UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME

FACULTY SENATE

THE JOURNAL

September 26, 1968 - Room 210-212 - Center for Continuing Education

The meeting came to order at 7:30 p.m. Professor Edward Murphy,

Chairman of the Faculty Senate, presided. The Journal was approved.

The Chairman announced the resignation of Professor James E. Robinson

from the Senate and the election of Professor Donald P. Kommers as his

replacement.

Professor Kenneth Lauer, the Treasurer of the Senate, presented a

report indicating a balance on hand of $3,585.89.

Professor Daniel Basto, Chairman of the Committee on Administration

of the University, presented a report of his committee's July 11 meeting.

The Committee discussed: (a) a request from Professor Hassenger that the

Faculty Senate condemn alleged racial segregation practices at the New York

Athletic Club; (b) the possibility of establishing communication with the

faculty participants of the st. Mary's College--Barat College--Notre Dame

Faculty and Administrative Committee; (c) the recent lay-off of skilled

labor at Notre Dame and a subsequent discussion of this matter between the

EKecutive Committee of the Senate and Father Joyce, the EKecutive Vice­

President of the University.

-2-

Professor Murphy reported that at a preliminary meeting in Chicago

with the Chairman of the Board of Trustees, the Vice President for Student

Affairs, the Student Body President, the Special Assistant to the President,

and the Chairman of the Faculty Senate, provisions were made for the Faculty

Senate to determine procedures for the election of faculty representatives

to the Student Life Council. Since this was a priority matter, the EXecutive

Committee sent to all faculty members a questionnaire in which three alternative

procedures were suggested: (a) Nomination by the Faculty Senate (from the

entire Faculty); election by the Faculty Senate. (b) Nomination by the

Faculty Senate (from the entire Faculty); election by the Faculty at large.

(c) Nomination by the Faculty at large; election by the Faculty at large.

A copy of the questionnaire and a tally of the returns was distributed

to each member of the Senate. There were 49 faculty members who opted for

alternative (a); 102 for alternative (b); 40 for alternative (c); 2 for other

alternatives.

The Senate recessed at 7:45 porn. and Mr. Philip Faccenda, Special

Assistant to the President, was invited to address the assembly.

Mr. Faccenda said that the Student Life Council was the direct result

of an action by the Ad Hoc Committee of the Board of Trustees. The Council

is constituted by representatives from the Administration, the Faculty, and

the Students. Each group has two ex officio members and six elected members.

The elected members are to be picked according to democratic procedures

established by each group. Since the activity of this Council is of great

importance and may well influence other campuses , it is important that

-3-

imaginative and inventive representatives be elected who will be able and

willing to devote considerable time to this work. The C01ll1cil is to be

not merely advisory but legislative in nature. Its acts will be subject

only to the veto power of the President. In this case there would be an

automatic appeal to the Board of Trustees.

At the conclusion of Mr. Faccenda t s remarks, the Senate continued its

business. Professor Murphy reopened the discussion on nomination procedures.

Father Burtchaell made a motion that "the election be in such wise that the

Senate nominate persons to the Council from the entire Faculty, with elections

by the Faculty at large". The motion was second.ed by Professor Pasto. It

was voted upon and carried.

Father Burtchaell moved that "failing alternative future decisions by

the Student Life Council, the three nominees receiving the highest number

of votes should be elected to a two year term and the next three to a one

year term and the election be held annually thereafter for two year terms".

The motion was seconded by Professor smelser. P~ofessor Bella moved to

amend the motion as follows: "Those elected from the faculty receiving the

highest vote would serve a term of office equal to the maximum established

by the Student Life Council". Professor Eagan seconded the motion.

Professor Williams offered the following amendment: "that the members

elected by the Faculty divide themselves into schools according to the

method adopted by the Student Life Council and applying to all the members

thereof, and failing any such decision, the three nominees receiving the

highest number of votes should be elected to a two year term and the next

three to a one year term and the election be held annually thereafter for

-4-

two year terms lf• The motion and amendments were put to vote. Professor

Williams' amendment was defeated. Professor Bella's amendment was defeated.

Father Burtchaell's motion was carried.

Recess was called at 8:40 p.m.

The meeting reconvened at 9:00 p.m. Professor ~lls moved that "each

faculty member vote for six representatives on the Council". Professor

Gross seconded the motion. The motion was carried.

Professor Smelser proposed the following re,solution: "Resolved, that

it is the sense of the Faculty Senate that the S.tudent Life Council will

require the best talents available and the expen.diture of considerable

energy and time by its members; therefore the Senate hopes that each college

and department which contributes staff to this Council will take into

consideration the possibility of adjusting the schedules of such members

to allow sufficient time for the deliberations a.nd works of the Student Life

Council lf• Professor Bender seconded the motion. The motion was carried.

The floor was opened for nominations to the Student Life Council.

The following were nominated:

Professor Charles W. AllenReverend Ernest J. Bartell, C.S.C.Professor Richard B. BizotReverend James T. Burtchaell, C.S.C.Professor James J. CarberryProfessor Donald P. CostelloProfessor James T. CushingProfessor Sperry E. DardenProfessor Paul C. DeCellesProfessor William F. E:tganProfessor Nicholas F. FioreProfessor Peter P. Grande

-5-

Professor John W. Houck:Professor Edward ManierProfessor James L. MasseyProfessor Peter F. MichelsonProfessor Bernard NorlingReverend Edward D. O'Connor, C.SoC.Professor Robert J. SchultzProfessor Donald C. Sniegowski

The Chairman said that prior to having his name placed on the ballot each

nominee would be consulted as to his willingness to stand for election.

New Business

Professor Eells advised the Senate on the availability of expert advice

in matters pertaining to group insurance for the Faculty.

Professor Swartz requested that the Committee on Faculty Affairs investigate

the parking and athletic fees. The Chairman referred the matter to the

committee.

The next meeting was set for November 6, 19680 The President of the

University has been invited to address the Senate at that time 0 The meeting

was adjourned at 9 :15 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

tJ IJ /~it./~,

(Rev.)/Leonard N. Banas, C.S.C.

UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME

FACULTY SENATE

THE JOURNAL

November 6, 1968 - Room 202 - Center for Continuing Education

The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. Professor Edward

Murphy, Chairman of the Senate, presided. Mr. David Barrett, one of

the newly elected representatives of the Professional Specialist Faculty,

was welcomed. The Journal was approved.

Reverend Theodore M. Hesburgh, C.S.C., President of the University,

addressed the Senate. He briefly reviewed Senate progress and offered

his encouragement for the future. Among specific items touched upon were

the following: (1) The Faculty Senate seems to be the most appropriate

body for undertaking a study which would lead to a better understanding

of the Faculty's professional responsibility. (2) The Senate is in a

better position than any other group to initiate and articulate forms of

experimentation in curriculum reform. While the Academic Council has the

ultimate say in these matters, the Senate can render a valuable service

in doing the groundwork. (3) There is a need for continuing the education

of educators by establishing interdisciplinary seminars for the Faculty,

especially in the areas of theology and philosophy. A Catholic university

is justified by its concern for ultimate values. Gaps between and within

departments could be bridged, and a more human community could be established

-2-

by such dialogue. (4) The Faculty Senate could also concern itself with

the problem of finances, the problem of institutional cooperation, and the

problem of international education.

After a brief question and answer period, Father Hesburgh concluded

his remarks and the meeting continued.

The Chairman requested that the following schedule of Senate meetings

and the ballot record for faculty representatives to the Student Life Council

be incorporated into the Journal.

