FACULTY MEETING AGENDA APRIL 20, 2006

FOUNDERS ROOM 12:00 P.M.

I. Call to Order II. Business A. Approval of Minutes of 24 March 2006 B. Approval of 2006 Graduates

C. Elections to faculty standing committees D. Motion from Faculty Council to Approve Revisions to Tenure Review Process E. Motion from Academic Senate (Review Committee) to Clarify Restriction on Double Majors and Minors F. Motion from Academic Senate Regarding Final Exam Policies III. Adjournment

FACULTY MEETING AGENDA APRIL 21, 2006

HIERONYMUS LOUNGE 3:30 P.M.

I. Call to Order II. Devotion III. Business A. Motion from Faculty Council to Approve Revisions to Tenure Review Process B. Motion from Academic Senate (Review Committee) to Clarify Restriction on Double Majors and Minors C. Motion from Academic Senate Regarding Final Exam Policies IV. Presidential Farewell 5:00 p.m. V. Adjournment

Reception for Stan & Judy Gaede in Kerrwood Hallway

Commencement Participants – May 2006 NAME Major 1 Major 2 Major 3

Kendall Rose Abro BiologyAshley Amelia Adams Communication Studies

Christine Lin Adams Social ScienceSarah Olayinka Akinwale SociologyAlexis Christine Alegria* English Spanish

Adrianne M. Allen SpanishCasey Allen Anderson English

Erin Beth Anderson SociologyLindsey Elizabeth Anderson* Sociology History

Megan Elaine Argabright MathematicsElaine Katherine Arkin Sociology

Teri A. Armstrong* Political Science HistoryNadine M. Aurhammer Kinesiology

Ava Ray Avedissian Political ScienceNicholas Adam Baer Religious Studies

Jonathan Jefferys Bailey Economics and BusinessAdam Jeffrey Bailon SpanishJordan Keith Ballard Political Science

Melanie Anne Bargaehr SociologyMagda Barnes Art

Bethany Crisula Barsotti BiologyKevin Dean Bartel Kinesiology

Chase Alexander Barton* Economics and Business PhilosophyStephanie Megan Bartsch SociologyJessica Comfort Basefsky Biology

Jessica Joanne Baumgartner SpanishMarisa Lynn Bedrosian Communication StudiesChristine Marie Belew English

Rebecca Leigh Bell EnglishAudrey Michelle Benson Economics and Business

Leah Anne Benson Economics and BusinessKristen Elizabeth Bergman English

Amy K. Bergsten Liberal StudiesPaula Lucille Berry Art

Jacquelyne Rae Bianchi PsychologyDaniel Charles Bietz Kinesiology

Brandon Jay Blank KinesiologyKara Lynn Blincow Economics and Business

Jennifer Michelle Bliss BiologyChristina Nichole Boland Liberal Studies

Gordon Jirair Bostick* Political Science HistoryMarie Elizabeth Bourns** Economics and Business Social Science Political Science

Erin Elizabeth Brehm Theatre ArtsBenjamin Ray Brookshire English

Nicholas James Burwell Computer ScienceCourtney Tyler Butler Political Science

Benjamin Rollins Caldwell* Economics and Business ArtErin Brooke Call Communication Studies

Josiah Michael Cameron Political ScienceMegan Ashley Campbell Communication Studies

Lauren Michelle Cano* Communication Studies SpanishMelissa Ivonne Chaty Psychology

Chase Patrick Clanton* Biology MathematicsAmber Marie Cole FrenchJill Renee Collins Communication Studies

Courtney Allison Conboy Liberal StudiesJonathan Nicolas Condit Political ScienceMichael Albert Conrad II Theatre Arts

Emalia Kaiulani Cornwell Communication StudiesJoseph Gregory Cover Economics and Business

Stephanie Diane Crockett Communication StudiesGwen Rebecca Cronin-Prather Social Science

