Faculty Senate	Minutes	Senate home | Comments
Tuesday, 20 April 2004   See Agenda   Meeting 04-08

Roll call

Absent: Clark (Business), Collins (Curricular Studies), Dodd (Biology), Dworkin (Psychology; Bookstore Committee), Hickman (Music), Kyzer (HAHS), Perko (HAHS), Roer (Graduate School), Scheuring (Nursing), Simmons (Anthropology), Usilton (History), Webster (Biology), Whitehead (Economics & Finance), Wilcox (Art & Theater)

Approval of minutes

March minutes were approved.

Individual reports

1. Chancellor Rosemary DePaolo reported on her first year in office:
   • In a busy first year, she initiated a series of task forces and a process of benchmarking, the results of which have now come together in this university's first strategic plan. It is a long-term plan and for its completion will require detailed strategies and the alignment of the budget with the plan. She does not see the plan as overly ambitious but as the natural extension of what we are already doing.
   • Two task forces were concerned with the community:
     • The "Paint the Town Teal" Committee has been much fun, and its members, including many alumni in the community, have shown great enthusiasm for developing plans to have Wilmington show its support for UNCW. Students in the fall will be greeted with visible expressions of community support.
     • The Community Relations Task Force aims to improve relations with the city and our close neighbors, and the latter have been grateful for the chance to be heard on their concerns. This will be an ongoing committee.
   • Internally, the Diversity Task Force has reported in impressive detail, and the International Task Force has also reported specific, doable recommendations. The First-Year-Experience Committee and the Basic Studies Task Force have been active but are not yet ready to report.
   • We have hired a firm to take us through the master planning process. They want to start now, but she wants much input and has asked them to do preliminary data gathering this summer and do the real work in the fall when faculty return.
   • Many construction projects are in various stages. The new education building will be one of only two in the country designed specifically for an education school. It will be an impressive, architecturally distinctive building.
   • In response to questions from senators:
     • The Board of Governors asked the legislature for a 6% raise for faculty; she thinks it is realistic to expect some raise, perhaps 2-3%.
     • We received over 9500 applications for 1800 spots in the freshman class; our popularity grows.
     • Transfer students have had a success rate comparable to that of freshmen. One problem is the lack of classes available for new transfers.
2. President Daniel Noland reported that the Chancellor is seeking faculty input in the search for a new Vice Chancellor for Public Service and Continuing Studies. He finds this an encouraging development and asks that faculty interested on being on a committee to interview finalists to e-mail him.
    
3. Faculty Assembly delegate Richard Veit reported that the Assembly conducted a survey on the degree to which faculty share in university governance on each of the sixteen UNC campuses. UNCW stacks up well, especially compared to several campuses with authoritarian administrations.

Committee reports

1. The following motions by the Steering Committee carried:
    
   1. [Motion 04-08-27; expedite minor revisions to majors/minors; carried]
           Whereas Senate approval is required for all revisions to majors, minors, and certificate programs; and
           Whereas the intent of this policy is for the faculty to exercise diligence in determining the university's curriculum; and
           Whereas some revisions involve no significant changes to the curriculum, such as changes to course numbers and minor additions or substitutions from lists of courses that fulfill requirements; therefore,
           Be it resolved, that the Senate delegates authority jointly to the chair of the University Curriculum Committee and to the president of the Faculty Senate to determine whether a proposed change to a major, minor, or certificate program is minor and non-substantive, and, if so and if both agree, to approve the change on behalf of the Faculty Senate; and
           Be it further resolved, that the Senate president shall notify the Senate of any such approvals at its next meeting.

   ---

2. [Motion 04-08-28; further revise Policies of Academic Freedom & Tenure; carried] That Section IV of the Policies of Academic Freedom and Tenure be revised as marked below [additions, deletions]:

   B. Probationary Service
        2. Length and Number of Appointments in the Probationary Period

2. An assistant professor shall be appointed to an initial term of four years. Before the end of the third year of this appointment, the department chairperson or school dean, after consulting with members of the department's or school's faculty as is required in the case of instructors and reviewing the evidence provided by the evaluation process, shall recommend that the assistant professor be either reappointed for a second term of three years or not reappointed. Before the end of the second year of the second three-year appointment, the department chairperson or school dean shall, in the same manner, recommend that the assistant professor be either reappointed with permanent tenure, at the same or higher rank and promoted to associate professor, or not reappointed. An assistant professor who has been reappointed at that rank with permanent tenure shall be reviewed for promotion at least once every four years.
3. An associate professor promoted to that rank from within this institution shall have permanent tenure. One coming to that rank from outside the institution shall be appointed to an initial term of five years; and in such cases, before the end of the fourth year, his/her department chairperson or school dean, after consulting with other members of the department's or school's faculty as required in the case of an instructor, shall recommend that the associate professor be either reappointed with permanent tenure at the same or higher rank, or not reappointed. An associate professor who has been reappointed at that rank with permanent tenure shall be reviewed for promotion at least once every four years.

