4

Chair Glass reported that PCC has made good progress toward updating the Tenure and Promotion process. It is working on a new evaluation form. One of the biggest concerns at PCC's recent meeting was the TP process followed this year. Historically, a calendar is distributed at the Faculty / Staff Institute, which did not happen. The TP process should have finished in November and the President should have already noted the recommendations he'll make at the April Board meeting. VPAA Jackson responded that we had to fight to bring tenure back this year. We don't have many people going up and there will be ample time to address any negative reviews of candidates.

Faculty Regent McFayden added that even if a faculty member is late in getting a negative answer, he or she will get another year contract, which should offer plenty of time to find a new job.

Chair Moffett reported that APC continues to work on two action items mentioned at previous meetings (an Administrative Withdrawal policy and one on Course Cancellations). He said the committee also was reviewing the calendar creation policy document since it appears to have been some time since it was last updated. He noted, for example, that the procedure by which the academic calendar is created is inaccurate on the document. It suggests that the Registrar creates the calendar and then sends to APC for approval, but APC has been the entity to create the calendar in recent memory.

President Sipes noted that the Executive Committee of Senate met at 2:00pm to discuss the results of the Presidential Search. There were three main areas of concern: the exclusion of Dr. Thompson as a finalist; the qualifications and backgrounds of the chosen candidates; and the actual process itself.

Regent McFayden said he has a fiduciary responsibility to the university and the search process followed national best practices. He observed that the Board has four or five attorneys and that there is no way they would be party to a dubious process. He said he had reviewed the processes at other institutions and what was done at KSU was no different. He suggested that if anyone believes he violated the law that he or she should contact General Counsel Rowe, the State Attorney General, and the Search Committee.

Upon request for clarification from a guest, President Sipes noted that Ex Comm was worried about verifying that the Board followed best practices. One major point of concern is its approval of finalists without documentation, as well as taking a vote with several Board members missing.

Another guest wondered if anyone had done research on the backgrounds of candidates. Was the Board aware of their issues?