9:30 am
Beck rooms
Agenda
1. Sign in for quorum
2. Call to order
3. Communications from Provost Robinson
4. Approval of agenda
5. Approval of the draft minutes of the May 8 meeting
6. Executive Committee report
7. Reports of standing and special committees
a. Academic Facilities Committee report
b. Admissions Committee report
c. Compensation & Welfare Committee report
d. Faculty Guide and Bylaws Committee report
i. Motion: First reading of proposed changes to the Faculty Guide regarding the use of tenure and promotion guidelines:
Proposed Revisions to Faculty Guide – Tenure and Promotion Guidelines
Red represents added language.
ARTICLE 4
APPOINTMENT, PROMOTION, AND TENURE STANDARDS
In considering an applicant for appointment, promotion, and tenure, all parties involved shall the eligible voting faculty of the department, the dean, the college/school rank and tenure committee, the university rank and tenure committee, and the provost must evaluate the application with reference to the criteria for the rank for which application is made, as specified in the department-approved tenure and promotion guidelines.
Although the criteria for tenure are identical to the criteria for associate professor, an additional consideration for tenure must be the needs of the department or college, including prospective enrollment in the program in which the applicant teaches.
In general, work performed before coming to the university is the basis for appointment, work performed after the appointment is the basis for the first promotion, and work performed after a previous promotion is the basis for the next promotion.
It is expected that each department that evaluates an application for promotion or tenure shall have a clear statement of research and publication expectations on file in the Dean and Provost’s office. The department shall forward with the application a precise and detailed statement on the attributes of the applicant as a teacher, scholar, and contributor to the university, the profession, and the community. The quality of scholarship, concern, and enthusiasm for teaching, relations with students, specific contributions to departmental, college, and university affairs, and leadership in the community should be included in the departmental evaluation and recommendation. The failure of the department or chairperson to submit timely evaluations regarding tenure or promotion shall not prevent the review process from continuing. At any point following the departmental recommendation, evaluators are encouraged to contact professional colleagues outside the university to assist in the consideration of the quality of the scholarship.
Those concerned with making recommendations shall consider a faculty member’s qualifications, teaching effectiveness or professional effectiveness, scholarship (including research and applied research) or other creative work, and service to the university, the profession, and the community, as more particularly set forth below, and as specified in the department-approved tenure and promotion guidelines.
Article 5.5
Department guidelines for promotion/tenure shall include a statement of research and publication expectations. The departmental guidelines must be committed to writing after formal departmental approval. Copies of same must be provided to all probationary faculty at the time of their appointment. The criteria in place shall be the criteria under which a probationary faculty member is evaluated for tenure.
Recognizing that there may be different periods of time after the awarding of tenure in which a faculty member may decide to apply for promotion to the rank of Professor, any criteria which shall be adopted subsequent to those which were provided to the faculty member at the time of hiring into the tenure track line shall be communicated to the tenured faculty at such time as they may have been approved by the faculty of a department. The guidelines shall include voting procedures for promotion to full professor when there are no faculty of that rank in the department.
Any changes approved by the department to the criteria for promotion to full professor shall be the only criteria used for evaluation and must be communicated in writing to all faculty in the department, and kept on record in the department, the dean’s office, and the provost’s office.
The department chair, department faculty, dean, college or school tenure and promotion committee, university tenure and promotion committee, and the provost must evaluate applications with reference to and on the basis of these departmental guidelines. All guidelines adopted by a department shall be forwarded to the dean and provost upon their adoption.
E. Written documents shall be the primary evidence considered at all levels in the promotion/tenure process.
Delete from current FG: College Rank and Tenure Committees and the University Rank and Tenure Committee may, during the course of their deliberations, invite the responsible official(s) at each level (department chairperson/dean/provost) to present evaluative statements and/or respond to questions. The record shall summarize these statements/responses.
Article 7.4.b
Departments shall establish guidelines for assessing progress in research for tenure-track and tenured faculty. Faculty will submit an annual report on their research to the department chair. The department, college or school tenure and promotion committee, the dean, the university tenure and promotion committee, and the provost shall evaluate candidates for tenure and promotion based only on these approved departmental guidelines, as noted above. If a department fails to establish such guidelines, then the guidelines approved by the faculty of the school or college will be used to evaluate candidates for tenure and promotion.
e. Library Committee report
f. Program Review Committee report
i. Motion: The Program Review Committee report on the Master of Science in Experimental Psychology is approved.
ii. Motion: The Program Review Committee report on the English Department is approved.
8. Committees with no reports
a. Academic Policy Committee
b. Calendar Committee
c. Core Curriculum Committee
d. Faculty Development Committee
e. Faculty Grievance Committee
f. Graduate Studies Committee
g. Instructional Technology Committee
h. Nominations, Elections, and Appointments Committee
i. Intellectual Property Task Force
9. Committee Motions
a. Faculty Guide and Bylaws Committee
i. Motion: First reading of proposed changes to the Faculty Guide regarding the use of tenure and promotion guidelines:
Proposed Revisions to Faculty Guide – Tenure and Promotion Guidelines
Red represents added language.
ARTICLE 4
APPOINTMENT, PROMOTION, AND TENURE STANDARDS
In considering an applicant for appointment, promotion, and tenure, all parties involved shall the eligible voting faculty of the department, the dean, the college/school rank and tenure committee, the university rank and tenure committee, and the provost must evaluate the application with reference to the criteria for the rank for which application is made, as specified in the department-approved tenure and promotion guidelines.
Although the criteria for tenure are identical to the criteria for associate professor, an additional consideration for tenure must be the needs of the department or college, including prospective enrollment in the program in which the applicant teaches.
