The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #71  on 
April 14, 1997:


RESOLUTION PASSED
==================

BE IT RESOLVED, That the UAF Faculty Senate ratifies the election of 
President-Elect on the basis of the following ballot.

BALLOT
PRESIDENT-ELECT

Please vote for ONE individual to serve as the President-Elect of the 
UAF Faculty Senate for 1997-98.


		Maynard Perkins, Associate Professor
		General Studies/Northwest Campus

  *** 		Madeline Schatz, Professor
		Music


***  President-Elect



******************

The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #71  on 
April 14, 1997:


MOTION PASSED (unanimous)
==============

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to add the following to the list for 
Transfer of Credit on page 11 of the UAF catalog:


10.	Any student who has completed a bachelor's degree from an 
	accredited institution will be considered to have completed 
	the equivalent of the baccalaureate core when officially 
	accepted to an undergraduate degree program at UAF.

	EFFECTIVE: 	Fall 1997

	RATIONALE: 	This motion addresses baccalaureate CORE 
		courses only.  The motion accepts students' 
		baccalaureate degrees as meeting the UAF baccalaureate 
		core requirement.  The student could be re-enrolling into 
		the UAF system after having completed a baccalaureate 
		degree at UAF in the past (when possibly the core 
		requirement was different), or the student could be 
		enrolling from another institution.  Because of the core 
		transfer policy there are actually few courses that 
		students would need to take and this policy, in the 
		majority of cases, would allow a core transfer without 
		a course by course evaluation.



******************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #71  on 
April 14, 1997:


MOTION PASSED (unanimous)
==============

Departments and programs will annually review courses not offered in 
the previous five-year period and consider if they should be deleted 
from the printed catalog.  A list of courses to be deleted will be 
forwarded to the Provost with the request to have the courses removed 
from the catalog.

	EFFECTIVE:  	Immediately

	RATIONALE:	This motion responds to the actions of the 
		provost in deleting courses from the University catalog.  
		The motion reconfirms that changes to the catalog made 	
		by administration affecting any academic concerns 	
		should only be implemented after appropriate faculty 
		deliberation.



******************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #71  on 
April 14, 1997:


MOTION PASSED (unanimous)
==============

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to clarify walk through requirements for 
graduate students as follows:


To meet the definition of having "essentially completed all degree 
requirements" (current policy) to "walk through" graduation 
ceremonies, a student must have meet the following requirements:

a.	successfully completed all required tests, course work and 
thesis/project defense; and 

b.	submitted to the Graduate School by the date set for filing a 
thesis/dissertation in Spring Semester, a memorandum signed by the 
student and the major advisor certifying that the student is essentially 
completed the graduate degree, and that all required signatures will be 
obtained and the thesis, project or dissertation filed by the last day of 
instruction.  If the student is a Ph.D. candidate, the major advisor or 
designated committee member must also agree to participate in the 
graduation ceremonies; and

c.	filed a copy of the required project/thesis/dissertation with the 
Graduate School with all required signatures, by the last day of 
instruction in Spring Semester; and

d.	for Ph.D. candidates, filed a 50 word abstract of the dissertation 
research along with the signed dissertation.  


NOTE:  Individuals who "walk through" graduation ceremonies will 
	NOT be listed in the graduation program.  These students 
	names, and if Ph.D. recipients, descriptions of dissertation 
	research, will appear in the program of the academic year in 
	which the Degree is formally granted.  

		EFFECTIVE:	Upon Chancellor's Approval

		RATIONALE:	Dana Thomas requested the Committee 	
		review the current policy and clarify the meaning of
		"essentially complete".  The above definition ensures
		that the student has "essentially completed" the degree 
		requirements and should be allowed to "walk through"  
		the ceremony.  



