported for all undergraduate students. Such a report can be seen in Appendix B.

--Cells in the tables with fewer than 10 grades should be suppressed, in order to protect the privacy of students, but the numbers should be included in the totals.

--The Office of Institutional Research and Reporting should see that required tables are produced each year and provide them to the chair of the Senate Committee on Educational Policy and to the office of the Executive Vice President and Provost.

4. The data tables and graphs required in (3) should be reported annually to the Senate. These data should also be provided to all deans and department heads, placed on a web site which is publicized.

COMMENT:

The genesis of the report of the Subcommittee is contained in the text of its report. The Senate Committee on Educational Policy and the Senate Consultative Committee have endorsed the report and ask that the Senate adopt its four recommendations.

JUDITH MARTIN, Chair
EDUCATIONAL POLICY COMMITTEE

DISCUSSION:

Professor Judith Martin, chair of the Educational Policy Committee (SCEP), said that this report is the result of a SCEP Subcommittee which has been working for over a year regarding the national discussion on the trends in grading over the last several decades. This discussion motivated the subcommittee to gather data from 1955 to make recommendations. The data showed that substantial grade inflation had occurred at the University between 1968 and 1973. The general pattern since that time is that not much grade inflation has occurred, even though there are difference between colleges. The Subcommittee has then proposed these 3 items for action.

The floor was then opened for discussion.

Q: The statement regarding what each grade standard signifies is available in the course schedule. Is it necessary that more bureaucratic information appear on every syllabus?

A: The Subcommittee is aware that while the information is available in the course schedule, many faculty do not use the full range of grades available. Therefore, the Subcommittee thought that if the grading standards appear on the syllabus everyone would be aware of the standards.

Q: Is this for the benefit of the faculty more than the students? Will this cause faculty to use the full range of grades available?

A: This will not do it, but perhaps the reporting mechanism will.

Q: If each department is supposed to talk about grading standards, then would two sections of a class, each with a separate professor, need to have similar standards?

A: The expectation is that there will be different standards in each class, but that there will departmental discussions about departmental expectations. This will not mandate quotas for departments.

Q: Are faculty expected to use the full range of grades available?

A: The idea of departmental discussions is an opportunity to debate what the standards mean.

A member of the subcommittee said that some faculty have included the grade standards on their syllabus and found that it had an impact on the way that faculty and students interacted over grades by significantly reducing grade complaints.

With no further questions, a vote was taken and the motion was approved.

APPROVED

IX. SENATE DISABILITIES ISSUES COMMITTEE
SENATE FINANCE AND PLANNING COMMITTEE
Paratransit Service Resolution
Action

MOTION:

To approve the following resolution regarding paratransit service.

RESOLUTION REGARDING PARATRANSIT SERVICE

WHEREAS the University of Minnesota is committed to making its campus accessible and user friendly to people with disabilities, and

WHEREAS suitable parking and transportation are important to facilitate interaction between the University and people with disabilities including students, faculty/staff, and visitors, and

WHEREAS parking on the Twin Cities campus has significantly worsened since the closure of the River Road Ramp, and

WHEREAS widespread and ongoing construction has limited mobility on campus, and

WHEREAS use of Paratransit Service by people with disabilities is growing as more and more people learn about this service, and

WHEREAS Paratransit Services users require service spanning the entire calendar year, and

WHEREAS no funds exist for Paratransit Service after the current academic year,

THEREFORE, be it resolved that:

The Senate recommends that the University of Minnesota allocate a minimum of $75,000 in recurring funds to fund this service for the full calendar year. This amount should be adjusted annually to reflect inflationary changes, to reflect any growth in Paratransit Service user needs and to reflect possible expansion of this service to other University of Minnesota campuses.

COMMENT:

Paratransit Service consists of a single van that provides safe, accessible transportation around the Twin Cities Campus to University students, faculty, staff and visitors with temporary or permanent disabilities. This service was funded by a one time grant from the state that began three years ago and expires at the end of the 1998-99 academic year. At present, the service operates between 7:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday when classes are in session.

JAMES CARREY, Chair
SENATE DISABILITIES ISSUES COMMITTEE

STEPHEN GUDEMAN, Chair
SENATE FINANCE AND PLANNING COMMITTEE

DISCUSSION:

Professor Sara Evans, chair of the Senate Consultative Committee (SCC), said that she was presenting this resolution on behalf of Professor James Carey, chair of the Disabilities Issues Committee. The resolution asks the University to continue to provide paratransit services once the state grant money has expired. The cost associated with this service is $75,000 per year.

The floor was then opened for questions.

Q: How will this effect the coordinate campuses in term of allocation of funds?

A: This specific resolution would not effect the coordinate campuses since this service is only for the Twin Cities. The spirit of this resolution would still apply to the coordinate campuses.

Q: How much money was allocated for this current year?

A: The same amount.

With no further questions, a vote was taken and the motion was approved.

APPROVED

X. SENATE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
SENATE RESEARCH COMMITTEE
Protection of Research Data Resolution
Action

MOTION:

To approve the following resolution on the protection of research data.

