Instructional Responsibilities--Section H
Administrative Explanations and Procedures
CURRICULUM
New/Changed Degree Programs
Vocational/Occupational Programs
Review of Existing Programs
Program Reorganization
New Courses/Course Changes
Interim Approvals
Experimental Courses
Graduate School Courses
Overseas Courses
Basic Undergraduate Curriculum
Deviations From Degree Requirements
INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETICS PROGRAMS
ADMISSION POLICIES
Student Athletes
Transfer Policies
Student Affirmative Action Policy
SPECIAL PROGRAMS
Merit Program for Minority Achievers
Herman B Wells Program for Outstanding Young Scholars
Gradpact
CALENDAR/SCHEDULING/REGISTRATION
CLASSROOM TEACHING POLICIES
Teaching Responsibilities
AI English Proficiency Exam
Student Evaluations
Mid-term Reports
Course Activities
Examination Policies
Grading
Plus/Minus Grades
Numerical Equivalents (GPA's)
Grade of "S"
Grade of "R"
Grade of "I"
Grade of "W"
Grade of "FX"
Official Grades and Grade Changes
Academic Fairness Committees
Grade Indexing
Posting Grades
ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT
CHEATING AND PLAGIARISM
DOCUMENTS
Explanations and procedures in this section are based on
the following official documents located at the end of this Section.
New Academic Program Proposals DOCUMENT H-I
The Review of Existing Instructional Programs DOCUMENT H-II
Program Reorganization Guidelines DOCUMENT H-III
Curriculum (1974 Reorganization Issues) DOCUMENT H-IV
Summer Travel for Credit DOCUMENT H-V
Graduate Course and Program Approval DOCUMENT H-VI
General Education Requirements DOCUMENT H-VII
Undergraduate Admissions Policy DOCUMENT H-VIII
Student Affirmative Action - Indiana University DOCUMENT
H-IX.
Student Affirmative Action - Bloomington DOCUMENT H-X
Merit Program for Minority Achievers DOCUMENT H-XI
Graduate Minority Achievers Program DOCUMENT H-XII
Herman B Wells Program for Outstanding Young Scholars DOCUMENT
H XIII
Calendar Committee, Bloomington Campus DOCUMENT H-XIV
Academic Calendar, Bloomington Campus, 1995-2000 DOCUMENT H-XV
Guidelines Concerning Calendars for All Campuses of IU DOCUMENT
H XVI
Faculty Council Actions on Registration, Class Periods, Drop/Add/Change
DOCUMENT H-XVII
Rule Determining Resident and Nonresident Student Status DOCUMENT
H-XVIII
Faculty Responsibilities DOCUMENT H-XIX.
English Proficiency for Foreign AIs DOCUMENT H-XX
Exam Policies DOCUMENT H-XXI
Grading/Grades DOCUMENT H-XXII
Incompletes DOCUMENT H-XXIII
Grades For Credit Earned by Exam DOCUMENT H-XXIV
Grades Given Upon Withdrawal From Courses DOCUMENT H-XXV
Grade Submissions, Posting, Changes DOCUMENT H-XXVI
Academic Fairness Committees DOCUMENT H-XXVII
Cheating and Plagiarism DOCUMENT H-XXVIII
Policy on Academic Dishonesty DOCUMENT H-XXIX
Policy on Student Records DOCUMENT H-XXX
Calendar Principles DOCUMENT H-XXXI.
The Little 500 DOCUMENT H-XXXII.
Gradpact DOCUMENT H-XXXIII
Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday DOCUMENT H-XXXIV
Indiana University Intercollegiate Athletics Programs Policy
DOCUMENT H-XXXV
Accommodations for Religious Observances DOCUMENT H-XXXVI
Course Transfer and Appeals Policies DOCUMENT H-XXXVII
Instructional Responsibility -- Section H
CURRICULUM
The faculty of Indiana University has primary responsibility for degree conferral and for all curricular matters. (See Bloomington Faculty Constitution, Section D, DOCUMENT D-VI.) Faculty approval of curricular changes and new programs is effected by way of faculty review committees at several levels of the University structure. In addition to faculty, administrative and institutional review, the Legislature of the State of Indiana requires review and approval of proposals for new and changed degree programs by the Indiana Commission of Higher Education. (For IHEC review, see DOCUMENT H-I). In 1972, shortly after its creation, the Commission assembled a roster of all degree programs offered by all institutions of higher education of Indiana. Changes and additions to that roster must be submitted to the IHEC.
NEW AND CHANGED DEGREE PROGRAM PROPOSALS
Proposals for new or changed degree programs are initiated by the faculty of the unit (academic
department or school). (Since proposals must eventually make their way to IHEC for review the
units are asked to start the process in the format requested by IHEC. Copies of the format are
available from the Bloomington Chancellor's Office.) Proposals are submitted for review and
approval to:
FACULTY, ADMINISTRATIVE, INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW
School faculty curriculum committee (including Graduate School where appropriate)
School Dean (including Graduate School Dean where appropriate)
Dean of the Faculties
Academic Officers Committee
Chancellor of the Bloomington Campus
Academic Program & Policy Committee
Trustees of Indiana University
IHEC
VOCATIONAL/OCCUPATIONAL PROGRAMS
Degree proposals that relate to vocational or occupational work also require the approval of one
or both of two state groups. The first group, the President's Commission on Occupational
Education Programs, consists of the presidents of Indiana institutions of higher education or their
representatives. This group must approve any degree proposals before the proposals are taken to
the Trustees of Indiana University. The other group is the State Board of Vocational Technical
Education. This Board, created legislatively, receives certain types of degree proposals at the
same time that the proposals are presented to the IHEC.
REVIEW OF EXISTING PROGRAMS
Since 1978 the IHEC has required review of existing degree programs offered by public institutions of higher education in the State. (See DOCUMENT H-II.) Primary responsibility for the reviews, which are to occur on a six- year cycle, has been placed with the institutions. For professional schools and programs which are subject to external accreditation reviews, those reviews provide a basis for a report to IHEC, and the review cycle will correspond to the accreditation cycle.
Initial reviews conducted under the mandate of IHEC normally consist of three separate evaluations which are sent to the school dean: one by the department or program itself, another by an internal committee of faculty from other campus units, and the third by an external committee of specialists from outside the University. After the program under review has had an opportunity to respond to the latter two evaluations, the deans draft reports on the degree programs for IHEC, in the format agreed upon for submission to the Commission and described on the following page. These reports are reviewed by an administrative committee chaired by the Dean of the Faculties for final submission. Subsequent reviews of the same program in the six-year cycle may follow somewhat different procedures for the purpose of updating the earlier review process.
Questions about IHEC procedures may be directed to the Dean of the Faculties' Office, 855-2809.
PROGRAM REORGANIZATION
Whenever a program review and evaluation raises the possibility of program reorganization or elimination for a unit, Dean of the Faculties is to be notified and kept informed. (See BFC actions DOCUMENTS H-III, H-IV.) In turn, the Dean of the Faculties consults with the Campus Curriculum Policies Committee. Any decision to reorganize or eliminate a program will be made in accordance with the Contingency Planning Policy of the Bloomington Faculty Council. (See DOCUMENT D-XII.)
NEW COURSES AND COURSE CHANGES
Requests to create new courses and to change existing courses require faculty and administrative approval on the Bloomington Campus and concurrence by all other campuses.
It is essential that all questions on the request forms which follow be answered and a course outline and textbook list be appended. It is especially important to consult with and obtain written comments from other affected departments or schools. The approval route is:
Initiator (faculty member or department committee)
Chairperson
School Dean:
Dean of the Faculties:
Certifies final approval to the Registrar.
INTERIM APPROVAL
Where compelling circumstances prevent completion of this process in time to offer a needed
course, interim approval may be granted. To obtain interim approval, the faculty member should
prepare the regular form and request interim approval. The form and the request for interim
approval is then routed through the departmental chair, the Dean of the School or College, and
the Dean of the Faculties.
EXPERIMENTAL COURSES
The College of Arts and Sciences has two series of experimental sequences. Courses offered as part of these sequences require the approval of the College's Experimental Curriculum Committee. Interested faculty members should contact the Office of the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences.
GRADUATE SCHOOL COURSES
Courses offered for credit in a graduate program over which the Graduate School has supervisory control must also be submitted to the Graduate School for approval. (See DOCUMENT H-VI.)
PROGRAM REVIEW
Minimal Set of Information Needs for Review of Existing Programs
1. Basic Program Descriptors
2. Activity Level Indicators
3. Quality and Success
4. Plans for the Future
5. Description of the Review Process
Note: It is expected that, in general, the information required under items 3 & 4 will be more
qualitative than quantitative.
NEW COURSE REQUEST FORM
[This document is viewable as a large .gif file.]
[This document is viewable as a large .gif file.]
OVERSEAS AND TRAVEL COURSES
Courses to be taught abroad, including proposals for credit for summer travel abroad, require review by the Overseas Study Advisory Committee in addition to the usual faculty and administrative approvals. The following pages provide guidelines for submissions to the Committee. For information contact the Overseas Study Office (855-9304). The Faculty Council has also set out some procedures and restrictions on summer travel for credit. (See DOCUMENT H-V.) The Council's guidelines are still followed with one exception: current practice does allow credit for those individual travel-study projects which have departmental approval.
