Report of the Faculty Policy Committee's
Subcommittee on Examination and Term Regulations

I. INTRODUCTION In the spring of 1998, the Faculty Policy Committee formed a Subcommittee on Examination and Term Regulations "to re-examine current faculty regulations governing the administration of quizzes, tests, and examinations during the regular term as well as the faculty regulations governing the end of term." As stated in the charge to the Subcommittee (Appendix A): This review is motivated by the concern over the increasing number of evening tests being scheduled by day-time classes as well as by the increase in the number of end-of-term rules violations reported by students. Many of these reported violations result from disregard or ignorance of faculty policies, but some are intentionally undertaken with the learning experience of students in mind. It seems timely, therefore, to begin a full review of these regulations, to ensure that they meet the goals of the educational experience, and to devise procedures to sanction their disregard. Specifically the Subcommittee was asked: to review (and re-endorse or change) current policies governing end-of-term regulations, including the regulations governing the definition and administration of comprehensive exams;   to review the current practices with respect to quizzes and exams scheduled in the evening by daytime classes in terms of length of tests, the scheduling of conflicts, and the encroachment on regularly scheduled evening classes and extra-curricular activities;   to review the policies that currently prohibit take-home exams;   to decide which faculty committee or other authority should be empowered to monitor these regulations, to provide guidance to faculty members in following them, and to grant exemptions to them when warranted by the goals (e.g. CAP, COC, Chair of the Faculty, Dean's office);   to review the means by which reports of violations can be communicated and acted upon, including a process of identifying and working with departments to keep violations to a minimum;   to recommend the best timing and medium of reminding faculty members of these regulations; and   to recommend additions to and changes in Rules and Regulations of the Faculty, as necessary. Membership of the Subcommittee included: a chairman selected from the Faculty, the chairs of the Committee on Academic Performance and the Committee on Curricula, a representative of the Office of Academic Services, and the chair of the Undergraduate Association's Student Committee on Educational Policy (SCEP).   II. METHODOLOGY During the spring, summer, and fall of 1998, the Subcommittee conducted a thorough review of current practices. The Subcommittee examined relevant regulations of the Faculty, as well as a number of pending issues. These included requests from several faculty members for revision of current regulations. Input was also obtained from Housemasters and members of the Athletics Department. The Subcommittee consulted periodically with students via SCEP. The Subcommittee also examined background material including the 1998 survey of undergraduates about evening examinations which was conducted by the Committee on Academic Performance, the Office of the Dean of Students and Undergraduate Education, and the Undergraduate Association (Appendix B). In addition, the Subcommittee reviewed data provided by the Schedules Office about the frequency of examinations, and summaries describing violations of the regulations, which were provided by the Chair of the Faculty and by the Associate Dean for Curriculum Support. Although originally scheduled to make its recommendations in May 1998, the Subcommittee found that it could not complete its deliberations until the following academic year. In early 1999 the Chairman of the Subcommittee discussed various versions of the draft report with affected parties and members of the Committee on the Undergraduate Program in order to seek advice and to gain acceptance prior to presenting the report officially to the Faculty as a whole. The report was shaped by these conversations and by those with the Faculty Policy Committee to whom this Subcommittee presented its recommendations. The Subcommittee presented its recommendations at the Faculty Meeting on May 19, 1999. In light of commentary from faculty, students, and staff received over the course of the past year, a number of changes have been made. The amended report was presented to the Faculty Policy Committee, and with its approval is now being presented to the Faculty for its approval. Revisions are noted in this final report.   III. PRINCIPLES Five interrelated principles inform the Subcommittee's conclusions and represent the basis for its recommendations.  The highest priority is student learning. Examination policies must reflect the commitment of our entire community--faculty members, staff, and students--to providing an education of the highest quality. Accordingly, everyone involved in the process is expected to act in ways that make sense from the standpoint of enhancing student learning. Regulations should enable actions that serve to enhance student learning and should restrict actions that, however well intentioned, detract from the overall learning experience.   Student learning as defined by the Task Force's Educational Triad encompasses academics, research, and community. The Subcommittee reaffirms the Educational Triad concept enunciated by the Presidential Task Force on Student Life and Learning. "Academics, research, and community are all important to education; each of these areas should be conducted in ways that both contribute themselves and enable the contributions of the other areas." Examinations fall within this purview.   Regulations must enable MIT's educational mission. All regulations should be viewed in the context of the educational mission. They are not intended to micromanage faculty members as they go about the business of teaching.   