The University of Kentucky text as a link to the main page.
The University Senate text as a link to the main page.

University Senate Minutes - March 9, 1998

The University Senate met in regular session at 3:00 p.m., March 9, 1998, in Room 115 of the Nursing Health Sciences Building.

Professor Jim Applegate, Chairperson of the Senate Council presided.

Members absent were: Debra Aaron, Laila Akhlaghi, Jim Albisetti, M. Mukhtar Ali, Leon Assael, Anthony Baxter, Douglas Boyd, Fitzgerald Bramwell, James Brennan*, Scott Brown, Geza Bruckner*, Johnny Cailleteau, Brad Canon*, Ben Carr, Edward Carter, Jordan Cohen, Raymond Cox*, Melanie Cruz, Susan DeCarvalho, Philip deSimone, Lee Edgerton, Robert Farquhar, Juanita Fleming, Donald Frazier, William Freehling, Richard Furst, Kim Glenn, Jonathan Golding*, Ottfried Hahn*, David Hamilton*, Patrick Herring, James Holsinger, Rick Hoyle, Mark Ison, Raleigh Jones, Jamshed Kanga, Jill Kelemen, Craig Koontz, Philipp Kraemer, Alan Leech, Thomas Lester, C. Oran Little, Marianne Lorensen, Steven Middendorf, Mark Miller, Josh Mitchell, David Mohney, Wolfgang Natter, Anthony Newberry, Michael Nietzel, Shirley Raines, Randall Ratliff, Dan Reedy, Thomas Robinson, Donald Sands, Horst Schach, David Shipley, Steven Skinner*, Edward Soltis, David Stockham, Louis Swift*, Henry Vasconez, Retia Walker*, Jesse Weil, Emery Wilson, Charles Wethington*, William Witt, Ernest Yanarella*, Elisabeth Zinser*.

* Absence Explained

The Chair stated that the minutes from February had been distributed. There were no corrections or amendments. The minutes were approved as distributed.

Chairperson Applegate made the following announcements:

The April 1998 Senate Meeting will be held in the new library. There will be tours offered afterwards. You will be getting more information on this meeting.

On March 23, 1998 (which is the next Senate Council meeting after Spring break). We have a lot of inquiries and questions from many of you about the new system. We have talked to the President about this and we will be meeting with Vice-President DeBin about the new It's About Staff system being implemented. If you have specific questions or concerns that you want the Council to ask or address in our meeting with Vice-President DeBin please feel free to e-mail me or contact us through the Web site. My e-mail address is japple@pop.uky.edu. We will make sure those questions are asked and give feedback on the meeting.

Some of you may have seen the legislative update that I sent out by e-mail. I will simply mention that your Senate Council and also the Coalition of Senate Faculty Leaders which represents faculty regents, trustees, senate leaders, and AAUP representatives from around the state under the leadership of Loys Mather has been busy interacting with our legislature. At the Senate Council meeting once a week there is legislation we act on since waiting a month to decide would probably be too late. A number of things have happened. The Senate Council sent forth a resolution to the House and Senate leadership supporting a bill that places a staff member on the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees. We have also discussed at some length and ultimately succeeded at having withdrawn a bill that would impose a particular form of post-tenure review on all state universities.

We also sent forward a statement of general support with a series of concerns related to original version of the Shaunessey Karem Merit Scholarship Bill. We wanted to ensure needy students needs were addressed before scholarships were given to less needy students. There have been a number of changes in that bill over the last several weeks.

There was a meeting of COSFL on Saturday in which there was a decision for individual institutions to decide on reaction to the collective bargaining bill for public employees which is still swirling about in the legislature although the prognosis is not positive.

COSFL has been extremely active in a number of ways; we have been meeting by compressed video with all eight universities on a regular basis. Largely because of that activity and success there will be a small news item in the Chronicle of Higher Education about the fact that despite what the recent shared governance article said. There are some good things happening in Kentucky in regard to shared governanace at academic senates.

As a last note, it has been suggested that rather than distribute the full form of the minutes to all senators, it be posted on the WEB site, kept in the Senate Council Office, and made available upon request. While as a matter of course we distribute to the full senate an abbreviated set of minutes which basically, per Robert's rules, are a record of motions introduced, reports made, actions taken, and votes cast. There was no objection to the suggestion.