BASIC UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULUM
On March 3, 1981 the Bloomington Faculty Council approved general education requirements
for all undergraduate degree programs instituted after that date. (See DOCUMENT H-VII.) All
students must take forty hours outside the major area, distributed among the Social Sciences,
Humanities, and Life and Physical Sciences, with at least nine hours in each.
DEVIATIONS FROM DEGREE REQUIREMENTS
The Office of the Dean of the Faculties has instituted a policy to establish responsibility for
approval of deviations from requirements which applies in all Bloomington degree programs.
"Requests for deviation from department, program or school requirements may be granted only
by written approval from the respective chairperson, director, or dean (or their respective
administrative representative). Disposition at each level is final."
This policy leaves the final decision regarding waivers with the administrator at the appropriate level, avoiding the additional problems and procedures of co-signing, appeals mechanisms, etc., and does not diminish the traditional authority of the unit in these matters. It assures that misunderstandings based on oral communication are avoided.
CULTURAL DIVERSITY
Each degree-granting unit must include a cultural diversity degree requirement appropriate to its curriculum. The requirement, intended to enhance understanding of cultural diversity, is to focus at least in part on racial, ethnic, and gender discrimination within the context of the United States (DOCUMENTS I-III). Programs are conducted on cultural diversity which are targeted at providing an enhanced understanding of cultural diversity on the parts of all faculty, librarians, Associate Instructors, and students.
INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETICS PROGRAMS
In May 1998 the Trustees approved an Intercollegiate Athletics Programs Policy for Indiana University which outlines the mission and goals of intercollegiate athletics programs, defines principles of authority and responsibility, and details the structure and functions of campus athletics committees and the Athletics Coordinating Council. (See DOCUMENT H-XXXV.)
ADMISSIONS POLICIES
In 1987 the Faculty Council and Trustees of Indiana University approved a general policy for
admission of entering undergraduates. (See DOCUMENT H-VIII.) This policy requires in-state
applicants to rank in the upper half of the high school graduating class and out-of-state applicants
to rank in the upper third of the high school graduating class. All applicants are expected to meet
the following qualifications:
In addition, upon receipt of evidence of extenuating circumstances, the campus may accept students who are deficient; otherwise, applicants are to be counseled about ways of removing deficiencies in order to qualify for admission. The campus may admit a student on a probationary basis or through faculty sponsorship.
INDIANA UNIVERSITY GUIDELINES FOR OVERSEAS STUDY PROGRAMS
The President has charged the Overseas Study Advisory Committee with approving and reviewing all programs carried out overseas for which Indiana University credit is granted. The purpose of this review is to guarantee academic quality, ensure operational efficiency, and avoid duplication of efforts. The Committee is chaired by the Director of Overseas Study and reports through the Dean for International Programs to the President. Programs conducted overseas for Indiana University credit will be listed on the Roster of Overseas Study Programs to display the range of offerings and inform the President and the Trustees of Indiana University overseas activities.
The Committee has identified two major types of Indiana University credit programs conducted overseas.
The first category includes those programs designed to take Indiana University students overseas to study. These programs are of varying durations, some for an academic year, some for a semester, and some for shorter periods in the summer or at other times. The essential feature of these programs is that they move Indiana University students overseas and may involve non-Indiana University instruction or course work substantially different from what is available on the home campus. In addition, these programs generally require the granting of Indiana University credit for course work taken overseas. Careful evaluation of this instruction is necessary before credit can be approved and before the program can be included on the Roster.
The second category includes those programs designed to take Indiana University instruction overseas to teach students already located in the foreign environment. These programs are also of varying duration. The essential feature of these programs is that they take existing Indiana University courses taught by Indiana University faculty and transfer them to the host country.
The Committee has different procedures for reviewing these two categories of overseas credit programs.
The Overseas Study Advisory Committee has the responsibility to review, approve, or disapprove proposals for Indiana University overseas study programs for IU students. The evaluation of these program proposals is to be done from the twin standpoints of academic quality and operational efficiency. Proposals are usually prepared by an individual faculty member, typically with assistance from the home department or campus colleagues. It is one of the functions of the Office of Overseas Study to help faculty members in the development of overseas study programs.
So that overseas study proposals may be approved by the committee in time to permit the necessary arrangements and publicity, completed proposals should be sent to the Office of Overseas Study according to the following calendar:
by August 15 for programs which are to begin between the months of December of that year and
April of the following year;
by December 1 for programs which are to begin between the months of May and November of the following year.
Guidelines for preparing of proposals for Category I programs for IU Students should be
requested from the Office of Overseas Study. Early submission of proposals is recommended to
facilitate consultation and revision as necessary.
CATEGORY II IU CREDIT COURSES CONDUCTED OVERSEAS
The Overseas Study Advisory Committee has the responsibility to review programs for Indiana University credit that are conducted overseas. In most cases, such programs will involve the transfer of existing Indiana University courses, already approved by the appropriate curriculum committees of the schools and university, to an overseas location. The review of such programs is designed to help identify potential difficulties resulting from foreign educational environments, to prevent duplication of University credit programs conducted overseas.
The procedures for conducting this review are simple. As soon as an opportunity for a Category II program appears and a school or department decides to develop the program, it should notify the Dean for International Programs. After checking the Roster of programs to determine whether there is any conflict or any other programs that could be helpful in the development of this new effort, the Dean will advise the program's sponsors on any potential difficulties.
Once the program is designed, a copy of the program description should be forwarded to the Overseas Study Committee Chair who will refer it to the appropriate subcommittee for advice and consultation. Because these programs generally involve existing courses and regular Indiana University faculty, the subcommittee will be primarily concerned to see that there are no conflicts with existing programs, no unanticipated difficulties to which services (library, laboratories, computer facilities, and the like) normally associated with the course work in Indiana have been addressed. In addition, the subcommittee will verify that non-IU instructors and course work specifically designed for the program meet IU standards.
When the subcommittee concludes the review and a report from the Overseas Committee Chair has been received, the Dean for International Programs will place the program on the Indiana University Roster, unless the review finds any potential difficulties. In that case, the subcommittee will inform the sponsors and resolve any outstanding questions. The committee chair may find it useful to solicit the advice of the full Overseas Study Committee in the resolution of any difficulties. As soon as these difficulties are resolved, the program can be placed on the Roster.
International Programs
Bryan Hall 205F
Indiana University
Bloomington, IN 47405
Office of Overseas Study
Franklin Hall 303
Indiana University
Bloomington, IN 47405
ROSTER OF OVERSEAS STUDY PROGRAMS
Country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Session
Administered by Indiana University
Co-Sponsored by Indiana University
NOTE:
ACTR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . American Council of Teachers of Russian
CIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Committee on Inter-Institutional Cooperation
CIEE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Council on International Educational Exchange
IES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Institute for European Studies
ADMISSIONS POLICIES: STUDENT ATHLETES
All student athletes must meet Indiana University admissions requirements.
To be a Qualifier, student athletes must:
1. Graduate from high school.
2. Achieve a GPA in 13 core courses which meets NCAA initial eligibility sliding scale of GPA and ACT/SAT scores.
3. Be certified by NCAA Initial Eligibility Clearinghouse after submitting an application and paying the required fee.
TRANSFER POLICIES
In transferring from one IU campus to another, credits are evaluated and accepted in terms at
least as favorable as credits from other accredited institutions. Generally, an in-state applicant is
expected to have attained at least a 2.0 grade average and an out-of-state applicant at least a 2.5.
If fewer than 26 semester hours are transferable, the conditions for entering undergraduates
above apply.
STUDENT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION POLICY
The Bloomington Student Affirmative Action Policy (DOCUMENT H-X) requires active recruitment and encouragement of women and minority applicants. It further stipulates that "traditional academic criteria shall not be the sole consideration in undergraduate and graduate admissions and support decisions. Criteria for admissions shall be flexible enough to take into account the effects of economic and cultural differences in the backgrounds of the applicants. . . . Race, sex, age, marital status, pregnancy, parenthood, and physical handicap of the student shall not be used as negative criteria in the evaluation of applicants for admission."
The University Student Affirmative Action Statement (DOCUMENTS H-IX and H-X) commits the University to correcting the effects of any past discrimination based on sex, race, religion, veteran status, disability, sexual orientation, or national origin. Reasonable accommodation is made to facilitate the higher education of disabled students. Sexual harassment is not tolerated, and the University responds to every complaint, providing remediation when harassment is determined. (See Indiana University Policy Against Sexual Harassment, DOCUMENT B-II.)
MINORITY ACHIEVERS PROGRAM
In 1987 the Bloomington Faculty Council established the Minority Achievers Program (MAP)
(DOCUMENT H-XI), which has been funded by the Bloomington Vice President, to attract and
support minority students on the Bloomington campus. MAP is meant to provide an annual
merit-based competition for 50 (when fully funded) gifted and talented black, hispanic, and
Native American high school graduates nationwide. MAP assures program participants a $2,000
scholarship for each of four years of baccalaureate study and treats all out-of-state participants as
in-state residents for tuition purposes. The program intends to develop and offer a special cultural
and academic enrichment seminar for first-year achievers and opportunities for early and
continuing mentor relationships.
GRADUATE MINORITY ACHIEVERS PROGRAM
In 1989 the Bloomington Faculty Council endorsed the Graduate Minority Achievers Program (GMAP). (See DOCUMENT H-XII).