******************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #71  on 
April 14, 1997:


MOTION PASSED (unanimous)
==============

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to approve the minimum requirements 
for Master's Degrees shall be as follows:  


For all Master's Degree Programs, the following must be met:

a.	Submit a Graduate Study Plan (GSP) and an Appointment of 
Committee Form to the Graduate School by the end of the second 
semester in attendance.

b.	Be registered for at least 6 credits per year (fall, spring, and 
summer combined), or have an approved leave of absence form on file.  

c.	Submit an Advancement to Candidacy form to the Graduate School.  
Once submitted, this form supplants the GSP and serves to formally 
establish specific degree requirements.  

d.	Submit an application for graduation and be registered for at 
least 3 graduate credits in the semester in which the degree is to be 
awarded; and 

e.	Complete all degree requirements within the 7-year time limit 
allowed.  

Furthermore, the following additional requirements are the minimum 
requirements for Master's Degrees:


For a Master's of Science or Master's of Arts Degree - with thesis 

	Successfully complete at least 30 credits of course work 
including at least 6 credits of thesis (699).   (No more than 12 
thesis/research (699/698) credits may be counted towards the 
minimum degree credits).

	At least 24 credits must be at the 600 or above, except for a 
Master's of Arts in Music, which must have at least 21 credits at the 
600 level or above.  

	Pass a written and/or oral comprehensive exam (may be combined 
with the thesis defense.  

	Publicly present and defend thesis.

	Submit a completed and signed thesis defense form to the 
Graduate School.  

	Archive thesis in UAF Library.


Master's of Science or Master's of Arts Degree - with project

	Successfully complete at least 30 credits of course work 
including at least 6 credits of project work (698).  (No more than 6 
research (698) credits may be counted towards the minimum degree 
credits.)

	At least 24 credits must be at the 600 level or above, except for 
a Master's of Arts in Music, which must have at least 21 credits at the 
600 level or above.

	Pass a written and/or oral comprehensive exam (may be combined 
with the project defense.)  

	Publicly present and defend project.

	Submit a completed and signed project defense form to the 
Graduate School.

	Archive project in UAF Library.


For a Professional Master's Degree (i.e. Master's of Business 
Administration, Education, etc.)

	Successfully complete at least 30 credits of course work 
(research or thesis credits NOT included).

	At least 24 credits must be at the 600 level or above  (research 
or thesis credits NOT included).

	Successful completion of a comprehensive exam or capstone 
course that includes demonstration of the ability to synthesize 
information in the field at a level appropriate for a Master's degree.  


Note on Implementation of Motion:  It is the understanding of the 
Graduate Curricular Affairs Committee that changes to existing 
programs degree requirements or the name of the degree which may be 
necessitated by this policy, if implemented, will need final approval of 
the Graduate Curricular Affairs Committee, but does not constitute a 
new degree offering, and will not need approval by the Board of 
Regents.  

No minimum presented herein prohibits programs from requiring 
additional work.  The adjustments that have been made from existing 
programs include the requirement for the non-thesis project to be 
documented and in some manner archived in the Library (i.e. slides, 
recording, report.)

	EFFECTIVE:	Fall 1998

	RATIONALE:	Currently there is great disparity in the 
		administration of Master's degrees using a thesis 
		or non-thesis option.  In addition, there is an increasing
		movement towards Professional Master's Degrees
		which require only course work. To ensure the quality
		and workload for a degree is comparable for the
		thesis, project option, and professional (non-thesis 
		and non-project) minimum must be set and applied 
		across all degrees.  



******************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #71  on 
April 14, 1997:


MOTION PASSED AS AMENDED (16 yeas, 8 nays)
==========================

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the resolution submitted by the 
Faculty Alliance regarding "upon recommendation of the faculty" to 
include the following:

WHEREAS, The University of Alaska Fairbanks, the University 
	of Alaska Anchorage, and the University of Alaska 
	Southeast are each separately accredited and are from a 
	student perspective separate universities, 


	EFFECTIVE:	Immediately

	RATIONALE:  	The purpose here is to justify inserting 
		the individual MAU after the University of Alaska 
		on dipolmas.  The current wording, "University of 
		Alaska," comes from the time when there was only 
		one University and that was located in Fairbanks.  
		For two decades, now, we have had three universities 
		forming one statewide system, and that should be 
		recognized on diplomas and at graduation.