Regulations must be adopted by the Faculty. The regulations that govern academics at MIT, including those pertaining to examinations, are Faculty regulations. The regulations pertaining to examinations must be published prominently and disseminated widely amongst the Faculty and students, so that there can be no justifiable excuse for not knowing the regulations.   Every academic activity must take into account the many demands on a student's time. Faculty members cannot expect to be able to optimize without external constraint any individual subject they teach; students have other time commitments. Hence, assignments must be viewed in the context of the time requirements of the subject as published in the Bulletin. Problem sets, term papers, laboratory reports, and other work products during the semester must be constructed so that they can be completed within the weekly time allowance by the majority of students in the class (not by only the top students).   IV. SPECIFIC FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The charge to this Subcommittee specified six topics for its consideration: term and end-of-term regulations, evening examinations, take-home examinations, governance of examination policy, procedures to deal with violations, and suggestions for informing the Faculty of the regulations. For each of these topics, the Subcommittee summarizes background information and then gives its findings and recommendations. The seventh task of the Subcommittee is to make recommendations for changes to Rules and Regulations of the Faculty. The focus of this Subcommittee's work has been undergraduate subjects. The Chair of the Faculty is expected to appoint another Subcommittee to make recommendations concerning graduate subjects.   A. Term and End-of-term Regulations Note: while the charge to the Subcommittee asked for a review of end-of-term regulations, the Subcommittee felt that it also needed to review term regulations about the scheduling and announcement of required work and assignments.   Background Current Term and End-of-Term regulations can be found in Appendix C. They were voted by the Faculty in the early 1980s. At the time, the Dean of the Graduate School and the Student Committee on Educational Policy both reported instances in which instructors announced scheduling of finals almost at the end of the term. Therefore, in March 1983, the Faculty voted to specify in Rules and Regulations of the Faculty, 2.51, that final examinations "shall be scheduled through the Office of the Registrar, as well as announced to the class, before the end of the third week of the term." A year later, in February 1984, the Faculty approved recommendations from the Committee on Educational Policy to alleviate end-of-term pace and pressure. In addition to lengthening the reading period, the Faculty voted to limit assignments as well as examinations during a prescribed end-of-term period: For each subject with a final examination no examination shall be given and no assignment, term paper, or oral presentation shall fall due... For each subject without a final examination at most either one in-class examination may be given, or one assignment, term paper, or oral presentation may fall due... An in-class examination given during those six days is limited to one normal class period (or to one and one-half hours, whichever is shorter). At that time the Faculty also voted to add the word "scheduled" to the last sentence of this regulation, so that it reads: "No assignment, term paper, or oral presentation for any subject shall fall due after the last day of class exercises scheduled for that subject." Since 1984, the only changes to this regulation have been a redefinition of the end-of-term period (since 1996 defined as after the last Friday before the start of reading period) and a renumbering of the regulations.  As students have become more aware of these regulations through the efforts of Feedback Forum and the Student Committee on Educational Policy, the number of reported violations of these regulations has risen. Appendix D summarizes the types of violations that have recently been reported to the Chair of the Faculty.   Findings and Recommendations In keeping with the principles stated above, the Subcommittee reaffirms the need to regulate end-of-term activities and recommends that most of the existing regulations be sustained. At the same time, some changes are recommended.   1. Announcement of Assignments at Beginning of Term  Currently, Term Regulations in the MIT Bulletin state:  During the first three weeks of classes, instructors are asked to provide a clear and complete description of the requirements in each subject, including the due dates for required work, the schedule of examinations during the term, whether there will be a final examination and the grading criteria and procedures to be used. Major assignments should be assigned early enough to allow students the opportunity to manage their time effectively throughout the term. If undergraduates are to make sound judgments about which subjects to take and how to budget their time during the semester, it is incumbent upon the Faculty to lay out the requirements of each subject and to do so as early as possible. The Subcommittee recommends that in each undergraduate subject the faculty member provide to students, by the end of the first week of classes, a clear and complete description of the required work, including the number and kinds of assignments, the approximate schedule for tests, whether or not there will be a final examination, the due dates for major projects, and the grading criteria and procedures to be used. By the end of the third week, the faculty member must provide the precise schedule of tests and major assignments. Once the requirements are announced and scheduled, major changes should not be made. In particular, final examinations should not be cancelled once they are announced, and after the final examination schedule is published by the Schedules Office, the schedule for a final should not be changed.   