Meetings of the Faculty Senate

September 26, 1968 (Thursday)

November 6, 1968 (Wednesday)

December 3, 1968 (Tuesday)

January 7, 1969 (Tueswa.y)

February 5, 1969 (Wednesday)

March 4, 1969 (Tuesday)

April 1, 1969 (Wednesday)

May 7, 1969 (Wednesday)

Ballot Record of Faculty Representatives to the Student Life Council

* James L. Massey 200

* Bernard Norling 186

* James T. Burtchaell 180

* John W. Houck 152

* Charles W. Allen 147

-3-

* Ernest J. Bartell 145

James J. Carberry 144

Peter P. Grande 126

Donald P. Costello 126

William Fe E)3,gan 110

Paul C. DeCelles 106

Sperry Eo D3.rden 100

Edward D. O'Connor 88

Robert J. Schultz 82

Nicholas F. Fiore 78

Peter Fe Michelson 72

Richard B. Bizot 52

James T. Cushing 50

* elected

standing Committee Reports

Professor ])miel Pasto, Chairman of the Committee on University

Administration, reported that Professor Robert McIntosh, member of the

st e Mary's-Notre Dame Faculty-Administration Committee (SM-ND), addressed

his committee and described the function of the fM-ND committee. He pointed

out that the committee's responsibility was to develop and further the

interaction of st 0 Mary's College and other womens' institutions with the

University of Notre Dame. The committee has coped with many minor, non­

academic subjects, but as yet has not tackled the more important academic

aspects of any cooperative program. The committee must now attempt to get

-4-

the respective department s of the institutions concerned to evaluate

their existing programs with the view of developing the cooperative

program.

With respect to the newly elected members of the faculty to serve on

the EJ4-ND committee, the following points were clarified in a conversation

with Father Walsh: 1) The newly elected members of the fM-ND committee

will be permanent replacements for Professor George Brinkley and Father

1)tvid Burrell, who are on leave. 2) Since the committee will probably

continue in existence for a considerable period of time, three-year

staggered terms are advisable. 3) Relationship of the SM-ND Committee to

the Faculty Senate, at present virtuaJ..ly non-existent, should be established.

The Subcommittee on Parking met with Mr. Arthur Pears to discuss the

various aspects of parking on the Notre Dame campus. It was the opinion of

the subcommittee that excellent progress is being made in the development of

the parking program. Several suggestions will be forwarded to Mr. Pears via

the EKecutive Committee along with a commendation for the development of the

program.

Professor Joseph Tihen, Chairman of the Committee on Faculty Affairs,

reported that Mr. Joseph F. 0 'Brien attended his committee's meeting to

discover whether personal contact with the Faculty would elicit a better

response for the United Fund appeal. It was the committee's view that the

present system was preferable. Professor Tihen reported also that schedules

of faculty salaries would be published and that progress was being made on

obtaining contracts for C.S.C 0 faculty members.

-5-

Professor Gerald Jones, Chairman of the Committee on student Affairs,

reported that Senate Resolution # 4 on Publications Policy was tabled

indefinitely by his commi.ttee because a statement of a substantially

identical nature has already appeared in the new student manual. He

reported further that his committee had been asked by the Ladies of Notre

Dame to consider and comment on their project of establishing stUdent-Faculty

social events.

Regular Business

The Chairman of the Senate called on Professor Pasto to offer a report

on the election of Faculty to the fIv1-ND Faculty-Administration Committeeo

Professor Pasto moved the following resolution:

"Faculty representatives to the present st. Mary' s­Notre D:une Faculty-Administration Committee are to beelected from the Faculty Senate by the Faculty Senateto serve three-year staggered terms. The members ofthis committee should maintain close liaison with theFaculty Senate University Administration Committee."

Professor Eells seconded the motion. The motion was carried.

The Chairman called for the nomination of faculty members to serve on

the sto Mary's-Notre Dame Committee. Professor John A. Williams was

nominated and elected for a three-year term and Professor stanley S. Sessler

for a one-year term. Professor Robert McIntosh will remain on the committee

for two more years.

The Chairman called for nominations to the Student-Faculty Board of

Traffic Appeals. Professor William F. Eagan was nominated and elected. The

-6-

Chairman requested that he report at some later date on the most desirable

tenure arrangement for this office.

Professor Darden, the Chairman of the Faculty Manual SUbcommittee,

made a motion that Article III Section 5 of the Faculty Manual which reads

as follows:

"•••The following members .(of the Teaching-and-ResearchFaculty ) receive tenure automatically:

(I) members of the rank of Professor or AssociateProfessor whose services are retained afterthree years of service on the Teaching-and­Research Faculty in any rank.;

(II) members of the rank of Assistant Professorwhose services are retained after six yearsof service on the Teaching-and-Research Faculty."

be amended to read:

"(II) members of the rank of Assistant Professor whoseservices are retained after six years of service on theTeaching-and-Research Faculty in any rank."

Professor Tihen seconded the motion. The motion was carried. The Chairman

instructed the Secretary to forward this recommendation to the Academic Council.

Miss Lawrence requested that arrangements be made for distributing the

Scholastic and The Observer to all the members of the Senate. The Chairman

referred this matter to the EXecutive Committee.

The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 P.M.

(Rev. )

Respectfully submitted,

4~rc·~ C-S.(

Leonard N. Banas, C.S.C.Secretary to the Faculty Senate

UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME

FACULTY SENATE

THE JOURNAL

December 3, 1968 -- Rooms 100 - 102 -- Center for Continuing Education

The meeting came to order at 7 :30 p.m. Professor Edward Murphy,

Chairman of the Senate presided. The Journal, as amended, was approved.

The Chairman read a letter from the Secretary of the Academic Council

in which the Faculty Senate was requested to consider additional questions

concerning academic tenure (cf. Appendix I). The matter was referred to

the Committee on Faculty Affairs.

The following motion was made by Professor Bernard Norling: "RESOLVED,

that the University sever all institutional, legal and financial ties with

The Scholastic forthwith." The motion was referred to the Committee on

Student Affairs.

The Chairman read a communication from the President of the University

concerning protest in the University (cf. Appendix II). The EXecutive

Committee proposed the following resolution:

"RESOLVED, that the position of this University in themainstream of our time and society provides certainoccasions for a wide variety of persons to be presenton our campus for a multitude of purposes. It isentirely out of keeping with the position and purposesof the University for such persons to be impeded or

-2-

forcibly interfered with in pursuing their lawfUlconcerns. To participate in such obstructive tacticsis a serious disciplinary offense. We recognize thatthere are appropriate provisions of the Student Manualpertaining to this matter, and we urge the vigorousimplementation of these provisions through normaljudicial procedures. It

The motion was discussed and carried.

Professor Smelser read a letter from one of his constituents which

objected to the use of Notre Dame's name and campus facilities for

commercial endorsements and requested that the Senate should recommend

to the Administration the discontinuance of such practices and should

establish guidelines which would be binding on all university personnel

who make commercial endorsements. The matter was referred to the

Committee on Administration of the University.

An informal discussion followed in which the merits of faculty

evaluation in respect to the broader question of professional ethics and

the improvement of teaching was discussed. No action issued from the

discussion.

The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

=I~)(J&~' c. 5: C ,

(Rev.) Leonard N. Banas, C.S.C.Secretary to the Faculty Senate

Appendix I

The following is a letter to the Chairman of the Faculty Senate

from Reverend Ferdinand L. Brown, C.S.C., Associate Vice President of

Academic Affairs:

At the meeting of the Academic Council on November 26,1968 it was proposed that certain questions concerning tenurebe referred to the Faculty Senate so that the Academic Councilmight receive the recommendations or opinions of the Senateon these questions. The questions are as follows:

1) How does part-time service, a visitinginstructorship or professorship, or aleave without p~ affect time of serviceas related to tenure?

2) Is it possible by mutual written agreementto continue the services of a faculty memberbeyond the six-year period without grantingtenure?

3) Is the six-year period after which tenuremust be conferred too short?

It would be helpful, I am sure, if we knew what otherrepresentative schools do in this matter.

There may be other matters, of course, relating to tenureon which the Senate might wish to make recommendations.

If you will send me the results of the Senate's deliberationson these matters, I will see they are presented to the AcademicCouncil.

Appendix II

The following is a letter to the Chairman of the Faculty Senate from

Reverend Theodore Hesburgh, C.S.C., President of the University:

As you will note from my recent letter to the faculty andstudents, I am requesting the Academic Council, the Faculty Senate,and the Student Life Council to formulate a policy statement thatwould somehow indicate that protest in the University is a legitimateform of expression, whereas repression of others' freedoms, whetherviolently or non-violently, is not legitimate and, in fact, woulddisqualify one from being a member of the University kind of opensociety. Because of the time element, we shall probably come upinitially with three different statements, but I am sure that thesecan be edited into a unified statement by a group from each body.As I mentioned in my letter, I think thi s is vital to the surrivalof the University, not only ours, but any other.

