The academic probation policy now goes to President Greiner for approval.

For academic good standing, students would have to achieve a cumulative grade point average of 2.0.

If they also achieve a 2.0 average for their most recent semester, complete 75 percent of all credit hours they register for, and enroll in a major by their junior year, they would be considered to be making satisfactory and timely progress toward a degree.

The 75 percent completion requirement is intended to prevent students from abusing their "shopping" period by registering for far too many courses and then resigning the ones they don't like.

Under the proposed academic probation policy, a student who failed to meet good standing or satisfactory progress standards would be placed on academic probation and would be subject to eventual dismissal.

The faculty approved an amendment allowing individual departments to implement higher standards. However, they rejected an amendment that would have created an appeals process for students, because, members said, the Academic Advisement Center already intercedes for students wrongly placed on academic probation.

The new policy is a revision of the faculty's first official academic probation policy, approved last year.

Also under discussion was a report, "Public Higher Education and the Imperative of Productivity; The Voice of the Faculty," developed by Johnstone with colleagues throughout SUNY and at the California State University Systems.

Johnstone told the Senate that in his former job as SUNY chancellor, he often discussed higher education problems with leaders in Albany and Washington. "Almost inevitably, the discussion turned to what I would have to call faculty-bashing," he said. "People out there really think that you're the problem."

Johnstone said political leaders believe that faculty overemphasize esoteric research at the expense of teaching, and that tenure destroys any motive to be productive. This image problem makes it harder to win political and financial support for public universities, he said.

He suggested that the faculties in both New York and California consider adopting a set of principles to improve their image. The principles would include commitments to do more with fewer resources, to help reform primary education, to embrace technology, and to teach necessary courses rather than merely enjoyable ones.

Under Johnstone's plan, the faculty would also make a statement in support of continuing evaluation of faculty by superiors and peers, even after tenure. "Academic tenure is widely perceived by those outside the academy to mean a lifetime of guaranteed employment with no accountability other than professional integrity and peer pressure," his report read. Johnstone described his report as a point of departure for discussion and action, not a binding proposition.

While several Faculty Senate members spoke in favor of Johnstone's recommendations, Joan Sulewski said that she feared they could be used against faculty. "We are in a process of downsizing," she said. Evaluations could be used by universities trying to cut payroll costs, she said, or by department chairs to get rid of faculty they don't like.