2. Testing during Last Week of the Term The Subcommittee examined the present regulations governing tests administered during the last week of the semester in subjects without finals (Appendix C) and concluded that the distinction set forth between tests and comprehensive examinations in the current regulations are ambiguous and effectively unenforceable. Under current regulations, tests must be restricted to subject matter taught in the last part of the semester. Comprehensive examination of the entire semester, even by a test lasting only a single class period, is forbidden. The rationale for this policy is that the last week of term is very hectic, and students do not have adequate time without the benefit of the reading period to review the entire semester's material. Therefore, the current regulations state that comprehensive examination of the entire semester must be done by holding a final examination that is scheduled during the final examination period. The Subcommittee believes that it is inappropriate to attempt to regulate content. Besides, the main issue is the time pressure placed upon the student during the hectic last days of the semester. In particular, this is precisely the time when cumulative projects come due. To avoid overloading, to allow students time to focus on term projects, papers, and presentations, and to give students the benefit of time to review over the reading period, the Subcommittee believes that it makes sense to shift all testing out of the last week of class and into the final examination period, regardless of the topical coverage of the test. The Subcommittee recommends that the regulations be changed to forbid all testing after the Last Test Date (currently called the Final Exercise Date), which is the Friday preceding the reading period. Instead, all testing at the end of semester must be conducted during the final examination period. Faculty members are reminded that final examinations need not be three hours in length; regulations provide for examinations lasting from one hour to three hours. The Subcommittee is proposing that more faculty members give the last unit test during the finals period with no increase in length of examination. If they do so, faculty members do not have to use a class period for the test, so there is more time for instruction. Students can use the reading period to review and then have up to three hours to work the test.   3. No End-of-Term Assignment in a Subject with a Final The Subcommittee examined the regulation banning problem sets and other homework assignments at the end of term for undergraduate subjects with tests in the final examination period. The Subcommittee believes that this regulation should be sustained. However, the use of sample problems during the last week of the term needs clarification. To help students to review and prepare for finals, some faculty members provide sample problems or questions. These sample problems or questions may be used to facilitate learning. Solutions to sample problems or questions should not be submitted as part of the grade for the subject, even for "extra points" or as a replacement or make-up for an earlier assignment. Sample problems or questions should be given to students only for self-study. In this regard the Subcommittee suggests that faculty members consider providing model solutions for optional sample problems or questions distributed for the last week. As a result of discussions after the report was initially introduced, the Subcommittee offers the following clarification: Normal background reading in preparation for lectures or class discussions is permitted.   4. One End-of-Term Assignment in a Subject without a Final The Subcommittee endorses continuation of the regulation stating that in an undergraduate subject without a final only one assignment may fall due in the last week of semester (after the Friday preceding reading period, to be called the Last Test Date). The Subcommittee proposes one small change. In some subjects, an oral presentation is scheduled at the end of the term to be accompanied by the submission of a written report. This is not allowed when the regulation is interpreted strictly. However, the Subcommittee believes that it is in the spirit of the current regulations to require both an oral presentation and a written report when the two derive from the same project. In other words, the assignment due the last week has two components: an oral component and a written component. Accordingly, the Subcommittee recommends that faculty members be allowed to require in the last week of semester an oral presentation and a written report when the two are parts of the same assignment, i.e., work products for the same project. The Subcommittee adds the following clarifications: Normal background reading for lectures and class discussions is permitted in addition to the one assignment. As in the case of subjects with testing in the final examination period, optional assignments during the last week shall be for self-study, and may not be used toward part of the grade in the subject, even for extra points or as substitutes for earlier assignments.   5. Scheduling of Finals In recommending that testing in undergraduate subjects be moved to the finals period, the Subcommittee recognizes that increasing the number of tests in the finals period will mean that more rooms (including departmentally controlled rooms) will have to be used during examination week, more conflict examinations will have to be given, and more subjects will have to give tests scheduled later into the final examination period. The Subcommittee recommends that the Schedules Office continue to schedule all finals, and asks for the cooperation of the Faculty in this effort. The Schedules Office should have scheduling priority in departmentally controlled rooms during finals week. One of the reasons that faculty members teaching large subjects do not want to have their examinations on the last day of examination period is the short time they are given to submit grades to the Registrar's Office. The Subcommittee recommends the expansion of on-line grade submissions so that the Registrar's Office does not need to hand-input grades.     