Resolution

Protection of Research Data

Whereas, the appropriations bill passed in October 1998 provides that the Director of the Office of Management and Budget amend OMB Circular A-110 to require Federal awarding agencies to ensure that all data produced under an award will be made available to the public through the procedures established under the Freedom of Information Act. The new language potentially makes all data in whatever stage of analysis available to anyone asking for it.

Resolved:

(1) The Senate is strongly opposed to this new provision because of its potential deleterious effects on researchers' abilities to carry out their research without external interference and its potential to compromise the confidentiality of human subjects in sponsored research studies,

(2) The Senate strongly urges that the University support current national efforts to have this language removed from the appropriations bill so that the original intent of the Freedom of Information Act can be kept intact,

(3) The Senate also strongly urges the Minnesota Congressional delegation to join in sponsoring legislation to repeal the new requirements, and

(4) The Senate also strongly urges that so long as the law remains in effect, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget adopt rules to eliminate or reduce the adverse impacts by protecting confidentiality, preventing harassment, and providing for full reimbursement of compliance costs.

COMMENT:

The University's Director of Federal Relations, Mr. Thomas Etten, brought to the attention of the Senate Research Committee and the Senate Consultative Committee language that had been adopted as federal law which could, in the view of the two committees, have a significantly damaging effect on the conduct of research. The resolution is largely self-explanatory, and the two committees urge its adoption.

SARA EVANS, Chair
SENATE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE

LEONARD KUHI, Chair
SENATE RESEARCH COMMITTEE

DISCUSSION:

Professor Len Kuhi, chair of the Research Committee, said that in the budget bill passed last October, language was included which changes the way in which the Freedom of Information Act would be applied. The new language will allow anyone to have access to raw data. The statute requires anyone with any type of data to make these data available to anyone asking for it. The Office of Management and Budget has proposed implementing regulations which interpret the statute narrowly, but those regulations do not sufficiently protect research data. This resolution allows the Senate to voice its strong opposition to the language in the budget bill.

The floor was then opened for questions.

With no questions, a vote was taken and the motion was approved.

APPROVED

XI. SENATE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
SENATE RESEARCH COMMITTEE
Animal Care and Usage Policy
Action

MOTION:

To approve the Animal Care and Usage Policy.

ANIMAL CARE AND USAGE
(ADOPTED: JANUARY 13, 1978)

OUTLINE

Statement of Policy

I. Purpose

II. Principles Governing the Use of Warm-blooded Animals

Procedures

I. Scope of Activities Covered

II. University Animal Care Committee

III. Executive Committee

IV. Director of Research Animal Resources

V. Inspection of Animal Facilities

VI. Animal Health

VII. Procedures Involving Potential Pain or Distress

VIII. Information Manuals

IX. Physical Facilities

X. Complaints

ARTICLE 1

STATEMENT OF POLICY

SECTION I. PURPOSE

Subd. 1. Objectives. In some fields of study, it is necessary to use laboratory animals to do effective teaching and research and to perform certain tests or service functions. It is essential that animals used in such activities receive humane treatment at all times; further, teachers, principal investigators, directors of service functions, and department or unit heads should be constantly aware that clean and comfortable animal facilities, proper feeding, and the humane treatment of animals are essential to the validity and efficacy of the results of the demonstration, experiment, or test involving animals. Regulations and inspection cannot assure the proper care and treatment of animals without acceptance of this principle by those who work and are responsible for animals.

The regents of the University of Minnesota thus reaffirm their established policy with regard to the use of warm-blooded animals in scientific research, teaching, and service functions:

(1) to assure proper procurement, care, housing, and health services for all warm-blooded animals used in research, teaching, and service functions;

(2) to provide the most appropriate animals for the diverse requirements of the varied activities of the University;

(3) to minimize pain and/or undue distress through selection of experimental procedures or administration of adequate anesthetic, analgesic, or tranquilizing drugs, except where such measures would interfere with the purpose of the experiment;

(4) to comply with all legal requirements established by the U.S. Department of Agriculture or other governmental agencies under authority of Public Laws 89-544 and 91-579 and any subsequent enactments; and to follow the guidelines in Section 4206 of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) "Guide for Grants and Contracts" and in the current edition of "Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals," published by the NIH; and

(5) to accomplish these aims with supporting activities that will promote the advancement of scientific research and educational goals.

Subd. 2. Guidelines. In order to accomplish these objectives, the University of Minnesota, through the Research Animal Resources of the Graduate School, will:

(1) establish a program for regular inspection of animal facilities to assure that acceptable standards are maintained with respect to cleanliness, feeding, cage size, and other environmental conditions;

(2) employ veterinary staff to make regular inspections of the health of the animals, provide medical consultation regarding prevention and treatment of animal diseases, advise regarding hazards and prevention of cross-infection between animals and people, contribute to training of animal care personnel, advise regarding use of pain suppressing drugs, establish procedures for euthanasia and control of parasites and pests, and advise in planning of new construction or remodeling of animal facilities; and

(3) establish a procedure for prior review of research and teaching protocols to assure that adequate anesthetics, analgesics, or tranquilizers are administered to prevent pain and distress, or authorize exceptions where use of such drugs would interfere with the purpose of the experiment or teaching activity.

Use existing procedures under B.A. Forms 22 and 23 at the time of the research grant application to assure that adequate animal facilities (e.g., cages, space, etc.) are available or will be available.