ACTION ITEM 1: Consideration of proposal to revise University Senate Rules, Section I - 1.2.2, Composition of the University Senate

Proposal:

{The language to be eliminated is in brackets[]; new language is underlined}

1.2.2 COMPOSITION

As specified in the Governing Regulations, Part IV, the University Senate is composed of both elected and ex officio membership. The elected membership shall number [104] 113, of which [85] 94 members shall represent the faculty, 18 shall represent the student body, and one shall represent the emeriti faculty. (US:10/12/81 and BofT:4/6/82; US: 3/20/89 and BofT: 8/22/89)

1.2.2.1 Elected Faculty Membership

The [85] 94 elected faculty members shall be apportioned each spring among the colleges and the University Libraries according to the following two equally weighted factors based on data for the preceding fall semester: (1) the number of full-time faculty, except those appointed in the extension series (although they are eligible for election to membership), research title series, Medical Center clinical titles series, and visiting series, with the rank of assistant professor or higher in the college or the University Libraries; and (2) the number of full time students enrolled in the college, computed so that students enrolled in the Graduate School shall be assigned to the college in which they are pursuing their studies. (US: 10/12/81 and BofT:4/6/82; BofT: 12/11/84) Ideally, the fraction of the total faculty Senate seats which would be apportioned to an academic unit would be obtained by using the following formula:

1/2 (Fu/Fe + Su/Se)

where Fu and Su are respectively the number of eligible faculty and the number of full-time students in the unit, and Fe and Se are the total eligible faculty and students, respectively, in all units. Usually the portion of the total faculty seats which would be ideally assigned to a unit will not be a whole number. For each unit a certain inequity will result, this being the non-negative deviation of a unit's actual percentage from its ideal percentage of the seats. The seats shall be apportioned to the units in a manner which minimizes the total inequity, subject to the condition that each unit gets at least one seat. (If two units have identical ideal percentages and the minimum would be attained by giving them different representations, then the extra seat shall be allocated to one of them by a random process.) An administrative title below that of Dean shall not automatically make the holder ineligible.

* Faculty members with administrative assignments of an academic nature which constitute no more than half of their current duties--the rest composed of teaching and/or research--will be construed as meeting the requirements of "full time faculty." (RC: 4/2/76)

  1. Terms; Vacancies: As specified in the Governing Regulations, each elected faculty member shall serve for a term of three years. Ideally, the terms of the representatives of each academic unit or sub-unit should be staggered so that one-third of them will be elected at each election. To this end the faculty of the academic unit represented, may, for any election, specify that a number of representatives be elected for two-year terms. If such action is taken, the dean of the academic unit involved shall notify the Secretary of the Senate of such intent in advance of the upcoming election. When more than one number is to be elected from a unit or sub-unit, those receiving the greater number of votes will serve three-year terms and those elected receiving the lesser number of votes will serve two-year terms.

1.2.2.2 Elected Student Membership

The 18 elected student membership shall consist of and represent the members of the full-time student body in the various colleges including Lexington Community College and the Graduate School of the University System. The colleges and the Graduate School each shall have one student representative. Students with no declared major shall be represented through the College of Arts and Sciences. (US:10/12/81 and BofT:4/6/82)

  1. Eligibility: Each elected student member shall be a junior, senior, or graduate or professional student, or in the case of LCC, sophomore standing, and shall not be on either academic or disciplinary probation.
  2. Election: The election shall be conducted during the second semester by the Student Government Association under procedures approved by the Senate Council.
  3. Terms; Vacancies: As specified in the Governing Regulations, each elected student member shall serve for a term of one year and shall be eligible for reelection as long as the student remains a full-time undergraduate, graduate, or professional student in the University System. If a student should at any time become ineligible to serve (e.g., by relinquishing his or her position as a full-time student, being placed on academic probation or violating the Senate attendance regulations), the administrative head of the group represented shall declare a vacancy and designate that member from the eligible student body who at the last election received the next highest vote to serve for the duration of the elected student member's ineligibility. The Secretary of the Senate shall maintain attendance records and shall notify the administrative head of the college represented when the representative of that college has been absent without explanation from three meetings of the Senate during the academic year. A student member shall become ineligible to serve on purgation from the Student Senate. (US:10/8/79)

Newly elected student members of the Senate shall take their seats at the first meeting of the Senate in the fall, or any special meeting called during the preceding summer.

