The Committee on Academic Standing (CAS) reviewed seventy-four (74) petitions for readmission by exception following academic suspension between 1st July 1997 and 31st of May 1998. Eight (8) of these were denied; sixty-six (66) were approved. There were no deferrals.

The policy guidelines by which the CAS is currently governed were reviewed, confirmed and amended on 12th January 1997. Since then, the high number of petitions approved by the CAS has prompted the Committee to reconsider the method by which it grants exceptions.

As currently configured, the guidelines emphasize the "extraordinary" nature of the circumstances in which reinstatement by exception should be granted. In other words, the student's poor performance should be the result of a "rare", "isolated", and "clearly documented occurrence such as a health problem" whose detrimental effect has been "corrected" by the time the student petitions the CAS. In practice, however, the Committee has reviewed a high number of cases in which a student's poor performance appears to be the result of more complex factors, including: previously undiagnosed learning disorders or other disabilities; the (often temporary but nevertheless detrimental) absence of adequate advising services within his/her program or department; extreme anxiety over the health or well-being of a parent, spouse or child, particularly among student athletes, whose home states are often prohibitively distant from Oregon; trauma (such as rape) whose long-term effects are not easily contained. In other cases, the petitioner has had powerful support from one or more academic advisors, which has, in the opinion of the Committee, compensated for a poor academic record, or for an explanation of poor performance in terms of events which are less than "extraordinary."

In light of these factors, a review of the guidelines is planned for the Fall (1998).

Other business conducted by the CAS during the 1997-98 academic year:

• agreed to prepare new members for the work of the Committee with the Faculty Resource Guide, "Accommodations for Students with Disabilities"; the UCPS brochure, "Tips on Recognizing and Assisting Students in Emotional Distress"; the Affirmative Action Office brochure, "Understanding Sexual Harassment"; the "Multicultural Resource Guide for Advising Students of Color"; and other materials produced by the EOP;

• responded to the new university policy (AR 20) that only the second grade earned by students who repeat courses will count towards their cumulative GPAs. Although as a consequence of this policy past term and cumulative GPAs will also be altered, the Committee approved the Registrar Office's decision that "a student's academic standing for a term during which a repeated grade changed the GPA [should] remain as original." Those students wishing to appeal on the grounds that a repeated course changes their grade may do so by submitting a petition for Reinstatement by Exception;

• confirmed that the CAS would not consider any cases after the end of the first week of classes, on the grounds that any later reinstatement is not in the best interest of students with a record of poor academic performance;

• reviewed the Student Health Services Medical Excuses Policy;

• reviewed OSU's policy on Academic Dishonesty, and the Report Form prepared by the Student Conduct Program;

• discussed the reintroduction of the reinstatement fee.

Respectfully submitted,

Jennifer C Cornell, Chair
English Department, CLA