SECTION II. PRINCIPLES GOVERNING THE USE OF WARM-BLOODED ANIMALS

Subd. 1. Risk of Pain. Experimentation and teaching involving live warm-blooded animals should be performed by or under the immediate supervision of a qualified individual. Warm-blooded animals should not be subjected to uses involving serious risk of pain, discomfort, injury, or death unless there is a prior expectation that the anticipated results would justify the use to a peer group of reasonable and prudent investigators.

Subd. 2. Supervision of Care. The housing, care, and feeding of laboratory animals for research projects or for the teaching or service functions of a department or similar administrative unit must be supervised by a qualified veterinarian or other individual competent in such matters.

Subd. 3. Avoid Suffering. Experimentation and teaching involving warm-blooded animals should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary suffering.

Subd. 4. Minimize Discomfort. Care of subject animals subsequent to an experiment should be such as to minimize discomfort to animals.

Subd. 5. Euthanasia. If it is necessary to kill an animal, this should be done in such a way as to minimize pain and ensure prompt death, in accordance with procedures approved by the director of Research Animal Resources. No animal assumed to be dead will be discarded until death has been ascertained.

Subd. 6. Pain Relief. Anesthetics, analgesics, and tranquilizers used to alleviate pain or discomfort will be evaluated with respect to effectiveness and dosage level by the veterinarians of Research Animal Resources in consultation with appropriate specialists as the need arises.

Subd. 7. Pain to Conscious Animals. Before procedures causing pain or discomfort to conscious animals are initiated, they must be reviewed and approved by the director or another veterinarian of the Research Animal Resources. Questionable cases will be referred to appropriate specialists and/or the University Animal Care Committee.

Subd. 8. Appeals. If a faculty member is unable to reach agreement with the director of Research Animal Resources on procedures causing pain to conscious animals or any other aspect of animal care and usage covered by this statement, the matter may be appealed by either person to the University Animal Care Committee, and ultimately the senior vice president for academic affairs.

ARTICLE 2

PROCEDURES

SECTION I. SCOPE OF ACTIVITIES.

Subd. 1. Activities Covered. This statement of policy and procedures for animal care and usage applies to all species of mammals and birds used in research, teaching, and service functions at the University of Minnesota or under its auspices when:

(1) the procedures are performed on premises owned, leased, or rented by the University;

(2) the procedures involve animals, facilities, or equipment owned by the University; or

(3) the activity is financed by the University or by funds administered by the University.

Subd. 2. Activities Not Covered. Research conducted by University faculty or staff outside of the state at another institution is not covered by this statement.

SECTION II. UNIVERSITY ANIMAL CARE COMMITTEE.

Subd. 1. Establishment. The University Animal Care Committee shall be a University committee reporting to the Senate Committee on Research as provided in Article IV of the constitution of the University Senate adopted January 13, 1978.

Subd. 2. Membership. It shall consist of not more than 10 members, including two representatives of the Academic Health Center and one each from the College of Veterinary Medicine; College of Agriculture, Food, and Health Sciences; College of Liberal Arts; College of Biological Sciences; Department of Environmental Health and Safety; Duluth campus; Morris campus; and a student representative. Insofar as feasible, there should be broad representation of the various types of research that utilize animals and the basic scientific areas that are relevant for animal care and usage. The committee will be encouraged to seek the consultation and advice of researchers in other units utilizing animals as well as specialists in areas relevant to animal care and usage. The director of Research Animal Resources shall be a nonvoting member of the committee.

Subd. 3. Terms of Service. Members shall be appointed in accordance with the University Senate procedures for staggered terms of three years.

Subd. 4. Chair. The chair shall be appointed in accordance with University Senate procedures.

Subd. 5. Quarterly Meetings. The committee shall meet at least quarterly.

Subd. 6. Duties and Responsibilities. The duties and responsibilities of the committee shall include:

(1) collaboration with the director of Research Animal Resources in formulation of recommendations to the senior vice president for academic affairs regarding University policies and standards governing procurement, care, and use of animals employed in research, teaching, and service functions;

(2) evaluation of the animal care program at regular intervals as required by Section 4206 of the NIH "Guide for Grants and Contracts";

(3) assistance to the director of Research Animal Resources in education of faculty in the need for good animal care, in the kinds of services offered by the director and the Research Animal Resources staff, and in the research benefits attaching to use of quality animals;

(4) consultation with the director of Research Animal Resources regarding professional personnel needs of that unit;

(5) mediation and review of appeals regarding the program of inspection of animal facilities or decisions of the director of Research Animal Resources regarding procedures involving pain or distress, with recommendations to the senior vice president for academic affairs for final decision in cases that cannot be resolved by mediation; and

(6) submission of reports to the senate through the Senate Committee on Research in accordance with the Rules and Organizational Procedures of the Senate, U1.303.5.

SECTION III. EXECUTIVE SUBCOMMITTEE.

Subd. 1. Membership. The executive subcommittee consists of the chairperson and two other members appointed by the chairperson. If any members of the executive subcommittee are unavailable at a time when a decision must be made, the chairperson may appoint temporary members.

Subd. 2. Purpose. The function of the executive subcommittee is to act for the University Animal Care Committee when, in the judgment of the chairperson, a decision must be made that does not allow time for full committee consideration. Such actions shall be reported to the full committee no later than the next meeting.