WELLS SCHOLARS PROGRAM
In 1988, the Bloomington Faculty Council established guidelines to govern the recruitment and education of outstanding undergraduate students in all disciplines under the endowment-funded Herman B Wells Program for Outstanding Young Scholars (DOCUMENT H-XIII). Flexibility has been accorded the Wells Committee in structuring a financial aid package, recruitment criteria, and curricular and program requirements for the Scholars. For additional information, contact the Program Director.
GRADPACT
On February 21, 1995, the BFC resolved to endorse the GRADPACT proposal pursuant to which undergraduate students at Indiana University Bloomington would be provided the option of ensuring their completion of an undergraduate degree after eight semesters of full-time study or earning 128 credit hours. Students who adhere to the program's requirements are assured of either obtaining their degrees in such a timely manner or having the remainder of the tuition paid by the University. The BFC's resolution and the details of GRADPACT are provided in DOCUMENT H-XXXIII.
CALENDAR POLICIES
The Bloomington Faculty Council approves the academic calendar, normally for a five-year
period, upon recommendation by the Campus Calendar Committee. (For the make-up of the
Committee and its charge, see DOCUMENT H-XIV). The most recently approved plan covers
the academic years 1995-96 through 1999-2000. (See DOCUMENT H-XV.) This calendar
provides for a Fall Semester consisting of 14 weeks and two days plus one week for final exams,
a Spring Semester of 15 weeks plus one week for final exams, an 8 week summer session, and at
least a two-week break between the end of the summer sessions and the beginning of the fall
semester. A spring vacation falls during the week following the ninth week of classes during the
second semester. The calendar must follow the guidelines established by the University Calendar
Committee for all campuses (DOCUMENT H-XVI), and the principles approved by the BFC
(DOCUMENT H-XXXI). Martin Luther King Day is observed as a holiday (DOCUMENT
H-XXXIV).
LITTLE 500
The BFC has strongly supported the scheduling of the Little 500 to interfere less with the last two weeks of the semester, an especially important time for integrating course material. The Council has asked that activities during the week preceding the race be limited dramatically and scheduled so as not to interfere with student studying. (See DOCUMENT H-XXXII.)
CLASS SCHEDULES
The Bloomington Calendar/Schedule Committee, a committee appointed jointly by the
Bloomington Dean of the Faculties and the Bloomington Faculty Council, advises the campus
administration on scheduling matters. The Schedules of Classes for each semester and each
summer session contain information relevant to registration, course reservation plans, fees,
schedule adjustment procedures, late registration, class schedules, and examination schedules.
Many of these policies were established by Faculty Council action and are included in this
section of the Guide. Procedural matters set out in the Schedule have been cooperatively
established by the Schedule Committee and the Registrar's Office. Since 1979, the campus level
Student Records Policy Committee has been charged by the Dean of the Faculties with student
records policies and procedures. This committee is composed of deans from the degree-granting
schools and liaison from the Faculty Council Educational Policies Committee and the Dean of
the Faculties.
The Faculty Council in 1987 established 50 min./75 min. class meeting periods. Guidelines for
scheduling classes within this framework have been developed by the Registrar and approved by
the Schedule Committee. A rather elaborate set of instructions has been prepared for
departmental and school scheduling officers to insure efficient assignment and use of space and
equipment. Classes and examinations must be conducted at the times and in the rooms listed in
the Schedule of Classes. Requests for adjustment should be submitted to the Registrar's Office
only in exceptional situations.
REGISTRATION
In 1981, the Faculty Council approved the principle of computerized registration as described in
the planning document "A Student Registration System Proposed for Indiana University
Bloomington." Incorporated into this 99 page blueprint were the details of a computerized
system of registration for continuing and new students. The system was to include the following provisions:
The approved registration system concept included the following
objectives:
FEES
The fee schedule for in-state and out-of-state students is established by the Trustees of Indiana University. The Trustees have also provided rules for determining resident status for fee purposes. (See DOCUMENT H-XVIII.)
CREDIT BY EXAMINATION ADVANCED PLACEMENT EXEMPTION
There are seven options through which incoming students may demonstrate proficiency and
qualify for advanced credit, advanced placement or exemption. The appropriate options depend
upon the subject areas of formal training or independent study, or the unique experiences
between high school and college.
Additional information is available from University Division.
CLASSROOM AND TEACHING POLICIES
It is expected that all academic appointees will take seriously their responsibilities to the students of Indiana University, that they will prepare carefully and thoroughly for their lectures, seminars, discussion sections, laboratories and other instructional formats that might be used, that they will hold regularly scheduled, liberal office hours which are made known to the students, and that they will respect their students as colleagues dedicated to the pursuit of knowledge. The Bloomington Faculty Council, in January 1981, charged the Dean of the Faculties to communicate to the faculty each semester that:
TEACHING RESPONSIBILITIES
"Faculty members teaching courses have the responsibility to provide instruction as scheduled. Variations from the schedule may occur for a variety of reasons, including illness, professional activities, and pedagogical considerations. When such variations occur, it is the responsibility of the faculty member both to provide equivalent academic activity for the students in the course and to notify the chairperson of the department offering the course of the change in schedule."
The faculty, through the action of its Faculty Council, has imposed upon itself general and
specific responsibilities in connection with teaching. The material below is quoted from the Code
of Academic Ethics which appears in its entirety in Section I of the Academic Guide as
DOCUMENT I-I. The Code was approved by the Faculty Council in 1970, and was amended in
1976, 1980, and 1992.
I. General Statement
Teaching. A teacher encourages the pursuit of learning in students holding before them the best
scholarly standards of the discipline. Students are respected as individuals; the teacher seeks to
establish a relationship of mutual trust, and adheres to the proper role as intellectual guide and
counselor. The teacher makes every effort to foster honest academic conduct and to assure that
the evaluation of students' scholastic performance reflects their true achievement, with reference
to criteria appropriate to the field of study. Any exploitation of students for private advantage is
rejected and their significant assistance is acknowledged. The teacher protects their academic
freedom and serves as an example of this principle by assuring that each student and colleague is
free to voice opinions openly and to exchange ideas free from interference.
II. Specific Responsibilities
AI ENGLISH PROFICIENCY EXAM
To insure that undergraduate students will not encounter undue difficulties in understanding
Associate Instructors, all graduate students from other countries whose native language is not
English must pass a TOEFL examination administered before they begin their teaching
assignments. This examination is conducted by the Center for English Language Training. (See
DOCUMENT H-XX.) Departments are urged to forestall potential problems by requiring an
acceptable TOEFL score from all candidates for Associate Instructorships. The Dean of the
Faculties is charged with administration of this policy.
STUDENT EVALUATIONS
Teachers are encouraged to seek systematically conducted student evaluations of their courses and teaching. Schools, departments, or individual faculty members may develop evaluation forms which are tailored to a specific school, discipline, or course. Multiple-Option (Multi-Op) forms which are machine-readable for mechanical tabulation are also available from the Bureau of Evaluative Studies and Testing (855-1595). Evaluations should be administered in a way which ensures the anonymity of the evaluators. A common practice is to ask one member of the class to submit all the completed forms to a departmental office. The completed forms, following the instructor's review of the data, are usually retained in departmental files for use in personnel and institutional reviews.
MID-TERM REPORTS
Each semester the Dean of the Faculties reminds teaching personnel of the requirement adopted by the Faculty Council that letter grade reports be given at mid-term for all University Division students, and that some sort of written evaluation be provided for all undergraduate students not later than two-thirds of the way through the semester. Such evaluations may use letter grades, written critiques of a paper, or written evaluations of total performance. (See DOCUMENT H-XIX.)
COURSE ACTIVITIES
Course activities, including night examinations where approved, may not be required of students if the activities require the absence of the student from regularly scheduled classes without the written permission of the teacher of the scheduled class. (See DOCUMENT H-XXI.)
EXAMINATION POLICIES
The examination schedule is printed in the Schedule of Classes and is therefore available to students before they have enrolled in any courses. It has been the sense of the Faculty Council that examination conflicts can be prevented or resolved at the time of enrollment. Faculty Council policies concerning examinations are:
EXAM PERIOD/FREE WEEK
NIGHT EXAMINATIONS
ABSENCE FROM FINAL EXAMS
Students who fail to attend the final exam of a class and who have a passing grade up to that point should be given an Incomplete only if the instructor has reason to believe the absence was beyond the student's control. If not, the grade of "F" must be awarded.
See DOCUMENT H-XXI for the Faculty Council actions concerning examinations.
GRADES
The current grade code for Indiana University is:
A - Highest passing
B
C
D
F - Failed
P - Passed
FX - Failed course when retaken
I - Incomplete
R - Deferred grade
S - Satisfactory
W - Withdrawn
PLUS/MINUS GRADES
Instructors in undergraduate and graduate courses may use a grading system which includes plus and minus grades. It is clear from discussion at the time of the University Faculty Council action (see DOCUMENT H-XXII) that any school or instructor may choose not to award pluses and minuses. Should they be awarded, however, the Registrar will use the following numerical equivalents in computing GPAs.
NUMERICAL GRADE EQUIVALENTS (GPAs)
A+, A = 4.0
A- = 3.7
B+ = 3.3
B = 3.0
B- = 2.7
C+ = 2.3
C = 2.0
C- = 1.7
D+ = 1.3
D = 1.0
D- = 0.7
F = 0.0
GRADE OF "S"
Permission must be sought from the School Dean and the Dean of the Faculties to offer a course
on a Satisfactory/Fail basis. The grade of "S" may be awarded only for such approved special
courses, "S" and "F" are the only grades which may awarded to enrollees in such a course.