B. Tests (and Other Required Academic Exercises) outside Scheduled Class Times (including Evening Tests Given by Daytime Classes) Background Current regulations and policy statements regarding scheduling of academic exercises and evening tests can be found in Appendix E. According to a history written by Norma McGavern in 1990 (Appendix F), discussions about evening tests given by daytime classes and attempts to regulate them have occupied the Faculty and its committees for almost 15 years. In 1985, because several faculty members were scheduling classes between 5 and 10 p.m., the chair of the Committee on Academic Performance (CAP) wrote a memo to the Faculty (Appendix G) reminding faculty members that under Faculty regulations there should be no academic exercises between 5 and 7 p.m. on weekdays. The CAP asked that faculty members tell students at the beginning of the term if they planned to schedule "class sessions" after 7 p.m. on weekdays. In addition, the CAP asked that the daytime schedule of that subject be reduced accordingly. The following year, in 1986, the issue was raised in the Committee on the Undergraduate Program after a number of complaints that evening quizzes, primarily in Engineering subjects, were conflicting with scheduled evening subjects in Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences (HASS), and students were feeling compelled to miss their HASS subjects. At that time there were 21 evening HASS subjects, enrolling approximately 25 students each, and at least 15 other subjects scheduling evening tests (these numbers represent tests scheduled through the Schedules Office). Most evening classes were given on Mondays, so conflicts were worse on that day. In 1988, the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science put into effect its own policies regarding evening tests (see Appendix F). These policies formed the basis for some of the current Institute-wide regulations that were promulgated by the Committee on Academic Performance and the Faculty Policy Committee in 1991 (Appendix H). In 1997 a reexamination of the policies governing evening tests was requested by the Economics Department in a letter to the chair of the Committee on the Undergraduate Program (CUP) following a student complaint about lengthy evening tests in two Economics subjects, 14.01 and 14.02. That request was the first in a series of policy discussions that led eventually to the charge to this Subcommittee. During the 1997-98 academic year, 54 evening tests were scheduled by the Schedules Office in the fall semester, and 46 evening tests in the spring. These subjects were from eight departments. Electrical Engineering and Computer Science continues to be the department having the most subjects with evening tests (17 in the fall, 11 in the spring), but evening tests are now also offered in one of the science core subjects (5.11), two of the HASS subjects with the largest enrollments (14.01 and 14.02), and other heavily enrolled subjects like 1.00 and 5.12. The number of evening HASS subjects has also increased, to 40 in the fall of 1997 and 33 in the spring of 1998 (Appendix B). The survey of students about evening tests which was conducted in spring 1998 (Appendix B) found that almost all respondents (95%) had taken evening tests for daytime classes and 80% had taken evening tests during the 1997-98 academic year. During that year, 33% were also taking subjects in the evening, and 87% were participating in extracurricular activities in the evening. As is to be expected, students taking subjects or participating in multiple extracurricular activities in the evening were more apt to agree that evening tests caused students to miss other subjects and extracurricular activities. Asked their opinion about whether evening tests for daytime classes were better than daytime tests, approximately one-third thought they were better than daytime tests, one quarter thought they were about the same, and the remainder, two-fifths, thought they were worse. The survey report also offers a snapshot, from the student perspective, of current practices when evening tests are offered. For the last three years student complaints to the Chair of the Faculty have increased as students have been made aware of the regulations by the creation of the on-line Feedback Forum three years ago and through mailings from the Student Committee on Educational Policy (SCEP) (Appendix I). A summary of complaints from fall 1998 is in Appendix D.   Findings and Recommendations In considering the need for evening test regulations, the Subcommittee suggests that the Faculty imagine the inverse of this extension of daytime subjects into the evening schedule: students unable to attend lectures or conduct laboratory experiments because a subject that meets normally in the evenings is offering a two-hour test during the day. The Subcommittee is concerned about the increasing numbers of such tests and their impact on evening subjects and activities. Given the trend, it is important to have regulations governing these tests. The Subcommittee recommends that the Faculty approve the following changes to the existing regulations governing scheduling of academic exercises and for evening tests for undergraduate subjects (Appendix E).   1. Scheduling of Academic Exercises a. Weekends: Currently for undergraduate subjects there shall be no required academic exercises between 1 p.m. Saturday and 8 a.m. Monday. The Subcommittee recommends that this weekend period begin at 5 p.m. Friday, instead of 1 p.m. on Saturday, and continue (as is now the case) to 8 a.m. on Monday. This change not only reflects the reality that undergraduate subjects are not offered on Saturday morning, but it also reinforces the current regulation that evening examinations, or review sessions, not be held on Friday evenings. The Subcommittee also believes that Friday evenings are not an appropriate time for scheduled undergraduate subjects.   