In general, work performed before coming to the university is the basis for appointment, work performed after the appointment is the basis for the first promotion, and work performed after a previous promotion is the basis for the next promotion.
It is expected that each department that evaluates an application for promotion or tenure shall have a clear statement of research and publication expectations on file in the Dean and Provost’s office. The department shall forward with the application a precise and detailed statement on the attributes of the applicant as a teacher, scholar, and contributor to the university, the profession, and the community. The quality of scholarship, concern, and enthusiasm for teaching, relations with students, specific contributions to departmental, college, and university affairs, and leadership in the community should be included in the departmental evaluation and recommendation. The failure of the department or chairperson to submit timely evaluations regarding tenure or promotion shall not prevent the review process from continuing. At any point following the departmental recommendation, evaluators are encouraged to contact professional colleagues outside the university to assist in the consideration of the quality of the scholarship.
Those concerned with making recommendations shall consider a faculty member’s qualifications, teaching effectiveness or professional effectiveness, scholarship (including research and applied research) or other creative work, and service to the university, the profession, and the community, as more particularly set forth below, and as specified in the department-approved tenure and promotion guidelines.
Article 5.5
Department guidelines for promotion/tenure shall include a statement of research and publication expectations. The departmental guidelines must be committed to writing after formal departmental approval. Copies of same must be provided to all probationary faculty at the time of their appointment. The criteria in place shall be the criteria under which a probationary faculty member is evaluated for tenure.
Recognizing that there may be different periods of time after the awarding of tenure in which a faculty member may decide to apply for promotion to the rank of Professor, any criteria which shall be adopted subsequent to those which were provided to the faculty member at the time of hiring into the tenure track line shall be communicated to the tenured faculty at such time as they may have been approved by the faculty of a department. The guidelines shall include voting procedures for promotion to full professor when there are no faculty of that rank in the department.
Any changes approved by the department to the criteria for promotion to full professor shall be the only criteria used for evaluation and must be communicated in writing to all faculty in the department, and kept on record in the department, the dean’s office, and the provost’s office.
The department chair, department faculty, dean, college or school tenure and promotion committee, university tenure and promotion committee, and the provost must evaluate applications with reference to and on the basis of these departmental guidelines. All guidelines adopted by a department shall be forwarded to the dean and provost upon their adoption.
E. Written documents shall be the primary evidence considered at all levels in the promotion/tenure process.
Delete from current FG: College Rank and Tenure Committees and the University Rank and Tenure Committee may, during the course of their deliberations, invite the responsible official(s) at each level (department chairperson/dean/provost) to present evaluative statements and/or respond to questions. The record shall summarize these statements/responses.
Article 7.4.b
Departments shall establish guidelines for assessing progress in research for tenure-track and tenured faculty. Faculty will submit an annual report on their research to the department chair. The department, college or school tenure and promotion committee, the dean, the university tenure and promotion committee, and the provost shall evaluate candidates for tenure and promotion based only on these approved departmental guidelines, as noted above. If a department fails to establish such guidelines, then the guidelines approved by the faculty of the school or college will be used to evaluate candidates for tenure and promotion.
ii. Motion: Second reading of the amendments to the proposed changes to sections 11.2.A.2 and 12.5.A in the Faculty Guide:
11.2.A.2
ORIGINAL:
Educational Policy Committee. This committee shall be responsible, consistent with established university academic policies, for recommending academic policy to the faculty of its respective college. Such policy shall include, but not be limited to, the college core, and department or interdepartmental programs, majors, and courses. The Educational Policy Committee of each college shall consider the impact of its policy decisions on ongoing or proposed programs in other units of the university. The Library Educational Policy Committee shall be responsible for recommending to its faculty policies affecting services to the students, faculty, community, and administration. Where appropriate, a college faculty may create separate graduate and undergraduate Educational Policy Committees.
REVISION:
This committee shall be responsible, consistent with established university academic policies, for recommending academic policy to the faculty of its college, and for reviewing proposed changes or additions to academic programs and making corresponding recommendations to the faculty of its respective college. Such policy shall include, but not be limited to, the college core, and department or interdepartmental programs, majors, and courses. The Educational Policy Committee of each school or college shall consider the impact of its policy decisions on ongoing or proposed programs in other units of the university. The Library Educational Policy Committee shall be responsible for recommending to its faculty policies affecting services to the students, faculty, community, and administration. Where appropriate, a college faculty may create separate graduate and undergraduate Educational Policy Committees. Likewise a faculty, if it deems appropriate, may create a separate standing committee to handle matters dealing with the college/school core curriculum.
12.5.A
ORIGINAL:
Through their governance units, the faculty of each school are free to create such officers and agencies (committees, task forces. etc.) as they deem appropriate to promote the interests of the faculty. These officers and agencies shall be selected in accordance with procedures developed and promulgated by the respective faculty units. Such officers and agencies must, in all announcements, etc., clearly identify themselves as representatives of faculty, not of the Faculty Senate or the university administration.
REVISION:
Through their governance units, the faculty of each school or college are free to create such officers and agencies (committees, task forces. etc.) as they deem appropriate to promote the interests of the faculty. These officers and agencies shall be selected in accordance with procedures developed and promulgated by the respective faculty units. Such officers and agencies must, in all announcements, etc., clearly identify themselves as representatives of their respective faculty unit, not of the Faculty Senate or the university administration. The By-laws Committee of each school or college shall review the by-laws of any new committee to ensure that the responsibilities of that new committee are clearly articulated.
b. Program Review Committee
i. Motion: The Program Review Committee report on the Master of Science in Experimental Psychology is approved.
ii. Motion: The Program Review Committee report on the English Department is approved.
10. Old Business
11. New Business
12. Communications
13. Adjournment