A guest commented on a lack of written reports on Board meetings from the Faculty Regent. President Sipes indicated she had requested the Faculty Regent to provide written reports of Board meetings, to which Regent McFayden agreed.
Chair Andries noted that he was working to be sure CC forms would be put on the senate website. He reminded senate about the deadlines for submitting requests, which should be around mid-October for spring implementation.
President Sipes noted that the Administrative Assistant was tasked with updating the senate website.
Chair Glass reported that PCC discussed the Registry’s suggestions for revising the Faculty Handbook, particularly with regard to tenure and promotion. The Handbook has been updated over the years on an ad hoc basis. A committee in 2014, led by Todd Davis, had worked on revisions. While they were submitted to the provost, these revisions were never approved, nor were they sent back to Senate for discussion. Therefore they have not been integrated into the current document. PCC received a file containing these revisions and will consider them as the committee moves forward.
The Registry had suggested we look at the practices of other universities our size with regard to promotion and tenure practices. At present we have an approach more in common with much larger universities such as the University of Kentucky or the University of Louisville. They suggested we look at universities with student enrollment of 2,000 or fewer as well as teaching faculties of around 100.
The committee discussed the VPAA’s suggestion at the previous senate meeting that faculty who had applied for tenure in 2014 pick up their dossiers for additions. The committee noted that those dossiers had already been vetted and that faculty may not want to resubmit, particularly since they may want to cite the work they have done since that time in an application for promotion once it is restated.
A senator asked if those eligible for tenure had been notified as the VPAA had indicated. Chair Glass said they were. A senator confirmed that he had received a letter and indicated that he had no intention of reworking his dossier since he had met the requirements three years ago when the moratorium on tenure was put in place.
Discussion ensued about the VPAA’s previous remarks about going up early for tenure. There was ambiguity about whether or not applications for early tenure would be considered. A senator noted that dates of the tenure process should be made public. A guest confirmed that those dates should have been made public on the first day of the academic year.
A guest commented that the university tenure and promotion committee had forwarded the dossiers of people ready for review in 2014 and there was no reason to redo the process for them; the matter is in the VPAA’s hands now.