1:00 pm
\nBeck rooms<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Agenda<\/strong><\/p>\n 1. Sign in for quorum<\/p>\n 2. Call to order<\/p>\n 3. Communications from Provost Robinson<\/p>\n 4. Approval of agenda<\/p>\n 5. Approval of the draft minutes<\/a>\u00a0of the March 22 meeting<\/p>\n 6. Executive Committee\u00a0report<\/a> i. Response<\/a>\u00a0from the Provost regarding EC release time<\/p>\n 7. Reports of standing and special committees<\/p>\n a.\u00a0Academic Policy Committee\u00a0report<\/a> i. Recommendation<\/a>\u00a0on student evaluation questions<\/p>\n ii. Recommendation<\/a>\u00a0on honor code policy<\/p>\n b.\u00a0Admissions Committee\u00a0report<\/a> c.\u00a0Compensation & Welfare Committee\u00a0report<\/a><\/p>\n d. Core Curriculum Committee\u00a0report<\/a> e.\u00a0Faculty Development Committee\u00a0report<\/a><\/p>\n f. Faculty Guide & Bylaws Committee\u00a0report<\/a><\/p>\n i. Second reading of proposed changes to Article 3.1.a of the Faculty Guide<\/p>\n Article 3.1.a\u00a0reads:<\/p>\n Full-time term appointments and reappointments shall not exceed a total of five years.<\/b><\/p>\n Motion: To add the following sentence to Article 3.1.a:<\/p>\n Term faculty\u00a0who are completing their fifth year in 2012-2013 are eligible to have their contracts extended for one additional year (2013-2014). This is a one-time waiver of the 5 year term limit.<\/p>\n Rationale:<\/p>\n Term faculty members play an essential role in the University. The expertise and experience of many term faculty members and the difficulty of replacing these faculty members demonstrates the need for a lecturer line that has rolling contracts. The Faculty Guide committee is developing a proposal for a lecturer line to be sent to the Senate in Fall 2013. Extending term faculty member contracts who are completing their fifth year in 2012-13 for one additional year, through 2013-14, will retain these faculty until\u00a0 a lecturer line without term limits is developed and approved.<\/p>\n ii. \u00a0First reading of proposed changes to Faculty Guide Article 5.5.d:<\/p>\n The following motion was approved by the Senate in December 2012:<\/p>\n Motion: (to add) Such guidelines shall include guidelines for voting procedures for promotion to full professor when there are no faculty of that rank in the department.<\/i><\/p>\n The Provost recommended adding the following:<\/p>\n The departmental guidelines should clearly include teaching, research and service expectations for those who seek to demonstrate a portfolio appropriate for advancement to the rank of professor. As for a process of evaluation of this portfolio, candidates may submit, with the approval of their dean,two external reviews reflecting on the level and impact of their scholarly accomplishments. The department has the prerogative to submit a position on the promotion, but with no vote.<\/i><\/p>\n Rationale: This additional language was proposed by the Provost to the motion submitted in Feb. 2013.<\/p>\n g. \u00a0Graduate Studies Committee\u00a0report<\/a><\/p>\n h. Report<\/a>\u00a0from the\u00a0Senate Representative of the Graduate Policy Advisory Board<\/p>\n i.\u00a0Instructional Technology Committee\u00a0report<\/a><\/p>\n j.\u00a0Library Committee\u00a0report<\/a>
\n<\/a><\/p>\n
\n<\/a><\/p>\n
\n<\/a><\/p>\n
\n<\/a><\/p>\n
\n<\/a><\/p>\n