By way of background, I would like to quote from Part Three,VIII, Section B of the Cox Commission Report on the "Crisis atColumbia". I believe this states the problem as well as anythingI have seen:

"Resort to violence or physical harassment orobstruction is never an acceptable tactic for in­fluencing decisions in a university. This principledoes not require notions of property or legality tosustain it. It derives from three considerations.

"First, force, harassment, and physical obstruction *contradict the essential postulate that the university isdedicated to the search for truth by reason and civility.

"Second, resort to such physical coercion tends toset in motion an uncontrollable escalation of violence.This is the plainest lesson of the rising cycle ofviolence that began at Columbia with the Naval ROTCdemonstration in 1965 and culminated in the brutalityof April 30 and May 22. The sequence of steps was notinevitable but each was the readily predictable con­sequence of those that went before.

"Third, the survival -- literally the survival -- ofthe free university depends upon the entire community'sactive rejection of disruptive demonstrations. Anysizeable group, left to pursue such tactics, can destroyeither the university by repeatedly disrupting itsnormal activities or the university's freedom by com­pelling the authorities to invoke overwhelming forcein order that its activities m8¥ continue. The onlyalternative is for the entire community to reject thetactics of physical disruption with such overwhelmingmoral disapproval as to make them self-defeating.

"This vital decision rests with the liberal andreform-minded students. They can save or destroy theinstitution" • pp. 196-197.

* !lIn using such terms as 'disruptive demonstrations'and 'physical harassment and obstructions', we do not meanto prescribe a code of conduct. We have in mind not onlythe seizure and barricading of buildings, but also othermeans of physically preventing, or seriously hampering,the normal activities of others in the community as ameans of protesting or inducing action, whether thephysical obstruction is violent or non-violent. Thecore of meaning seems quite clear even though there isa shadowy area around the fringes where minor physicalinconvenience m8¥ be justifiable in the interest ofexpression." p. 27

I would appreciate it very much if you would pose this questionto the membership of the Faculty Senate so that we might have someformulation of the University community's conviction in this matter.I believe that one of the key sentences in the above citation fromthe Cox Commission is the one that says: "The only alternative isfor the entire community to reject the tactics of physical disruptionwith such overwhelming moral disapproval as to make them self-defeating!l.I believe we should also make it clear that persons who deliberatelyand consciously act against the overwhelming moral di sapproval of thecommunity should understand that they are thereby forfeiting theirmembership in this community.

Please give my sincere word of thanks to the members of the FacultySenate for their efforts to establish a clear University standard inthis matter of the survival of the University as a community "dedicatedto the search for truth by reason and civiIity II •

UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME

FACULTY SENATE

THE JOURNAL

January 21, 1969 -- Rooms 112 - 114 -- Center for Continuing Education

(I)

The meeting came to order at 7: 30 P.M. Profes sor Edward Murphy,

Chairman of the Senate, presided. The Journal was approvedo The Chairman

notified the members of the Senate that a private office in the Memorial

Library (G-1l6) had been allocated for Senate use.

Professor Robert Anthony reported that two subcommittees of the Senate

are presently at work reviewing the grading system and would be offering

recommendations at an early meeting of the Senate. The other subcommittee,

operating within the Faculty Affairs Committee, is headed by Professor

Norman Haaser. It was reported that a joint meeting was held by the two

groups to hear Mr. Leo Corbaci's views, suggestions and recommendations on

the subjects of student averages, requirements for good academic standing,

and pass-fail courses. Professor Anthony reported on these matters in detail

and invited comment s and suggestions from Senate members. One matter which

evoked considerable discussion was the possibility of pass-fail grading on

a limited basis.

-2-

Professor Joseph Tihen, Chairman of the Committee on Faculty Affairs,

reported that a general statement on tenure would be ready for consideration

and disposition at the next meeting.

Professor Gerald Jones, Chairman of the Committee on Student Affairs,

reported that his committee had discussed the resolution to recommend

severance of all ties between the Scholastic magazine and the University.

Mr. William Cullen, the Editor-in-chief of the Scholastic, was invited to

offer his views. Mr. Cullen said that a genuine effort was being made to

represent all views fairly but that it was not always possible to find

writers for each side of an issue. He said that the magazine in its present

form could probably not survive without financial assistance from the

University. After, discussion, the Committee agreed to table the resolution.

The Chairman announced that in view of the pending report and

recommendation of the Committee on Faculty Affairs concerning the tenure

question, consideration of the matter, originally scheduled for this

meeting, would be postponed to the next meeting.

(II)

The Chairman of the Senate called a recess at 7:55 P.M. and invited

Dr. Thomas Stewart, Assistant to the President for Planning and Analysis,

to address the Senate. Dr. Stewart explained that the function of his office

was to set up guidelines and standards by which (1) the University's

informational system could be made more efficient (2) its computation ability

improved and (3) its long-range growth and development systematically planned.

His first task in achieving this would be to create a ttnatural language" in

-3-

terms of population, finances, space and time. There would then be an

attempt to establish a reasonable set of priorities. By trying to determine

the implications of decisions and by avoiding costly mistakes in

administration, Dr. stewart hoped that the financial crisis in education

and related problems could be effectively handled. A question and answer

period followed.

The next meeting was set for March 4, 1969. The meeting adjourned

at 9:00 P.M.

Respectfully sUbmitted,

~~)~cs_c.(Rev.) Leonard N. Banas, C.S.C.

Secretary to the Faculty Senate

UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME

FACULTY SENATE

THE JOURNAL

March 4, 1969 -- Room 202 -- Center for Continuing Education

The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. Professor Edward

Murphy, Chairman of the Senate, presided. The Journal was approved.

The Chairman read into the Journal the Executive Committee's letter

of February 12, 1969 which was sent to the members of the Senate and later

to the entire Faculty expressing the inadvisability of calling a special

meeting of the Senate to deal with matters surrounding the recent

"pornography conference". He then called upon Professor Allen for a

report on the "review" of this matter by the Student Life Council.

Professor Allen reported on the activities of the Student Life Council

subcommittee which is conducting the investigation. OVer 700 pages of

testimony had already been compiled. From this material a report was to be

drawn up -- hopefully, before Easter.

It was reported that the Executive Committee had obtained, through

the assistance of the local AAUP chapter, copies of a brochure entitled

"The College and University Teacher" and will distribute this brochure to

members of the Faculty to help promote further discussion of professional

responsibility and improvement of the quality of teaching.

-2-

standing Committee Reports

Professor Daniel Pasto, Chairman of the Committee on University

Administration, reported that 1) Liaison men between the Faculty Senate

and the various vice-presidents of the University had been assigned. The

purpose of this program was to develop more informal means of communication

between the Faculty Senate and the Administration. The following men have

been assigned to these posts:

Professor Wayne Echelberger to Mr. Frick's office.Professor Peter Grande to Father Wilson's office.Professor William Liu to Dr. Rossini's office.Professor Daniel Pasto to Father Joyce's office.

2) Resolutions on grading, advertising policy, and parking are ready for

presentation.

Professor Joseph Tihen, Chairman of the Committee on Faculty Affairs,

reported that a resolution on academic tenure was ready for presentation.

Professor Gerald Jones, Chairman of the Committee on Student Affairs,

reported that the Faculty Senate had been asked by Father Walsh to evaluate

the Honor Code. Professors McGlinn, Eagan, Fairley and Rogers have

volunteered to study the matter and draw up recommendations.

Resolutions

Professor Haaser, seconded by Professor Pasto, moved the following

resolution:

At present four different grade averages are computed foreach undergraduate student at Notre Dame, namely, a semesteraverage, an Academic Average for computation of Dean's Honor

-3-

Lists, a University cumulative general average, and a collegecumulative general average. This practice of computing fourseparate averages is wasteful of time and effort in theRegistrar's office and is unnecessary. Since semester averagesare calculated automatically at the end of each semester, butacademic year averages require separate processing, it isrecommended that the simpler procedure be followed of generatinga new Dean's Honor List at the end of each semester based on thesemester averages. This would eliminate the need for academicyear averages. Moreover, inasmuch as the use of the Collegecumulative general average does not benefit 90 to 95% of thestUdents, this average should also be abandoned.