Background and Rationale:

This proposal is an accommodation to legally mandated changes passed during the special session of the legislature in May of 1997 requiring integration of the operations and governance of the Lexington Community College (LCC) with that of the University of Kentucky while splitting off the rest of the Community College system under a separate Board. The Senate Council supports the creation of a unified Senate to facilitate academic coordination and the creation of a system of collaboration that serves as a model for Universities and Community Colleges across the nation. Numerous academic/governance issues will need to be addressed in the coming months and the creation of a unified Senate will facilitate discussion of those issues.

The number of faculty Senators added is consistent with the number that should represent LCC faculty given their numbers and the current formula for calculating representation found in Senate Rule I - 1.2.2.1. Though a student representative is being added from LCC this does not increase the size of the Senate by a 10th member since Senate membership as defined in the current regulations reflects one MORE student senator than has actually served in the Senate since the merger of the College of Library Science and the College of Communications. The merger resulted in the actual reduction of number of student senators by one but the number in the regulations was never changed. This change is to ensure student representation from the Lexington Community College. A sophomore student would be a more senior member of the student community.

If approved, this proposal will be forwarded to the administration for inclusion in the Governing Regulations.

Implementation Date:

1 July 1998

The motion passed in a voice vote.

ACTION ITEM 2: Reconsideration of proposal to revise University Senate Rules, Section I - 1.5.1.1, Authority Relative to Appointment of President

Proposal:

{The language to be eliminated is in brackets new language is underlined}

1.5.1.1 Authority Relative to Appointment of President

The Governing Regulations adopted by the Board of Trustees May 5, 1970 and amended February, 1972, and October, 1987 provide: "in the event of a vacancy in the Office of President or disability of the President, the Vice President for Administration shall exercise the functions of the President in the absence of the appointment of an Interim President by the Board. If the Board finds it desirable to appoint an Interim President it shall seek advice from a joint Board-Faculty Committee to recommend the appointment of a President if such has been constituted or, if the committee has not been constituted, from the University Senate Council. The President of the University is appointed by the Board of Trustees with the advice of a joint committee of the Board, faculty, and student body. The committee shall consist of five members of the Board appointed by its chair; [three] four [members of the full-time teaching and/or research faculty of the University System] University faculty eligible to serve on the University Senate, selected by a procedure determined by the University Senate; [one member of the full-time teaching faculty of the Community College System selected by a procedure determined by the Community College System Council;] and one full-time student appointed by the chair of the Board. The committee shall provide opportunity for discussion between representative administrative, faculty, and student groups and prospective presidential candidates."

1.5.1.2 Procedures

In the event of a vacancy, or official announcement of an impending vacancy in the Office of President, the following procedure shall be utilized in selecting the [three] four faculty members of the University System to serve on the Search Committee:

  1. The University Senate shall serve as the nominating body. Nominations shall take place at a regular or special meeting of the Senate.
  2. Each voting member of the Senate will be provided with a complete list of [the full-time teaching and/or research faculty --] the same faculty members who are eligible to be elected to the Senate.
  3. The University Senate shall proceed to nominate six (6) candidates. (An addressed sealed envelope containing two smaller envelopes will be given to each member of the Senate present. One of the smaller envelopes will contain four cards which the members will use in voting on the first ballot and the second smaller envelope will contain six cards to be used by the members in voting on the second ballot.) The Senators shall include both the first and last name or initials of the persons for whom they vote to avoid confusion.
    1. Each member, using the list of those eligible for election, shall vote for no more or no less than four (4) persons.
    2. Only voting members of the Senate shall be eligible to vote in the nominations. An ad hoc committee of the Senate appointed by the Senate Council chair shall count the votes immediately and announce the names of the twelve (12) individuals receiving the highest number of votes, plus any ties for the 12th position. No nominating speeches will be allowed.
    3. The Senators shall then vote for no more or no less than six (6) of these candidates.
    4. Each Senator will sign his or her name in the upper left-hand corner of the envelopes containing ballots.
    5. The six candidates receiving the highest number of votes, plus any ties for the 6th position, shall be declared nominated. The chair of the Senate Council will check on each of the nominees to determine that he or she is available and willing to serve before the six names are placed on the election ballot. If any of the six or more is unwilling or unable to serve, the person receiving the next highest number of votes on the second nominating ballot will serve as replacement. In the event of ties, decision by lot will be reached.
  4. The Secretary of the Senate shall then conduct a mail election ballot on the nominees. Those eligible to vote on this ballot shall be the same as those eligible to be elected to the Senate.
  5. * Each faculty member shall vote for no more or no less than [three (3)] four (4) of these candidates. No ballot containing more or less than [3] [4] names shall be counted. (RC: 4/14/86).

