MINUTES OF THE OPEN FORUM: REVISION OF THE FACULTY HANDBOOK
March 8, 2006 10:00 – 11:30 p.m.
The following
themes were discussed at the forum, which was sparsely attended. A suggestion to hold subsequent forums in
mid-afternoon to enable more faculty to attend was noted. The following themes
were discussed:
Organizational
differences among Schools and Colleges: In the College of Education
for example, there are no departments and there are program coordinators and
directors. A similar situation exists
in the School of Management in which there are no departments; instead the
School is organized into disciplinary areas with coordinators.
Promotion and
Tenure Review Committees: The issue of whether Associate Professors
should participate in the promotion reviews of candidates for Full Professor
was discussed. It was noted that in
some units, it may not be possible to exclude participation by Associate
Professors because of the small number of existing Full Professors. The issue of whether one should be permitted
to cast a vote in a promotion and/or tenure case at more than one level (i.e.
at the department and school levels) was discussed. Apparently policies on this issue are not uniform throughout the
university.
Criteria for
Promotion and Tenure: The appropriate role (and weight) of service
contributions in the promotion and tenure process is problematic and apparently
inconsistent throughout the university.
In some departments and schools service is expected for probationary
faculty but this may be the case throughout the university. In some units the pressure to publish
sometimes means that faculty receive tenure with almost no service. A problem also appears to exist with
articulating the criteria and evidence required for a candidate to establish
the he/she has achieved genuine
excellence in teaching. Candidates
should be advised to work with Laurie Fathe, Director of the Center for
Teaching Excellence.
Why are there so
many tenured Associate Professors who do not seek promotion to Full
Professor? Part of the problem may be
that the reward is so small – salary increase of only $2,000 - $3,000 It was also noted that upon promotion to
Full Professor, you are in a higher benchmark group for compensation and that
some faculty wish to achieve the Full Professor designation for its own
sake.
Appeals Process for Denial of Promotion and
Tenure: The appeals procedure now defined in the Faculty Handbook may be rarely used, but it is effective. The problem of a long time lag in the appeals process may require
the petitioner to find other employment of economic necessity. The dean and provost are not part of the appeals
process; the president makes the final decision.
Institutes: It
would not be practical to completely eliminate institutes, but it might be
desirable to consider how they now fit into the organization scheme of the
university and in the Handbook.
Respectfully
submitted,
Meg Caniano
Clerk, Faculty
Senate