Be it resolved that the academic regulations of the Universitybe changed to read as follows:

36. Only course grades which are given at the University arecomputed into a general average on a cumulative basis. The coursequality points per credit hour are multiplied by the semester hoursof credits to determine quality points for the course. The sum ofthe quality points divided by the sum of the credit hours carrieddetermines the semester average. Total quality points and creditsare added to previous semester accumulations. The total credithours carried to date are then divided into the accumulated qualitypoints to date in order to compute the cumulative average.

The grade given is representative of:

Letter Grade Quality (Points per credit hour)

A

B

C

D

F

4

3

2

1

°

Superior

Good

Satisfactory -- Lowest passing gradefor a graduate student in any course.

Passing

Failure in the course. This value isalso assigned to ''wF'' -- (Withdrew failing-- nate), "AX" -- (Absent from finalexamination) or "FAit -- (Failure on accountof excessive absences from class).

-4-

Grades which are given but which are not included in the averageare as follows:

W Withdrew with permission -- Date.

S Satisfactory work (Courses without semester hours ofcredit or graduate research courses).

U -- Unsatisfactory work (Courses without semester hoursof credit or graduate research courses).

I -- Incomplete -- Reserved for graduate student ingraduate courses only.

NR No Grade Reported.

V Auditor.

Probation for Poor Scholarship

51. To be in academic good standing, a student who enters asa first semester freshman must achieve a minimum semester averageof 1.70 at the end of the first semester and a minimum semesteraverage of 1.90 at the end of the second semester or summer session.A student must obtain a cumulative average of 2.00 at the end of thethird semester and each semester thereafter. In addition to achievingthe above averages, all undergraduates must pass at least two-thirdsof the credit hours for which they are registered in any semester.An undergraduate student failing to measure up to the standardsprescribed above in all respects loses his academic good standing,followed either by probationary status during the ensuing semester,or by dismissal from the College. The undergraduate student onprobation is restricted in the privileges proper to his class, andis ineligible for participation in intercollegiate athletics.Academic good standing will be restored if the student meets theprescribed standards of scholarship at the end of the semester inwhich he was on probation. In exceptional cases, academic goodstanding may also be restored at the discretion of the dean of thecollege if the student on probation at the end of the spring semesterenrolls in the Summer Session of the University, carries at least sixhours of work, and restores his cumulative average to the minimumprescribed above.

95. To be graduated from the College of Arts and Letters,Business Administration, Engineering or science, in addition tosatisfying the other requirements the student is required to achievea cumulative average of at least 2.00.

-5-

After considerable discussion, the motion was referred to Committee for

further study.

Professor Haaser made the following motion. Professor Pasto

seconded it.

Whereas a number of Notre Dame students take courses atst. Mary's College, and probably many more st. Mary's studentstake courses at Notre Dame, some problems have arisen in .connection with student averages because of differences ingrading systems employed at the two institutions. St. Mary'suses both half-integer and integer grades on the four-pointsystem, e.g., 4.0, 3.5, 3.0, 2.5, 2, etc., while Notre Dameuses only the integer grades 4, 3, 2, 1, and O. Be itresolved that this problem should be considered by the jointNotre Dame-St. Mary's Committee.

The motion was carried.

Professor Anthony of the Committee on University Administration moved

on behalf of the Committee the following recommendations relative to Grading

and Clarification of Wording of Academic Regulation 61.

1) Exemption of Upperclassmen (Juniors and Seniors) fromfinal examinations in courses.

At the present time, the possibility of being exempted fromthe final examination in a course is a possibility restricted toSeniors in their final semester, according to Academic Regulation31. The (Senior) student must have a grade of B, or better, inthe course, and the possibility of exempting the student from thefinal examination is at the discretion of the instructor. Inpractice, other students are frequently exempted from finalexaminations, e.g., in some Freshman English courses (Rhetoricand Composition), in some ROTC courses, in other courses where afinal examination would have little significance or value as ameans of testing, and in various other unspecified courses. Aftercareful consideration, the Committee on University Administrationrecommends the exemption from the final examination in a coursebe extended to all upperclassmen (Juniors and Seniors) subject tothe following conditions: 1) The student must have a grade of B,

-6-

or better, in the course at the time of the final examination;2) All such exemptions are at the discretion of the instructorin the course.

The motion was defeated.

2) Removal of a grade of AX in a course.

It was noted that current regulations pertaining to theremoval of a grade of AX in a course have led to many abuses andto unnecessary delays in the determination of a proper final gradefor the course. The Committee on Administration recommends thatthe pertinent portion of Academic Regulation 33 be amended to read:The student's Dean will determine whether the cause of absence wassufficient to permit the taking of the examination at a later date--but not later than thirty days after the start of the next semester.Failure to remove the grade of AX within the specified time periodwill result in the grade being permanently recorded as an F. Whereextended illness or other urgent reasons require it, the Dean mayextend the allotted time to the end of the following semester.

The motion was carried.

3) Dismissal for poor scholarship (and conditions under which astudent may reapply).

Academic Regulation 61 describes the conditions under whicha student incurs dismissal from the University for low scholarship.The final sentence in Academic Regulation 61 now reads, "If astudent is dismissed, he may reapply after one year provided he canpresent evidence of potential academic success to assist the Deanin making this decision." According to Mr. Leo Corbaci, thisstatement has been taken out of context by students applying forreadmission to the University, and has been subject to twomisinterpretations: a) The statement has been interpreted by someformer students as implying that the University must readmit themwhen they reapply; b) The statement has also been interpreted bysome former students to imply that they may reapply followingdismissal for disciplinary reasons. There appears to be nojustification for the first misinterpretation. To prevent theaccidental (or deliberate) use of the second misinterpretation, itis recommended that the wording of the last sentence of AcademicRegulation 61 be changed to read: If a student is dismissed forlow scholarship, he may reapply after one year provided he canpresent evidence of potential academic success to assist the Dean inmaking this decision.

-7-

The motion was recommitted to the Committee on Administration of the

University.

Professor Darden of the Committee on Faculty Affairs presented the

following motion:

Resolution: In deciding questions relating to tenure, theUniversity of Notre Dame should follow the 1940 statementof the American Association of University Professors, asoutlined in sections 1 and 2 of the 1968 RecommendedInstitutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure.

The motion was carried. (cf. Appendix I for copy of statement referred

to in this motion.)

The Chairman of the Senate opened discussion on a letter of Reverend

Ferdinand L. Brown, C.S.C., Associate Vice President of Academic Affairs,

(cf. Journal, December 3, 1968, Appendix I) requesting the opinion of the

Faculty Senate on the following questions:

1) How does part-time service, a visiting instructorship orprofessorship, or a leave without pay affect time ofservice as related to tenure?

2) Is it possible by mutual written agreement to continue theservices of a faculty member beyond the six-year periodwithout granting tenure?

3) Is the six-year period after which tenure must be conferredtoo short?

In reply to these questions, the Senate offered the following opinions:

1. a) Part-time service should not count towards tenure.b) A visiting instructorship or professorship should count

towards tenure.c) Leave without pay should count toward tenure, if for

academic purposes; it should not so count, if fornon-academic purposes; a clear statement of whether ornot it is to be counted should be expressed in writingat the time a leave is granted.

-8-

2. It should not be possible by mutual written agreement tocontinue the services of a faculty member beyond the normalprobationary period without granting him tenure.

