RESOLUTIONS OF THE 1997-98 FACULTY SENATE

Faculty Senate Minutes of October 14, 1997; Paragraph 5b. Admissions and Academic Affairs - Final Exam Policy:

Cartwright/Schauer moved to accept the policy statement. Discussion included a note that the present policy leaves it up to the student to resolve an exam problem. The proposed policy uses the Registrar's office as an arbitrator. Senator Marks asked what was intended by the term "comprehensive." Hogan/Erdmann proposed an amendment to strike all occurrences of the term "comprehensive." Erdmann/Cartwright proposed an amendment to strike the first paragraph of the proposed policy. Chair Hanson ruled the second amendment out of order. The Hogan/Erdmann amendment was defeated. Marks moved to amend the number of exams from 2 to 3. The motion died for lack of a second. The Final Exam Policy passed as originally submitted.

Final Examination Policy All comprehensive final examinations shall be administered at the prescribed time during the final examination period. For those classes where there is no comprehensive final examination, the time prescribed during the final examination period shall be used as a regular class meeting. No student shall be required to take more than two comprehensive final examinations on the same day. Any student with more that two comprehensive final examinations scheduled on the same day who wants to reschedule the excessive examinations(s) may try to make arrangements with the instructors involved. If this is unworkable, the student must notify the Registrar by the end of the week following the deadline to drop a semester course or at the given during the final examination period. (FS978-2)

1. The current rating system in our reappointment rules should be abandoned. As is now the case for promotion to the rank of Professor, the reappointment decision should be determined by whether or not the candidate has met specific department, college and university performance criteria.
2. The decision to deny reappointment would be accompanied by a statement from the administrative level (department or chancellor) at which the decision to deny was first made. That statement would specify the performance criteria that the candidate failed to meet.
3. The format for the reappointment data file would be similar to and consistent with that specified by the new promotion policy.
4. The merit review policies defined by Regent Resolution 6198 (Recommendation #9 of the Governor's Commission Report) will be formally incorporated into the UW-Whitewater Faculty Personnel Rules. The performance review format required by this Regent policy will be integrated into the performance review policies for retention and promotion.
5. Following a department reappointment/tenure decision the entire data file considered by the department along with the resulting reports and recommendations from the department and dean shall be submitted to the chancellor. That file shall be the evidence file upon which the chancellor's part of he reappointment decision shall rest. The motion passed. (31 yes, 0 no, 3 abstentions).

Faculty Senate Minutes of November 11, 1997; Paragraph 8.

Resolution on campus health and safety policies proposed by Steve Albrechtsen: Goroff/Schauer moved the following resolution:

Resolved that the Faculty Senate requests that the Chancellor withdraw the recently imposed policies entitled "Policies and Procedures for the Invasive Procedures and Drawing of Human Blood" and Policies and Procedures for Human Stress Testing" because these policies are unreasonable, unnecessary and discriminatory.

A discussion followed centering on the need to retain or discard the present campus policies and procedures for drawing blood and stress testing. Brenda Clayton spoke in favor of retaining the present UW-W policies to insure compliance with OSHA and DILHR standards. The basic concern is with the health and safety of all campus personnel. Steve Albrechtsen spoke against the present UW-W policies. The rationale was that the policies were poorly written, confusing and unnecessary.

Schauer/Ghosh made a motion to refer. That the Albrechtsen motion be referred to the IRB with the provisions that blood drawing and stress testing policies be reviewed for clarity and conciseness. The IRB is to report its results to the Chancellor. Weston moved the question. Passed. (1 no vote) The motion to refer passed.