Nicholas Blair Debban SociologyKatharine Dietrich Religious Studies

Hilary Grace Dimitruk SpanishBrandon Howard Dockery Political Science

Jennifer Marie Dockery* Art Social ScienceAmber Nicole Donovan KinesiologyColette Nichole Dotters Economics and Business

Meghan Button Doyle Communication StudiesLaura Anne Drake BiologyElyse Ashley Edler Sociology

Jenna Deanne El Fattal PsychologyRose Elaine Elfman* Theatre Arts English

Kimberly Ann Erickson* Chemistry BiologyKatherine Lynne Estrada Communication Studies

Kaimana Grace Farris EnglishMegan Dawn Fate Communication Studies

Rachel Lawton Finch KinesiologyQuinlan Kathleen Flaherty Communication Studies

Nathan Aubrie Fleming* Biology EnglishValerie Darnelle Foskett English

Jamie Alexis Freeman KinesiologyBetsie Ann Frei* Sociology Spanish

Ellen Renee Friesen BiologyGarrett Paul Fujiwara* Economics and Business Social Science

Katie Christine Gaddini SociologyKirsten Lynn Gaede* Art EnglishDarcy Leigh Galvan Art

Amy Krista Gammelgard KinesiologyKyle Robert Gates Psychology

Amber Rae George Religious StudiesHarriett Rachel Ghormley Art

Jessica Ruth Gintert SpanishLindy Ann Giusta Psychology

Skylar Douglas Glasier Political ScienceZachary Thomas Gordon* Biology Chemistry

Jessica Loree Goulder KinesiologyScott Michael Governor Economics and Business

Alison Ruth Graff HistoryJaclyn Nicole Grant Sociology

Kathryn Louise Greene* English HistoryMegan Jane Grieshaber Religious Studies

Sarah Elizabeth Gruss KinesiologyMatthew Vas Gunner Chemistry

Amber Elizabeth Haag BiologyJoanna Marie Hallam* Art English

Amy Lauren Halliburton Communication StudiesPhoebe Anna Hamann* Kinesiology Economics and Business

Daniel Robert Hamm PsychologySteven A. Hardesty Political Science

Timothy Jon Harvey KinesiologyPaul Martin Heckman Economics and Business

Theresa Jean Heidbrink EnglishAndrew Glen Helms Political Science

Rebecca Lynn Hensley SociologyJennifer Emiko Higa SociologyTaylor SueAnne Hill Kinesiology

John Tilford Hilp Computer ScienceChristopher Rick Hodgman Economics and Business

Lindsey Anne Hogg Communication StudiesAllison Jean Holland Kinesiology

Jessica Lynn Holmquist BiologyDaniel R. Hoss* Biology Chemistry

Emily Ann Huebscher EnglishKara Lynn Huff Psychology

Thomas Kristian Hugo PhilosophyEmilee Rachelle Hurlbert Music

Jessica Diane Hynes Liberal StudiesLeah Jo Isaak Economics and Business

Danae Ann Jacobson EnglishDeborah Lynn Jennings History

Bradley Alan Jensen Computer ScienceMark Peter Joens English

Natalie Cale Johnson PsychologyKaris Elizabeth Jolley English

Nicole Christine Jones English-Modern LanguageMatthew Martin Kaddatz* Computer Science Religious Studies

Kylea Anne Kangles Liberal StudiesEmily Jeanne Katz Communication Studies

Brian Thomas Keaney Social ScienceKatherine Colleen Kelly Psychology

Kristin Margaret Kidd MathematicsGeorgette Marie Kightlinger* Communication Studies English

Kathleen Laurel King ArtLucas Raymond King* Neuroscience BiologyMatthew David Kissel Music

JoAnn Elaine Klandrud EnglishKelly Marie Kleist Biology

Stephanie Nicole Kremmel Religious StudiesKelli Jo Kugler Neuroscience

Lilit Kusheryan SociologyLindsey Janel Kwartz English

Rachel Marie Labarbera BiologyKelsey Anne Laird Economics and Business

Josiah David Lamz Economics and Business

Heidi Rochelle Lawton Political ScienceShannon Jeanette Leal Economics and Business