SECTION IV. DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH ANIMAL RESOURCES

Subd. 1. Qualifications. The director of Research Animal Resources will be a veterinarian with experience in laboratory animal medicine and scientific investigation. The director will have an administrative appointment in the Graduate School and an academic appointment in the department of the University most appropriately related to the director’s training or anticipated long-term interest.

Subd. 2. Authority. The director of Research Animal Resources will have full responsibility and authority for the activities of Research Animal Resources in implementing the policies of the University, the directives of the senior vice president for academic affairs, state and federal laws, and administrative regulations of government agencies.

Subd. 3. Accountability. The director of Research Animal Resources will be accountable to the office of the senior vice president for academic affairs.

Subd. 4. Duties and Responsibilities. The duties and responsibilities of the director of Research Animal Resources will include:

(1) collaboration with the University Animal Care Committee in formulation of recommendations to the senior vice president for academic affairs regarding University policies and standards governing procurement, care, and use of animals;

(2) development and implementation of programs for disease prevention, euthanasia, parasite and pest control, and treatment of diseased animals; liaison with specialists and the diagnostic laboratory in the College of Veterinary Medicine;

(3) consultation regarding species selection and animal procurement;

(4) supervision of a program for regular inspection of animal facilities to ensure compliance with standards of government agencies and the University;

(5) consultation with investigators and instructors regarding anesthetics, analgesics, and tranquilizers, and evaluation of the adequacy of each in procedures potentially involving pain or distress;

(6) review of procedures for research, teaching, and service functions involving pain or distress in conscious animals, with referral to specialists and/or the University Animal Care Committee, when necessary;

(7) advice in the planning and signatory approval of new animal care facilities and in the remodeling of existing animal care facilities;

(8) preparation of a manual of procedures for the guidance of animal users and caretakers;

(9) direction of a training program for animal technicians; and

(10) maintenance of liaison with regulatory agencies.

Subd. 5. Staff. The director of Research Animal Resources will be assisted by additional veterinary personnel. Veterinarians employed to provide part-time services at facilities outside the Twin Cities will be under the director’s general supervision, and the selection and continued employment of such personnel must be acceptable to the director.

SECTION V. INSPECTION OF ANIMAL FACILITIES.

Subd. 1. Unannounced Inspections. The director of Research Animal Resources or an appointed representative will make unannounced inspections of animal facilities.

Subd. 2. Purpose of Inspection. The purpose of the inspection program is to ensure that all animal facilities are in compliance with the requirements of federal and state laws, the animal care regulations of federal agencies, and the standards of the University. The inspections will be concerned with cleanliness, feeding, watering, cage size, the number and kind of animals in a given room, storage of supplies and waste, temperature, humidity, ventilation, lighting, and other conditions that may be included in the requirements of government agencies or University standards.

Subd. 3. Room Requirements. When animals are to be moved into a room previously used for another purpose, the room must conform to the requirements for the species for which the room will be used, and the director of Research Animal Resources must be notified before the animals are moved.

Subd. 4. Responsible for Care. Ultimate responsibility for the care of animals belonging to research projects rests with the principal investigator in all cases, even when direct supervision of the care has been delegated to another person or University service. In their administrative capacity, department chairpersons are similarly responsible for care of animals used in teaching.

Subd. 5. Reports. Reports of inspections will be sent to relevant investigators, department chairpersons, and deans.

Subd. 6. Noncompliance. Cases of repeated noncompliance will be reported by the director of Research Animal Resources to deans or other appropriate executive officers and, if not corrected, to the University Animal Care Committee and the Office of the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs. In such cases, closure of the deficient animal facility may be recommended to the senior vice president for academic affairs.

Subd. 7. Appeals. Appeals regarding any aspect of the program of inspection of animal facilities may be made to the director of Research Animal Resources, then to the University Animal Care Committee. Appeals not resolved by mediation of the University Animal Care Committee will be forwarded with the committee’s recommendations to the senior vice president for academic affairs for final decision.

SECTION VI. ANIMAL HEALTH.

Subd. 1. Observation of Animals. All animals must be observed daily by the animal technician or the principal investigator, or by the faculty member responsible for the specific animals involved.

Subd. 2. Treatment of Sick Animals. Sick animals shall be given prompt medical treatment appropriate for the condition or promptly and humanely destroyed, except that this section shall not be construed as requiring the premature abandonment of research involving induced medical problems.

Subd. 3. Periodic Inspections. Veterinarians on the staff of the Research Animal Resources Unit or providing part-time services to the branch campuses or experiment stations will make periodic inspections of the state of health of animals in all facilities.

Subd. 4. Consultations. Consultation regarding animal health problems will be available on all campuses and experiment stations from Research Animal Resources or local veterinarians hired on a part-time basis. Research Animal Resources will serve as liaison with the College of Veterinary Medicine to arrange for consultation with specialists and diagnostic laboratory services.

Acceptable existing arrangement for such consultation, especially for large animals, are not abrogated by the provisions in this subdivision.

SECTION VII. PROCEDURES INVOLVING POTENTIAL PAIN OR DISTRESS.