b. Monday-Thursday, 5-7 p.m.: The Subcommittee strongly supports preservation of the 5-7 p.m. period Monday through Thursday for student dining, athletics, and other activities. Faculty are reminded that not only evening tests, but all academic exercises related to undergraduate subjects fall under this regulation. For example, review sessions, which can attract students who feel compelled to attend for fear of missing out on presentation of important material, should not be scheduled between 5 p.m. and 7 p.m. It has also come to the attention of the Subcommittee that some laboratory subjects routinely run past 5 p.m. Laboratory subjects should be structured in such a way as to allow students to complete their work by 5 p.m. or to allow students to leave at 5 p.m. and return later to complete the work. As a result of discussions with faculty after the report was initially reported, the Subcommittee recommends that the Monday through Friday 5-7 p.m. period be in force during the instructional periods (from the first to the last day of classes) in the spring and fall terms. It is not relevant to the reading and examination periods of the terms and to the Independent Activities Period. Recognizing that many students participate in athletics during the 5-7 p.m. period, the Subcommittee believes that students need some time to compose themselves between athletics and evening tests, so evening tests should start no earlier than 7:30 p.m. The Subcommittee makes this recommendation with the expectation that a student with a 7:30 test will be released from athletic practice as if he/she had a 7 p.m. class. In general, students who have academic exercises until 5 p.m. or beginning at 7 p.m. must be given adequate time by their coaches to dress and travel. They cannot be required to cut part of their classes. With increasing numbers of subjects and tests scheduled in the evenings, scheduling conflict tests is an issue. If conflicts arise, students need to be accommodated. Unfortunately, it is becoming more common to schedule conflict tests during the 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. period. If students prefer not to take the conflict test at this time, they need not have an academic reason, and faculty members must offer alternatives.   c. Weekday Evenings: In keeping with the efforts recommended by the Task Force on Student Life and Learning to invigorate the programs in the living groups and student activities, the Subcommittee reaffirms the regulation that prohibits evening examinations and other academic exercises outside regularly scheduled class times from being held on Monday evenings. The current policy recommendation that evening examinations "preferably" not be held on Wednesday evenings is not being observed: 85 percent of student respondents to the evening examination survey (Appendix B) reported having examinations or review sessions on Wednesday evenings during the 1997-98 academic year. The Subcommittee judges it appropriate to allow examinations to be held on three evenings (Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday).   d. Daytime Examinations: The Subcommittee suggests that faculty members consider offering outside-of-class examinations at times when classes are less frequently scheduled during the day. According to data provided by the Schedules Office, most undergraduates are not in class at 9 a.m. weekdays or on Friday afternoons. By polling students at the beginning of the term, faculty members in smaller classes may be able to find acceptable two-hour blocks during the day.   2. Reduction in Class Time and Work When Examination Is Added Current regulations require that a regularly scheduled class period should be cancelled or that no homework should be assigned for the week during which an evening test is given. The Subcommittee affirms the need for this regulation and recommends more explicit language: that (a) one regularly scheduled academic exercise be dropped or (b) no assignment fall due within two calendar days before the test, on the day of the test, and for the remainder of the calendar week. This regulation would apply to all tests offered outside of class time for undergraduate subjects. Tests held outside scheduled class time add to the time spent on the subject. Hence, the work load should be reduced to comply with the units distribution, e.g., 4-0-8. Initially the Subcommittee recommended that both a lecture/recitation and an assignment be cancelled. However, after discussion with faculty the Subcommittee now recommends that when an outside-class test is given, either one lecture/recitation should be cancelled or no homework assignment should fall due. Because the Subcommittee believes it is not pedagogically sound to have a homework assignment fall due concurrently with an outside-class test, it recommends the explicit language that "no assignment fall due within two calendar days before the test, on the day of the test, and for the remainder of the calendar week."   3. Length of Examinations Currently, regulations state that an evening test should be the equivalent of a quiz that could be given in a normal class period, even though students are allowed more time to complete the test. The Subcommittee finds that the current regulation is difficult to enforce and recommends that it be simplified: Tests outside class time should be limited to no more than 2 hours. Faculty members are reminded that one of the justifications for adopting the longer format made possible by evening testing is its capacity to reduce time pressure. This advantage is lost when faculty members set tests of length and difficulty that make it impossible for students to finish in the time allotted. Initially in its report the Subcommittee recommended, "Faculty members are to set tests (both those scheduled outside as well as during class times) at a difficulty such that the large majority of students (not just the top student) can comfortably finish the entire test with time to spare." After discussion with faculty, the Subcommittee now believes that the simplified statement, "such tests should be no more than 2 hours," is sufficient.   