Andrea Mayumi Lee Liberal StudiesJuliana Kaye Lee Sociology

Valerie Claire Lehman* Neuroscience BiologyJessica Sharon Lemkuil ArtKirsten Edeltraut Letsch Art

April Ann Lewis Liberal StudiesChelsea Lynn Lewis Communication Studies

Robin M. Long Communication StudiesApril Doris Louie Chemistry

Elise Noelle Luna Communication StudiesKalin Andrew Lundquist Economics and Business

Shane Douglas Macdonell Political ScienceCailin Brenna Maguire Kinesiology

Christopher Daniel Mahoney KinesiologyMiriam Amber Majernik SociologyChristine Laura Manley BiologyJustin Dickinson Marks Mathematics

Rebecca Anne Martin ArtAaron Martinez Kinesiology

Charlene Grace Martinez EnglishCasey John Massena Religious StudiesJesse Allen Mathews Religious Studies

Amanda Marie Mathisen* Religious Studies SociologyJohn Michael Mayer Biology

Lori Ann McCoy Economics and BusinessRyan Jeffrey McGill Political Science

Todd James McKillop SociologyShomari Alexander McLemore Kinesiology

Melissa Ruth McLeod MathematicsMary Katherine McManemin* English-Modern Language Spanish

Erica Lynn McMurray Religious StudiesMamie Elizabeth McNeil Sociology

Kiah Jordan Meidal* Economics and Business SpanishJane Michelle Messah* History EnglishAllison Elizabeth Miller Liberal Studies

Amanda Barbara Miller** Neuroscience Chemistry BiologyShawn Curtis Miller Psychology

Candice Nicole Mingleton Social ScienceDerek Christopher Mohr* Economics and Business Social Science

William Tyler Moore Engineering PhysicsKatharine Grogan Mooty SociologyRachel Elizabeth Morris Religious StudiesMatthew Donald Moser Economics and Business

Kristina Ruth Mow EnglishConnor Xavier Murphy Religious Studies

Liam Sean Murphy Engineering PhysicsDiana Ruth Musson Social Science

Jennifer Lynn Nadler Theatre ArtsGregory James Noblitt Economics and Business

Mary Elizabeth Noell Liberal StudiesAlison Adams Noseworthy Neuroscience

Virginia Ruth Nussey EnglishRachel Anne Ockwell English

Megan Jean Odell Liberal StudiesMeghan Kathleen O'Donogue Biology

Jeffrey Oshiro Oehlman KinesiologyAdrienne Aiko Ohashi Kinesiology

Luke Stephen Oliver Religious StudiesBrian Thomas Olson SpanishAlexis Justine Ortiz* English Spanish

Jessica Lorraine Osborn ChemistryDominick Vincent Joseph Paluso Kinesiology

Kate Lynn Panziera* Biology Economics and BusinessSara Elizabeth Park Communication Studies

Heather Lynn Parrish BiologyAlicia Alexandra Parsons Biology

Katie Noel Parsons PsychologyMary Rebecca Patterson Music

Shannon Christine Patton Communication StudiesErin Rebecca Pederson Religious Studies

Myrna Lynn Perez* Biology HistoryCarver Clarke Peterson Political Science

Michael J. Petty MathematicsMisty Nicole Plumb Kinesiology

Lauren Kendall Podley BiologyKristyn Ann Pointer Sociology

Benjamin David Posluch EnglishRachel Kate Prandini* Political Science Philosophy

Nicholas Erik Price* Art EnglishLauren Marie Pugh* Biology History

Jonathan Edward Raimer* Economics and Business HistoryDominique Alexandra Rastrelli Communication Studies

Julie Jessica Ray ChemistryJonathan Michael Rea Chemistry

Andrew James Reid EnglishShannon Michele Reid Liberal Studies

Jennifer Lynn Renfer KinesiologyMicah Richard Rice Economics and Business

Carolyn Snowden Rich Liberal StudiesElizabeth Joy Richards Sociology

Ian Conrad Richenbacher Economics and BusinessKrista Elaine Roberts* Communication Studies Spanish