Subd. 1. Evaluation of Pain-Suppressing Drugs and Procedures. The adequacy of the choice and dose levels of anesthetics, analgesics, and tranquilizers used to prevent pain or distress in animals used for research, teaching, and service functions will be evaluated by the director of Research Animal Resources or veterinarians on the staff of that unit in consultation with appropriate specialists, when the need arises. As required by state and federal laws and regulations, information will be collected on current practices in the usage of such drugs at the University and a list of standard minimum dosages by body weight, species, and route of administration will be compiled to provide general authorization for the majority of applications. Cases not covered by the standard list, and other methods for prevention of pain, such as cervical dislocation, decortication, or decerebration will be evaluated on a individual basis.

Subd. 2. Pain and Distress in Conscious Animals. Procedures for research, teaching, and service functions involving pain or distress in conscious animals will be reviewed by the director of Research Animal Resources or other veterinarians in Research Animal Resources. Approval must be obtained before initiation of painful or distressful procedures. The procedures will be approved only if the use of pain-suppressing drugs or less painful or distressful procedures would interfere with the purpose of the research, teaching, and service functions. Difficult cases may be referred to the University Animal Care Committee by the director of Research Animal Resources. If approval of a procedure causing pain or discomfort to conscious animals is withheld by the director of Research Animal Resources, the faculty member has the right to appeal in person to the University Animal Care Committee, hear all arguments against the procedure, present arguments favoring the procedure, and obtain a decision from the committee. Appeals not resolved by mediation of the committee will be forwarded with the committee’s recommendation to the senior vice president for academic affairs.

SECTION VIII. INFORMATION MANUALS.

Manuals containing the following information will be prepared by the director of Research Animal Resources in consultation with specialists and regulatory agencies:

(1) acceptable methods of euthanasia;

(2) standards for cage sizes;

(3) standards for animal care procedures and cleanliness;

(4) standard dose levels for commonly used anesthetics, analgesics, and tranquilizers by body weight and route of administration for commonly used species;

(5) the currently applicable statement of Policy and Procedures for Animal Care and Usage at the University of Minnesota; and

(6) such other information as the veterinary staff may desire.

SECTION IX. PHYSICAL FACILITIES.

Subd. 1. Responsibilities of DEHS. The Department of Environmental Health and Safety (DEHS) will provide surveillance and consultation for animal research that involves the use of radioactive materials, biohazardous (viable) agents, chemical carcinogens, and other hazardous chemical agents. The DEHS will also give attention to matters related to general sanitation and safety, illumination, ventilation, insect and rodent control, water supplies, and handling of waste from animal care facilities. Results of surveys and/or determination regarding animal care facilities will be reported to the director of Research Animal Resources and the appropriate principal investigators and/or department chairpersons and deans. Responsibility for compliance will rest with either the Department of Environmental Health and Safety or the director of Research Animal Resources, as appropriately defined in other portions of this policy statement and the policies pertaining to the Department of Environmental Health and Safety (e.g., the "Biohazards Control and Procedures Manual" and the "Manual of Policies and Procedures for Radiation Protection").

Subd. 2. Responsibilities of the Director. The director of Research Animal Resources will maintain a file on all animal facilities to be used for reference in decisions regarding renovation or changes in the function to be served by the facility.

Subd. 3. New Construction Design Approval. When new construction or remodeling includes animal facilities, the director of Research Animal Resources must approve the design specifications to assure that applicable minimum standards are being met.

SECTION X. COMPLAINTS.

Complaints regarding any aspect of animal care or usage should be addressed to the director of Research Animal Resources. If the complainer and the director are unable to reach a mutually satisfactory agreement, either may refer the matter to the University Animal Care Committee.

SECTION I. DEFINITIONS.

Subd. 1. Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee. "Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee" or "IACUC" shall mean the committee established by the president to perform the review of University protocols, animal facilities, and uses of animals.

Subd. 2. Institutional Official. "Institutional official" means the individual designated by the president to monitor the care and use of animals in University activities.

SECTION II. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS AND POLICIES.

Subd. 1. Applicable State and Federal Laws. All University activities involving animals must be in accordance with state and federal laws and regulations applicable to the care and use of animals. These laws include, but are not limited to, the Animal Welfare Act; federal regulations implementing the Animal Welfare Act; the Health Research Extension Act of 1985; the Public Health Services Policy on the Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals; and the provisions and principles set forth in the most recent editions of the Guide for Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, published by the National Academy of Sciences, and the Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals.

Subd. 2. Applicable University Policies and Procedures. All University activities involving animals must be in compliance with all applicable University policies and procedures.

SECTION III. OBLIGATIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATION AND UNIVERSITY MEMBERS.

Subd. 1. Administrative Support. It is the responsibility of the president, the institutional official, the IACUC, and the Research Animal Resources to support and protect the officially sanctioned use of animals in research, teaching, and service at the University.

Subd. 2. Administrative Procedures. The president, in consultation with the Senate Research Committee, shall adopt appropriate administrative policies and procedures to implement this policy.

Subd. 3. University Members. University faculty, staff, or students involved in the care and use of animals shall:

(1) be appropriately qualified or supervised for conducting procedures on animals;

(2) receive and participate in adequate in-service training including the proper and humane care and use of laboratory animals;

(3) receive periodic certification of training; and

(4) abide by and carry out the decisions of the IACUC.