  6. The [three] four nominees receiving the highest number of votes shall be recommended to the chair of the Board of Trustees for appointment to the Board-Faculty Committee. Ties shall be broken by lot.

Background and Rationale:

The Senate Council felt that despite the separation of faculty from all but one of the Community Colleges it was important to retain four faculty representatives on the committee to maintain a strong and diverse faculty voice in this important process. Lexington Community College faculty eligible for Senate membership would be eligible for selection to the committee in the same way faculty on the Lexington and Medical Center Campuses would be.

Implementation Date:

1 July 1998

The item passed in an unanimous voice vote.

The next item is for discussion only. There will be no action taken today. Amendments and changes can be proposed, but we will not vote on those today. We felt that this was an important enough issue that it warranted discussion. Since this is a discussion item only, I'll give you a little of the background on this. As you remember we are in the process this year of dealing with a series of recommendations that came from a task force, looking at our whole promotion and tenure system that worked last year under the able leadership of then chair of psychology, now Graduate Dean, Mike Nietzel and Mary Witt from the College of Agriculture. We have passed and it is now about to be approved by the President and placed into the rules the elimination of the old prior service system. The approved interruption of service proposal has been forwarded to the President for consideration by the Administration as well. We are hopeful that will receive a favorable review. This current proposal is by far the largest of those we have considered. Having been the Senate Council's liaison with Mary Witt's subcommittee, which looked at this part very heavily, I share with you a couple of things that they were trying to do here. One was to open up the terms we use to think about promotion and tenure, the types of scholarship that we acknowledge and reward for excellence and with promotion and tenure. The second element of this was to work to reinstate the role of disciplines in articulating down from the general university requirements the way the criteria for excellence and promotion and teaching and service translate into different disciplinary context. The third issue was some redefinition and clarification of the way we define what it means to be an assistant professor, an associate professor, and a full professor.

The floor was open for discussion.

FOR DISCUSSION ONLY: Criteria for Privilege and Tenure

CURRENT:

From the Current Administrative Regulations AR II-1.0-1

V. Criteria of Evaluation for Appointment and Promotion in the Regular Title Series

PROPOSED:

(a new section A is added)

V. Criteria of Evaluation for Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure

A. Introduction

In order to:

  1. assure teaching, research and other creative activity, and service are of high quality;
  2. maintain a diverse university faculty
  3. support the faculty in preparing students to participate effectively in a democratic and pluralistic society;
  4. foster rigorous professional standards; and
  5. maintain a high quality of shared academic governance;

the University of Kentucky adheres to the following general system for determining academic appointment, tenure, and rank. The University of Kentucky is distinguished as the state's flagship institution for research, teaching and service. The research scholarship of a dedicated and creative faculty enhances the teaching and service missions of this land grant university.

The balance of emphasis between scholarship and other assigned activities varies from one faculty position to another. Forms of scholarship appropriate to each unit's specific mission within the University should be clearly written as guidelines by the unit's faculty, taking into consideration the full range of UK academic and civic mandates.

Objective and systematic appraisal of faculty candidates for initial and continued reappointment, promotion in academic rank, and granting of tenure is essential. The land grant mission and guidelines listed below provide common criteria applicable to all University of Kentucky faculty in the professorial rank.