Melissa Juanita Roberts Communication StudiesPeter Jonathan Rumford Kinesiology

Kevin Michael Saiki BiologyJohn Stephen Sandoval Economics and BusinessJonathan Lawson Saur Communication Studies

Claire Elise Savin NeuroscienceJennifer Leanne Scarbrough BiologyLaura Elizabeth Schambers Neuroscience

Samantha Sue Scheidler* Economics and Business ChemistryErin Grace Schenk Kinesiology

Katherine A. Schick Liberal StudiesMicah Jeffrey Schloss Biology

Caroline Bonaire Schoo BiologyNicholas Mather Schoolland Political Science

Tyler Mitchell Schuld* Economics and Business PhilosophyDerrin Michele Shafer Spanish

Brittany Elizabeth Shank Communication StudiesDaniel Philip Shank Computer Science

Abigail Elizabeth Sheets EnglishKathrina May Sicam English

Alissa Li-Wen Sie MathematicsKarl Robert Smerecnik Communication Studies

Alana Glynne Smith Economics and BusinessCrystal Jayne Smith Economics and BusinessLindsey Marie Smith Religious Studies

Stephanie Louise Smith* Spanish ArtAnna Melissa Sommermann Religious Studies

Sabrah Faye Spencer AnthropologyHeather Lynn Splain Liberal Studies

Amy Elizabeth Sprouse Liberal StudiesJennifer Marie Stanford* Philosophy Law and SocietyHolly Christine Stewart* Kinesiology Economics and BusinessMelissa Jane Stocking* History French

Robin Diane Stoner BiologyJacob Michael Stretz Biology

Brenton Ashley Strine* Philosophy EnglishMichael Joshua Strongman Physics

Alyson June Strother ArtRachel Anna Sutherland* Art Communication Studies

Barnabas Zhi Yao Teo* Chemistry Economics and BusinessCasey Christina Thomas English

Rebecca Ann Thompson* Economics and Business Communication StudiesGregory John Tocco Biology

Ryan Raines Toussaint Engineering PhysicsErica Mercedes Trapps Sociology

Amy Noel Trollinger* English FrenchAaron Colin Tudor Communication Studies

Olympia Sina Alailima Tuliaupupu KinesiologyLaura Joanne Tuohey-Mote Social Science

Warren Zachary Turner HistoryMatthew D. Tyler Religious Studies

Sara Ellen Uhlman BiologyClint P. Unander Communication Studies

Christopher James Van Mourick Economics and BusinessMatthew Christopher Van Peursem Religious Studies

Fatima Marlene Vazquez PsychologyCarson Allen Veldstra Chemistry

Mia Kaisa Vesanen Liberal StudiesJohn Paul Vicory Biology

Joseph D. Villanueva SpanishGregory Burton Wadsworth Music

Courtney May Walker BiologyMaggie Ruth Walsh Communication Studies

Megan Noelle Walton Communication StudiesRebecca A. Walton Biology

Kyle Padia Watters* Physics Computer ScienceLyndsey Patricia Weaver Biology

Ryan Dean Weeda Engineering PhysicsHaley Shaun West Kinesiology

William Jae Wiersma Political ScienceNaomi Ruth Wiggins* English Art

Meredith Lee Wilkinson HistoryKatiann M. Willems Biology

Kristen Lucille Williams Economics and BusinessLuke Coyle Williams Kinesiology

Sharon Marie Williams ArtAllegra Danielle Willis Communication Studies

Kaci Lillian Winter EnglishDavid Glenn Witheridge Biology

Laura M. Wong Communication StudiesNathan John Wood Kinesiology

Ashley Marie Wright EnglishJennifer Yinhee Yoo English

Crystal Joy Young KinesiologyChristie A. Youssef BiologyKristin Lee Zamora Economics and Business