SECTION IV. INSTITUTIONAL OFFICIAL.

Subd. 1. Appointment of the Institutional Official. The president shall appoint an institutional official to oversee all aspects of the University’s animal care and use programs.

Subd. 2. Authorities of the Institutional Official. The president shall delegate the authorities necessary to carry out the responsibilities identified in subdivision 3 to the institutional official.

Subd. 3. Responsibilities of the Institutional Official. The institutional official shall:

(1) ensure compliance with applicable laws and policies identified in section II;

(2) appoint IACUC members, in consultation with the administrative staff of the IACUC;

(3) develop administrative policies and procedures for review and possible adoption by the president which are necessary to implement this policy;

(4) implement this policy with the assistance of the president, the Research Animal Resources, and the IACUC;

(5) perform all necessary reporting requirements; and

(6) report to the appropriate federal governmental and University officials any serious or continuing noncompliance with the laws and policies identified in section II and any corrective action taken.

SECTION V. ANIMAL CARE AND USE COMMITTEE.

Subd. 1. Establishment of Animal Care and Use Committee. The president shall establish and maintain an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee.

Subd. 2. Membership. The IACUC shall consist of at least five members with diverse backgrounds and expertise, one of whom comes from a community external to the University.

Subd. 3. Responsibilities. The IACUC shall:

(1) review protocols for the use of animals;

(2) conduct biannual inspections of facilities where animals are being used;

(3) review and make a determination on all proposed activities involving animals prior to the start of the activity;

(4) conduct continuing review of previously approved ongoing activities at least once per year;

(5) review and investigate complaints of noncompliance;

(6) report any serious or continuing noncompliance with federal, state, or University laws, policies or procedures to the institutional official; and

(7) report any corrective actions taken in response to noncompliance to the institutional official.

Subd. 4. Determinations. The IACUC shall review and approve, require modifications in, or withhold approval of all University activities involving animals in accordance with University policies and procedures.

Subd. 5. Authorities. The IACUC has the authority to:

(1) inspect all facilities used for the care and research of animals;

(2) review and evaluate the University’s animal care and use programs;

(3) obtain records and other relevant information related to the use of animals;

(4) take any actions, including suspending an activity, that are in its judgment necessary to ensure compliance with applicable federal, state, or University policies and procedures.

Subd. 6. Principles of Animal Research. In performing its duties, the IACUC shall adhere to the following recognized principles:

(1) procedures involving animals will be designed and performed with due consideration of their relevance to:

(i) human or animal health,

(ii) the advancement of knowledge, or

(iii) the good of society; and

(2) the proper use of animals requires the avoidance or minimization of discomfort, distress and pain consistent with sound research design.

SECTION VI. VETERINARY SERVICES AND SUPPORT.

Subd. 1. Requirement for Veterinary Services and Support. The president shall establish and maintain a specific program to provide veterinary services and support as defined in subdivision 2 for animals used in University activities. The president may establish and maintain Research Animal Resources to fulfill this function.

Subd. 2. Services and Support Provided. The veterinary services and support provided shall include:

(1) quality husbandry programs,

(2) quality veterinary medical services; and

(3) expert consultation on the selection, care, and use of University research and educational animals.

COMMENT:

This is a new policy, replacing the one adopted in 1978, and it has been reviewed and approved by the Senate Research Committee and the Senate Consultative Committee. It is very important, from the perspective of grants management, that the new policy by adopted, and the University Senate is urged to vote in favor of it.

SARA EVANS, Chair
SENATE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE

LEONARD KUHI, Chair
SENATE RESEARCH COMMITTEE

DISCUSSION:

Professor Len Kuhi, chair of the Research Committee, said that the University has received the designation of exceptional status by the NIH, which actually means the opposite of what it sounds like. One of the reasons for this status is that the University's policies concerning research, in the past, have been very loose and very fuzzy. Exceptional status has led to a concerted effort to revise the entire grants management process and a number of other policies, as well as creating new policies where needed. This policy tightens up the care and management of animal research on campus. It states who has the authority to appoint an institutional official who will manage and monitor the care of animals on campus and requires that all people involved in animal research be trained. It also brings University policy into compliance with federal and state law.

The floor was then opened for questions.

With no questions, a vote was taken and the motion was approved.

APPROVED

XII. PRESIDENT'S REPORT

President Mark Yudof addressed the issue of the proposed Rochester campus by saying that it would be a non-resident campus which would have classes for junior, senior, graduate, and professional levels. The hope is that there would be some joint programs with Mayo. The proposal requires the approval of both the University and MnSCU governing boards, but there has been some opposition from a few MnSCU campuses. The University will use the next month to have discussions with these institutions, particularly the campus at Mankato, to make sure that they are comfortable with these arrangement and that the University will not replicate strong programs already offered there.

Second, relations with Governor Ventura are going well. In terms of the budget, the Governor has recommended 80% of the University's request, which includes $122 million in operating expenses and an additional $39 million from the tobacco settlement to be used for AHC education and research. The latter proposal eliminates competition between the AHC and other University needs. The proposed funds cover all 5 University initiatives, as well as fully funding 100 new faculty positions. The Legislature has also been receptive to the University's request, in particular by asking a student to testify who was enrolled in President Yudof's first-year seminar this past fall.