CURRENT:

A. Areas of Activity

Four areas of activity are important in the evaluation of faculty for appointment and promotion in the regular title series: (1) teaching, including both formal classroom activities and informal influence on students' growth; (2) research and other creative productivity; (3) professional status and activity; and (4) University and public service. Since all appointments and promotions shall be made on the basis of merit, the following detailed statements regarding each of these areas will serve as a guide to review committees evaluating the accomplishments of a faculty member.

PROPOSED:

(section A becomes B and is changed)

B. Areas of Activity

Participation in any or all of these scholastic areas is appropriate in the evaluation of faculty at all ranks: (1) research and other creative activity; (2) teaching, advising and other instructional activities; (3) professional, University and public service.

Each of these areas is essential to the successful mission of a land grant university. The level of a faculty member's participation should be commensurate with his/her specified allocation for each area. Excellence in research and creative scholarship, teaching, advising and other instructional activities, and in professional, University and community service should be rewarded. It is critical that all scholarly activities be well documented and recognized as positive evidence for promotion and tenure.

CURRENT:

2. Research and Other Creative Activity

The individual under consideration must show evidence of continuing research or creative activity in the particular field of assignment. Normally, publication in the form considered appropriate for the field will constitute this evidence. Evaluation of the quality of such publication is imperative, and specialists in the field from both inside and outside the University should be called upon to attest to the value of the individual's research. Since certain types of research or creative work require a longer period of development before publication than do others, evaluation also should be made of work in progress, particularly in cases where retention is involved. It should be understood that in certain activities, "publication" as used in this document may be achieved in modes different from those of the sciences and the book-based disciplines.

PROPOSED:

(this becomes section 1 and is changed)

1. Research and Other Creative Activity

University faculty have a responsibility for the creation of knowledge--not simply the dissemination of current practice. Faculty members should document their scholarship related to research and/or creative endeavors. Common to all endeavors is that the work is original, of high quality, and validated by rigorous peer review. Moreover, communication of the work's significance to the scholarly community and to the public at large is a component of the mission of a land grant university and, therefore, its evaluation is an integral part of the promotion and tenure process.

Evidence of recognition of research and creative activity and its long-lasting merit and worth is valued. The impact of a person's research or creative work will be assessed by the intellectual and creative traditions of his/her discipline, as stated by unit guidelines. In addition to the more traditional methods of presentation, examples of creative scholarship include public performances and exhibitions, audio and visual recordings, applications of technical innovations, and both exterior and interior contributions to the built environment. This work must be evaluated for originality, significance, quality, and must be communicated to others. For example, the value of creative works can be determined through adjudicated productions using outside reviewers and/or peer review, publication of critical reviews of performances or exhibitions, and invited or juried shows or exhibitions.

CURRENT:

1. Teaching and Student Relations

Markedly superior teaching and advising are distinct values and should be recognized in appointment or promotion. Recognition also should be given to a faculty member's contribution to student welfare through service on student-faculty committees or as an advisor to student organizations.

Objective evidence of the quality of teaching shall be included in the final dossier. Such evidence should include: (a) reports by colleagues qualified in the field; (b) evaluations by students and, if available, graduates; and (c) when appropriate, the subsequent accomplishments of graduates whose major work has been supervised by the individual under consideration.

Colleges shall evaluate the quality as well as the quantity of academic advising done by each faculty member. The results of this evaluation shall be considered in the annual performance review and in the decisions concerning retention and/or promotion of each faculty member.

PROPOSED:

( this becomes section 2 - after research - and is changed)

2. Teaching, Advising and Other Instructional Activities Teaching involves creating a learning environment, as well as transmitting, transforming and extending knowledge. Excellence in teaching and advising are distinct values that are recognized in appointment and promotion. Themes for the teaching mission are to encourage students to:

A faculty member's contributions may be demonstrated in a diversity of ways. For faculty whose assignment includes teaching, evidence of successful fulfillment of these duties is critical for appointment and promotion. Teaching (and advising activities, where applicable) must be documented through the teaching portfolio. Educational activities extend far beyond the classroom, and the University of Kentucky acknowledges the importance of educating citizens of Kentucky, both on and off campus, as part of its land grant mission. Appropriate methods of documenting outreach activities and scholarly contributions to the state will be elaborated in unit guidelines.

