University Governance
Minutes
FACULTY EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
March 31, 2009
Approved 4/14/09
PRESENT: Nancy Kinnersley, Mary Berry, John Stratton, Lisa Wolf-Wendel, Ben Eggleston, Lisa Friis
EXCUSED: Liz Kowalchuk, John Staniunas
ALSO PRESENT: Molly Mulloy, Governance; Prof. Mark Ezell, chair, SPPT Committee.
Chair Nancy Kinnersley called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m.
MINUTES for 03/19/09 were approved.
REPORT OF THE FACULTY PRESIDENT
Nancy Kinnersley reported that the budget statement released by the Board of Regents today indicates that the original 7% reduction will stand. Most of the federal stimulus money will be used for deferred maintenance at the universities. Nancy Kinnersley stated that while the Regents may now set admission standards, the standards must be uniform across the units in the state system.
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE SPPT COMMITTEE (STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES FOR PROMOTION AND TENURE).
Nancy welcomed Mark Ezell, chair of the SPPT Committee (Standards and Procedures for Promotion and Tenure), who was present to discuss several SPPT documents.
SPPT DOCUMENT #1 - “General Interpretations of Article VI: SPPT Committee Guidance Document.” March 2009
Mark Ezell noted that FSRR Article VI does not allow UCPT (University Committee on Promotion and Tenure) to develop new criteria or requirements for tenure and the Blue Form is not supposed to create procedural rights. He led a discussion about departments developing their own criteria and whether or not the dean has the right to approve those criteria. SPPT does not believe the dean has this right.
Following much discussion, consensus of FacEx was to have a standing charge to the SPPT Committee to review its guidelines each year and to add an introductory paragraph to all SPPT guideline documents stating: “This guidance document is intended to assist units and is not a binding policy. While not a policy document, SPPT thinks it can be useful to units as they work on their promotion and tenure policies. It will be reviewed annually.”
Lisa Wolf Wendel/Lisa Friis moved to accept SPPT’s “General Interpretations” guideline document. Passed with one abstention.
SPPT DOCUMENT #2 - “Promotion and Tenure Issues with Proposed Amendments.”
Ezell reported that SPPT met with Dan Bernstein to discuss its charge to study the recommendations of the Task Force on Teaching and Learning regarding standards for teaching and determine if such language should be added to FSRR. Referring to a 6-page handout, Ezell and FacEx members discussed the various amendments recommended by SPPT and agreed to the following changes:
1) 6.2.1.2 – Update the titles of librarians.
2) 6.2.2 - In the 3rd sentence, add the word "all" and delete the word "summaries." Several FacEx members objected to the use of summaries of student evaluations and preferred to see a compilation of student evaluation forms. Friis said the written comments from students can be a powerful tool in evaluations and that UCPT wants to see the comments. Several members expressed disappointment that the new C&I form does not include comments.
3) 6.2.2.2 - Delete the word "including" and insert "which may include." Also add a sentence at the end ("Collaborative peer reviews to be used in the ongoing developing of teaching may be included in the promotion and tenure portfolio at the candidate's discretion.") There was much discussion about the distinction between evaluative peer review and collaborative peer review. Wolf-Wendel said in smaller schools the same person might do both reviews.
4) 6.4.1 - Add the phrase "For teaching faculty" at the start of the 3rd sentence. John Stratton pointed out that librarians are not classroom instructors; they may teach a class but not for credit.
5) 6.5.3.1 Add the words "respected and established" outside reviewers to the first sentence. In the 2nd sentence, delete "who are affiliated w/at least an equivalent institution" and change the word “direct” to “close.” Add a new 3rd sentence: "In rare instances, a candidate’s field of expertise requires drawing from individuals with close professional connections.” In the 4th sentence, delete "at least" and insert "up to" (The committee….. to suggest up to at least six names… and to identify up to at least three names…) In the discussion, Lisa Friis said in some cases it will be difficult to find faculty with no prior direct connection.
As it was time to adjourn, Nancy Kinnersley asked members to review pages 5 and 6 of this document and to forward comments to Mark Ezell for discussion at the next FacEx meeting.
SPPT DOCUMENT #3: “DRAFT: Review of the 2008-09 Blue Forms.” March 31, 2009
Ezell distributed copies of this document, which will be discussed at the next meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Molly Mulloy