CGAFF Committee                                                      Meeting: October 20, 2005, Tuesday, 8 AM


Present: Terry Beck, SN Rajagopal, Barry Schockmel, Keith Sherony, Matt Taylor, and Mary Tollefson


Absent: Drew Stapleton (medical reaction), Lalita Pandit


Excused: Delores Heiden



Minutes approved with one minor change (Raj's initials).  M/S/P 5-0-0.


Lengthy discussion regarding Student Non-Grade appeals as relevant to CGAFF.  The conclusion suggested there is an incongruity between the following procedures regarding academic appeals:


1. From “Supplemental CGAAF Committee Rules and Guidelines for Complaints” (2003)
 I. CGAAF Pre-Hearing Procedures for Complaints
A. The chancellor or the chancellor's designated administrative representative, who should be a member of the UW-L academic community, shall initiate the complaint process by submitting a written formal complaint to the chairperson of CGAAF.  
This has been understood to mean that all complaints heard by CGAAF come from the Chancellor’s office.

2.  Student Grievance Policy Regarding Discrimination
V.  If further action is requested by either part to the grievance, the Affirmative Action Officer shall request an ad hoc Grievance Review Panel to informally review the facts and report its findings, with or without recommendations, to the Chancellor and/or Affirmative Action Officer as soon as practical, but within twenty (20) class days, unless there are extenuating circumstances.
Not clear why there should be an ad hoc Grievance Review Panel when there is a committee in place to hear grievances (CGAAF) and when other parts of the policy actually do refer grievances to CGAAF.

3. Student Academic Non-Grade Appeals
V.    Formal Hearing Procedures

If the informal procedures do not result in a satisfactory resolution of the problem, then the complainant will be referred to the Complaints, Grievances, Appeals and Academic Freedom Committee (CGAAF Committee).  If this step is to be taken, then fairness dictates that both parties to the dispute will be identified.  If any sanctions are to be recommended and recorded, the accused must have the opportunity to confront his/her accuser.  If the person lodging the allegation wishes to postpone such a confrontation, the CGAAF Committee will set a time limit, which appears reasonable, depending upon the circumstances and reasons given.  The formal hearing proceeding may be terminated by mutual agreement of petitioner and respondent at any step.  Either party may seek the help of legal counsel at any stage of the hearing.


Matt Taylor will email Carmen regarding the discrepancies in these three documents and request how she would like CGAFF to deal with them, whether it is actively involved in resolving the language or officially notifying Faculty Senate that these discrepancies exist, etc.


Secondly, it was decided to request information from the Deans before planning a workshop:


1) What are each Dean's procedures for complaints of student non-grade academic appeals?

2) How many appeals have occurred in the last 5 years, and in the last year?

3) Of these appeals, how many were resolved informally versus going through a formal committee process?


Mary Tollefson will create the letter, circulate to CGAFF and send to the Deans with a response deadline by Friday, Nov. 11 at 4 p.m.


In order to schedule a meeting not conflicting with anyone's schedule, the next meeting is scheduled for 6:45 AM (anyone need a wake-up call?) on Nov. 22, Tuesday.  The meeting will be held in 231 Fine Arts (same place as previous meetings).  The agenda will be discussing the Deans' responses and determining our report for Faculty Senate due Dec. 8. 


Mary Tollefson will bring donuts and have the coffee going.


Meeting adjourned at 9:05 a.m.


Respectfully submitted, Mary Tollefson