Daniel Adam Zia Enterprise Dev & Comm StudiesSarah Maria Zia* Sociology Spanish

Kiel Matthew Zielke Economics and BusinessKacey Megann Zundel Biology

Proposed Changes to Review & Tenure Procedures 2.2.1.4. Procedure Personnel Committee Reviews & Recommendations. Typically, the intermediate tenure review will occur in the spring semester of the third year, and the final tenure review in the spring of the sixth year. Promotion reviews not connected with the tenure process typically will occur in the fall semester. a) For each promotion and tenure review, each faculty member being reviewed is responsible to

demonstrate sufficient progress toward tenure and promotion in the form of a portfolio presented to the Personnel Committee. Required items include: 1) a current curriculum vitae; 2) personal statement (self-assessment essay and faith-learning portfolio as described in section

2.2.1.3); 3) course evaluations for all courses taught during the previous two years, or the results of alternative

means of evaluation previously approved by the Provost and the Personnel Committee; 4) the schedule and class rosters for each current course; 5) a list of students for potential interviews; 6) a list of faculty for potential interviews; 7) a list of external references to be contacted (required of candidates for promotion to full professor,

optional in other reviews); b) At the time of each review for promotion and tenure, the Personnel Committee will assign one of its

members (“reviewer”) to each faculty member undergoing review (“reviewee”). The reviewer must be at least of the same rank as that for which the faculty member is a candidate, and must be tenured in the case of a final tenure review. The Personnel Committee shall endeavor to avoid conflict of interest when assigning members to review cases. Faculty not on the Personnel Committee who believe an assignment may result in a conflict of interest may state their objections to the Personnel Committee through the Provost. Both in gathering data and in writing reports and summaries, reviewers shall endeavor to ensure confidentiality and, except in the case of student course evaluations, shall disregard comments or evaluations for which authorship is not claimed. Responsibilities of reviewers are as follows: 1) review the faculty member’s personnel file, including departmental assessment summaries and any

prior reviews; 2) meet with the reviewee at least once toward the beginning of the review process in order to provide

an orientation to the process and both ask and answer questions, and again toward the end of the process in order to address any issues or concerns raised during the review process (see number 9, below);

3) solicit written feedback from and interview each member of a reviewee’s department (alternate means of soliciting input may be required if a departmental colleague is out of the area; in such instances telephone interviews or extensive written feedback should suffice; a formal departmental recommendation is not required);

4) solicit evaluations from faculty colleagues and administrators who have relevant information;

5) examine student course evaluations provided by the reviewee; 6) attend two class sessions taught by the reviewee, preferably of two different courses; 7) interview at least eight students from classes taught the previous two years, one-half of the number

of students interviewed selected from a list provided by the reviewee and the other half chosen by the reviewer from class rosters;

8) solicit external reviews and evaluations of professional competence in teaching and scholarship (required for candidates for promotion to full professor; optional in other reviews);

9) provide the reviewee with a written list of any problems or concerns raised by the review process at least 24 hours in advance of a face-to-face meeting between reviewer and reviewee, and allow the reviewee the opportunity to respond in writing to such concerns, within 48 hours following the meeting;

10) prepare a written report for the Personnel Committee’s deliberation and recommendation (the reviewee’s written response, if there is one, shall be presented to the Committee together with the report for consideration during the scheduled review meeting);

c) The chair of the Personnel Committee (or vice chair, as appropriate) will notify the reviewee of the Committee’s recommendation on the day the review is concluded (the conclusion is reached when the summary statement is finalized). Within three weeks of this date, the Provost will meet with the reviewee to discuss the review and its implications, and to obtain written acknowledgment jointly signed by the Provost and the reviewee of notification of the above mentioned recommendation. If the Personnel Committee has recommended against tenure or promotion, the Provost will seek to arrange a conversation with the faculty member within 24 hours of the negative recommendation.