GRADE OF "R"
The grade "R" (deferred grade) may be used to indicate that the nature of the course is such that
the work of the students can be evaluated only after a period longer than one semester.
"The grade R is appropriate in those courses in which the student's work is evaluated when the thesis is completed. It may also be used at the end of the first semester of a one- year course if the course is announced as a "deferred grade" course in the Schedule of Classes. This procedure will assure the approval of the department and the willingness of the students to take both semesters of the course before getting a grade."
If a student drops the course before the completion of the work, the instructor must assign a regular grade for the course. When a student completes the work, R's are changed to another letter grade via a Removal-of-Deferred-Grade card submitted through the dean of the student's school to the Registrar.
GRADE OF "I"
The grade of Incomplete may be given 1) only when the completed work for the course is of passing quality, and 2) only upon a showing of such hardship to a student as would render it unjust to hold a student to the normal time limits. A student's desire to avoid a low grade is not a legitimate reason to award an Incomplete. Incompletes are to be removed within a year, although this time may be shortened by the instructor or extended by the school dean. These policies, as well as procedures for removal of Incompletes are set out in DOCUMENT H-XXIII.
GRADE OF "W"
Withdrawals during the Drop and Add period do not become a matter of permanent record and transcript. Withdrawals will be given automatically on undergraduate courses taken for undergraduate credit as late as the second class day immediately following the published date for submission of mid-term grade reports. After this date, approval by the Dean of the student's school is required. To qualify for the grade of W after the deadline, a student must be passing the course(s) on the date of withdrawal. If the student is failing, the grade on the date of withdrawal will be F. (See DOCUMENT H-XXV and Schedule of Classes.)
GRADE OF "FX"
The grade of "FX" is noted on the transcript on courses retaken which were previously failed, along with the second grade earned. However, the GPA shall take into account only the second grade earned. (See DOCUMENT H-XXII.) On the Bloomington Campus, the FX policy allows substitutions only during the first 45 hours of coursework. A person can request an FX for three courses for a total of ten hours.
The Bloomington Faculty Council (April 19, 1983) forwarded to the University Faculty Council
its recommendation that the FX policy be abandoned. Under this policy students would be
permitted to retake courses, but both grades would be calculated into the GPA. The University
Faculty Council has to approve this policy before it takes effect.
OFFICIAL GRADES AND GRADE CHANGES
On February 17,1953, the Faculty Council approved a resolution (see DOCUMENT H-XXVI) specifying that a grade becomes official after it has been received by the Office of the Registrar and that no change of official grades may be made except with the written consent of the dean of the school with which the faculty member or instructor is associated. Temporary grades such as Incompletes (I) and Deferred Grades (R) are exceptions.
Faculty members or instructors may request a change of a non-temporary grade such as A, B, etc., by submitting a Change of Grade form to their dean. If approval of the grade change is granted, the dean sends the form to the Registrar.
ACADEMIC FAIRNESS COMMITTEES
The Bloomington Faculty Council requires that each school have an Academic Fairness Committee (DOCUMENT H-XXVII), containing representatives of both faculty and students which is empowered to consider procedural errors and to direct the School Dean to change grades on the basis of the Committee's findings.
GRADE INDEXING
The BFC has adopted a policy requiring grade indexing to appear on undergraduate transcripts, at least for internal purposes. (See DOCUMENT H-XXII.)
POSTING GRADES
Faculty members and instructors are encouraged to use a code to identify students whose grades
are posted. Students should not be identified by name. (See DOCUMENT H-XXVI.)
The Office of the Registrar has been charged by the Bloomington Faculty Council (see
DOCUMENT H-XXVI) with the distribution of the following information to each instructor on
campus. The information is to be distributed as soon as possible after the close of the fall and
spring semesters.
STUDENT ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT
The UFC officially affirmed at its meeting of October 13, 1992 that procedures in the policies titled "Cheating and Plagiarism" (DOCUMENT H-XXVIII) and "Policy on Academic Dishonesty" (DOCUMENT H-XXIX) have been superseded by adoption of the Code of Student Ethics, which also provides procedures and sanctions for academic dishonesty. Until disparities between the two are discussed and resolved, those in the Code of Student Ethics are to be followed. Concerns about this matter should be raised with the Dean of the Faculties.
CHEATING AND PLAGIARISM
The Faculty Council's action (DOCUMENT H-XXVIII) concerning the obligations of the faculty member in regard to cheating and plagiarism is quoted following:
"The faculty member has a responsibility to foster the intellectual honesty as well as the intellectual development of his students. He or she should carefully scrutinize his methods of teaching and his assignments in order to be sure that they encourage students to be honest. If necessary, the faculty member should explain clearly the meaning of cheating and plagiarism as they apply to the course."
"The faculty member's obligation is particularly serious in connection with examinations. It is his or her duty to arrange for careful supervision of all examinations and class exercises."
"Finally, should the faculty member detect signs of plagiarism or cheating, it is his or her most serious obligation to investigate these thoroughly, to take appropriate action with respect to the grades of his students, and in any event to report the matter to the Dean for Student Services [or equivalent administrator]. The necessity to report all cases of cheating, whether or not further action is desirable, arises particularly because of the possibility that this is not a first offense, or that other offenses may follow it. Equity also demands that a uniform practice be enforced; otherwise some student will be penalized while others guilty of the same actions will go free."
ACADEMIC DISHONESTY
A policy on academic dishonesty (DOCUMENT H-XXIX) was approved by the Bloomington Faculty Council on March 20, 1984. It provides more specific definitions of cheating, fabrication, plagiarism, interference, facilitation of academic dishonesty, possible penalties, procedures to be followed by the instructor, and the appeal mechanisms available to students.
OTHER MISCONDUCT
The Indiana University Code of Student Rights, Responsibilities, and Conduct also describes other types of misconduct for which students may be penalized when committed on University property, such as actions which endanger the University and the University community and possession of firearms. The Indiana University Code of Student Rights, Responsibilities, and Conduct indicates the procedures to be followed in these cases.
STUDENT RECORDS
Every academic appointee who maintains records of any sort for students should be familiar with the University's policy on access to student records. The complete policy appears in DOCUMENT H-XXX.
DOCUMENT H-I
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR DEVELOPING A NEW ACADEMIC PROGRAM
PROPOSAL
(State of Indiana Commission for Higher Education, 3/14/80)
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR DEVELOPING A NEW ACADEMIC PROGRAM PROPOSAL
I. Introduction
The enabling legislation of the Commission for Higher Education specifies the responsibility to approve and disapprove at public institutions any new associate, baccalaureate, or graduate degrees, and any additional programs of two (2) semesters in length that lead to a certificate or other indication of achievement. The legislation also gives the Commission authority to review all programs. (See Appendix "A" for the pertinent legislative language.) These are major responsibilities of the Commission; hence its policies and procedures need to be clear.
It is important to state at the outset the distinctions between two terms that might be confused. The terms are "degree" and "academic program". In this document, a degree is a label that indicates a certain level of educational attainment. An academic program is a set of related instructional activities, or curriculum, that culminate in a specific certification of accomplishment. (Both terms are explained in more detail later). As Appendix "A" states, Commission responsibility is not limited to labels, such as whether a campus may offer the Bachelor of Science degree, but includes the authority to consider distinct academic programs, such as Bachelor of Science in Biology or Bachelor of Arts in Chemistry. However, the Commission does not intend to review student study lists or course choices.
To assist the Commission in carrying out its responsibility to decide on new degree programs at public institutions, the staff of the Commission analyzes and interprets proposals, and makes recommendations on them. It is the Commission's desire that where appropriate and helpful this be a "formative" process, which assists institutions in developing strong programs. The Commission staff may be consulted at any time in the development of a new program proposal.
The primary responsibility for the review and approval of new vocational education programs
resides with the State Board of Vocational and Technical Education. Therefore, its forms and
procedures should be followed. While the review process will include a recommendation from
the Commission for Higher Education to the State Board of Vocational and Technical Education
of approval, disapproval, or approval with amendments, final action on such programs is the
responsibility of the State Board.
II. Definitions and policy guidance For example, what is a new academic degree program? How does it differ from a revised course
of study? Does it differ from a major or concentration? How narrowly or broadly defined should
it be? At what point and in what way does a course of study or a sub-field become a new degree
program? What labels and levels should be considered as degrees? Certainly associate, bachelor,
master, and doctorate should be included, but what about certificate and specialist designations
designed primarily to certify the satisfaction of non-institutional requirements?
It is the position of the Commission that the following description provides a useful working
definition of an academic program: Frequently, a degree program can be identified with student majors as listed in the Higher
Education General Information Survey (HEGIS) taxonomy of non-vocational sub-specialties
(i.e., those not listed in the 5000 series) or their equivalents. However, definitions of terms such
as major, minor, concentration, option, cognate, etc. can differ among institutions and even
among disciplines. We subscribe to the following definitions:
A program of study leading to a "major" is one which consists of a specified number of required
and elective course credits and/or the successful completion of specified competence
requirements, and which culminates in an authorized degree. The major is a concentration in a
cluster of related subjects which constitute specialization. It is that part of the curriculum in
which a student concentrates on one subject or a group of subjects. Such a concentration, or
major, which usually consists of a number of courses in one field or in two or more related fields,
is the depth component of the undergraduate curriculum. The content of a major is usually
defined by one academic department, but it can also be defined jointly by two or more
departments and, in special cases (and with faculty advice and approval) by individual students.