4. Review Sessions Faculty members should consider time spent by students attending review sessions as part of study time budgeted for a subject. Faculty members are reminded that review sessions are not meant for introducing new subject matter.   5. Tests Scheduled by the Schedules Office Examinations held outside regular class times should continue to be scheduled by the Schedules Office, so that there can be a central source of schedule information on these examinations. As noted earlier, examinations should be announced in the first week of class, and the precise schedule of examinations made available by the end of the third week. In scheduling such examinations faculty members should try to avoid conflicting with evening subjects and with other evening examinations--especially subjects with large enrollments or those that are likely to be taken by the same students.   C. Take-home Examinations  Background Currently, as stated in the Term Regulations distributed by the Chair of the Faculty, take-home finals are not allowed in undergraduate subjects. Rules and Regulations of the Faculty, 2.51 states that the final examination scheduled in any subject shall be scheduled by the Registrar's Office and last "not more than three hours." (See Appendix J for Current Regulations on Take-home Examinations.) Take-home finals have been prohibited since 1994. In April of that year Linn Hobbs, the chair of the Committee on the Undergraduate Program, announced at the Faculty meeting that the Committee had decided to end approval of an experiment permitting take-home finals for subjects satisfying the distribution requirement in Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences and at the same time decided not to approve a request for a take-home final in 6.001. The rationale for these decisions were described in a letter from Professor Hobbs to the Faculty (Appendix K). In spring of 1998 a request was made to the Chair of the Faculty, Lotte Bailyn, to permit an extended final examination so that students could take the examination out of the classroom to use the library and to write on computers. The argument made pedagogical sense to Professor Bailyn, who approved the request. She also asked this Subcommittee to examine whether the three-hour final period should be made less restrictive to permit such testing.   Findings and Recommendations The Subcommittee does not support unbridled take-home final examinations and wants to avoid the situation in which a take-home final in a single subject consumes vast quantities of students' time during the final examination period. However, the Subcommittee does support adding more flexibility to the current testing format. The Subcommittee recommends allowing faculty members to offer ex camera (out-of-room) finals with the following restrictions: an ex camera final must be scheduled through the Schedules Office; the ex camera final must be offered over the course of a single afternoon, starting at 1:30 p.m. and ending no later than 7:30 p.m. (students may pick up and return examinations 15 minutes before and after these times); students are permitted unrestricted use of resources, i.e., open book, open notes, etc. The faculty member must state expectations of the students, i.e., inform students what is and is not acceptable behavior during the course of taking an ex camera final. Requests for ex camera examinations should be approved by the Chair of the Faculty. Ex camera examinations are intended to be a different mode of testing, used only in a limited number of subjects. The Subcommittee sees giving students access to computers and libraries as justification for ex camera examinations. Ex camera examinations can also be designed to evaluate student ability to select resources and answer questions of an integrative nature. Ex camera examinations are not intended to be opportunities to double the amount of material covered in conventional examinations. The Subcommittee initially included in its recommendation, "the ex camera examination is set at a difficulty such that the large majority of students (not just the top student) can comfortably finish the entire examination within the available time." After meeting with faculty subsequent to the initial report, the Subcommittee does not think this statement should be included as it would not be easy to use such a measure of difficulty.   D. Governance Background Five standing committees of the Faculty can be involved in examination policies. The roles of the Faculty Policy Committee (FPC), the Committee on Graduate School Policy (CGSP), the Committee on the Undergraduate Policy (CUP), the Committee on Curricula (COC), and the Committee on Academic Performance (CAP) are described in Rules and Regulations of the Faculty (Appendix L). The committees' responsibilities overlap generally on issues of academic policies, not just in regards to examination policies.   Findings and Recommendations The Subcommittee-whose membership includes the chairs of COC and CAP-has not taken on the redesign of the Faculty committee structure. Rather, the Subcommittee recommends that issues involving examinations, including requests for exceptions to the regulations and permission for ex camera examinations, should be referred to the Chair of the Faculty, who will direct them to the appropriate committee or committees. In the past, exceptions have been granted indefinitely. The Subcommittee recommends that the Chair of the Faculty grant exceptions to regulations and permissions for ex camera examinations for periods of no more than five years. Once existing policies have been revised, all exceptions currently in effect should be reviewed once again by the Chair of the Faculty and renewed for no more than five years. The Subcommittee reaffirms the regulation forbidding faculty members from securing "agreement" to departures from the regulations by asking students to vote on the matter. Because such votes are typically conducted by show of hands (not by secret ballot) and because students feel pressured to comply with the wishes of the Faculty, this procedure cannot be deemed a fair measure of student opinion.   