MINUTES OF THE FACULTY HANDBOOK REVISION COMMITTEE

Wednesday, April 11, 2007; Mason Hall, D1 – 8:30 – 10:00 a.m.

 

Present:  Kevin Avruch, Associate Director and Professor of Conflict Resolution, Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution; Lorraine Brown, Professor of English, College of Humanities and Social Sciences; Martin Ford, Senior Associate Dean, College of Education and Human Development; Dave Harr, Senior Associate Dean, School of Management; Marilyn Mobley, Associate Provost for Educational Programs and Associate Professor of English; Suzanne Slayden, Associate Professor of Chemistry and Biochemistry, College of Science.

 

Absent:  Rick Coffinberger, Associate Professor of Business and Legal Studies, School of Management, Chair; David Rossell, Associate Provost for Personnel and Budget, ex-officio.

 

In the absence of Rick Coffinberger, the meeting was chaired by Kevin Avruch.

 

Further Revisions:  2.3.3. Procedures for Appointment and Reappointment of Term Faculty (Multi Year Contracts) pp.2& 3 template  (yellow = deleted; RED = Revisions)

·        (b):  Replace:  “If the decision is made for reappointment, the faculty member may either receive a second, three-year appointment or a single-year appointment” with “If the decision is made for reappointment, the faculty member may either receive a one, two or three-year appointment.”

·        ( c ) Add “and thereafter” so that revised sentence now reads “In the Term Faculty member’s sixth year or thereafter, s/he may be considered for promotion, normally to the rank of Term Associate Professor, and reappointment to a two or three or five-year contract or for reappointment to a one, two, or three-year contract at his/her current rank.”

·        ( c ) Add “for associate professor” so that revised sentence now reads “Candidates for promotion to Associate Professor must demonstrate at least high competence in the focus area (teaching or research) by the standards  developed locally and approved by the Provost.”

·        ( c ) Add new sentence directly following previous sentence:  “Candidates for promotion to Full Professor must demonstrate genuine excellence in the focus area (teaching or research) by the standards developed locally and approved by the Provost.”  This addresses concern earlier expressed among some faculty whether genuine excellence required for promotion to full term professor or associate term professor  (in their focus area); leaves to local academic unit how to define “genuine excellence”.

 

REVISED TEXT FOLLOWS: - yellow = deleted; RED = Revisions

2.3.3 Procedures for Appointment and Reappointment of Term Faculty:  pp.2-3:  Multi-year Contracts- 2003 Addendum – 2007 Revision

 

Term Faculty on multi-year contracts will be evaluated for reappointment during the final year of their initial appointments. 

a.       Based on that evaluation and programmatic needs, and after appropriate faculty review, the respective Dean or Director will recommend reappointment or non-reappointment.  This recommendation is due to the Provost by November 1st of the faculty member’s final year of the current, multi-year contract.  The Provost will make the final determination and advise the Term Faculty member, in writing, by the end of that fall semester (no later than December 15th). 

 

b.      If the decision is made for reappointment, the faculty member may either receive a one, two or second, three-year appointment or a single-year appointment.

 

c.       In the Term Faculty member’s sixth year or thereafter, s/he may be considered for promotion, normally to the rank of Term Associate Professor, and reappointment to a two or three or five-year contract or for reappointment to a one, two, or three-year contract at his/her current rank.   Candidates for promotion to Associate Professor must demonstrate at least high competence in the focus area (teaching or research) by the standards developed locally and approved by the Provost.  Candidates for promotion to Full Professor must demonstrate genuine excellence in the focus area (teaching or research) by the standards developed locally and approved by the Provost.  The recommendation for promotion is due to the Provost by November 1st of the faculty member’s final year of the current, multi-year contract.

 

Term Faculty not recommended for promotion in their sixth year may be recommended for another three-year term at their current rank.  They then may be recommended for promotion in their ninth year, but may not remain on multi-year appointments if not promoted at that time.

 

d.      By the end of fall semester of the final year of the current multi-year contract (no later than December 15th), the Provost will notify the Term Faculty member, in writing, of a decision to recommend promotion or reappointment at the current rank.

 

e.       Term Faculty who are promoted will be announced to the Board of Visitors and may will be appointed to either a two or three or five year contract at their new rank.  The length of reappointment contracts for research faculty may be less than five years, depending on the funding available, without impact on rank.

 

f.        Professor will be evaluated for reappointment to additional two or three or five-year contracts in the final year of each contract, following the same time frame and procedures outlined above.  They may also be considered for promotion to Term Full Professors.

 

g.       Both the University and the Term Faculty member retain the option to request a change from a multi-year contract to a single-year contract.   This action must be endorsed by the respective Dean/Director and approved by the Provost.

 

h.       At the initial implementation of this process, faculty members currently on one-year contracts, but being offered multi-year contracts, may request that prior years of service be counted in consideration for reappointment/promotion,2and units must respond with explicit recommendations to the Provost regarding the stage of appointment.  The Provost will make the final determination.

 

DISCUSSION:  2.2.5 University Professors

Since our last meeting (April 4th), documents obtained from David Rossell were distributed on the new University Professor and Distinguished Service Professor Policies, dated 3/21/07.   

·        Is University Professor a rank in the traditional sense, or an honor?  A way to honor exemplary faculty already here, as well as a mechanism to bring someone (new) in.

·        Must be affiliated with some academic unit; Robinson professors the only exception.

·        Also needs to be cross-referenced in Promotion and Tenure section. 

2.2.5 University Professor – 2007 Proposed Revision RED- new text; yellow-deleted text

From time to time the University will encounter opportunities to recognize current members of the university faculty or appoint to its faculty women and men of  great national or international stature.  University Professors are appointed by the President and the Board of Visitors with the advice and consent of a standing committee appointed by the Provost. 