******************

RESOLUTION
===========

WHEREAS, The University of Alaska Faculty Alliance gains it 
	authority by policy 03.01.01 of the University of Alaska 
	Board of Regents, and

WHEREAS, The University of Alaska Faculty Alliance provides 
	official representation for the faculty of the University 
	of Alaska in matters which affect the general welfare of 
	the University and its educational purposes; and

WHEREAS, The University of Alaska Faculty Alliance provides 
	consultation to the President of the University and the 
	Board of Regents on academic matters; and

WHEREAS, The University of Alaska Faculty Alliance 
	recognizes the faculty of the individual academic major 
	administrative units as having the primary responsibility 
	and authority for recommending the establishment of 
	degree requirements; implementing the degree 
	requirements; establishing the curriculum, the subject 
	matter and the methods for instruction; determining 
	when established degree requirements are met; and

WHEREAS, The University of Alaska Faculty Alliance has 
	advisory and coordinating role in academic affairs of the 
	individual academic major administrative units; and

WHEREAS, The University of Alaska Fairbanks, the University 
	of Alaska Anchorage, and the University of Alaska 
	Southeast are each separately accredited and are from a 
	student perspective separate universities; now

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the University of Alaska 
	Board of Regents shall have included at all University of 
	Alaska graduations and in all diplomas the phrase ". . .
	and upon the recommendation of the Faculty of the 
	University of Alaska . . . ." with the insertion of the 
	appropriate major academic unit's name.  


******************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #71  on 
April 14, 1997:


MOTION PASSED (unanimous)
==============

The Faculty Senate moves to approve the disbanding of the Academic 
Computer Users Committee and let this function be moved to the 
Provost's Office.  

	EFFECTIVE:	Immediately

	RATIONALE:	The Academic Computer Users Committee 
		handles academic issues and should fall under the 
		Faculty Senate or the Provost who is the chief academic 
		officer.  The Committee also feels that it would be more 
		effective if it reported directly to the Provost.  


******************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #71  on 
April 14, 1997:


MOTION PASSED AS AMENDED (unanimous)
==========================

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to approve the following prerequisite for 
all core ethics courses in the Perspective on the Human Condition:  
"Junior standing; completion of two courses in the Perspectives on the 
Human Condition recommended but not required."

	EFFECTIVE: 	Fall 1997

	RATIONALE:	Upon consensus among Political Science, 
		Philosophy, Natural Resources Management, and 
		Communication, Junior Standing will be the prerequisite 
		for all the ethics courses.  Requiring the same 
		prerequisite will enable students to have equal access 
		to all these courses.  



******************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #71  on 
April 14, 1997:


MOTION PASSED (1 nay)
==============

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the Department Head Policy to 
clarify department affiliated faculty members' eligible to vote for 
department head as follows:


A full-time faculty member currently holding academic rank is 
affiliated with a department if:

1)	the head of that department evaluates the faculty member or;
2)	the head of the department signs the faculty member's 
	workload agreement.

	EFFECTIVE:  	Immediately

	RATIONALE:  	The motion to amend the policy defining the 
		role and duties of the department head, which also 
		establishes the procedures for the election of 
		department heads at UAF (as passed by the UAF Faculty 
		Senate at its Meeting #21 [October 15, 1990] and #23 
		[December 17, 1990]  and modified by the Chancellor) is 
		intended to clarify Section III. B.  Eligibility to Vote.


