Undergraduate Council
Academic Curriculum/Policies
Subcommittee Meeting

January 20, 2004

Voting Members Present: Gail Burd, Bill Conway, Carol Feingold, Stacey Nelson, Anne-Marie Nequette, Clare Rowe, James Shockey

Non-Voting Members Present: Noris Montalvan, Celeste Pardee, Lynne Tronsdal

Members not Present: Elizabeth Zegura

Recording Secretary: Noris Montalvan

James Shockey, Co-chair called the meeting to order at 3:35 p.m.

I.   Approval of 12/9/03 Curriculum/Policies Meeting Minutes
Bill Conway moved to approve the minutes, and Carol Feingold seconded the motion. The motion was approved.

  • Elizabeth Zegura continues to represent the College of Humanities on the Subcommittee but has a class conflict this semester.  She submitted her vote for approval of the minutes via email.

II.  Revision of the Academic Renewal Policy (see draft)

  • The only change under consideration is related to a student’s eligibility for Academic Renewal:
    • At the time the request is filed, the student’s cumulative GPA must be below a 2.000.
  • Sandra Knighton had submitted the following data on the GPAs of students filing for Academic Renewal within the last academic year (60 applications):
    • 3 were denied because they did not meet the GPA, unit, or time period criteria.
    • 10 applicants started with a GPA below 2.000.
    • 47 applicants started with a GPA above 2.000; most of these were above 2.500

With the additional criterion, only 10 out of the 60 applicants would have been approved for Academic Renewal.

  • The Subcommittee based the current proposal on the Academic Renewal policy in effect at ASU. Celeste Pardee asked if members would like to consider (as a model) NAU’s Academic Renewal policy, which does not limit this option to students on academic probation:

After Academic Renewal is granted your permanent record will be annotated to indicate that no work taken during the disregarded term is applicable toward graduation; however all work will remain on your permanent record to reflect your accurate history. In addition, two cumulative grade point averages will be carried on your permanent record: a Total Cumulative GPA that reflects all of your attempted courses and a Renewal Cumulative GPA that reflects your attempted courses minus the disregarded terms. We will use your Renewal Cumulative GPA to determine your academic status at NAU and your eligibility for graduation. We will use your Total Cumulative GPA to determine any graduation with honors distinctions. [from the 2003-04 NAU General Catalog]

  • All students are eligible for Academic Renewal at NAU, but they cannot use their “renewal GPA” to attain graduation with honors, which was one of the Subcommittee’s concerns. Celeste will contact NAU to find out how this policy has affected the number of students who apply for Renewal.
  • Stacey Nelson believes that UA’s policy needs to be changed, especially in light of the data from Sandra Knighton. NAU seems to offer a compromise between limiting Renewal to students on probation and allowing a student to take advantage of this option in order to graduate with academic distinction. UA’s current policy is not fair to good students who experience some academic difficulties but who graduate with a GPA based on all the grades they earned. If the primary purpose of Academic Renewal is to retain students through degree completion, then students should be eligible for this option only if they have a GPA below a 2.000.
  • Currently, the Student Information System (SIS) at the UA cannot accommodate 2 cumulative GPAs. If the Subcommittee is interested in the NAU model, Celeste will find out if Matrix (the new system) is capable of reflecting two cumulative GPAs.
  • If 2 GPAs were recorded on a student’s transcript (the Total Cumulative GPA and a Renewal Cumulative GPA) which GPA would be used for scholarship eligibility and other academic awards? Every scholarship offered at the UA would need to identify the GPA that would be used for students to qualify. Members thought that having 2 cumulative GPAs would be confusing.
  • The Subcommittee’s objective in modifying the Academic Renewal Policy is to make it available for students to raise their GPA to meet graduation requirements, not to earn academic honors.
  • Another GPA requirement that might prevent a student from graduating is the major GPA. Limiting Academic Renewal to students with a cumulative GPA below a 2.000 may not help the student who has a problem with the major GPA. Students may have a 2.600 cumulative GPA but a 1.700 major GPA; without the Academic Renewal option they might not graduate. Currently there are no majors that require a GPA above 2.000 to graduate.
  • Members suggested modifying the Academic Renewal policy by adding the following eligibility criterion:
  • At the time the request is filed, the student’s cumulative GPA or major GPA must be below a 2.000.
  • A question was raised regarding possible approval of a minor GPA requirement. If a 2.000 GPA is required for a minor, should students with less than a 2.000 GPA in their minor (if a minor is a degree requirement) be allowed to apply for Academic Renewal? Discussion followed. The majority of degree programs do not require a minor. Therefore, if the student’s GPA is below a 2.000 in minor course work, the student can simply erase the minor and graduate without it. For this reason, members decided against adding "minor GPA" to the above statement.
  • Carol Feingold moved to approve adding the above statement to the Academic Renewal Policy, and Annie Nequette seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously.
  • Celeste will update the proposal and will find out if the proposal can be added to the 1/27/04 UGC meeting as a consent agenda item for discussion and possibly a vote.

