REPORT FOR THE UNIVERSITY SENATE

University Senate Committee:  Faculty Personnel Committee

Charge to Committee (Brief History of Issue — why the issue is being considered):  A post-tenure review subcommittee carrying out its charge noticed that FASH 5.29 seems to require associate professors on the subcommittee to discuss the under-review faculty member’s progress   toward promotion to professor (and the same for an assistant’s progress toward associate):

Each post-tenure review subcommittee shall consist of members of the Department Personnel Committee that old the same or higher rank as those being reviewed… Each subcommittee shall develop a written evaluation for its assigned faculty members. For faculty under the rank of Professor, the evaluation must include explicit discussion of the faculty member’s progress toward promotion to the next rank. (FASH 5.28-9)

The issue was brought to the FPC via the Dean of CAS and the Provost’s office.

Points Discussed by Committee:

• That associate professors should not be charged with evaluating the progress of other associate professors toward promotion to professor.
• That assistant professors should not evaluating the progress of other assistant professors toward promotion to associate professor.
• That the language allowing this was an unintended consequence of an amendment made on the senate floor.
• Whether ‘below the rank of Professor’ is preferable to ‘under the rank of Professor’, as ‘under’ means “within the group or designation of” in addition to “below”.

Pros of Recommendation:

• Clarifies the passage in question.
• Gives effect to the intent of the passage.

Cons of Recommendation:

• None.

MOTION FOR THE UNIVERSITY SENATE

The University Senate Faculty Personnel Committee, by a vote of  5 – 0 – 0  (for, against, abstain), on April 11, 2008, moves that the University Senate approve the following changes to the Faculty and Academic Staff Handbook, Chapter 5, page 29:

Charge To The Committees

Each post-tenure review subcommittee shall be responsible for conducting a review of those faculty members who are scheduled for post-tenure reviews and who hold a rank no higher than that of any member of the subcommittee. Each review shall be both summative and formative in nature with the express purpose of both evaluating past performance and facilitating improvement in future performance. Each subcommittee shall develop a written evaluation for its assigned faculty members. For faculty under below the rank of Professor, the evaluation must include explicit discussion of the faculty member’s progress toward promotion to the next rank; subcommittee members at the same rank as the faculty member being reviewed shall be excluded from this specific discussion. For faculty at the rank of Professor, the evaluation must include explicit discussion of the faculty member’s growth and professional development. The written evaluation shall not contain any recommendations as to administrative action to be taken as a result of the review

Implementation date: upon approval.

Respectfully submitted,

Sean McAleer

Chair, Faculty Personnel Committee