******************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #71  on 
April 14, 1997:


MOTION PASSED (unanimous)
==============

The UAF Faculty Senate forwards to the Faculty Alliance its concerns 
and recommendations regarding proposed changes to Regents' Policies 
and Regulations on Discrimination, Harassment and Sexual Harassment 
as follow:

1)  the proposed policies and regulations are poorly organized.  The 
regulations for general harassment seem to have been simply inserted 
into the regulations on Sexual Harassment (R04.06.09 B).  Given the 
organization of University Regulations, the regulations on general 
harassment and discrimination should be contained in R04.06.09 B; an 
existing section in University regulations which is titled Harassment 
and Discrimination.  The blending of sexual harassment regulations and 
the regulations for general harassment and discrimination is contrary 
to the organization of University Regulations and adds confusion to the 
distinct issues.

2)  The provisions regarding third party sexual harassment (R04.06.09 
B.7) are redundant since harassment of an individual resulting from a 
relationship with a third party would already constitute harassment 
under P04.06.09 A. (Harassment and Discrimination).  Also, in the 
current form, the third party sexual harassment provision as a special 
form of sexual harassment has the potential to violate an individual's 
freedom to association.

3)  The language in the proposed regulations allowing anonymous 
complaints (R04.06.09 B. 7) on the surface seems to be benign in that a 
formal investigation of charges and possible disciplinary actions would 
only occur if anonymous complainant names his/her self.  However, the 
regulation also states that the acceptability of anonymous complaints 
depends on the number of or persuasiveness of anonymous complaints.  
Hence, if enough "poison pen" complaints are made or if they are 
sufficiently well written, a formal investigation my occur.  This is 
completely unacceptable.  This clause simply opens the way for 
institutionalized character assassination.  While this clause seems to 
afford protection from formal disciplinary action due simply to 
anonymous complaints, it does not prevent informal actions.  For 
example, repeated or persuasive anonymous complaints may result in 
the perception on the part of peers or supervisors that an individual 
acts unprofessionally, thus affecting periodic evaluations or chances 
for tenure or promotion.

4)  In R04.06.09 B. 2. h (Definition of Harassment Review) it appears 
that the review will typically be conducted by a single individual.  This 
would give a single individual excessive power.  An investigatory 
committee of three (or more) individuals should be constituted to 
investigate an alleged violation of harassment or discrimination 
policies.

5)  Policy P04.04.09 A. 1. (a) through (d) (Examples of Harassment) 
outlines examples of harassment.  Given these examples, policy seems 
to state that the situations, if they occur, are sufficient to constitute 
harassment.  The policy should be reworded to state that the examples 
listed may be lead to harassment and that the determination that 
harassment has occurred is made by examining the total context of the 
situation.  In addition, the many examples are vague and potentially 
open the door to limiting academic freedom.  For example, examining 
supposedly "sexually charged literature" may restrict an English 
professor's academic freedom.  Or, prohibiting supposedly "suggestive 
objects" may restrict an anthropology professor's academic freedom.  
Lastly in a separate issue, with respect to examples of discrimination, 
modifiers need to be added such as the "reasonable accommodation" 
language of the American's with Disabilities Act.

6)  Since it is frequently the case that an individual who violates this 
policy does so out of ignorance, policy and regulations should stress 
this.  Hence, with respect to disciplinary actions, more emphasis needs 
to be placed upon the education role that the harassment policy can 
fulfill.

7)  Throughout the proposed policy there is language which is 
prejudicial to the accused which seems to imply "guilty until proven 
innocent".  For example in R04.06.09 B. 4., the accused is referred to as 
the "aggressor". In order to remove some of the prejudicial language 
when referring to an individual accused of harassment or 
discrimination, the definition of a "respondent" should be added to 
R04.06.09 B. 2. (Definitions) where "Respondent" should be defined as an 
individual accused of violating Regents' Policies and Regulations 
regarding harassment or discrimination.

	EFFECTIVE:  Immediately

	RATIONALE:  The motion responds to a formal request from 
		Faculty Alliance to UAF Faculty Senate regarding input 
		on the proposed changes in Board of Regents' Policies 
		and Regulations on Discrimination, Harassment and 
		Sexual Harassment.  The poorly written document 
		received from BOR was scrutinized by the UAF FASAC 
		in response to that request.