Departments can, and frequently do, require their majors to take certain courses (major cognates)
in other departments. At some colleges, students may be required (or have the option) to pursue,
in addition to the major a less intense concentration, or sub-major, in a subject other than the one
chosen for a major. This abbreviated concentration (or minor or option) generally consists of half
as many or fewer courses as a major.
For example, a curriculum in biology may develop to the point that a substantial number of
courses in microbiology are available. Including these courses in a curriculum could result in a
new sub-major or even a new major. The critical point in determining whether a set of courses
warrants designation as a new degree program, and is therefore subject to review by the
Commission, is when the proposed curriculum satisfies the criteria set forth in these paragraphs
and offers a set of academic experiences that are intended to produce student outcomes which are
markedly different from any existing degree program. Therefore, majors would most often be
included, but minors or cognates would not. A new academic program, then, is one that differs
substantively in its curriculum from existing programs. It represents more than a rearrangement
of courses or a partial concentration; it is more than a recombination of courses for an existing
degree.
Differences in clientele, sponsorship, funding requirements, or third party licensing
regulations and mandates are not necessarily indicators that two otherwise similar groups of
academic activities are distinct programs. If no new faculty need be hired, or courses developed,
then the new arrangement may not be the foundation of a new program. There are, of course,
different cases of "new" programs. Some are new to the site but common in higher education,
such as Anthropology at IU-PU Fort Wayne.
Others, however, are not only new to the site but also uncommon in higher education, such as
Behavioral Analysis at Ball State University. In both cases, proposals for the new programs
would be subject to review by the Commission.
It is the Commission's intention to consider an academic program as a coherent course of study
that culminates in the awarding of a specific degree or other recognition of accomplishment. A
degree program course of study is normally but not always characterized by: 1) a specialized
body of knowledge; 2) a faculty-designed curricular path that is chosen as a student's major
emphasis of study; 3) an increasing sophistication in curricular content during the student's
period of study; 4) certain intended or expected student outcomes; and 5) faculty identification
with an organized instructional effort in a subject matter area.
The Commission does not want to inhibit change or innovation by requiring that fields of study
must exist elsewhere before it will consider them to be legitimate at an Indiana campus. The
Commission also wants programs at Indiana's institutions to be up-to-date and known by names
that are appropriate to their intentions and familiar to peers, students, and employers. For these
reasons, the Commission will review proposals for new programs without regard to the maturity
of the fields of study.
Approval of a new academic program will be location-specific. An institution may not offer an
already approved program at a new location even if only the clientele and setting are new.
Whenever a collection of courses that make up a degree program are offered at a location away
from the original one, new questions about mission compatibility, quality, unwarranted
duplication, supply and demand, and the use of scarce resources must be considered. Therefore,
approval of new academic degree programs will be specific to a particular location. Whenever 50
percent or more of the credit hour requirements in courses prescribed for a degree are attainable
at a site which does not have authority to award the degree, and whenever an institution plans to
offer a degree program at a new site, the Commission for Higher Education should be advised.
When there is doubt about whether a curriculum modification should be classified as a new
degree program the Commission office should be contacted for advice. For example, what may
seem like a new program, and, therefore, require a proposal according to these guidelines, may
actually be a request to rename a program or to consolidate several existing degree programs into
one. Cases such as these may be settled after an exchange of correspondence and a routine
decision item rather than on the basis of a fully developed proposal.
III. Procedures and possible Commission actions As part of its review process, the Commission staff will make use of expert consultants from
collegiate institutions, public agencies, and private industry to help evaluate proposals. For most
graduate degree programs, and some undergraduate programs the staff may ask for a special
review by a committee of leading scholars. A summary of any consultant's review will be
reported to the institution as well to the Commission.
New program proposals will be received by the Commission staff at any time, and it will make
every effort to bring proposals to the Commission for final action promptly. The Commission
normally meets ten times a year, and will consider proposals at any meeting. However, for a
proposal to be considered at a particular meeting, it must be received in completed form at least
five weeks prior to the meeting at which Commission action is desired. The Commission staff
will apprise institutions of the progress being made on the review of the proposal.
All program proposals should be submitted in two (2) copies using the "New Program Proposal
Format". It is customary for institutions to send copies of proposals to other institutions in the
state offering related programs.
Although institutions normally submit separate proposals for multi- level programs (e.g.,
associate and baccalaureate levels, or baccalaureate and master's levels) the combination of levels
into one proposal is acceptable. However, in these cases information should be presented in a
manner that will permit separate evaluations of the levels, including separate tables for facilities,
budget, and enrollment data.
In evaluating new program requests, the Commission employs the following criteria:
The meanings of most of the preceding criteria are self evident. However, for many quality has
proven to be an elusive concept. The Commission believes that the term quality represents
certain characteristics--including effectiveness--of an activity. It represents an informed
judgment about the degree of attainment of distinctive goals in a manner that respects resources.
In order to reach this judgment, one must consider purpose, or goals; the congruence between
program goals and institutional goals, which inevitably must be congruent with patron values and
goals; the effective use of resources; the context in which the activities of the program take place;
and the degree to which the program attains its goals or peak performance. Therefore, new
program proposals should provide information about the institution's ability to offer a program of
high quality in an efficient manner.
After it has reviewed a proposal, and determined that it is complete, the staff will mail to the
Commission a summary of the proposal and a recommendation for action. The Agenda for the
next regular Commission meeting will include a brief description of the proposed program,
including projected enrollments and cost. At the meeting, a member of the Commission staff will
offer an oral review of the program as it was most recently submitted, and the recommendation.
Representatives of the institution will provide supplementary information, and after a period of
discussion, the Commission will make a decision. A decision to approve taken at this time may
include amendments authorized by the Commission. Another option is for the staff to announce
that the program has been withdrawn without prejudice by the institution. In this case, the
institution has the option to re-submit the proposal with or without modifications at a later date.
The Commission's decision options are: 1) to approve the program to begin immediately; 2) to
approve the program but to delay implementation until adequate funds are available to initiate
and maintain the program (this will normally be during the next budget biennium); 3) to approve
the program on an experimental basis for a limited period (see below); 4) to disapprove the
program; or 5) to confirm a request to delay consideration. A request for delay may be made by
the institution, in order for it to gather more information, or by the Commission staff, so that it
may add to its review and analysis.
To approve a degree program is to grant a "license" to announce and to offer a particular
educational opportunity, and to certify accomplishments within it. Approval carries with it the
authority to offer all courses in support of the program. However, approval of a particular
program does not sanction development beyond that level; for example, the junior year of the
bachelor's level when the approval is for an associate degree.
The Commission should be notified as soon as possible if the projected implementation date of a
new program is changed, and an explanation for the delay provided. Approved degree programs
which are not implemented within three years after the projected starting date will automatically
be reviewed by the Commission, and a determination made as to the future status of the program.
Newly approved programs should be incorporated into the cycle for the review of existing
programs (either by the Commission or by the State Board of Vocational and Technical
Education) as soon as practicable, but within six years. For the first three years of a program, the
Commission staff will review data from the Student Information System and inquire of the
institution about placement data, financial expenditures, and other information related to program
activity.
Sometimes a program may be approved with certain conditions placed upon it. Such approval
may be considered "experimental" and subject to a special review within a specified period of
time. These reviews are the responsibility of the sponsoring institution, and comply with the
conditions set forth by the Commission at the time of approval. The designation as experimental
may be used only when the program is not currently offered at an Indiana public postsecondary
institution. It implies that the progress of the program will be followed more closely than others
and that proposals to offer similar programs at other locations will normally not be considered
until an evaluation of the experimental program has been accepted by the Commission.
A program proposal that has been disapproved by the Commission may be re- submitted either
when evidence is available which may alter the reasons for disapproval, or after two years. For
example, new evidence of market demand may be offered, or changes in other aspects of the
proposal may be presented. Re-submissions must use the standard program proposal format.
One consideration of the Commission in approving a new program is to insure its financial
feasibility. Each new program will generate revenues from students (tuition) and from the state
(with appropriate marginal cost consideration for activity level changes). However, program
development costs frequently exceed expected revenues because of equipment purchases,
curriculum development costs, hiring faculty in advance of student enrollment, etc. Program
start-up costs are the net of these reasonable expenditures in excess of expected revenues.
Whenever needed and possible, start-up funding is recommended as part of the Program Change
budget category for the first two to four years of program development. To initiate programs that
have a program cost which is higher than average, a permanent addition to the base budget is
needed and these funds are also to be requested as part of the Program Change category. The
financial data collected in Table 2 (page 39 and following) will be used as the foundation for
program start- up requests.
DOCUMENT H-II Existing Instructional programs Discussion
The primary responsibility for the systematic, ongoing review of all instructional programs
should remain with the institutions. Institutional program review responsibilities typically focus
on the degree of accomplishment of program objectives and the identification of areas of possible
improvement. Evaluations of personnel, space, supporting equipment, curricular content and the
interrelation among programs are elements of the internal program review process.