CURRENT:

3. Professional Status and Activity

The demonstration that the abilities of the individual under consideration are recognized outside the University is important in evaluation, but such recognition must be weighted according to rank. Obviously, a candidate for the lowest rank will not be likely to have achieved wide recognition. There are many ways in which extramural recognition may be evidenced, and those entrusted with evaluation will use the kind of evidence appropriate to their fields. Qualitative rather than quantitative judgments should be made.

4. University and Public Service

Effective participation in activities appropriate to the formation of educational policy and faculty governance and effective performance of administrative duties shall be taken into consideration in the evaluative process. A service component is a normal part of a faculty members obligation to the University.

Service to the community, state, and nation also must be recognized as positive evidence for promotion, provided that this service emanates from the special competence of the individual in an assigned field and is an extension of the individual's role as a scholar-teacher. In the colleges of the Medical Center, patient care is recognized as a special competence in an assigned field and is an integral part of the service component. Public service unrelated to the individual's role as a scholar-teacher does not constitute evidence for appointment, promotion, or salary increase.

PROPOSED:

(sections 3&4 are collapsed into section 3 and changed)

3. Professional, University and Public Service

The activities and contributions of faculty to their professional field are important in the evaluation process. Active interest in professional groups of colleagues and practitioners contributes to regional, national and/or international intellectual networks which supports the creation and dissemination of knowledge in a field. Further, contributions to this professional networking establish the faculty member's reputation outside the university and contribute to the overall image of the university. Documented evidence of professional leadership, activities, contributions and recognitions should be recognized as positive evidence for promotion and tenure.

Effective participation in activities appropriate to the formation of educational policy and faculty governance, and effective performance of administrative duties, will be taken into consideration in the evaluation process. A service component is a normal part of a faculty member's obligation to the University.

Faculty members are expected to engage in service related to their professional role as scholar for the benefit and development of the broader community. This includes local, state, national and international populations, and the University community. Documented scholarship related to service that is directly associated with one's special field of knowledge, expertise, and professional role within the University will be recognized as positive evidence for promotion and tenure.

Citizenship activities of faculty members and projects unrelated to faculty members professional roles in the University, while laudable, do not constitute evidence for academic tenure and rank.

CURRENT:

B. Balance and Intellectual Attainment

A major consideration in any appointment or promotion with tenure is superior achievement in the various activities discussed in the preceding paragraphs. While the proportion of these activities may vary in terms of the individual's assignments and specialty, it must be recognized that superior intellectual attainment is evidenced both by the quality of the individual's teaching and the quality of the individual's research or other creative activity. Ideally, individuals selected for tenure should demonstrate superiority in all of the major criteria discussed here and, while special circumstances may cause the weight of emphasis on each to vary, care must be taken to insure that outstanding performance in a single activity does not obliterate the other factors that should be considered in evaluating academic excellence.

PROPOSED:

(C&D are added following B above which is unchanged)

C. Evaluation of Collaborative Efforts

The products of collaborative efforts in teaching, research, and service shall be considered as evidence of scholarship by the candidate. The candidate shall document the contribution he/she has made to the collective project and appraisal of the candidate's effectiveness as part of the collaborative effort should include statements by co-members.

D. Implementation at Unit Levels

Each unit is required to develop guidelines related to its criteria of evaluation for initial and continued reappointment, promotion, and tenure consistent with this document.

CURRENT:

C. General Criteria for Ranks

Although it is impossible to specify the exact criteria for judging an appointment or promotion to any one particular rank, the following general statements are guides for review committees.

1. Assistant Professor

Appointment or promotion to the rank of assistant professor shall be made after it has been determined that the individual has earned the terminal degree appropriate to the field of assignment and has a current capability for good teaching, research, and University service and a potential for significant growth in these areas.

2. Associate Professor

Appointment or promotion to associate professor shall be made only after an indication of continuous improvement and contribution by an individual both in teaching and research or other creative activity. Furthermore, the individual should have earned some regional recognition for excellence appropriate to the field of assignment.

