| PCC members | Ex Officio/Guest |
|---|---|
| Cindy Glass- President (Excused) | |
| Stephen Ulrich –Vice President | Kim Sipes |
| Buddhi Gyawali- Secretary | |
| Jens Hannemann | |
| Mara Merlino (Excused) | |
| Fariba Bigdeli-Jahed | |
| Catherine Vedder | |
| Rebecca McCoy (absent) | |
| Rita Sharma |
Meeting called to order at 3:15 PM
Vice President Stephen Ulrich chaired the meeting.
Minutes of October 24 were passed. Stephen read Chair Cindy’s email and initiated a discussion about the task for revising tenure and promotion and faculty evaluation criteria and benchmarks. Kim Sipes shared her discussion with Cindy about a deadline to submit a revised T&P and evaluation benchmark policy and the expectation to receive a draft of the revised policy before next Board of Regents meeting in January 2017. PCC members have been gathering such information from different institutions for a group discussion in the meeting. Three senators have emailed such documents.
Kim reiterated the board and administration’s request for a consistent policy for tenure and promotion. suggesting that KSU should have a standard benchmark for teaching, research, and public service evaluation, while allowing for flexibility within the scholarship area. Each department should also prepare its own benchmark and make them consistent to the KSU’s T&P benchmarks. Kim talked about Boyer’s model (Scholarship Reconsidered priorities of the professorate) and handed it out to the PCC members for review. She also shared other two documents “Defining Scholarship for the Discipline of Nursing” and “Scholarly and Professional Activities” Business-Accreditation- ACBSP and asked us to review. She suggested PCC can utilize Boyer’s model for preparing to redefine benchmarks for scholarship. It broadly considers scholarship, which is traditionally perceived as conducting research and publishing in peer reviewed journals. In the Boyer’s model, scholarship is considered inclusive of discovery, integration, application, and teaching. There are many ways faculty member can accomplish scholarship of discovery. It is discussed that as more teaching institutions are requiring faculty to engage in research, there must be different avenue for research. In KSU, we don’t have always resources to do traditional type of research so there is less likely of significant outcomes that
1