The Commission's program review responsibilities center on statewide concerns for the
coordination of all higher educational services. The total educational services are more than the
sum of the individual institution's efforts which are in a continuous state of flux. Institutionally
initiated changes should be evaluated for the impact they would have on statewide planning and
budgetary considerations.
The staff believes that the most appropriate program review approach for Indiana is for the
institutions and the Commission to have clearly differentiated roles with the institutions retaining
the primary responsibility for ongoing program review and the Commission incorporating their
findings and the results of special studies by the Commission into the biennial budget
recommendations. Emphasis should be placed on improving the linkages between the ongoing
institutional program review activities and state level planning and budgeting activities.
Flexibility must exist in statewide procedures to take into account the various review schedules
imposed by external review agencies and by internal management needs.
Staff Recommendations
Existing instructional Programs--The institutions should be requested to notify the
Commission of the schedule for the review of all existing programs, the process adopted, and as
they are known, the results and subsequent administrative actions. The Commission should
initiate program reviews for selected subject areas which justify statewide policy concerns. The
results of both of these reviews should be reported to the institutional administrators and trustees
and included in the budgetary recommendations submitted to the Governor and the General
Assembly.
The preliminary guidelines for the review of existing instructional programs would include the following:
2. By June 30th of each year beginning in 1979 the institutions would be requested to notify the
Commission of a. the results of the program reviews completed that academic year, including a copy of any
internally or externally generated reports, memoranda or other documentation of the program
review and including information on resource use by program; and b. any administrative actions or board of trustee decisions in response to the program review
findings.
3. From time to time the staff will recommend to the Commission special program review studies
it believes should be conducted on a statewide basis. Criteria to be used by the staff in its
recommendations will include, but will not be limited to: imbalances in skilled personnel supply
and demand; student demand--program capacity; evolving institutional missions; available
resources; program duplication, and geographical imbalances. 4. For the institutions to assume the primary responsibility for the conduct of the continuous
review of all existing programs, their review process should incorporate those elements of value
for statewide planning and budgeting purposes. While it is recognized that a considerable amount
of data is collected during the institutional accreditation self-evaluation review activity on the
campuses, probably only a portion of this information has value in a statewide context or is in a
comparable form among the campuses. It is also recognized that external agency (e.g.
accreditation) reviews should be closely coordinated with the Commission's involvement with
program review. While these technical details need to be worked out with the institutions, a
summary of the important considerations is in order at this time. a. Integrating statewide concerns into the institutional review process. b. Integrating information requirements to assess statewide concerns with the institutional review
procedures. To assess the statewide concerns, information would be required in such areas as
demographic characteristics of students, student placement, student retention, past and projected
financial support requirements. c. Relating the Commission's needs to the needs of external review agencies. 1. State Board of Vocational Education (SBVTE) The SBVTE is required by federal statute to
review all vocational programs in a five year period. The Commission would coordinate its
efforts with the SBVTE to eliminate unnecessary duplication of institutional effort. The
Commission would make an effort to insure that the SBVTE program review process would
meet the needs of both agencies. 2. Accrediting Agencies A possible way of making these accreditation reviews more beneficial to the state would be for
the Commission staff to be a party in the review process, e.g. in the final interview of the
accreditation team.
New Programs--The staff should monitor new programs during the implementation phase and
conduct a review after two graduating classes. All new programs meeting their original
objectives at that time will be considered existing programs and reviewed by the process
described above. New programs not meeting their objectives may be recommended to be phased
out or continued for an additional trial time period. The results of these new program reviews
should be reported to the institutional administrators and trustees and included in the budgetary
recommendations submitted to the Governor and the General Assembly. The preliminary
guidelines for the review of newly approved programs would include the following:
1. The six universities and college would be requested to notify the Commission by November 1
of each year for each new program of:
a. the profile of the students being served (e.g. number of students en rolled to obtain degrees,
non-majors being served by the program, demographic characteristics, attrition, etc.); b. the resource expenditures (and their sources) in support of the program; c. an analysis of the program performance in relation to the targeted program objectives at that
time period in the development of the program; d. any administrative actions which would materially affect the original plan for program
development; and e. the placement information of graduates in fields for which they have trained.
2. The staff would report annually on the development of newly approved programs and would
initiate a review of these programs after the second graduating class. The review would be
primarily concerned with an evaluation of a program's performance in meeting the program's
objectives. DOCUMENT H-III
Before describing the procedures and enumerating the requirements for information to be
included in a proposal for a new program, it is important to define terms and to state the
Commission's position on certain issues.
An academic program for which the Commission has responsibility is one that requires study for
at least two semesters (or their equivalent) and leads to a certificate, degree, or other formal rank
or indication of educational attainment (technical certificate, associate degree, bachelor's degree,
master's degree, specialist degree, doctorate degree, or professional degree); that to a significant
extent is composed of both required and elective courses, and related activities, which are
connected in a coherent manner; that provides an educational experience which is sequential,
continuous, integrative, and cumulative; that is of increasing difficulty and includes different
schools of thought; that provides an orientation to the nature, theories, skills, results, and
directions of an academic discipline or a field; and that advances learning in a subject area.
At regularly scheduled meetings and upon conclusion of an appropriate staff review, a
recommendation will be presented to the Commission for approval or disapproval of a proposed
new academic program. (See above for a description of the role of the State Board of
Vocational and Technical Education.) The sponsoring institution will be notified by letter and
afforded the opportunity to discuss any reservations raised by the Staff and Commission at least
five days prior to final action by the Commission. The institution will be notified by letter of the
action taken.
THE REVIEW OF EXISTING INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS
(State of Indiana Commission for Higher Education, 1/13/78)
The following are the results of public discussions concerning the statewide review of existing
programs which took place at the October and December 1977 Commission meetings and
numerous communications between the staff and institutional personnel.
New Instructional Programs
1. The six universities and college would be requested to notify the Commission by June 30,
1978 of
a. the schedule by which they would review all existing degree programs at least every 6 years
(at an approximately even rate annually and with the appropriate groupings of program areas;
and with greater frequency if appropriate for other external review agencies).
b. the review process they intend to employ which should include the use of substantive
external experts when appropriate and which would complement the accreditation and
evaluation processes employed by outside agencies or groups.
The program review conducted by external agencies will meet many of the statewide objectives
for program review. The institutions should supplement these analyses when necessary to fulfill
the statewide requirements.
PROGRAM REORGANIZATION GUIDELINES
(Approved: BFC 11/18/80)
DOCUMENT H-IV
1974 REORGANIZATION ISSUES-- CAMPUS CURRICULUM
We endorse the principle of the establishment of a campus-wide committee to advise on
curricular matters at the Dean of the Faculties' level, leaving open for further discussion the
whole question of the authority of the Dean of the Faculties on matters of curricular programs, etc.
(Approved: BFC 9/18/79)
E. Program Resolutions:
E.1. Undergraduate student transfers into any school, college, or department of the university
from the University Division or from any other school or college shall be made only with the
consent of the school, college, or department into which the transfer is being made and upon the
basis of standards approved by them.
(Approved: BFC 4/18/78; UFC 11/13/79)
E.2.a.[Tabled: recommendation asked that any curricular change affecting other units should be
publicized and cleared through the Dean of the Faculties' Office.]
(Approved: BFC 4/18/78)
E.2.b.Schools, colleges, and departments should not change their requirements for undergraduate
admissions without publicizing their intent to do so. The schools, colleges, and departments
should allow a reasonable period of time to elapse between publicizing the changes and
instituting changes in standards.
(Approved: BFC 4/18/78; UFC 11/13/79)
E.3. [Tabled: recommendation required that any graduate courses--to be counted toward any
graduate degree--must have the approval of the school involved for the content and quality of the
course on the particular campus at which it is taken.]
(Approved: BFC 4/18/78)
E.4. Increased efforts should be made to help IU students with internships, work experiences,
clinical practice activities, and similar programs in metropolitan areas.
(Approved: BFC 4/18/78; UFC 11/13/79)
E.5. Multi-campus schools should conduct their placement activities in such a way as to give full and equal help to all their students, whatever their campus, with the understanding that this may involve the utilization of differing offices and facilities on different campuses.
E.6. Where responsibilities for program and budget activities on a particular campus are vested in different Vice Presidents, differences in view as to program expenditure priorities should be resolved by negotiation and mutual consent of the two Vice Presidents or their staffs or--failing such agreement--by the Executive Vice President or President, with as much consultation with representatives of affected faculties as possible.
DOCUMENT H-V
SUMMER TRAVEL FOR CREDIT
(Approved: Faculty Council 10/3/50)
1. Credit may be given at the rate of one semester hour per week, but with a maximum of six
hours credit for extended tours, for work accomplished in organized hours in any field in
which we give credit in residence, provided:
a. That the instructor be approved by the department or division and by the Dean of that division.
b. That a detailed plan of the academic work to be done during the travel, including proper
provision for checking the students' achievement (by notebook, term paper, examination, etc.) be
approved by the department in advance.
c. That the tour is sponsored by Indiana University or by some other recognized educational institution.
2. Credit for travel should not be included in the minimum number of residence hours required for a degree.
3. No credit should be given for individual travel.
DOCUMENT H-VI
GRADUATE COURSE AND PROGRAM APPROVAL
(Approved: Graduate Council 4/11/77)
The following policies refer to the activities of the Indiana University Graduate Council and the
graduate programs over which the Council has supervisory control.
DOCUMENT H-VII
GENERAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS
(Approved: BFC 3/3/81)
The following policy shall be adopted for all degree programs instituted from this date.