E. Violations Background Currently, as the Chair of the Faculty tells faculty members at the beginning of each term (Appendix M), students report violations of the regulations to her, usually via an email message to feedback@mit.edu. During the 1997-98 academic year students could report complaints through the Feedback Forum web site which provided an electronic filter removing the identity of complainants. At this time, Feedback Forum is inoperative. In recent years, as student groups like Feedback Forum and the Student Committee on Education Policy have educated students about policies (see sample mailing in Appendix I), the number of reports of violations has increased. A summary of complaints reported to the Chair of the Faculty in Fall 1998 is in Appendix D. When the chair receives a complaint, she talks directly to the faculty member involved. Frequently the faculty member is unaware of the regulations, and has not intentionally flouted the rules.   Findings and Recommendations The Subcommittee believes that enforcement of the regulations is critical to the success of the educational enterprise. Indeed, in the past, enforcement has been a great challenge. Furthermore, there is a need to act swiftly when violations of regulations occur. Time passes quickly; MIT semesters run only 14 weeks. The Subcommittee recommends that violations of regulations continue to be reported to the Chair of the Faculty. However, in a departure from current practice, the Subcommittee recommends that the Chair of the Faculty contact not only the faculty member whose actions are in question but also his or her Department Head. The hope is that it will become a matter of pride on the part of the department not to be confronted with "problems" in connection with violations of regulations. The Subcommittee appreciates that students are reluctant to report violations of regulations, primarily out of concern about loss of anonymity. For fielding reports from students the Subcommittee endorses the use of an electronic filter such as Feedback Forum. In its absence, a student who is concerned about anonymity may send a letter by interdepartmental mail to the Chair of the Faculty. However, this limits the Chair's ability to handle the case. If students identify themselves, the Chair can discuss the situations with them and report back to them on how the situations have been resolved. To begin the process, students may contact the Student Committee on Educational Policy (SCEP) for advice and support.   F. Informing Faculty Members of the Regulations Background Regulations are currently published in print and in most cases also on the web in Rules and Regulations of the Faculty, the Bulletin, and Term Regulations from the Chair of the Faculty (see Appendices C, E, J, L, M). Summaries of the policies are also in the Academic Guide for Undergraduates and Their Advisors (available in print and on the web at http://web.mit.edu/acadinfo/undergrad/academic-guide). In addition, the Student Committee on Educational Policy has recently been mailing summaries of the regulations to students (Appendix I). Administrators in the academic departments are informed of the regulations by mail and at regular meetings, and are asked for their help in enforcing them. The previous Chair of the Faculty reported that frequently when she investigated violations, the instructor said that he or she was unaware of the regulations. In the 1998 Evening Examination Survey, 23 percent of the student respondents were very familiar with the evening examination policies, while 56 percent knew about some, but not all, of the policies.   Findings and Recommendations In the opinion of the Subcommittee there is an acute need to raise faculty awareness of the relevant policies and regulations. Recall that when MIT became proactive on the issue of sexual harassment, an educational campaign was an integral component of the program. The Committee believes that making Deans and Department Heads more knowledgeable about the issues could start a cascade of awareness. Presentations at departmental meetings are in order. In parallel, students need to be informed of all regulations by such means as mailings by SCEP and bulletin boards.   G. Changes to Faculty Regulations Background As noted above, currently relevant regulations include not only sections of Rules and Regulations of the Faculty, but also policy statements in the MIT Bulletin and other publications. Each term the Chair of the Faculty now summarizes these and other Term Regulations for the Faculty.   Findings and Recommendations The Subcommittee proposes revisions to two sections of Rules and Regulations. First, in "2.10 Calendar," the last paragraph of 2.12 should be revised to state: For undergraduate subjects, during the instructional periods of the fall and spring terms, there shall be no required academic exercises between 5 P.M. and 7 P.M. Monday through Thursday and between 5 P.M. Friday and 8 A.M. Monday. Requests for exceptions shall be referred to the Chair of the Faculty, who will direct them to the appropriate committee. Exceptions shall be granted for no more than five years. The changes to this section reflect the Subcommittee's recommendations regarding scheduling of undergraduate academic exercises. The Subcommittee also proposes that 2.50 now be called "Assignments and Examinations," and be expanded and re-organized to state: 2.51 These regulations apply to academic exercises during the fall and spring terms including the Reading Periods and final examination periods as defined in Section 2.11. Questions of interpretation and requests for exceptions to regulations shall be referred to the Chair of the Faculty, who will direct them to the appropriate committees. Exceptions to regulations shall be granted for no more than five years. 