---

3. [Motion 04-06-20; revise the RTP Instructions document; carried] That the Recommendations for RTP: Instructions document in the Faculty Handbook be revised as marked below [additions, deletions; an addition proposed in the original motion but deleted by an amendment is marked in blue]:

Recommendations Applications for RTP: Instructions

[Approved by the Faculty Senate April 1998; revised April 2004]

I. Eligibility and timing

1. Recommendations for reappointment should be submitted one and one-half years before the end of the first contract.
2. Recommendations for promotion and/or tenure should be submitted two years before the end of the second contract period.
3. Recommendations for tenure at the assistant professor rank should state the extraordinary circumstances that justify that action.
4. Candidates for an early promotion/tenure decision (i.e., before a decision is mandatory) must state the extraordinary circumstances or the exceptional quality of the submission by showing that they not only meet but substantially exceed the established criteria.
   1. For faculty (assistant professors with an initial three-year contract) hired prior to 1995 who have not had previous tenure-track appointments on other campuses or comparable experience in research, teaching, or professional settings: "Early" means coming forward prior to the fifth year of appointment. Recommendations should be based solely on exceptional faculty performance.
   2. For faculty hired since 1995 who have not had previous tenure-track appointments on other campuses or comparable experience in research, teaching, or professional settings, and who had completed all requirements and been awarded the terminal degree before beginning service at UNCW: "Early" means coming forward prior to the sixth year of appointment. Recommendations for promotion/tenure should be based solely on exceptional faculty performance.
   3. For faculty hired since 1995 who had not completed all degree requirements upon beginning service at UNCW and whose initial service was at the rank of instructor: "Early" means coming forward prior to the mandatory time for review, with the instructor period counting as probationary service. Recommendations for promotion/tenure should be based solely on exceptional faculty performance.
   4. For assistant or associate professors who have had previous tenure-track appointments on other campuses or comparable experience in research, teaching, or professional settings: "Early" means coming forward after the required two-year probationary period but prior to the mandatory time for review—i.e. before the sixth year for an assistant professor or the fourth year for an associate professor. In considering an early review, faculty, departments, and deans should not assume an automatic addition of years for previous service elsewhere to the years of experience at UNCW, and any candidate forwarded for such a review should be demonstrably exceptional.
1. A faculty member hired as an assistant or associate professor must complete at least two years of probationary service before being considered for tenure. No other minimum time requirement for service at any level has been established. Applications for tenure before a decision is mandatory must demonstrate that special circumstances or exceptional productivity have provided sufficient evidence that the faculty member has met the qualifications for that action.
2. An untenured assistant or associate professor may not apply for promotion without also applying for tenure.
3. A faculty member may not be tenured at the rank of assistant professor.⁽¹⁾
4. A faculty member who has been denied tenure or who has withdrawn an application for tenure after the dean has forwarded a recommendation on that application to Academic Affairs is not eligible to reapply subsequently for tenure and is not reappointed at the end of the current contract. However, a faculty member who has withdrawn a tenure application at any time prior to the dean's forwarding a recommendation on that application is eligible to reapply subsequently for tenure, provided that the deadline for review has not passed. A faculty member who has been denied tenure based on grounds of institutional financial exigency may reapply for tenure if the Chancellor determines that the financial exigency has ended and if either the faculty member's contract has not expired or the faculty member has been reappointed at a tenure-eligible rank.
4. E. Typically, candidates for tenure and promotion are reviewed in the fall, and candidates for reappointment are reviewed in the spring. However, a faculty member hired with a start date in January may be reviewed for reappointment in the fall or for tenure and promotion in the spring if that semester is the mandatory final semester for review. Discretionary reviews, whether for tenure (with or without promotion) after the required two-year probationary period but prior to the mandatory time for review or for promotion of a tenured faculty member, may be conducted either fall or spring semester.
5. F. An assistant professor with an initial 4-year contract must be reviewed for reappointment no later than early in the 6th semester of employment.
6. G. An assistant professor with a second 3-year contract must be reviewed for tenure and promotion no later than early in the 3rd semester of that contract (11th semester of employment).
7. H. For an assistant professor who previously held the rank of instructor at UNCW, the mandatory review period is the same as for other assistant professors, except that it is measured from the first semester of employment as instructor.
8. I. An associate professor with an initial 5-year contract must be reviewed for tenure no later than early in the 7th semester of employment.