1. Forty hours of bachelor's degree hours shall be assigned to general education requirements
taken outside of one's major area. These forty hours shall be distributed among the following
areas with at least nine hours in each of the areas:
a. Life and physical sciences
b. Social sciences
c. Humanities
2. The following conditions may be seen as a basis for exempting a degree program from the
above policy:
a. When long-standing traditions of programs in the area of the major impel the proposing
unit to present so large a number of requirements that discretionary hours which might
be assigned to general education are markedly reduced, or
b. When the interdisciplinary nature of the major itself requires an adequate sampling of
courses from several different departments within the three disciplinary groups listed
above.
3. Reasons for exceptions will be judged by the Dean of the Faculties' Curriculum Advisory Committee.
DOCUMENT H-VIII
UNDERGRADUATE ADMISSIONS POLICY
(Approved: UFC 4/28/87; Trustees 8/4/87)
Indiana University supports and complies with Affirmative Action regulations; admission to the University will be evaluated without regard to sex, age, race, religion, ethnic origin, veteran status, or disability.
Indiana University has adopted the following admissions policy in order to insure that undergraduate students are properly prepared for college work. These standards as adopted seek to insure either adequate academic preparation in high school or evidence of unusual motivation on the part of each student admitted to the University. Effective First Semester, 1991-92, applicants for admission to Indiana University will be expected to have qualified as follows:
Freshman Students1:
1. Graduation from a commissioned Indiana high school or comparable out-of-state institution,
successfully completing a minimum of 28 semesters of college preparatory courses which include:
a. Eight semesters of English. (One semester each of speech and journalism may be included.)
b. Four semesters of social science (economics, government, history, psychology, or sociology).
c. Four semesters of algebra (two semesters of which must be advanced algebra) and two
semesters of geometry.
d. Two semesters of laboratory science (biology, chemistry, or physics).
e. Eight semesters in some combination of foreign language, additional mathematics, laboratory
science, social science, computer science, and other courses of a college preparatory nature.
f. Four semesters of foreign language are strongly recommended.
g. Courses which develop writing composition skills are strongly recommended.
2. A rank in the upper half of the high-school graduating class for Indiana residents or a rank in
the upper third of the high-school graduating class for out-of-state residents.
3. A score above the median established by Indiana students on a nationally standardized
admissions test. Students who have been out of high school for three or more years do not
have to submit test scores unless required for admission to specific programs.
4. Each campus may accept students who are deficient in #1, #2, or #3 of the above
specifications upon receipt of such evidence as the combination of strength of college
preparation program, rank in class, grades and grade trends in college preparatory courses, and
standardized test scores. For persons who do not meet the above criteria and have been out of
high school three or more years, admission can be based on other factors such as a General
Educational Development (GED) diploma, maturity, work experience, military service, and
other factors as determined by the campus.
5. Each campus at its discretion may admit a student on a probationary basis and/or through
faculty sponsorship.
Transfer Students2:
1. Submission of official transcripts from all previous institutions attended.
2. The transcripts must reflect a cumulative grade point average of at least a 2.0 (on a 4.0 scale)
for Indiana residents and at least a 2.5 (on a 4.0 scale) for out-of-state residents.
3. If the student has fewer than 26 transferable semester hours, the high school record should
reflect compliance with freshman admission requirements as specified above.
4. The credentials of students seeking transfer to Indiana University will be evaluated on an
individual basis.
When students do not qualify upon first application, they will be counseled about ways of removing deficiencies so that they may qualify for admission at a later date.
If any provision of this policy is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect other provisions of this policy which can be given effect without the invalid provision, and to this end the provisions of this policy are severable.
Transferability of Credits
(Approved: UFC 4/11/78)
It is Indiana University policy that credits transferred from one campus of Indiana University to another will be evaluated and accepted in terms at least as favorable as credits transferred from other accredited institutions in the United States. No review of the credits will be undertaken except in good faith terms of the same criteria used in evaluating external credits.
DOCUMENT H-IX
STUDENT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION - INDIANA UNIVERSITY
(Approved: Trustees 6/29/74)
Indiana University, pursuant to its obligations under Title VI and Title IX, will not exclude any person on the basis of race, color, national origin or sex from participation in its programs or activities or deny any of these persons the benefits of any program or activity.
Indiana University is committed to correcting the effects of any past discrimination. The University is involved in efforts to increase the number of minority group (American Black, Latino, American Indian and American Asian) students and to balance the male/female ratio at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. Each campus of Indiana University develops its own programs to deal with the needs of its students.
Veterans and Disabled Students
(Administrative Practice)
The university provides accommodation and auxiliary services which facilitate the higher
education of qualified, temporarily and permanently disabled students and veterans. The extent to
which these services are supplied is based on an individual student's need, resources budgeted
and available, and existing requirements. All requests for accommodation and auxiliary aids
should be made at the local campus office which handles veterans or disabled student services.
Decisions of an academic dean, a veteran or disabled student services administrator, affirmative
action officer or an administrator in charge of physical facilities, regarding a request of a veteran
or disabled student may be appealed to the chief administrative officer of the campus.
Religion
(Administrative Practice)
The University makes reasonable accommodation to a student's religious holidays and observances.
Sexual Harassment
(Excerpt from University Faculty Council 4/26/88)
Indiana University does not tolerate sexual harassment of students or employees and responds to
every complaint, providing proper remediation when harassment is determined.
(Sex Discrimination Guidelines, EEOC 3/30/72)
Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors and other verbal or physical conduct of a
sexual nature constitute sexual harassment when:
Individuals who believe that they have been sexually harassed should notify either their
supervisor, an academic or student services dean or official, and/or the Campus Affirmative
Action Officer.
DOCUMENT H-X
STUDENT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION POLICY FOR BLOOMINGTON CAMPUS OF
INDIANA UNIVERSITY
(Approved: BFC 5/5/77)
I. Recruitment, Admissions, Retention, Financial Aid, and Housing
A. Recruitment
In order to ensure equality of opportunity for admissions, the University shall actively recruit and
encourage women and minority3 applicants at all levels; this effort shall include the active
recruitment of those students graduating in the top 10 percent of their graduating class.
B. Admissions
1. Traditional academic criteria shall not be the sole consideration in undergraduate and graduate
admissions and support decisions. Criteria for admissions shall be flexible enough to take into
account the effects of economic and cultural differences in the backgrounds of the applicants.
2.Race, sex, age, marital status, pregnancy, parenthood, and physical handicap of the student shall not be used as negative criteria in the evaluation of applicants for admission.
C. Retention
Educational access must also mean educational attainment. The University must provide a
receptive and supportive climate for minority and women students in order to ensure their
optimal growth.
D. Financial Aid
1. Criteria for financial aids, including part-time employment, shall take into
account economic and cultural differences in the backgrounds of applicants.
Existing criteria shall be supplemented by affirmative action objectives.
2. Where educationally advisable, scholarships, loans, and deferred tuition plans
shall be available to part-time students, pro-rated on the same basis as full-time
students, whenever legally possible.
3. To the extent consistent with federal regulations, neither age, sex, marital status,
pregnancy, parenthood, or physical handicap of the student shall be negative
factors in determining eligibility for any form of financial support administered
by the University.
4. The University should establish "Expanded Educational Opportunity
Fellowships" for women and minority students in those disciplines in which
these groups are clearly underrepresented.
5. >The determination of residency and dependency status for fee purposes shall be
the same for men and women, where law permits. Action shall be taken to aid
students to complete residence requirements for degrees by a combination of full
and part-time work. The benefits and services available to full-time students
shall also be made available, when possible, to part-time students who are
degree candidates. If accreditation bodies require full-time study, the University
shall actively initiate and/or support efforts to have such requirements
eliminated. Any existing University requirements of full-time study which are
not necessary to achieve accreditation shall be eliminated, unless it can be
demonstrated positively that such accreditation or University requirements are
essential to successful attainment of valid educational objectives.
E. Housing
1. There shall be no University housing restrictions, requirements, or regulations which
discriminate against members of any race, sex, or age. This does not prevent the establishment of
all-male or all-female floors, units, or dormitories.
2. University housing for students with dependent children shall be equally available to men and
women, regardless of marital status.
II. Advising, Guidance, Counseling, and Tutorial Services
A. Academic, career, family, and personal advising, guidance, and counseling shall be provided
by the University to help meet the needs of women, special groups of people, minority students,
and special groups of minority students. It is recommended that the University provide
counselors of both sexes and of various minority groups, since the student's perception is an
important factor in the student's communication with counselors despite the high qualifications
of the counselors. Optimally, however, the objective is to obtain counselors who are highly
qualified and relate effectively to all students.
B. In recognition of the influence exercised by teachers and counselors on the development of
interests, attitudes, and career patterns of young people, the University's instructional or training
programs shall be sensitive to the changing roles of men, women, and minorities.
C. Faculty members should avoid sex-role and minority stereotyping both in advising students
and in the classroom. Advisors shall also avoid such stereotyping in their work with students and
shall encourage students to examine educational, vocational, and life goals commensurate with
the student's potentials and interests.
D. The University shall make a concerted effort to collect and analyze information about the
attrition rates of minority and women students.