3. The six-year period after which tenure must be conferredis not too short.

The next meeting was set for April 2, 1969. The meeting adjourned

at 10:20 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

cg{~ ~.~ (-5- (,

(Rev.) Leonard N. Banas, C.S.C.Secretary to the Faculty Senate

-9-

Appendix I

1968 Recommended InstitutionalRegulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure

FOREWORD

These regulations are designed to enable the [named institutio~ toprotect academic freedom and tenure and the requirements of academic dueprocess. The principles implicit in these regulations are for the benefitof all who are involved with or are affected by the policies and programsof the institution. A college or university is a marketplace of ideas,and it cannot fulfill its purposes of transmitting, evaluating, and extendingknowledge if it requires conformity with any orthodoxy of content andmethod. In the words of the United states Supreme Court, "Teachers andstudents must always remain free to inquire, to stuqy and to evaluate, togain new maturity and understanding; otherwise our civilization willstagnate and die. If

1. Statement of Terms of Appointment

(a) The terms and conditions of every appointment to the facultywill be stated or confirmed in writing, and a copy of theappointment document will be supplied to the faculty member.Any subsequent extensions or modifications of an appointment,and any special understandings, or any notices incumbent uponeither party to prOVide, will be stated or confirmed in writingand a copy will be given to the faculty member.

(b) With the exception of special appointments clearly limited to abrief association with the institution, and reappointments ofretired faculty members on special conditions, all full-timeappointments to the rank of instructor or higher are of twokinds: (1) probationary appointments; (2) appointments withcontinuous tenure.

(c) Except for faculty members who have tenure status, every personwith a teaching or research appointment of any kind will be informedeach year in writing of his appointment and of all matters relativeto his eligibility for the acquisition of tenure.

2. Probationary Appointments

(a) Probationary appointments may be for one year, or for otherstated periods, subject to renewal. The total period of full-time

-10-

service prior to the acquisition of continuous tenure will notexceed seven years, including all previous full-time servicewith the rank of instructor or higher in other institutionsof higher learning, ~cept that the probationary period mayextend to as much as four years, even if the total full-timeservice in the profession thereby exceeds seven years; theterms of such extension will be stated in writing at thetime of initial appointment--the exception here noted appliesonly to an institution whose maximum probationary periodexceeds four years~ Except as provided in Regulation 12,time spent on leave of absence will count as probationaryperiod service, unless the individual and institution agreeto the contrary at the time leave is granted.

(b) Regardless of the stated term or other provisions of anyappointments, written notice that a probationary appointmentis not to be renewed will be given to the faculty member inadvance of the expiration of his appointment, as follows:(1) Not later than March 1 of the first academic year ofservice, if the appointment expires at the end of that year;or, if a one-year appointment terminates during an academicyear, at least three months in advance of its termination;(2) not later than December 15 of the second academic yearof service, if the appointment expires at the end of thatyear; or, if an initial two-year appointment terminatesduring an academic year, at least six months in advance ofits termination; (3) at least twelve months before theexpiration of an appointment after two or more years ofservice at the institution. The institution will normallynotify faculty members of the terms and conditions of theirrenewals by March 15, but in no case will such informationbe given later than April 15.

UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME

FACULTY SENATE

THE JOURNAL

April 1, 1969 -- Center for Continuing Education -- Room 202

The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. Professor Edward Murphy,

Chairman of the Faculty Senate, presided. The Chairman reported that he

had notified the respective Colleges of the need to elect replacements

for the Senators whose terms expire on May 1. The Chairman urged that

the elections be completed in sufficient time to notify the newly elected

Senators of the May 7 meeting.

Standing Committee Reports

Professor Pasto, Chairman of the Committee on Administration of the

University, said that no formal reports were ready but that several

resolutions dealing with the R.O.T.C. were under consideration.

Professor Tihen reported that the Committee on Faculty Affairs had

adopted resolutions on Faculty fringe benefits, and these would be

proposed at this meeting.

Professor Jones, Chairman of the Committee on Student Affairs, reported

that an interim report on the subject of the Honor Council would be

presented later in the meeting. He also said that a resolution on Student

-2-

Publications and on the Sale and Distribution of Literature on Campus would

be introduced under the heading of New Business.

Resolutions

Professor Haaser, seconded by Professor Pasto, moved the following

resolution:

Tentative Proposal on Pass-Fail

Inasmuch as the university seeks to encourage theenlargement of each student's academic investigations withinthe broadest reasonable limits, we urge adoption of thefollowing measure, which, without relaxing the obligationof high achievement, relieves such inquiry from some of thestrictures imposed by competition for conventional grades:

Each undergraduate, after his fourth semester, may electone course for credit per semester, in which his performancewill receive a grade of either P (pass) or F (fail).

He may exercise this option only in an elective.

Moreover, he must have the approval of his department andthe department offering the course.

He must declare his intention to be graded according tothe measure of "pass-fail" when he registers for the semester,and he must abide by his decision once the course is under way.

The resolution was discussed and carried.

Professor Hasser moved the following resolution which was seconded by

Professor Barrett:

Standards for Academic Probation andDismissar-for Poor Scholarship---

Probation and dismissal for poor scholarship andreinstatement of students dismissed for poor scholarship shouldbe based on the following principals:

-3-

1. A student should be placed on probation whenever thecaliber of his work indicates that there is doubt concerning hissuccessfully completing his degree program.

2. A student should be dismissed for poor scholarshipwhenever it becomes reasonably certain that he cannot successfullycomplete his degree program.

3. A student dismissed for poor scholarship should bereinstated by his Dean only when the Dean is convinced that thereis reasonable expectation that the student can complete his degreeprogram.

4. Cumulative averages should not be applied as a criterionfor probation for poor scholarship in such a way that a studentwho has never previously been in academic difficulty will beplaced on probation unless he performs at a level above thatrequired for the completion of his program.

5. A student who has made an obvious error in the initialselection of his program in his freshman year and yet seemscapable of success in another program should be given theopportunity to continue in a new program without excessivepenalty for this initial error.

Whereas at present four different grade averages are computedfor each undergraduate student at Notre Dame, namely, a semesteraverage, an academic year average for computation of Dean's Honorslists, a University cumulative general average, and a collegecumulative general average, and this practice of computing fourseparate averages is unnecessary and is wasteful of time and effortin the Registrar's Office;

And whereas the present standards by which a student is placedon probation for poor scholarship in his early semesters are so lowthat a student may not be plac~d on probation for poor scholarshipalthough the level of his work indicates that a decided change inhis performance, must be made if he is to complete the requirementsof his degree program;

And whereas the present regulations, by applying a requirementof a 2.00 'cumulative average retroactive to previous semesters inwhich a lower average is considered acceptable, may in fact requirethat a student who has never previously been on probation for poorscholarship must attain a semester average greater than the averagerequired for the completion of his degree program;

Be it resolved that the academic regulations of the Universitybe changed to read as follows:

-4-

36. Only course grades which are given at the Universityor under University sponsorship are computed into gradeaverages. The course quality points per credit hour aremultiplied by the semester hours of credits to determinequality points for the course. The sum of the qualitypoints divided by the sum of the credit hours carrieddetermines the average. The cumulative average consistsof the total quality points for all courses taken to dateat the University after the completion of the freshman yearof studies divided by the total of credits for such courses.

The grade given is representative of:

Letter QualityGrade (Points per

credit hour)

A 4

B 3

C 2

Superior

Good

Satisfactory -- Lowest passinggrade for a graduate student inany course.

D

F

I

o

Passing

Failure in the course. This valueis also assigned to "WF" -- (Withdrewfailing -- Date), "AX" -- (Absent fromfinal examination), or "FA" -- (Failureon account of excessive absences fromClass).

Grades which are given but which are not included in the averageare as follows:

W Withdrew with permission -- Date.

S Satisfactory work (Courses without semesterhours of credit or graduate research courses).

U -- Unsatisfactory work (Courses without semesterhours of credit or graduate research courses).

I -- Incomplete -- Reserved for graduate student ingraduate courses only.

NR No Grade Reported.

V Auditor.

-5-

51. To be in academic good standing, a student who entersas a first semester freshman must not be more than eight qualitypoints short of achieving a 2.00 average at the end of the firstsemester, e.g., if he carries 15 credit hours he must achieve aminimum average of 1.47, if he carries 16 credit hours he mustachieve a minimum average of 1.50. To be in academic goodstanding at the end of the second semester of the freshman yearor at the end of the summer session, a student must not be morethan four quality points short of achieving a 2.00 average inthe second semester or second semester and summer sessioncombined. Good standing for upperclassmen requires a minimumcumulative average of 2.00. A student's cumulative averageincludes all courses taken to date at the University after thecompletion of the freshman year of studies.