2.5 Faculty Development 2.5.1: Leave 2.5.2: Conferences and Travel 2.5.3: Professional Development a) Faculty Mentoring: As a resource for newly hired full-time faculty, a mentor will be appointed

from outside the department (selected by the Provost in consultation with the department chair) to help the faculty member adjust to institutional practices and expectations, to answer questions as they arise, and to create a safe space for asking questions and addressing difficulties. While the nature of the mentoring relationship is largely informal, a probationary faculty member may request that the mentor be involved in early probationary assessment meetings and processes. Guidelines for mentors will be provided by the Provost's office.

b) Initial Departmental Assessment: To develop newly hired full-time faculty, a departmental assessment shall be conducted in the second year of employment. 1) The assessment shall occur in the fall semester of the second year and shall consist of both a

written summary and a meeting among the probationary faculty member, the department chair, and the Provost. Such meeting shall be initiated and scheduled by the Provost’s office. In the event that the department chair having the most relevant information is off-campus or no longer serving as chair when the assessment must take place, the Provost (in consultation with the department and faculty member) shall designate the most appropriate person to submit the written assessment and attend the required meeting. The probationary faculty member may request that the mentor be included in the assessment process and/or the meeting.

2) The probationary faculty member will provide the chair with a progress portfolio not later than the first day of class of the faculty member’s second year of service. The progress portfolio shall include: an up-to-date curriculum vitae, a 2-3-page self-assessment addressing his or her performance in the first year according to the full range of responsibilities outlined in the Faculty Handbook section 2.2.1, and any evidence which seems appropriate to the self-assessment.

3) Following receipt of the progress portfolio, the department chair shall provide the Provost’s office and the probationary faculty member a written assessment, identifying both strengths and areas for improvement, relative to section 2.2.1 in particular, and requirements for promotion and tenure in general. In preparation for the written assessment, the department chair shall: attend no fewer than two of the probationary faculty member’s classes, preferably in two different courses and in two different semesters, during the faculty member’s first year of service, paying particular attention both to professional competence and general pedagogical effectiveness; read the entire set of the faculty member’s first-year teaching evaluations; solicit feedback from departmental

colleagues and students, formally or informally; and meet with the probationary faculty member at least twice during the first year both to provide feedback and to solicit questions or concerns.

4) Within two weeks of the joint assessment meeting, any participant (chair, mentor, or probationary faculty member) may provide additional written response to the Provost. Such responses will be placed in the probationary faculty member’s personnel file, together with the rest of the department assessment documents and a summary statement written by the Provost.

c) Fifth-Year Departmental Assessment: The department chair and a probationary faculty member shall meet during the fall semester of the fifth year of probationary service in order to discuss progress toward tenure and promotion. The summary statement arising out of the intermediate tenure review (conducted by the Personnel Committee) will serve as a catalyst and benchmark for discussion and goal-setting. Following this meeting, the department chair will notify the Provost’s office that such meeting has taken place.

d) Curricular and Professional Projects e) Summer Session Salary and Policies f) Loans for Completion of a Terminal Degreeg) Accountability of Full Professors----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2.2 Evaluation, Promotion and Tenure

Evaluation of faculty for promotion and tenure benefits the individual and the College. The procedures are similar, but particular criteria are weighted differently depending on the objective of the review. These differences correspond to the complementary roles promotion and tenure play in accomplishing the educational mission and goals of the College. a) The purpose of the intermediate review is to make a judgment concerning the reviewee’s progress

towards tenure. Is the candidate on a trajectory that would lead to tenure? b) The tenure review, although based in part on the criteria for the Associate Professorship and the

expectation of sustained professional growth (see Section 2.2.2.2.4), places special emphasis on dedication to the institutional mission, classroom teaching, commitment to the integration of faith and learning, and contributions to student growth and development.

c) Evaluation for promotion, while taking into account institutional service, emphasizes professional criteria generally associated with the faculty member’s discipline in the larger academic community and at Westmont College.