XIII. QUESTIONS TO THE PRESIDENT

NONE


XIV. SENATE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE REPORT

Professor Sara Evans, chair of the Senate Consultative Committee (SCC), said that she had recently given her quarterly report to the Regents. In the Fall, she spoke about the tradition of shared governance and why it is so important for faculty. This report was more concrete, with examples of what SCC has been doing. This included the grants management project, a series of discussions on the intellectual future of the University, and a series of workshops on shared governance. This last piece is for deans, administrators, department heads, and faculty, and will start in the AHC this spring. Lastly, SCC has been involved in conversations regarding the proposed Rochester campus.

XV. TRIBUTE TO DECEASED MEMBERS OF THE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY

FACULTY

John D. Allison
Associate Professor
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
1930-1998

Jack Allison, professor of Physical Therapy at the University of Minnesota, died on November 29 after a six-month battle with lung cancer at the age of 68. He is survived by his wife Eadie, daughters Betsy and Sue, son John, brother Donald, and 6 grandchildren.

He was born in Michigan City, Indiana. He attended Purdue University from 1949-1952. He received his baccalaureate degree in Physical Therapy from the University of Minnesota in 1954. He served as a physical therapist in the U.S. Army at Valley Forge Hospital from 1954-1955 and at the University of Minnesota Hospital from 1956-1957. His teaching career in the Program in Physical Therapy at the University of Minnesota extended from 1957-1993. He was an accomplished educator endeared by all students. In 1992, he received the prestigious Horace T. Morse - University of Minnesota Alumni Association Award for his outstanding teaching talent. He was an inventor of two patents on devices related to supporting the head during physical therapy and measuring head mobility. He served on numerous committees and in elected positions at both the state and national levels of the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA). In 1981, he received the APTA - Minnesota Chapter Outstanding Service Award. He served as an on-site evaluator for accreditation of physical therapy educational programs nationally. He was a renowned speaker on health care insurance and he served as a consultant for Blue Cross/Blue Shield.

He was a community leader. He loved the north country and assisted others in their enjoyment of nature by devoting much time to Camp du Nord of the YMCA, including chairing the camp's Board of Directors. Above his many professional accomplishments, he will be remembered most by the 1000 physical therapy students whom he taught in his career for his genuine friendliness, concern and dignity shown to all.

James M. Beaton
Professor
Industrial Relations
1939-1999

Employer Education Services (EES) and the Industrial Relations Center (IRC) of the Carlson School of Management have lost a wise voice and good friend and counselor in Jim Beaton. He tirelessly reminded all of us of our obligation to contribute to the improvement of industrial peace and the betterment of society. Jim's background and wide circle of friends and acquaintances gave him a unique and valued perspective. We will miss his humor, his loyalty, and his encouragement. His wisdom and courage will long be remembered.

Robert Carter
Professor
Medicine
1923-1998

Robert Eldred Carter, M.D., the founding dean of the University of Minnesota, Duluth, School of Medicine, passed away on Thursday, December 31, 1998 from complications of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in his retirement home of Corrales, New Mexico.

Dr. Carter was born on July 14, 1923 in Minneapolis, MN. He graduated from Los Alamos Ranch School in New Mexico and then went on to the University of Minnesota to receive his Bachelor of Science degree in 1945, his Bachelor of Medicine degree in 1946 and his Doctor of Medicine degree in 1948. From there Dr. Carter returned to Los Alamos to conduct medical research for the Manhattan Project . He then went on to complete his residency in Pediatrics and Hematology at the University of Chicago, IL. In 1957, Dr. Carter was promoted to Assistant Professor of Pediatrics at the University of Chicago until 1959 when he was appointed Assistant Professor at the University of Iowa. He then was promoted and held the position of Associate Professor from 1961 - 1965, at which time he became a full Professor. In 1962, he was appointed Assistant Dean of the School of Medicine, University of Iowa - a position that he held until 1966 when he was appointed Associate Dean. In 1967, Dr. Carter went on to the University of Mississippi where he was a Professor in the Department of Pediatrics and also the Dean of the School of Medicine and Director of the University Medical Center in Jackson, Mississippi. Dr. Carter then returned to Minnesota where he was a Professor at the Department of Biology at the University of Minnesota, Duluth. He then went on to be the founding dean of the School of Medicine. He held this position until 1974. Dr. Carter was the recipient of numerous medical awards and honors, including the Markle Foundation Scholarship in Medical Sciences.

He is survived by his wife, Lotta "Chris" Ahrens Carter; a brother, Theodore F. Carter; a daughter, Ann C. Carter, J.D.; and sons Jonathan Carter, M.D. and David Carter, D.M.A..

Because of his long career in medical education, Dr. Carter influenced the lives of many physicians in many states. He is remembered as a distinguished pediatrician, medical educator, artist, philosopher, hiker and loving father and grandfather.

To honor Dr. Carter, the University of Minnesota, Duluth, School of Medicine, has set up the Robert E. Carter Memorial Scholarship Fund.