In addition to achieving the above averages, all under­graduates must pass at least two-thirds of the credit hoursfor which they are registered in any semester. An undergraduatestudent failing to meet the standards prescribed above in allrespects loses his academic good standing, followed either byprobationary status during the ensuing semester, or by dismissalfrom the University. The undergraduate student on probation isineligible for participation in intercollegiate athletics andis restricted in his participation in other extracurricularactivities. Academic good standing will be restored if thestudent meets the prescribed standards of scholarship at theend of the semester in which he is on probation. In exceptionalcases, academic good standing for the upperclassman may also berestored at the discretion of the Dean of the college if thestudent on probation at the end of the spring semester enrollsin the Summer Session of the University, carries at least sixcredit hours of work, and restores his cumulative average tothe minimum prescribed above.

90. For academic purposes, the rating of a student asfreshman, sophomore, junior, or senior depends upon the numberof semester hours he has completed. The Dean of each collegewill determine the number of hours for each classification onthe basis of the total semester hours required for a degreeconferred in his college. For certain purposes, i.e., scholar­ship and loan applications, dormitory room reservations, etc.,the rating may be based upon the number of resident hours thestudent has attempted plus the number of credit hourstransferred from another school and accepted toward the degree.

For purposes of class rank, in the freshman year ofstudies, the student's semester average will be used andfor upperclassmen the student's cumulative average will beused. Students are to be ranked by class year within eachcollege, from high to low.

-6-

91. At the end of each semester a Dean's Honors Listwill be published honoring those students who have achievedan average of 3.25 or better for the previous semester.

95. To be graduated from the college of Arts and Letters,Business Administration, Engineering or Science, in additionto satisfying the other requirements the student is requiredto achieve a cumulative average of at least 2.00.

96. The baccalaureate degrees conferred by the Universityare conferred with distinction of honor for exceptional qualitybased on a total undergraduate average for all courses takenat the University, including courses taken in the freshmanyear of studies, as follows: Cum Laude for a total undergraduateaverage of at least 3.25; Magna Cum Laude for a total under­graduate average of at least 3.50, and Maxima Cum Laude for atotal undergraduate average of at least 3.75.

Discussion

The present regulations seem to violate principals 1 and4 and as a corollary number 2. They do however allow forprincipal number 5. There seems to be a great deal of agreementthat the present semester averages of 1.40, 1.60, and 1.80 forthe first three semesters are too low and that many students whomeet these standards are, nevertheless, poor prospects for thecompletion of their degree programs. Moreover in the fifthsemester a cumulative average of 2.00 is applied which is retro­active to the third semester. This requires that a student whohas never been on academic probation but has been on theborderline must obtain as high as a 2.20 semester average inthis fifth semester to avoid going on probation.

The motion was carried.

Professor Pasto made the following motion for the Committee on

Administration of the University:

Draft Resolution £!! Faculty and Staff Endorsement

Resolved, that the Faculty Senate recommends that the administrationof the University adopt and enforce the following provisions regardingthe use of the University's name by individual members of the facultyand administrative and professional staff; further, that theseprovisions be incorporated, by the most feasible means, into all

-7-

existing and future contracts between the University and its facultyand staff.

1. When members (or any single member) of the faculty andstaff publicly endorse a product or opinion not directly relatedto their professional responsibilities at the University, they mayinclude the title of their position and the name of the Universityfor purposes of identification. In all such instances, however,the endorsement must be followed by the following statement ofdisclaimer: lJInstitutional affiliation(s) given for purposes ofidentification only and does not imply endorsement by the Universityof Notre Dame." Where individuals or groups affiliated with otherinstitutions are involved in the endorsement, the disclaimer maybe altered appropriately and the phrase "institutions involved" orits equivalent substituted for "University of Notre Dame."

a) Where such endorsement is transmitted in printedform, the disclaimer must be printed within the same spacecarrying the endorsement.

b) Where such endorsement is transmitted by radiobroadcast, the disclaimer must be spoken verbally at theconclusion of the endorsement.

c) Where such endorsement is transmitted bytelevision broadcast, the disclaimer must be spokenverbally and/or set forth in readable print at theconclusion of the endorsement.

2. The provisions set forth in paragraph 1 shall not apply

a) When the name, symbols, or campus of the Universityare not presented, expressed, or inferred in the endorsement.

b) When the endorsement applies to books, equipment, orother products, or to opinions and ideas, directly related tothe professional responsibilities of the individual facultyor staff members involved. Ho\vever , it shall be understoodthat the University of Notre Dame is in no sense a party to anyendorsement by members of its faculty and staff, whether suchendorsement carries a disclaimer or not.

3. In the case of endorsements made under the provisions ofparagraph 2b, and which do not include a disclaimer as set forthin paragraph 1, the council of vice-presidents of the Universityshall, upon application of one or more members of the faculty andstaff, make a ruling upon the relevance of the endorsement to theprofessional responsibilities of the endorser(s). In such caseswhere the council decides that the endorsement is not relevant,it shall prohibit further public issuance of the endorsement withoutthe disclaimer set forth in paragraph 1.

-8-

The motion was carried.

Professor McGlinn of the Committee on Student Affairs gave an interim

report on the Honor Council. He said that a questionnaire had been sent to

the Faculty to determine its thinking in respect to the Honor Code. A report

should be ready within a month. He reported that the students were taking

a poll of student opinion.

Mr. Sereiko, seconded by Professor Montana, moved the following

resolution on Parking:

Resolution 3£ Faculty and Staff Parking

Resolved, that the Faculty Senate recommends that theAdministration of the University adopt and enforce the followingregulations on faculty and staff parking:

The University of Notre Dame provides free parking indesignated locations for faculty and staff. The great majorityof these people park in the designated areas. However there area few who persist in parking in prohibited areas.

Thus, for the faculty and staff we propose that for eachacademic year the first two tickets issued to any faculty orstaff member for parking violations be considered as warnings.The third and any subsequent tickets will subject the owner ofthe car to a charge for the use of an unauthorized parking space.The amount of each charge shall be one dollar ($1), and will bededucted from his paycheck. All such charges collected will beallocated to the University scholarship fund.

This regulation is to be implemented by the issuance ofnew faculty and staff parking stickers. At the time of issuance,the faculty and staff members will be required to sign an agreementto abide by the parking rules, and authorize deduction from paychecksof the forementioned charges. If the faculty or staff member refusesto sign the agreement, he will not be issued a parking permit. Hewill then have no authorization to park on campus except in thevisitors' lot. If he parks elsewhere, his car will be sUbject totowing away.

-9-

Professor Fiore, seconded by Professor Haaser, moved to amend the

resolution by adding the following to the first sentence of the final

paragraph: "valid for parking in any of the designated general Faculty

and Staff parking areas respectively.". Professor Eagan made a motion to

change the fine in paragraph three from $1.00 to $10.00 to conform to the

amount charged for student violations. Professor Hennion seconded the

motion. Both amendments were carried. The main motion as amended was

carried.

Professor McLane, for the Committee on Faculty Affairs, made the following

motion:

The Faculty Senate recommends the following resolutions to theAdministration:

1) The University should eliminate the gap in bothsalary and fringe benefits which separates Notre Damefrom comparable universities and should achieve an Arating in all ranks by 1971.

2) Those retiring in the next few years should receiveapproximately the same percentage of final salary inretirement income as those who have been under the fullstep-rate plan for their years of service here.

The motion was carried.

New Business

Professor Jones reported the following resolutions on behalf of the

Committee on Student Affairs:

Resolution on Student Publications

The following resolution is recommended favorably to theFaculty Senate by the Senate Committee on Student Affairs.

-10-

The University of Notre Dame recognizes thatstudent publications are a valuable aid in establishingand maintaining an atmosphere of free and responsiblediscussion and of intellectual exploration on the campus.They are a means of bringing student concerns to theattention of the faculty and the institutional authoritiesand of formulating student opinion.

