'
To:
Dean Ncinnon
proi'u
Rcistri
Dean RiecLhof
4 April,
1961
You
will
roc-1l that
on 6
T.
1 eent y
ou
the
it
rc
nd im oE the Senmzto
Cc ci r a
l-ttou on Uicrrzduate
A1iiion
rcJ Stmdings -li,h I
had hoped
to p:wcnt to the
-otig on Ap:±l
3rd.
Since I did not
reiv any ccctt
from th Dc.m or be
of
hnl
theIr Faculties I did
not
preont
Clio to t±c April. meeting of ree, but I would like
to
Pr
es
ent
Snrtc. Would it h poihlC
for
you
toe:qodito discion o the roe
rdin dQf erred
grades and
fl^
in Zzimlus
in your Facultie.
D.P. tohortson
Rgitrr
1)? TZIrO
S
'SM
5 A/A 7
Paper 3F
To: Members of Senate
From: K. E. Rieckhouf,
Acting Dean of Science
Date: March 20, 1967
Re:
COURSE GRADES
The distribution of course grades during the fall semester
1966 received considerable discussion within the Faculty of Science
both in the committee level and in meeting of the faculty. The
Undergraduate Curriculum Committee, with the support of the
advisory members from the other Faculties, made specific re-
commendations to the Faculty of Science, and the Faculty of Science
passed a motion with one opposing vote accepting these recommen-
dations subject to a slight amendment. The recommendations
regarding course grades, passed by the Faculty of Science, read
as follows:
i)
Recognizing that different subjects may require
different grading practices, and also recognizing
that the grading distribution awarded in any
particular area has very important budgetary
• implications, the Faculty of Science, after ex-
amining the grade distributions during the Fall
Semester 1966, is concerned with the degree of
disparities apparent in these statistics and wishes
to express its concern to Senate.
•
.•
ii)
That Senate be asked to have a committee formed
under the auspices of the Faculty of Education with
suitable participation of the other Faculties to study
the question of grading practices in all its impli-
cations, and the committee make all its recommen-
dations to Senate.
6:
er/?2
fl
KERmc
K. E.
Rieckhoff
S.