Dongsae Cho
Assistant Professor
Finance and Insurance
1945-1998

Bryce L. Crawford
Professor
Chemistry
1914-1998

Huldah W. Curl
Assistant Professor
Media Resources
1925-1998

Huldah Curl, assistant professor emeritus, died on December 17, 1998. Professor Curl began her career in 1964 as director of Continuing Education in Art under joint appointment with the Extension Service and the General Extension Division (later to become Continuing Education and Extension and now University College). In this new position, she established a statewide program to extend the art resources of the University to Minnesota residents, working with various groups of artists and institutions to present highly successful projects such as series of traveling exhibitions; short courses and workshops in painting; regional exhibitions of amateur art; the Town and Country Arts Show (which ran for many years on the St. Paul Campus); the Southwest Minnesota Art Exhibition; and many other popular and well-received programs and exhibits. Upon retiring from Extension in 1985, she continued briefly with Continuing Education and Extension working at KUOM Radio. Professor Curl held a BA degree in art from Bennington College, Bennington, Vermont, and studied art and architecture at the University of Minnesota. Before joining the University, she was curator of the St. Paul Art Center for one year, after 12 years on staff of the Walker Art Center in Minneapolis, serving in various capacities, including registrar and assistant director of the sales and rental program. A private funeral service was held in December.

Mary D. Hanley
Assistant Professor
Bio-Medical Library
1922-1998

Paul J. Montgomery
Assistant Professor
Rhetoric
1933-1998

With deep regret we announce the death of our colleague Paul Montgomery, 65, of a heart attack on December 20. Paul was an Assistant Professor in the Department of Rhetoric since Fall, 1992, when he joined our department from the Waseca campus. At Waseca he won an Outstanding Teacher award.

Paul taught several courses, including Humanities: 20th Century Culture; Humanities: The Literature of Social Reflection; and Public Speaking. He took great delight in introducing students to the world of art, a subject that was very important to him. He was a movie buff, he loved the theater, and he was an expert on Broadway musicals. Though he rarely talked about it, he gave unselfishly of his time to the homeless men at St. Stephen's Shelter.

He was genial, affable, and brought a pointed humor to his conversations and to his teaching. "You are allowed," he would tell his students, "no more than five exclamation points ... in your life." Anyone who takes that advice seriously, and considers its implications, is certain to be a better writer.

Paul Montgomery was a humanizing and liberalizing element among us--gone too soon.

He is survived by his wife Marilyn and his son Paul.

David Parmelee
Professor
Bell Museum
1924-1998

The University Senate mourns the loss of Professor Emeritus David Freeland Parmelee on December 18, 1998. Dr. Parmelee served the University of Minnesota from 1970 until his retirement in 1986. He will be remembered for his outstanding leadership and contributions to the Lake Itasca Forestry and Biological Station where he was Director from 1970 until 1986. He then became Curator of Ornithology at the Bell Museum of Natural History, where he conducted research on Arctic and Antarctic birds and taught until his retirement in 1992.

Dr. Parmelee's concern for students was demonstrated in his many years as Advisor to the Biology Colloquium, helping that student-led program grow from a small group of a dozen students to today's program that attracts nearly 150 students annually. His graduate students have gone on to exceptional careers at universities and natural history museums across the country. He gave of his time and his personal resources, becoming a member of the University of Minnesota Foundation's Presidents Club in support of the Breckenridge Chair in Ornithology. His contributions science and to the lives of his students have added prestige and honor to the University of Minnesota.

Lloyd Ultan
Professor
Music
1929-1998

O. Meredith Wilson
President
1909-1998

STUDENTS

Monica Leonard
University College

Barbara Muehler
College of Natural Resources

Anne Schoonover
Graduate School

XVI. OLD BUSINESS

NONE


XVII. NEW BUSINESS

NONE


XVIII. ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 3:21 p.m.

Rebecca Hippert
Abstractor

1In the case of a campus assembly committee, the resolution shall be forwarded to the campus assembly.

2In the parlance of the categorization of administrative appointees at the time this protocol is written, it covers class numbers 9301-9305, 9314, 9316, 9321-9328, and a few of the individuals in class 9330.

3The selection of the University President is the legal responsibility of the Board of Regents and the search committee for this office is drawn from the members of the Board. This committee has customarily involved the Senate Consultative Committee in the search, either relying on SCC to act as a search advisory committee or asking SCC to appoint such an advisory committee. It is presumed that this practice would continue.

4And, for the Directors of Intercollegiate Athletics (Twin Cities), the (Twin Cities) Assembly Committee on Intercollegiate Athletics.

5There are two different ways to think about grades. One, they can be norm-referenced: the performance of a class is scaled, so that the top X% of students receive an A, the next Y% receive a B, and so on. In its pure form, there is no absolute standard against which the performance is measured; if the maximum score for a test is 100, and the top X% of the students received a score between 45 and 50, those students would receive an A.

The other way to think about grades is as criterion-referenced: there is an absolute standard of achievement established for the student to receive a particular grade. Thus, if the maximum test score is 100 points, the instructor may say that any score above 90 will receive an A - even though, when the test results are known, no student received an A.

The Subcommittee does not presume to know which of these two approaches to grading most faculty use. We suspect that many faculty may use an ad hoc compromise between the two approaches, so the grades in a course are partly norm-referenced and partly criterion-referenced.