 

University Professor appointments are reserved for eminent faculty of national and international achievement.  Such appointments should be reserved for full professors.  The criteria should include strong research or scholarship or arts credentials, as appropriate to the discipline, as well as consistent record of high quality publications. 

2.2.5 University Professors – 1994 Handbook Text

From time to time the University will encounter opportunities to appoint to its faculty men and women of unusually great stature and eminence from the world of national and international achievement. The rank of university professor is reserved for such eminent individuals.

 

Since the value of these individuals to the University's academic community transcends the boundaries of departments, colleges, schools, and institutes, university professors are appointed as at-large members of the General Faculty. At the discretion of local or collegiate unit faculties, however, university professors may be invited to accept primary affiliation in one or more departments, colleges, schools, and/or institutes. University professors invariably hold tenured appointments. They are appointed by the President and the Board of Visitors with the advice and consent of an ad hoc faculty committee of the President's own choosing.

 

Distinguished Service Professors Criteria: 3/21/07 Policy reproduced below:

 

Distinguished Service Professors should be named by the Provost, either directly or following a recommendation by the dean or director of the unit in which she or he holds academic rank. Since service may take many forms over a long period of time, the Distinguished Service Professorship should be used to recognize individuals whose careers have had a major impact on their field or on the university community that go well beyond the ordinary levels of service. In other words, the intention of this designation is not simply to recognize someone for many years of employment at the university.

 

Criteria for naming someone to this rank are listed below.

 

A.                  Full Professor

B.                  Sustained contribution to the good of the university and the academic unit

C.                  High level service that goes considerably beyond the routine

D.                 Contributions to the field that extend beyond the boundaries of the university

 

·        Not the same as University Professor, elements of service to academic unit and beyond, not to link service to academic unit alone as too restrictive. Disagreement whether contributions to academic unit necessary to qualify for this honor, given individual circumstances.  Noted must already be full professor. 

·        “And” vs. “Or” – after some discussion, decided in addition to requirement of full professor rank, to reorder wording to that must have C plus B and/or D.

·        To use parallel language where applicable to 2.2.5 University Professor

·        To insert in Handbook between 2.2.5 University Professor and 2.2.6 (now 2.2.7) Emeritus Status

 

DRAFT TEXT:  NEW: 2.2.6 Distinguished Service Professor

2.2.6 Distinguished Service Professor – April 2007 adaptation RED = new  FHC    BLACK = 3/21/07 text     Blue – parallel to 2.2.5

Distinguished Service Professors are recognized as individuals whose careers have had a major impact on their field or on the university community that goes well beyond the ordinary levels of service.  Distinguished Service Professors should be named by the Provost, either directly or following a recommendation by the dean or director of the unit in which she or he holds academic rank.  Such appointments should be reserved for full professors.  The criteria should include high level service that goes considerably beyond the routine; sustained contribution to the good of the university and the academic unit, and/or contributions to the field that extend beyond the boundaries of the university.  

REVIEW:  Revisions Suggested by Provost Stearns

1.2.3        Other Members of the Central Administration:  Is this language consistent with Administrative Faculty Handbook text? 

1.3.3        Colleges and Schools:  need to recognize schools may also be subunits of colleges.  To add “Colleges may also be subdivided into schools” to end of first paragraph. 

1.3.4        Definition of Local Academic Units:  to remove phrase “except those holding the title of university professor” in third paragraph in view of new policy.

1.3.4.2 Institutes:  to remove phrase “normally at the graduate level” in first paragraph, verified already completed in revision text.

2.2.5 University Professors: to replace with new policy.  Further revisions are noted above. 

2.4 Criteria for Evaluation of Faculty:  several revisions suggested; to be discussed at future meeting when all committee members are here.  Consensus to look at section holistically.  To incorporate Provost’s suggestion to update text for three year review of tenure-track faculty.  An important faculty protection; in practice many years ago in which faculty were reviewed every two years, 

2.4.1 Teaching and 2.5.1 Teaching:  suggestion made to insert “and assessments of learning outcomes” to be discussed at future meeting.

2.8.2 Procedures for Promotion and Tenure (e):  unclear, request clarification. 

2.8.4.1 Eligibility for Reconsideration:  does the Provost wish to insert “rare instances for new evidence,” in lieu of a.b.c.d.e?   General discussion about faculty member going through reconsideration process (which basically says) materials turned in during October; much happened subsequently between October and May.  Should the reconsideration process be integrated with the appeals process?  Logically, new criteria/evidence could serve as basis for appeal.  Counterpoint:  there is another level of appeal to those denied reconsideration.  You cannot make a further appeal to the Board without support of at least one appeal board member in your favor, vs. appeal could be on several bases, including procedural.  Reference to

2.9 Appeal Procedure for Negative Decisions in Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Cases

The University recognizes the need for an appeal procedure for faculty who fail to gain reappointment, promotion, and/or tenure. The appeal must be based on one or more of the following allegations:

  1. violation of federal and state legislation or university policy in regards to discrimination;
  2. denial of academic freedom;
  3. denial of procedural due process in consideration for tenure, reappointment, or promotion;
  4. inadequate or faulty consideration and/or additional evidence presented in light of the procedures outlined in this document.

The intent of the appeal procedure is to provide fair and competent review of the petition, followed by a final appeal in the case of a non-unanimous decision, or in cases where the appeal board reverses unanimously the decision of the administration. Any material included in a reconsideration process (see Sections 2.8.4.1 and 2.8.4.2) will be made available for the appeal process

Respectfully submitted,

Meg Caniano

Clerk, Faculty Senate