1982-1983 SENATE DOCUMENT #20 APC DOCUMENT #20 PROPOSED POLICY ON ACADEMIC ELIGIBILITY DELETE: Entire section titled "Academic Eligibility" (pp. 34-35, 1982-83 Catalog) ADD: Academic Eligibility The University has established a minimum grade point average which must be met by students wishing to continue their studies. Failure to meet these standards will result in dismissal from the University. Dismissed students who can show concrete evidence that their status should be reconsidered may petition the Admissions Committee for readmission. Except in extraordinary circumstances, the dismissed students will not be readmitted until two semesters have elapsed. After August 15, 1983, students must meet the following cumulative grade point average on hours attempted at UNCA in order to continue study at the University: Cumulative Semester Minimum Cumulative Hours Attempted Grade Point Average ------------------- ------------------- 24-35 1.500 36-47 1.750 48-59 1.875 60 or more 2.000 A student whose cumulative grade point average is less than a 2.000 at the end of any semester will be placed on Academic Probation. If, at the end of any semester, a student on probation falls below the minimum cumulative grade point average required as stated above, the student will be dismissed from the University. Students enrolled prior to August 15, 1983, who are disadvantaged by this policy change may petition the Admissions Committee for relief. A student on Academic Probation is not permitted to enroll in more than 12 semester hours during a Fall or Spring Semester, or for more than 4 semester hours during a summer term, to a maximum of 8 semester hours during the entire Summer Session. Page 2 A grade point average of 2.0 on work completed at UNCA since the beginning of the Fall semester 1978 is required for graduation. Also, a minimum grade point average of 2.0 is required on all work attempted at UNCA in the major department. Work completed prior to Fall 1978 is not computed in the grade point average. Probation and dismissal regulations apply to all classifications of students. RATIONALE: The Admissions Committee wants to raise admission criteria for Transfer students. The existing catalog statement now requires transferring students only to meet the present local standard for academic eligibility. The argument for this policy was that we should treat transfer students no differently from our own. Under the current statement we must admit into upper level courses students who have clearly demonstrated below average performance. In addition it may be noted that UNCA's standard is substantially lower in this respect than such schools as Western Carolina, UNC-G, UNC-C, and Appalachian State. In general, this policy accomplishes Mr. Bernhardt's goal of requiring minimally average (C) performance while being more forgiving in the student's freshman year. A student who has experienced a poor freshman year can remain in school by achieving higher than average work in his sophomore year (assured by the 1.750 and 1.875 ranges). The Director of Enrollment Services has testified to the administrative difficulties of the current Academic Probation policy. The new policy places everyone below a 2.000 average on Academic Probation and dismisses the students at clearly defined points in his academic progress. Since the Admissions Committee is charged with considering the appeals of suspended and/or dismissed students the clarity of this policy is its concern. A clear-cut dismissal policy will facilitate the formation of equally clear standards and procedures for appeal. The need to implement this policy for the next academic year derives from several considerations: a. The Admissions Committee is in the process of formulating a comprehensive and coherent admissions policy which includes both consistent standards and efficient procedures. Its goal is to implement this "package" for Fall, 1983, admissions. b. Delaying implementation does not serve to ease the transition from one set of standards to another. c. The Registrar's office already has difficulty implementing the present policy. Any scheme of dual standards would only further confuse any attempt to fairly and consistently administer either standard. Page 3 d. As Mr. Bernhardt has eloquently pointed out, the present policy is confusing to student and advisor alike. The current swelling of student enrollment increased the scale of problems with which we must deal.