![]() ![]() | |
![]() ![]() |
February 16, 1999 - 2:00 PM Coolbaugh House ATTENDEES: Ely, Klusman, Lu, Nickum, E. Pang, Readey, Romberger, Underwood, and Wendlandt APOLOGY: Griffiths, Kidnay, Ohno and Van Tyne VISITOR: VPAA Trefny COMMENTS FROM GUEST:
Attachment I – 2/16/99 DATE: June 8, 1998 TO: Department Heads Committee FROM: Dennis W. Readey, Handbook Committee and Senate SUBJECT: Proposed Faculty Handbook Revision on VPAA P&T Committee Background The current handbook makes the following statements regarding both
the tenure (Section 8.1.7.A.7.) and promotion (Section 8.2.3.6.):
(Note: New wording in normal-bold, existing wording in
italics, and 8.1.7 Tenure Review Process Tenure-Track Faculty 7. The VPAA shall convene the department heads as a group to discuss and submit recommendations on all tenure applications received during the relevant time period." 8.2.3Promotion Review Process 6.The VPAA shall convene the academic department heads as a group discuss all promotions under consideration during the relevant time period. Handbook Committee Concerns Members of the Handbook Committee expressed concern about the suitability of this Committee consisting of department heads. It was suggested that it might be better if the Committee members were senior faculty members who broadly represent the CSM community. There were several reasons for this suggestion, not the least important of which was that it is a time-consuming process and the department heads have other more important duties to perform. In addition, concerns were voiced about the propriety of department heads making decisions about promotion and tenure in addition to their individual inputs to the Committee. There is no evidence that either explicit or implicit improprieties have occurred during these deliberations in the past. Nevertheless, there exists a perception that the circumstances invite a reticence by a department head to be completely candid about his or her negative evaluation of a candidate from another department for fear of a reciprocal negative evaluation for his or her own candidate. To eliminate potential perception of less than open and free discussion of candidates, it has been suggested that this Committee advising the VPAA on tenure and promotion issues be a representative group of senior faculty rather than department heads. A Promotion and Tenure Committee consisting of senior faculty would also be more consistent with procedures that exist at other colleges and universities. Faculty Senate Discussion and Review
At the direction of the Handbook Committee, the issue was brought before the Faculty Senate on April 24th for discussion and the Senate suggested that a change in the Committee structure might be in order. I was charged by the Senate to provide a proposed change in Handbook wording to reflect the formation of a new committee made up of senior faculty members. On April 7, I presented to the Senate a proposed wording for the Handbook. These were discussed and modified on April 21. The revised wording was then reported to the Handbook Committee for Review Handbook Committee Review of Proposed Wording After much discussion among the members of the Handbook Committee, Graeme Fairweather took on the task of making several additions revisions to the proposed wording, particularly regarding the Committee structure and operating procedures.. I have made those changes and included them in the following proposed Faculty Handbook wording. I have not changed the name of the Committee to the "Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee" as suggested. The old Committee name has been retained for the present. Renaming the Committee can be a separate issue. Since the change has an impact on the role and responsibility of the Department Heads, it was suggested that the proposed changes be presented at the June 8 Department Heads meeting for their input and discussions. Proposed Faculty Handbook Revisions 8.1.7 Tenure Review Process A. Tenure-Track Faculty 7. The VPAA shall convene the Promotion and Tenure Review Committee and 8.2.3 Promotion Review Process . 6. The VPAA shall convene the Promotion and Tenure Review Committee This requires the formation of a new committee, the Promotion and Tenure Review Committee. Considering the importance of this Committee, I would suggest that it be established as a CSM committee. Therefore, the following addition to the Faculty Handbook is suggested under "Section 12, University Committees." Subsection 12.6-Promotion and Tenure Review Committee 12.6.1 Function The Promotion and Tenure Review Committee shall provide the VPAA with a systematic and broad base of advisement from faculty on matters of appointment, promotion and tenure. 12.6.2 Membership The membership of the Promotion and Tenure Review Committee shall consist of five members and an alternate. Only full-time, tenured, full professors who are not department heads or division directors are eligible for nomination and appointment to the Committee. No department shall be represented by more than one person. The membership should represent the diversity of faculty disciplines and interests as much as possible. With the exception described in 12.6.3, the alternate shall be entitled to participate as a voting member at meetings when any regular member is absent and to attend any other Committee meetings as a non-participating observer. 12.6.3 Operation The VPAA shall appoint the chair of the Committee. A member or an alternate of the Committee shall be excluded from any participation in the Committee's consideration if the affected individual and the Committee member or alternate are assigned to the same department. 12.6.4 Method of Appointment Committee members and the alternate are appointed by the VPAA from a list of candidates provided by the Faculty Senate. The list shall include twice as many names as there are vacancies on the Committee. 12.6.5 Terms of Appointment Members and the alternate shall serve staggered two-year terms. A Committee member or alternate cannot be appointed until he/she has been off the Committee for a minimum of three years. Comments 1. It will be up to the Senate and VPAA to make sure that the faculty is broadly represented. 2. Staggered terms minimizes "memory effects." 3. Being off the Committee for three years eliminates "memory effects" and ensures open discussion and evaluation. 4. Not having representation from each department helps to minimize "departmental" biases and perceptions of improprieties. |