1. Student publications should be free ofcensorship and advance approval of copy, andtheir editors and managers should be free todevelop their own editorial policies and newscoverage. At the same time, this editorialfreedom entails the corollary responsibilityto be governed by the canons of responsiblejournalism.

2. Editors and managers of student publicationswhich are supported by recognized universitybodies (student government, colleges,departments, etc.) should be protected fromarbitrary suspension and removal because ofstudent, faculty, administrative or publicdisapproval of editorial policy or content.Only for proper and stated causes should editorsand managers be subject to removal and then byorderly and prescribed procedures.

Each student publication should have aseparate tripartite board of directorsresponsible for the standards of quality ofthe pUblication, the appointment of editors,and their removal for cause.

3. All student publications should prominentlystate that the opinions expressed are notnecessarily those of the College, Universityor student body.

Sale and Distribution of Literature on Campus

The proposed Senate Resolution on Student Publications doesnot deal with the question of University policy towards the saleor distribution of literature on campus which might not beconsidered legitimate student publications. Two recent examplesare "Vaciline" and "Uranus".

The Senate Committee on Student Affairs has discussed variouspolicies but has been unable to formulate a resolution which wouldrepresent a substantial majority of the committee. The committee

-11-

suggests that the Senate consider and debate the followingalternatives:

1. The University of Notre Dame should not prohibit theorderly sale or distribution of any literature oncampus except that which could be reasonably construedto be in violation of law.

2. The University of Notre Dame should establish standardsfor any literature that is to be sold or distributed oncampus. A tripartite board should judge whether a givenpublication meets the required standards.

These matters will be taken up at a subsequent meeting.

The meeting adjourned at 10:15 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

,c;t~ ?/z~, (5 C.

(Rev.) Leonard N. Banas, C.S.C.Secretary to the Faculty Senate

UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME

FACULTY SENATE

THE JOURNAL

May 7, 1969 - Room 202 - Center for Continuing Education

The meeting came to order at 7 :30 P.M. Professor Edward Murphy,

chairman of the Faculty Senate, presided. The Journal for March 4, 1969

was approved. The Journal for April 1, 1969, as amended by Professor

Williams, was also approved. The amendment to paragraph two reads:

"Professor Pasto ••• said that no formal reports were ready but that several

aspects dealing with R.O.T.C. were under consideration".

Professor Kenneth Lauer, the treasurer of the Senate, presented a

report indicating a balance on hand of $2,507.01.

The chairman read a letter from the president of the University

which referred previous Senate resolutions to appropriate bodies or

persons for further action. (cf. Appendix I)

Election of Officers

The following officers were elected by the Senate:

Professor Joseph Tihen - ChairmanProfessor Daniel Pasto - Vice-ChairmanReverend Leonard Banas, C.S.C. - SecretaryProfessor Salvatore Bella - Treasurer

-2-

Professor Edward Murphy addressed the Senate briefly and expressed

his thanks for its cooperation during the past two years. He was

presented with an engraved gavel and given an ovation upon withdrawing

from the assembly. Professor Joseph Tihen, the newly elected chairman,

presided for the remainder of the meeting.

The Senate drew up a list of nominees for the Student Life Council

which will be sent to the entire faculty for balloting.

Standing Committee Reports

Professor McGlinn, chairman of the Subcommittee on the Honor Council,

presented the following report:

Proposed Resolution ~ the Honor Council

The Honor Council has suspended activities. As a result,the former method of implementing that system, including theselection of honor council members for the following year hasnot been effected at this late date. Thus it seems inadvisableto attempt to revitalize the system for the fall semester.

Therefore be it resolved that the university should continueto follow the procedures for insuring academic honesty as theseare outlined in Father Walsh's letter of Feb. 14, 1969, at leastthrough the first semester of next year; and that a jointcommittee of the faculty and student senates be formed as soonas possible to examine all relevant questions, to consider inparticular the results of the recent student and facultyquestionnaires, and to draw up appropriate legislation.

The resolution was carried. Professor Eagan recommended that the

joint subcommittee continue to serve in this capacity, and the chair so

directed.

-3-

Professor Jones, chairman of the Committee on Student Affairs,

summarized his committee's dealings with the matter of student publications

and presented the following resolution:

Resolution on Student Publications

The following resolution is recommended favorably to the FacultySenate by the Senate Committee on Student Affairs:

The University of Notre Dame recognizes thatstudent publications are a valuable aid in establishingand maintaining an atmosphere of free and responsiblediscussion and of intellectual exploration on the campus.They are a means of bringing student concerns to theattention of the faculty and the institutional authoritiesand of formulating student opinion.

1. Student publications should be free ofcensorship and advance approval of copy,and their editors and managers should befree to develop their own editorialpolicies and news coverage. At the sametime, this editorial freedom entails thecorollary responsibility to be governedby the canons of responsible journalism.

2• Editors and managers of student publicationswhich are supported by recognized universitybodies (stUdent government, colleges,departments, etc.) should be protected fromarbitrary suspension and removal because ofstudent, faculty, administrative or publicdisapproval of editorial policy or content.Only for proper and stated causes shouldeditors and managers be subject to removaland then by orderly and prescribed procedures.

Each student publication should have aseparate tripartite board of directorsresponsible for the standards of quality ofthe publication, the appointment of editors,and their removal for cause.

3. All student publications should prominentlystate that the opinions expressed are notnecessarily those of the College, Universityor student body.

-4-

Professor Quigley made a motion to amend the second paragraph of

section two. Professor Sniegowski seconded the motion. The amended

paragraph should read:

Each student publication should have a separate tripartiteboard of directors. This board is responsible for thepublication policy and the standards of quality of thepublication, the appointment of editors, and their removalfor cause.

The motion was carried.

Father Flanigan, seconded by Professor McGlinn, moved the following

addition to paragraph two of section two:

This tripartite board does not have any control over theeditorial policy.

The motion was defeated.

The resolution as amended was carried.

Professor Tihen, former chairman of the Committee on Faculty Affairs,

presented the following resolution:

Additional Resolution on Retirement Policies

At the meeting of April 1, the Faculty Senate passed aresolution recommending that: "Those (faculty members)retiring in the next few years should receive approximatelythe same percentage of final salary in retirement income asthose who have been under the full step-rate plan for theiryears of service here."

A couple of related resolutions presented at that meetingwere referred to the Faculty Affairs Committee. That Committeenow recommends to the Senate the following resolution, which isat least in part an elaboration and expansion of the recommendationabove:

-5-

That a more realistic University minimum retirement income(for those with twenty-five years or more of service atNotre Dame), geared to the yearly percentage increase inannual salary, should be announced each year. Also, widowspast age 60 should have a minimum retirement incomeequivalent to two-thirds of the minimum retirement incomeof the married couple.

Note: Since the last minimum ($5000, which includes husband's andwife's social security payments) was announced in September, 1966,the average salary has increased over 5% a year--and the cost ofliving about 8% fo~ these two years. Hence if $5000 was an adequateminimum in 1967, it should be $5500 in 1969, and probably continueto go up about 5% every year.

Professor Jones, seconded by Professor McLane, offered the amendment

that paragraph three should read:

That a more realistic University minimum retirement income (forthose with twenty-five years or more of service at Notre Dame),geared to the yearly percentage increase in annual salary, shouldbe announced each year. In those cases when the University issupplementing the faculty member's retirement income the Universityshould, in the event of his death, supplement his widow's incometo two-thirds of the minimum retirement income of the marriedcouple.

The motion was carried. The resolution as amended was carried.

Professor Montana of the Committee on University Administration moved

the adoption of the following report:

Report of the Faculty Senate Committee on-UnIVersity Administration --

At the suggestion of the University Registrar, the Committee onUniversity Administration was asked to consider the matter ofacademic credit for ROTC courses.

The Committee has completed a series of discussions with Col.Ferrari and Abbott of the Air Force, Col. Lavin of the Army, andCapt. Papas of the Naval ROTC units. Many aspects of the ROTC

-6-

program were openly discussed. Resumes of the structuring of theROTC units, course syllabi, and the academic background of theinstructors were provided. The following paragraphs of this reportreview the major highlights of these resumes, which we feel mustbe carefully considered before rendering judgement.

