2004-2005 FACULTY SENATE
OF
California State University, Sacramento

Minutes
April 14, 2005

ROLL CALL [+ indicates alternate]

ACTION ITEMS

Search Committee, Associate Vice President, Student Affairs-Enrollment Management
Lakshmi Malroutu

ASI Elections Complaint Committee
Jordan Halgas, 2006

ASI Appellate Council
John LaRocco, 2006

Carried unanimously.

Carried unanimously.

Background: At the November 18, 2004 Faculty Senate meeting, the Academic Policies Committee was asked to consider various options modifying the traditional academic calendar, i.e., shift spring break to coincide with the Cesar Chavez Holiday, extend the two-day Thanksgiving Break to the full week, including the preceding Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, and insert a three-day Fall Break in the middle of the semester. The pros and cons of each option is outlined in the March 17, 2005 Faculty Senate Attachment D.

The Faculty Senate recommends adoption of the proposed 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 academic calendars (as amended, so that the Cesar Chavez Holiday falls within spring break).

Carried.

[additions in bold; deletions in strikeout]

The Faculty Senate recommends amending the Student Grade Appeal Process and the Grading Policy as follows:

(Amend subsection I.B:)

I. GRADES THAT MAY BE APPEALED BY THIS PROCESS

Assigned final letter of Credit/No Credit grades, otherwise known as course grades, may be appealed; but

A. Incompletes may not be appealed until a final letter or Credit/No Credit Grade has been assigned.

B. “U” grades may not be appealed.

BC. Grades assigned to particular pieces of student work or to particular student performances may not be appealed independently of their influence on the calculation of a course grade.

(Amend subsection II.A:)

II. GROUNDS FOR APPEAL AND BURDEN OF PROOF

To convince a grade appeal panel to alter a grade, a student shall allege and prove by a preponderance of the evidence one or more of the following compelling reasons for changing the grade assigned.

1. That the instructor assigned the grade arbitrarily.

Note: To make out a case of arbitrary grading, a student shall show that the instructor would not or could not give any reasons for the grade assigned rooted in failure to submit work or attend class or in the substance and form of the work submitted for grading either when that graded work was returned or subsequently in a routine conference to discuss the student's performance before the student had begun to seek any relief from the grade appeal process.

(Amend subsection V.B:)

V. DEFENSES TO AN APPEAL

1. To convince a grade appeal panel to maintain the grade assigned, an instructor defending a disputed grade shall show by a preponderance of the evidence that the disputed grade was assigned reasonably.
    
2. A reasonably assigned grade is one that results from a careful evaluation of the work submitted for grading or as a consequence of a failure to submit required work or to attend class as required or some combination of these alternatives embodied in a grade report submitted to the Registrar in a timely manner. reported to the Registrar in a timely manner Work has been carefully evaluated (1) if the purpose of the evaluation has been to ascertain from the substance and form of the work itself the relative quality of the work submitted, (2) if the means of evaluation are reasonably related to achieving that purpose and (3) if the means of expressing that evaluation include some explanation of the results of it to enable the student to distinguish the better work from the worse for him- or herself. Grades so assigned are grades reasonably assigned within the meaning of this policy. Note: Means of evaluation are reasonably related to achieving the purpose of evaluation if, in the judgment of a grade appeal panel, they fall within a continuum of conceivable choices of means bounded on the one hand by means plainly or obviously adapted to the purpose and on the other by means not wholly or completely unrelated to it. A panel may not limit the extent of this discretion by substituting its own choice of reasonable means for an instructor’s choice, provided the instructor’s choice is within the continuum described in this note.

(see Attachment E-1 for an explanation of the WU grade)

[additions in bold; deletions in strikeout]

The Faculty Senate recommends amending the STUDENT GRADE APPEAL PROCESS to have the student consult with the department chair if the instructor is unwilling or unable to meet with the student, as follows:

(Adds to subsection VIII.A:)

VIII. GRADE APPEAL PROCEDURES IN DETAIL

A. Informal Process

1. Chair delivers this document to student.
    
2. Student meets with instructor. Students who believe that they have not received a reasonably assigned grade shall seek to resolve, in good faith, the matter informally with the instructor who assigned the grade. This shall be done as soon as possible, but no later than the end of the third week of classes of the semester following the semester in which the grade was assigned.

