Chair Glass explained that she could not attend the recent PCC meeting, but President Sipes attended to discuss other ways of looking at scholarship. President Sipes noted the context for this discussion is that PCC is scheduled to offer revised tenure and promotion policies in January. There was discussion in committee about the need for a consistent policy across the university. Some members of the committee questioned whether that is possible since departments can prove vastly different in mission. President Sipes argued that teaching should be evaluated the same way across the board. Service is easier to define across campus; research is one of the more difficult criteria. VP Jackson had suggested looking at the Boyler scholarship model, which is currently used in the Business Department. This model defines scholarship differently, with four main areas: the scholarship of integration, the scholarship of application, the scholarship of discovery, and the scholarship of teaching. Consistency might be achieved by using this model, but it is broad enough to allow each department to set its own benchmarks within the categories.

Chair Rye pointed out that some universities have research or teaching tracks chosen by faculty. A senator noted that with the Boyler model, one would not need to make such a choice. Conversation then continued about the challenge of evaluating teaching itself.

A motion to extend time for 5 minutes passed unanimously.

President Sipes argued that the important point for the university is to keep the focus on teaching above other criteria. Chair Rye pointed that in the past teaching has been perceived as the primary area of faculty review.

VP Jackson stressed that KSU is primarily a teaching institution because of 4/4 loads. Chair Andries observed that teaching load is different in the College of Ag. A senator responded that this kind of variation is addressed through the Distribution of Effort form. Chair Andries explained that the situation can be complicated since a faculty member in his area may only teach one course, and if he or she is not effective, is he or she then to be reassigned to focus solely on outreach and research? At most other land grant institutions there would be other faculty to make up for an ineffective teacher, but KSU does not have that depth of personnel.

A guest noted that faculty need to have the opportunity to do what they need to do to make students well-prepared; if a faculty member buys out 50% of his or her teaching time with a grant, will that affect the way his or her teaching is evaluated? President Sipes responded that the bottom line is one cannot get tenure at KSU while being an ineffective teacher.

Chair Rye asked if the committee is going to make recommendations on promotion, to which a senator replied it would be. PCC is not ready to do that yet since it is still considering tenure guidelines. Chair Andries pointed out that the tenure guidelines for his area still need to be integrated into the Faculty Handbook.

Dr. Jackson apologized for running late; the Senate meeting conflicted with a President's Cabinet meeting. She reiterated that the Committee Book is published and we need Senate appointees.