Synopsis of Reports by ROTC

Why ROTC? The Air Force, Army, and Naval Academies produce onlyabout 2000 officers annually compared to a collective requirementof about 30,000 officers. Officer Candidate Schools provide onlya relatively few. Expansions of the Military Academies couldprovide the required number of officers. However, it is felt thatif we must have the Military, it should be a predominantly civilianeducated Military. The ROTC programs are capable of providing therequisite number of officers annually at a considerably lower cost(less than $2000 for a graduate of a ROTC program compared to anestimated $48,000 for a graduate of one of the Military academies)and with a better all around background.

Why ROTC for the Students? There are basically three reasons thestudents enroll voluntarily in a ROTC program.

1. Protection from the draft until their studies arecompleted, including an available four years forgraduate study.

2. If the student must, or wants, to serve in abranch of the military, he would prefer to enteras an officer.

3. Currently 180 full fellowships are available toNotre Dame ROTC students; this figure beingprojected to increase to 240 full fellowships(worth approximately $900,000) in the near future.

What is the Commitment of the Student? In the Air Force and ArmyROTC programs the freshman and sophomore years are considered atrial period, the student having the prerogative of leaving theprogram at any time. On entering the junior year a commitment issigned to serve a number of years on active duty, a number of yearson active reserve duty, and a number of years on inactive reserveduty, generally totalling 6 to 8 years. The Naval ROTC program isa committed four year program followed by active duty.

On an average, 15% of the officers continue on in the Military asa career after fulfilling their initial commitment.

What comprises a typical ROTC course program? Approximately 50%of the courses are strictly military in nature; for example militarystructure and tactics, weaponry, etc. The other portion of courses

-7-

are of a less military nature; for example military history,structure of government, international relations, etc. The NavalROTC program currently accepts for credit in their program coursesin the latter areas taught in the departments of Government andHistory. Experimental programs are being developed by the AirForce in five Universities, and the Army is currently developinga new curriculum at Notre Dame to incorporate similar changes.

In each of the military areas the student takes one 3-credit hourcourse per semester in addition to Leadership Laboratory courses(drill) for which no credit is given. The amount of drill hasbeen reduced in one of the ROTC units.

The maximum number of ROTC credits accepted toward graduation varieswith the College; ranging from 6 to 12.

General Comments and Observations by theCommittee ~ University Administration-

1. Currently at Notre Dame approximately 1200 students are enrolledin an entirely voluntary program which represents one-fifth ofthe students at Notre Dame.

2. The placement of military personnel on the ROTC staffs occurs byrecommendation by the military of an individual to the UniversityAdministration. The Office of Academic Affairs either accepts ordeclines the proposed staff member.

3. The Committee did not consider the matter of faculty status forthe ROTC staff. This matter should be taken up by the FacultySenate Committee on Faculty Affairs.

4. In conclusion, the committee has tried to carry out an analysisof the ROTC programs and their relationship to Notre Dame. Inthis effort we have had the excellent cooperation of thecommanding officers of each segment of the ROTC, and we wish toacknowledge and commend them for their cooperation.

The majority of the committee feels that the education of theofficers of the U. S. Armed Forces should take place as much aspossible on the campuses of our universities with broad exposureto the social and political problems of our times, and not inthe relatively shielded and mission-oriented atmosphere of themilitary institutions.

RESOLVED, that academic credit be granted only forcourses taught by faculty members holding anappointment in one of the regular (that is, non-military)departments of the university; that appropriate

-8-

authorities may select, certify, or otherwise designateany number of such courses for the purposes of theReserve Officers Training program; that no limit interms of credit hours be placed on the number of suchcourses that students may select other than thoselimits imposed by the degree programs of the severaldepartments and colleges; however, that in no sensedoes this resolution imply recommendation or approvalof a major or other degree program in the specificarea of military training or studies.

After considerable discussion, the motion was carried. (cf. Appendix II

for a minority report of the Committee on University Administration)

New Business

The chairman reported that the Student Senate adopted a resolution

concerning building structures on campus. Copies will be distributed and

the matter will be referred to the appropriate committee for consideration.

The meeting adjourned at 11:10 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

/) ~~ tfl( I C $-(.

(Rev.) Leonard N. Banas, C.S.C.Secretary to the Faculty Senate

Appendix I

Letter of Father Hesburgh to the Secretary of the Faculty Senate,

dated May 5, 1969.

Many thanks for your letter of April 23 regardingthe actions of the Faculty Senate.

I have sent I (Tentative Proposal on Pass-Fail),II (Standards for Academic Probation and Dismissalfor Poor Scholarship), and III (Draft Resolutionon Faculty and Staff Endorsement) to Father Brown,the Secretary of the Academic Council, for theconsideration of that body. No. IV (ResolutionFaculty and Staff Parking) I am sharing with FatherWilson, and No. V (Resolution of Fringe Benefits)with Father Walsh.

Appendix II

Minority Report of the Committee ~ Administration

The minority concur with the majority report and resolution throughoutwith the exception of the last sentence of the report:

The Majority of the committee feels that education ofthe officers of the U. S. Armed Forces should take placeas much as possible on the campuses of our universitieswith broad exposure to the social and political problemsof our times and not in the relatively shielded andmission-oriented atmosphere of military institutions.

The minority feel that the committee's investigations were not sufficientlybroad to justify such a general conclusion at this time. We believe thatthe committee should seek additional evidence and hear further arguments,including critical arguments, before passing upon the question of anindefinite continuance of ROTC programs on this campus.

MINU,TES OF A SPEljIAL MEETING OF:

Rev. Charles I. McCarragher, C.S.C., and Messrs. Edmund A. Stephan,lw1r. Edward Murphy, Philip J. Faccenda and Richard Rossi, Thursday,July 18, 1968, 2:00 p.m. in the office of Mr. Stephan, 231 SouthLaSalle street, Chicago, Illinois.

The above group convened to discuss the composition, size, methodof selection and other attendant matters concerning the proposedStudent Life Council at the University of Notre Dameo

Mro Rossi presented an informal brief of the propositions to beconsidered.

The following conclusio~s were reached at the meeting after extendeddiscussion of each subject:

Composition of the Council: The Council shall be composed of equalmembers of Students, Faculty and Administrative representatives.All matters shall be decided by a simple majority vote of the repre­sentatives attending a meeting provided that a quorum is present.

Size: There shall be eight (8) representatives of each of theStudents, Faculty and Administration o

Method of Selection: There shall be two representatives of eachgroup who shall serve ex officio and six representatives of eachgroup who shall be elected by their respective constituents. Theex officio representatives shall be the Student Body President,Student Body Vice President, the Chairman of the Faculty Senate,the Chairman of the Student Affairs Connnittee of the FacultySenate, the Vice President of Student Affairs and the Dean ofStudents.

Time of Election for 1968: It was agreed that each group would havetheir representatives properly elected prior to Monday, October 14,1968. It is presumed that the initial formation meeting of the newStudent Life Council "TOuld be convened on this date.

Minutes of a Special Meeting - 2

Method of Election:

The students shall conduct a general election from the entirestudent body.

The Faculty shall democratically select their representatives fromthe entire faculty, the exact method to be determined by the FacultySenate.

The Administration, who for this purpose, shall mean the VicePresidents of the University, the Rectors of the Residence Halls,the Priest Prefects, the Senior Lay-Prefects, who are part of thepermanent faculty (such as Dr. Carberry), and certain professionalcounselors, shall elect from their number their representatives.

Quorum: The new Council shall determine its own ByLaws, however,this meeting strongly recommends that no fewer than five (5)members of each group be required to constitute a quorum.

Judicial Board: The new Council shall be empowered to appoint onerepresentative of each of the StUdents, Faculty and Administration,either from the Councilor otherwise, who shall constitute a TriPartite Appeals panel to hear appeals from the decisions of thevarious judicial panels and councils empowered to act at theUniversity.

Petition: The Student Life Council shall be required to hear assoon as possible any petition presented from the student body whichshall bear the actual signatures of at least 500 regular student s.