3. Professor

Appointment or promotion to the rank of professor is an indication that, in the opinion of colleagues, an individual is outstanding in teaching and in research or other creative activity and, in addition, has earned national and, perhaps, international recognition. It should be stressed further that this rank is recognition of attainment rather than of length of service.

PROPOSED:

E. General Criteria for Ranks

The following general criteria for appointment and promotion serve as guidelines for persons involved in the decision process.

Assistant Professor

Appointment or promotion to the rank of assistant professor shall be made after it has been determined that the individual has earned the terminal degree appropriate to the field of assignment as recognized by the academic discipline, has capability for excellent scholarship and teaching, and demonstrates potential for significant growth.

Associate Professor

Appointment or promotion to associate professor shall be made only after a candidate has met the criteria for assistant professor and has demonstrated high scholarly achievements commensurate with his/her assignment in areas of. (1) research and other creative activity; (2) teaching, advising and other instructional activities; (3) professional, university and public service. Particularly, an indication of continuous improvement and scholastic contributions should be evident as documented by the candidate. Further, the individual should have earned external recognition for excellence in her/his scholarly activities. Where appropriate, this recognition should be on a regional level in the field of assignment.

Professor

Appointment or promotion to full professor shall be made only after a candidate has met the criteria for associate professor and has demonstrated high scholarly achievements commensurate with his/her assignment in areas of. (1) research and other creative activity; (2) teaching, advising, and other instructional activities; (3) professional, university and public service. Particularly, such an appointment implies that, in the opinion of colleagues, the candidate's scholarship is excellent and, in addition, s/he has earned a high level of professional recognition. Where appropriate, this recognition should be on a national or international level in the field of assignment. It should be stressed further that this rank is in recognition of attainment rather than length of service.

Add:

FACULTY HANDBOOK ADDITION:

Information on Policies and Procedures

Promotion and Tenure

Dossier and Considerations

The candidate and unit chairperson develop a dossier for each recommendation to promote and/or grant tenure. Such a dossier contains materials from the Standard Personnel file although ordinarily only materials since the last promotion or appointment are included in addition to the following material:

Contents of the file must include documentation related to teaching and student relations as well as advising. To document teaching efforts, the following are required:

The following are suggested but not required:

Where advising is a portion of the faculty member's usual assignment, evaluation should include the extent of advising and its quality along with an indication of the grounds for evaluation, including the following required items:

Suggested, but not required are:

Add:

Illustrations of possible activities to be included in the dossier and evaluated

To illustrate activities which help fulfill the tripartite mission of the land grant university and which could be incorporated into criteria for evaluation of promotion and tenure dossiers for faculty the following is provided. These criteria must be tailored to the opportunities for scholarship that exist within each unit or field.

Appendix

To illustrate activities which help fulfill the tripartite mission of this land grant university, academic units should consider the following in developing their guidelines for initial and continued reappointment, promotion in academic rank, and granting of tenure. These criteria should be tailored to the opportunities for scholarship that exist within each unit's field.

Research and Other Creative Activity

Examples of research and other creative activity include, but are not limited to:

Teaching, Advising, and Other Instructional Activities

Examples of teaching, advising, and other instructional activities include, but are not limited to:

Professional, University, and Public Service Activities

Examples of professional, University, and public service activities include, but are not limited to:

Background and Rationale

The Senate Task Force on Promotion and Tenure devoted academic year 1996-97 to a review of the promotion and tenure system at the University. Their report provided a number of proposed revisions which the Senate Council has reviewed and forwarded to the Senate over the course of this academic year. This proposal is a significant revision in the criteria for promotion and tenure. The task force intended to broaden and make more explicit the types of scholarship (e.g., the scholarship of discovery, teaching, application) that could be evaluated as a basis for promotion and tenure. In addition it sought to provide better guidance, to those seeking promotion and tenure. Finally, it sought to make explicit the role of the academic unit and the University respectively in the process.

If approved, this proposal will be forwarded to the administration for inclusion in the Governing Regulations.

Implementation Date:

1 July 1998

The meeting was adjourned at 4:35 p.m.

Donald Witt
Secretary, University Senate