II. Content

B. A. Instructions to the RTP candidate.

1. Compose the application to include the first six Roman-numbered sections specified in the prescribed format. Beginning with section IV, all required subcategories must be included as numbered.
2. [1.] Whenever it is appropriate to list items by date, use reverse chronological order (most recent first).
3. [2.] There are typically two parts to an RTP candidate's dossier: the recommendation application (to which is appended the chairperson's⁽²⁾ recommendation) and the supporting documentation.
   1. The recommendation application format should consist of (1) a narrative specifically prepared for the personnel action being recommended applied for and (2) lists of accomplishments. The recommendation application should be self-contained, since it is typically read in its entirety by RTP Committee members before supporting documentation is consulted. The recommendation application must be prepared in the prescribed format.
   2. Supporting documentation
      1. Supporting documentation must include:
         1. all of the candidate's SPOT summaries—the printouts summarizing results of all 16 evaluation questions—over at least the most recent two-and-one-half years, as well as copies of the Question 16 Section Summaries and frequency graphs over the same period. All SPOT results should be organized in reverse chronological order. (See Guidelines for the Administration, Use, and Interpretation of the "Student Perception of Teaching" (SPOT) Evaluation, especially Section B4.)
         2. all refereed publications published since the candidate was appointed at the present rank. A "selected" sub-collection of those publications is not sufficient, nor is a collection of photocopies of titles pages or tables of contents. Copies of publications will be returned to the candidate when the review process is completed.
      2. A table of contents or explanation of the organization of the supplementary documentation is helpful.
      3. The supporting documentation normally can be presented in one, or perhaps two, three-ring binders. It is not necessary or desirable to submit boxes of voluminous files.

A. B. Instructions to the administrator responsible for initiating the making the initial recommendation.⁽²⁾

1. [4.] No later than four weeks prior to submission of a recommendation forwarding an application, request from the Office of Institutional Research a "Report of SPOT Question 16 by semester" for each RTP candidate in time to include that report with the recommendation Section IV of the application.
2. [6.] Assemble, and consult, and take an advisory vote of the senior faculty of the school or department.
3. [7.] Prepare, sign and date the Chair's Evaluation (Section VII of the recommendation application).
4. [8.] Complete the Certification section (Section VIII of the recommendation application).
5. [3.] Compose the recommendation to include Verify that the application includes the eight Roman-numbered sections specified in the prescribed format. Beginning with section IV, all required subcategories must be included as numbered. Any optional subcategories may be omitted, but those included should be numbered sequentially.
6. [5.] Verify that all courses taught by the RTP candidate during the preceding two and one-half years are listed on that report, and sign the report to that effect.
7. Notify the senior faculty of how the chair is recommending and append a separate senior-faculty recommendation, if any [see the process for such recommendations in the RTP Process document].
8. [2.] Number the pages of the recommendation application.
9. [1.] Submit 10 copies, each stapled or bound in some manner.

---

Footnotes

⁽¹⁾This policy does not apply to faculty tenured as assistant professors prior to April 2004.

⁽²⁾ Normally, this is the department chairperson.

• In the case of the School of Nursing, it is the chair of the School of Nursing Committee on RTP.
• In the case of Randall Library, it is the chair of the Randall Library Promotion Committee.
• In cases where the department chair is being recommended, the administrator responsible for initiating the making the initial recommendation is the college or school dean.

[Much discussion took place about whether a faculty member who has been turned down for tenure should be permitted to reapply in a subsequent semester. An amendment that would specifically allow reapplication was defeated on a 19-16 vote. A subsequent motion that deleted all reference to reapplication in this document then carried by a similarly contested vote. The question remains unresolved.]

---

2. [Motion 04-08-29; revise SPOTs; postponed until April 27] The motion to revise the SPOT instrument (see the motion in the agenda) was postponed until a special meeting called for Tuesday, April 27 (reading day). Most discussion centered about whether a pilot study should be undertaken involving a subset of tenured faculty before the instrument is used for all faculty.

   ---

3. [Motion 04-08-30; endorse Strategic Plan; carried] The following motion by the Steering Committee carried:

   That the Faculty Senate endorses "Soaring to Greatness: Transforming Ideas into Action: A Strategic Plan 2004-2009" and the open, participatory process of its creation, and the Senate welcomes the opportunity for continued participation in the refinement and application of this document.

   ---

New business

Adjournment

Minutes by Richard Veit, Senate Secretary