III. Curriculum Development
A. The University has made a preliminary commitment to the three academic departments or
programs dealing with minorities and women (i.e., Afro-American Studies, Women's Studies,
and Chicano-Riqueno Studies). It is critical that the University continues this commitment and
expands upon it, so that each of these programs has the opportunity to develop to its fullest
academic capacity and to make its offerings available to a large number of students. These
commitments include increased funding, library acquisitions, and staff additions.
B. The University should encourage and facilitate the establishment of a more permanent and
firm series of course offerings and academic programs (such as certificates, double majors, etc.)
in minority studies and Women's Studies. The University should encourage the inclusion of
material on women and minorities in the subject matter of the curriculum of the University.
IV. Student Grievance Procedures
A. General Statement
A supplementary grievance procedure shall be available to all students to deal with complaints
against faculty and staff alleging discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, national
origin, age, or handicap. The procedure should have a strong conciliation component as well as a
hearing component. The following is a suggested outline.
B. Formation of Grievance Committee Panel
1. Each of the following individuals or groups shall appoint four members (two faculty and/or
appropriate staff, two students) to the Grievance Committee Panel: Vice President
(Bloomington), IUSA, Campus Affirmative Action Officer, Dean for Afro-American Affairs,
Dean for Women's Affairs, and Dean for Latino Affairs. It shall be the responsibility of these
individuals/groups and others to provide information to the Panel that will assist it in its review
of discrimination complaints.
2. These appointees may be chosen to serve as conciliators or members of the Ad Hoc
Committee, as described below.
C. Conciliation Procedure
1. To initiate the conciliation procedure, the student with a complaint shall contact the Campus
Affirmative Action Officer and describe the alleged discriminatory act. The Campus Affirmative
Action Officer shall then encourage the student to select a conciliator acceptable to both parties.
The Campus Affirmative Action Officer may offer the Grievance Panel roster or the names of
other persons as possible conciliators.
2. The Campus Affirmative Action Officer shall notify the conciliator of the student's selection.
If the proposed conciliator cannot serve, the student shall be requested to make another selection.
The conciliator shall be responsible for attempting to mediate the student's complaint on an
informal basis.
3. The conciliator and the student shall report back to the Campus Affirmative Action Officer on
the outcome of the mediation. If the mediation is unsuccessful, the Campus Affirmative Action
Officer shall inform the student of available avenues of redress, to include the department,
school, or available grievance procedures and the Formal Complaint Procedures described below.
The student shall be encouraged to use all available procedures, but other grievance procedures
need not be used if the complainant wishes to proceed directly to Formal Complaint Procedures.
D. Formal Complaint Procedures
1. Complaint
To initiate this proceeding, a written complaint setting forth with reasonable particularity the
basis of the complaint and the relief sought shall be filed with the Campus Affirmative Action
Officer within six months of the alleged discriminatory act. The complainant shall state what
other school/division grievance procedures have been used and the outcome of any such
proceedings. The Campus Affirmative Action Officer shall inform the person(s) against whom
the student makes a complaint that a complaint has been filed and shall give the respondent(s) a
copy of the complaint.
2. Investigation and Conciliation
The Campus Affirmative Action Officer shall attempt conciliation even if such efforts by a
conciliator have previously failed. If conciliation by the Campus Affirmative Action Officer is
not achieved, the Officer will inform the complainant in writing of the options open to him/her,
including taking the complaint to an Ad Hoc Hearing Committee.
3. Impaneling of Ad Hoc Hearing Committee
The Campus Affirmative Action Officer shall supervise the selection of a five-member Ad Hoc
Hearing Committee to be impaneled in the following manner. Each party to the complaint shall
be given a roster of the membership of the Grievance Committee Panel. Each party shall select
two members (one student, one faculty) of the Panel to serve on the Ad Hoc Hearing Committee.
A member thus selected may refuse to serve by notifying the Campus Affirmative Action
Officer. The affected party shall make another choice from the Panel. These four members shall
select a fifth member from the Panel. This fifth member fills the role of the Chair. (Either party
may appeal to the Campus Affirmative Action Officer if the person selected has a conflict of
interest.) A person who served as conciliator in the case may not serve as an Ad Hoc committee member.
4. Rules of Procedure
a. The Committee shall meet to decide whether the complaint falls within its jurisdiction. The
Committee shall also determine whether the complaint is sufficient to raise issues of
discrimination. The Committee may request the parties to file briefs to assist it in its decision.
b. If the Committee decides to hear the complaint, it shall determine the nature of the complaint
and the type of hearing that shall be held. Unless otherwise determined by the Committee, the
parties shall present their cases in the following manner:
1. Opening statement by complainant
2. Opening statement by respondent
3. Evidence in support of complainant
4. Evidence in support of respondent
5. Rebuttal by complainant
6. Closing statements
c. The Committee shall encourage parties to conciliate throughout the course of the hearings.
d. Unless the complaint has been resolved and formally withdrawn, the Chair will set a date for a
hearing which shall be no sooner than ten days and no later than thirty days after the responding
party has been notified of the complaint. A reasonable postponement of the hearing may be
granted for good cause. A complete record of the hearing shall be kept.
e. Role of the Committee
(1) Parties shall submit to the Chair a list of their witnesses and the Chair shall notify each
witness of the time of the hearing.
(2) The Committee shall have the right to ask questions of witnesses and of parties.
(3) The Committee shall have the right to request information it deems useful and to call
witnesses not called by the parties.
(4) The Committee will be the arbitrator of the relevance of any given information.
(5) The decision made by the Committee must be made strictly on the recorded evidence. The
Committee shall consider no evidence which the other party has not had fair opportunity to rebut.
Subject to safeguards to be determined by the Committee, statements may--when necessary--be
taken outside the hearing and reported to it. If this is done, both parties shall be notified and
given the opportunity to be present when an oral statement is taken and to cross-examine it. Each
party shall be given the opportunity to rebut these oral statements.
(6) The Committee shall make its recommendation in writing with appropriate reasons to the
Vice President within ten working days after the termination of the hearings. Copies shall be sent
to all parties at that time. The Vice President, in consultation with the school deans or division
heads, shall make his/her recommendation based on the evidence accumulated by the
supplementary procedures as well as by the regular procedures. Within thirty days the Vice
President shall take action on the complaint, accompanied by appropriate reasoning. The
Committee and/or the Vice President shall notify both parties if a decision cannot be made within
the thirty-day limit.
(7) If either party does not appear at the hearing, the Committee shall have the power to proceed
on the evidence presented to it.
f. Rights of the Parties
(1) either party may be represented at the hearing by any person of his/her choice.
(2) The hearing shall be private unless both parties to the grievance agree to open hearings. At
private hearings, each party shall have the right to bring two observers.
(3) Parties shall have notice of all papers filed with the Committee.
(4) Either party may request specific information from the other party, provided the information
is relevant.
(5) Parties may state before the hearing which facts are or are not in issue.
(6) Each party shall have the right to question evidence presented by the other party.
E. Recommendations the Committee May Make to the Vice President
The Committee will recommend appropriate sanctions or remedies to the Vice President in line
with those recommended in the University's Affirmative Action Plan.
F. Re-Filing of Complaint
A complaint may not be re-filed with the Grievance Committee after a final decision by the Vice
President, unless there is new evidence not discovered at the time of the first hearing, which
might affect the findings by the Committee or the Vice President.
G. Additional Procedures
The Committee may establish additional procedures in keeping with the concepts of due process.
Any additional procedures may not abrogate those stated above. Parties must be informed in
advance of a hearing of any new procedures.
H. Annual Review
The Campus Affirmative Action Officer shall review annually the work of the Panel and the
Committee and will report to the Vice President. The Panel may recommend changes in
procedures to the Vice President at this time.
DOCUMENT H-XI
MERIT PROGRAM FOR MINORITY ACHIEVERS
(Approved: BFC 4/7/87)
The Bloomington Faculty Council recognizes the desirability of enrolling more minority students
on the Bloomington Campus and supports the establishment of a Merit Program for Minority
Achievers, using the program outlined in Circular B36-87 [see below] as a guide.
To implement the program, be it hereby resolved:
Guidelines
Summary of Need for New Program
The total number of talented minority students attracted to and enrolled at IUB is woefully low.
Four factors seem to contribute to this paucity of minority talent. First, recruiting efforts have
been found to be limited and restricted to the state of Indiana. Second, in spite of the growing
undergraduate enrollment, minority enrollment is reaching critically low levels, significantly
reducing the pool of talented minority students from which the Honors Program may select.
Third, institutional structures exist only for the nurturing of those minority students who are at
academic risk or who are exceptionally gifted academically. Fourth, attractive incentives are not
being offered by IUB to outstanding minority high school graduates.
Purpose of the New Program
The purpose of the Merit Program for Minority Achievers is to provide an annual merit-based
competition for 50 gifted and talented minority (specifically Black, Hispanic, and Native
American) high school graduates. The goal is to serve a neglected group of individuals whose
talents and skills may go unnoticed because an institutional mechanism is not is place to assess
and assist in the meeting of their needs. The program seeks to enrich the intellectual, creative,
and leadership pool in the state of Indiana by searching nationwide for the most capable minority
students. The first phase of the program should last four years. This will ensure an accurate
evaluation of the program's success and the performance of the first 200 students. If successful,
the program should be continued.
The program comes in response to the drain of the many capable minority residents of Indiana attending universities outside of the state. Additional aims of the program are to encourage minority high school students to become more competitive in a variety of domains, including but not limited to academic exce