2.52 The regulations in this section apply to all subjects, undergraduate and graduate. Final examinations shall be held during the final examination period following each term, and shall be scheduled through the Schedules Office. The final examination scheduled in any subject shall last at least one hour and not more than three hours. Final examinations may not be cancelled once they are announced, and after the final examination schedule is published by the Schedules Office, the time of the final may not be changed. No assignment, term paper, or oral presentation in any subject shall fall due after the last scheduled class period of that subject. The Dean of Students and Undergraduate Education in the case of an undergraduate student, or the Dean for Graduate Students in the case of a graduate student, may excuse a student from a scheduled final examination for reasons of illness or significant personal problems. (See the grade of OX, Section 2.62.3.) The Faculty member in charge of a subject may excuse a student from a final examination for such reasons as conflicts either between examinations or with religious holidays, if a mutually satisfactory agreement can be reached between the student and the Faculty member, if the agreement is ratified in advance of the examination by the head of the department in which the subject is offered, and if the Faculty member is prepared to submit a grade based on other evidence. 2.53 The regulations in this section apply to undergraduate subjects only. The faculty member must provide to students, by the end of the first week of classes, a clear and complete description of the required work, including the number and kinds of assignments, the approximate schedule of tests and due dates for major projects, whether or not there will be a final examination, and the grading criteria and procedures to be used. The precise schedule of tests and major assignments must be provided by the end of the third week. The length of tests held outside scheduled class times shall not exceed two hours. Such tests must be scheduled through the Schedules Office. They may begin no earlier than 7:30 P.M. and may not be held on Monday evenings. A student who is unable to take the test owing to a conflict with a scheduled academic exercise or extracurricular activity shall be allowed to do so at another time. When a test is held outside scheduled class time, a regularly scheduled class hour (lecture or recitation) shall be cancelled, or no assignment shall fall due within the two calendar days preceding the test, on the day of the test, or during the remainder of that calendar week. Ex camera finals may be held with the permission of the Chair of the Faculty. Permissions for ex camera finals shall be granted for no more than five years. The following restrictions apply: the ex camera final shall be offered over the course of a single afternoon, starting at 1:30 P.M. and ending no later than at 7:30 P.M., and students shall be permitted unrestricted use of resources. There shall be no tests after the Friday preceding the start of the Reading Period, to be called the Last Test Date. For each subject in which there is testing during the final examination period, no assignment may fall due after the Last Test Date. For each subject in which there is no testing during the final examination period, at most one assignment may fall due between the Last Test Date and the end of the last scheduled class period in the subject. Optional assignments during the last week shall be for self-study, and may not be used toward part of the grade in a subject, even for extra points or as substitutes for earlier assignments. 2.54 The regulations in this section apply to graduate subjects only. The faculty member must provide, by the end of the third week, a clear and complete description of the required work, including the number and kinds of assignments, the schedule for tests and due dates for major projects, whether or not there will be a final examination, and the grading criteria and procedures to be used. For each subject with a final examination, no examination shall be given and no assignment, term paper, or oral presentation shall fall due after the Last Test Date. For each subject without a final examination, at most, either one in-class examination may be given, or one assignment, term paper, or oral presentation may fall due, between the Last Test Date and the end of the last regularly scheduled class in the subject. An in-class examination given during this period is limited to one normal class period (or to one and one-half hours, whichever is shorter). This section thus becomes the single source for regulations regarding assignments and examinations, incorporating the recommendations of this Subcommittee regarding undergraduate subjects, as well as existing policies for graduate subjects currently published in the Bulletin and Term Regulations for the Faculty. The Subcommittee hopes that another Subcommittee will make now review these policies and make recommendations regarding graduate subjects. The Subcommittee proposes that its changes go into effect beginning with the academic year 2000-2001. Once these changes to regulations are approved, other policy statements should be revised for consistency, and the regulations should be published so as to be readily accessible.   V. REVIEW The Subcommittee recommends that examination practices be monitored, and examination and term regulations be reviewed periodically. A committee designated by the Chair of the Faculty should undertake the review four years after the new regulations are implemented.