Restriction on Double Majors and Minors

The Review Committee of the Academic Senate has asked that the policy on double majors and minors be clarified/modified. Current Policy: (pg 35 of Catalog)

5. Four units of upper-division credit earned in a major may be applied to meeting the requirements of a minor. No upper-division credits may be shared by two minors. (There is no limitation on the overlap between two majors.)

The issue: Some majors/concentrations are either nearly identical to or are subsets of each other. For example:

1. A student completing a BS in Physics would need only two additional courses (one of which would be lower division) to complete a BS in Engineering/Physics.

2. A student completing a Social Science major is quite close to completing a second major in the area of primary emphasis.

3. With modest attention to the selection of courses, a student completing a Neuroscience degree can complete a BA in Biology with two additional courses.

Such double majors seem to reduce the significance of the idea of a major and place Westmont in an unflattering light. Moreover, in each of the above scenarios, the four-unit overlap restriction would preclude taking a minor in the second area. Thus, under the current regulations, a student may relatively easily obtain a double major where a minor is precluded. Proposed Solution from the Executive Committee:

5. Four units of upper-division credit earned in a major may be applied to meeting the requirements of a minor. No upper-division credits may be shared by two minors. (There is no limitation on the overlap between two majors. However, a student will not be awarded two majors when one coincides with the area of concentration of or is a specialization within the other major.)

EXAMINATIONS

1. FINAL EXAMINATIONS As an academic institution that holds scholarly rigor in high esteem, the Westmont community affirms the importance of a final examination week at the conclusion of each semester. The week of final exams is the 15th instructional week of Westmont’s academic calendar and is reported as such to both WASC and the state of California.

a. The study day and final examination schedule will be published by the registrar

prior to advance registration for each semester.

b. Some sort of required, retrospective course activity is to take place during the scheduled examination time. Appropriate activities include comprehensive exams, unit exams, portfolio or project reviews, and other types of reflective activities.

c. The last examination in any course may not be scheduled during the last week of

classes. A unit exam may be given in the last week of classes provided a final exam is also given during the final exam week.

d. When unit exams are given or projects are due in the last week of classes, care

should be exercised to ensure that the total workload for the last week of classes and the exam week is appropriate and does not place an undue burden on diligent students.

e. Classes, laboratories, and other types of new instruction are not to be held during

the examination week. The final date for the submission of regular written work must be no later than 5:00 p.m. on the last day of classes.

f. Take-home examinations and projects may be used at the faculty member's

discretion, but these must not involve new instruction or research during the week of final exams and must be submitted by the student no later than the published examination time.

g. Faculty members are not free to reschedule final examinations for individuals or for

the whole class. The Academic Senate Review Committee acting on petitions from students or faculty must approve exceptions for individuals or classes. All requests for rescheduling are to be presented at least two weeks in advance of the scheduled examination time.

h. Professors and students who arrange for tests to be taken outside the regularly

scheduled block are urged to take appropriate steps to ensure the confidentiality of the test. Such steps might include offering an alternative version of the test, asking students to sign an honor statement, or scheduling make-up tests as close as possible to the regular test.

i. Individual students will be granted permission to reschedule examinations in the

event of serious illness or family tragedy. The registrar will grant permission to

reschedule examinations when needed to accommodate extended examination times required by students with documented learning disabilities.

j. Students will not be required to take more than two final examinations on any day.

Requests to reschedule additional examinations may be presented to the registrar for rescheduling. The Academic Review Committee will consider all other requests. Rescheduling requests must be presented to the registrar at least two weeks in advance of the scheduled examination time.

k. Prior to submitting any request for rescheduling, the student will negotiate with the

instructor a tentative alternate time, to be approved by the registrar. For students who are scheduled to take more than two exams in one day, the exam to be rescheduled is: first, any examination given in the 12:00 – 2:00 p.m. time period; secondly, any examination given in the 8:00 – 10:00 a.m. time period.

l. Examinations should be designed so they can be completed within two (2) hours,

but students may be allowed three (3) hours for completion if the instructor permits the extended time. Only in cases of documented learning disabilities should students be permitted to continue working on an exam into the next exam period.