III. Proposal to establish a minimum Minor Grade Point Average (see draft)

  • Celeste presented a brief history of the proposal, which was approved by the Subcommittee in Spring 2003 but was tabled by full Council on 4/22/03, at the request of the College Academic Administrators Council (CAAC) who wanted more time for obtaining input and discussing this change. At the 12/9/03 Curriculum/Policies Subcommittee meeting, members indicated that the plan for managing the proposed 2.000 GPA requirement in the minor needed revision.
  • While the Catalog statement is essentially the same as that proposed to full Council last April, Celeste changed the management of the proposed policy to that which was recently approved for managing the major GPA. The one addition that was not included in the previous proposal is related to University Credit: A minimum GPA presupposes that at least one 3-unit course in the minor is University Credit. Currently there’s no University Credit requirement for a minor. However, if the University requires a 2.000 GPA for the minor, at least one course should be taken in residence to establish a GPA. Without this stipulation, it’s possible for a student to graduate with a minor composed of credit by exam, transfer courses, and/or correspondence courses and thus no GPA.
  • Graduation Services collected the following data on December 2003 graduates who had a minor with a GPA below a 2.000. Out of 1,200 bachelor degrees posted (many of which do not include a minor):
  • There were 21 minors with a GPA below 2.000.
  • Most of the minor GPAs were between 1.500 and 1.900.
  • One student graduated with a minor GPA of 0.950.
  • There was one minor with no GPA, since no UA courses had been taken in that field.
  • If the policy and management of the policy are changed as proposed, then someone with a 1.900 GPA would need permission from the dean of the college that offers that minor to graduate. Gail Burd noted that deans are unaware of any problem since there is no minor GPA requirement.
  • Requiring a minor GPA of 2.000 or above protects the quality of the degree since the minor is listed on the transcript. If a minor is required in the degree program, and the student does not have a GPA of 2.000 or above in minor course work, the student would not graduate without taking additional courses in the minor field to raise the GPA. Another option for raising the GPA would be to change the minor to a thematic minor (courses from 2 or more disciplines). If the minor were not required, then the student would be able to graduate by dropping the minor.
  • Jim Shockey pointed out that the minor is misnamed; incoming freshmen might think that the courses are of “minor” importance. He has tried to correct this misconception in the College of Social & Behavioral Sciences by explaining that the minor is another concentration of study that supports the major and strengthens the degree program. Students need to carefully select a minor that fits their major so when they leave the UA they can show that they built a coherent academic program. The minor is useful for admission to graduate school, professional school, or to get a job.
  • Most minors are loosely defined so that a student can choose any 18 units in the subject area, as long as they include 9 upper division units. There are few minors with core courses specified.
  • Suggested changes to the proposal:
  • Under "Proposed addition to the General Catalog statement on Minor Requirements" change the first sentence to: A cumulative Grade Point Average (GPA) of 2.000 or better is required for all University Credit work …
  • Under the "Management of the proposed policy," mention that the dean who oversees any exception to the GPA requirement would be the dean of the college offering the minor; for the thematic minor it would be the dean of the college offering the major.
  • Also in this section, add that at the end of each semester Graduation Services will send the Vice Provost for Instruction and the Curriculum/Policies Subcommittee the degree packets of students who graduated with a minor GPA lower than 2.000.
  • Members supported these changes to the proposal but would like the University Professional Advising Council (UPAC) and CAAC to review and give their input. Celeste will revise the current proposal and will send it to the Subcommittee for their consent before presenting it to UPAC; Gail and Jim will then present it to CAAC.

IV. Update on admission of transfer students and readmits with junior standing who are undecided on a major
This is a student retention issue and Lynne Tronsdal would like to remove it from the Subcommittee’s agenda and present it to the Retention Coordinating Group and the Office of Recruitment for input. If there is a policy decision to be made, she will bring it back to the Curriculum/Policies Subcommittee with a recommendation from one of these groups.

V. Update on number of University Credits required for a degree

  • The Subcommittee had asked for an investigation on how the UA degree requirement--30 University Credits--compared to the number required at peer institutions. Celeste presented initial findings:
  • University of California – Berkeley          24 credits
  • Michigan State University                          20 credits
  • University of Michigan – Ann Arbor     60 credits
  • University of Minnesota – Twin Cities     30 credits
  • University of Utah                                      30 credits
  • University of Wisconsin – Madison         30 credits
  • Celeste will bring a complete list (of 15 institutions) to the next meeting so that members can decide if they want to keep this issue on the Subcommittee’s agenda.

VI. Prioritization of Curriculum/Policy Issues
What is the next policy issue for the Subcommittee to resolve?

  • Gail Burd brought an issue for the Subcommittee to consider. The College of Science would like to place students on probation who have a major GPA lower than 2.000, even though their cumulative GPA is 2.000 or above. According to the General Catalog, a "college probation" status does not exist. Can a college place a student on probation when the student has a cumulative 2.000 GPA?
  • Clare Rowe answered that students in the BFA program in Theatre Arts Design Technology are put on "probation" within that program if their major GPA is lower than 3.000. The students are not allowed to participate in theatre productions and are advised to take other courses until their GPA returns to a 3.000. If they are on "program probation" for 2 semesters, they must change to a BA program. This probation status is not noted on the UA transcript.
  • Annie Nequette stated that in the College of Architecture, students with a low major GPA are considered on probation and are not allowed to enroll in the next level of design studio. Additionally, if a student earns a "D" in one of the design studio courses, the student may enroll in the next sequential studio but must earn a "C" in that course to continue in the studio sequence. If that student earns a second "D" grade, the student is not allowed to continue in the major.
  • Carol Feingold noted that if a student earns less than a "C" in a core course in the College of Nursing, the student must retake the course. If a student earns 2 grades less than a "C," the student must leave the program.
  • The College of Science would like to place a student on "college academic probation" before disqualifying the student from the College. The Subcommittee decided to add "academic probation" to the list of policies to be reviewed. Unless this policy is formally revised, a college or school probation status would not appear on the transcript.
  • Members agreed on the following priority for upcoming policy issues:
  1. College academic probation
  2. Double-dipping between a major and minor
  3. Second bachelor’s degree and General Education requirements

The meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m.

Corrected by C. Pardee
2/11/04

Return to the Undergraduate Council main page

The UA Undergraduate Council, http://w3.arizona.edu/~uge/ugc/
Send us your questions and comments.