If the instructor cannot or will not attempt to resolve the matter informally by at least meeting with the student for a discussion of it before the end of the third week and the student has made a good faith effort, subject to verification, to secure an informal resolution by having a meeting with the instructor, the student shall at once notify the Chair as provided in subsection VIII.A.3, and the appeal shall go forward without further delay.

[additions in bold; deletions in strikeout]

The Faculty Senate recommends amending the STUDENT GRADE APPEAL PROCESS to 1) specify conditions necessary to demonstrate a violation of procedures, and 2) provide for a summary judgment to not move forward with an appeal in the case where the nature of the appeal is not a “violation of procedures”. (Adds new subsections 8 and 9 to IX.B and renumbers the remaining subsections accordingly:)

IX. APPEAL OF VIOLATIONS OF PROCEDURE

A. Procedural Appeals Board

B. Appeal of Violations of Procedure

1. Standard of review of the conduct of grade appeals
2. Who may appeal
3. Grounds for appeal
4. No change of grade pending resolution of an appeal
5. When to appeal
6. Letter of intent
7. Letter of appeal
    
8. Presumption. Panels and departments are presumed to have acted in a manner consistent with the provisions of the Grade Appeal Process. Therefore a party appealing shall seek first to persuade the Procedural Appeals Board by the contents of the letter of appeal and by the documents submitted with it by the party or by the Vice President for Academic Affairs to conclude the following:

1. That a panel may have committed the violation or violations of procedure alleged in the letter of appeal;
2. That the alleged violation or violations may have deprived the process as a whole of fundamental fairness; and
3. That the alleged deprivation may have been the sole cause of a decision by the panel adverse to the party appealing.

If the Board is not persuaded by the letter of appeal and documents submitted with it to reach each of the conclusions specified in items a through c, above, the Board shall take no further action on the appeal and the decision of the panel shall be upheld.

9. Summary Judgment. Whenever it appears on the face of a letter of appeal that the person appealing cannot prevail on his or her claim, the Board may dismiss the appeal at once. Normally, the Board shall exercise this discretion when the plain language of the Grade Appeal Process in and of itself precludes the claim being made, as for example when an oral hearing is claimed and the process provides for none but written hearings in the case.

108. Ordinary appeals.
119. Expedited appeals.
1210. Oral hearing.
1311. Disposition of appeals.

The Faculty Senate recommends waiving the first reading of FS 05-23, Guidelines for Use of Non A-F Credit/No Credit Grading Symbols.

Carried.

The Faculty Senate recommends adoption of the explanations and guidelines for assigning what might be characterized as "exception" grades and recommends that these explanations and guidelines be distributed to faculty (see Attachment A as amended).

Background on the guidelines can be found at Attachment A-1.

Carried.

The Faculty Senate recommends waiving the first reading of FS 05-17B, Grading Policy, Amendment of.

Carried unanimously.

The Faculty Senate recommends amending the Grading Policy as follows:

[underscore = addition]

(under GRADE APPEAL PROCEDURES)

While there is a presumption that grades assigned by faculty are correct, students who believe that a correct final grade has not been assigned may use the Student Grade Appeal Procedure. This procedure may only be used to appeal earned letter or "CR"/"NC" grades and the assignment of a WU grade.

Carried unanimously.

INFORMATION

1. Faculty Senate's home page:  www.csus.edu/acse, or, from the CSUS home page, click on Administration and Policy, then Administration, then Faculty Senate.
2. Actions of the 2004-2005 Faculty Senate: 
3. Faculty Senate meetings for Spring 2005:
    

   April 21, 2005 - Senate meets (location changed to the Alumni Center) Tuesday, April 26, 2005 - Outstanding Teaching and University Service Awards Reception - the Alumni Center April 28, 2005-2nd organizational meeting (elections) of the 2005-2006 Senate (3:00-3:30); business meeting of the 2004-2005 Senate (3:30-5:00)

   Tuesday, May 3, 2005 - Outstanding Community Service Awards and Lifetime Achievement Awards for Community Service Reception - Ballroom May 12, 2005 - Senate meets from 3:00-4:00; wine and cheese hosted by President Gonzalez from 4:00-5:00

The meeting was adjourned at 4:40 p.m.

*Presidential approval requested.