Faculty Senate Meeting October 23, 2014 Agenda I. Call to Order and Roll Call - Steven Grant, Secretary II.

Transcript Faculty Senate Meeting October 23, 2014 Agenda I. Call to Order and Roll Call - Steven Grant, Secretary II.

Faculty Senate Meeting

October 23, 2014

Agenda

I. Call to Order and Roll Call - Steven Grant, Secretary

II. Approval of September 18, 2014 meeting minutes III. Campus Reports and Responses A. President’s Report, M. Bohner (5 mins) B. Administrative Reports i. R. Marley for C. Schrader (5 mins) ii. R. Marley (5 mins) C. Staff Council Report, S. Lewis (3 mins) D. Student Council – NO REPORT, R. Jacobsen (3 mins) E. Council of Graduate Students – NO REPORT, E. Ronchetto (3 mins) IV. Reports of Standing and Special Committees A. Rules, Procedures, and Agenda, M. Fitch (2 mins) B. Curricula, T. Schuman (5 mins) C. Information Technology / Computing, T. Vojta (5 mins) D. Tenure, B. McMillan for M. Davis (10 mins) E. Public Occasions, M. Zawodniok for S. Sedighsarvestani (2 mins) F. Personnel, L. Acar (5 mins) V. Old Business VI. New Business and Announcements A. Evaluation of Ability to Work VII. Adjourn

Agenda

I. Call to Order and Roll Call - Steven Grant, Secretary

II.

Approval of September 18, 2014 meeting minutes

http://facultysenate.mst.edu/media/campussupport/facultysenate/documents/fsminutes/2014/FS.Minutes.09.18.14.pdf

III. Campus Reports and Responses A. President’s Report, M. Bohner (5 mins) B. Administrative Reports i. R. Marley for C. Schrader (5 mins) ii. R. Marley (5 mins) C. Staff Council Report, S. Lewis (3 mins) D. Student Council – NO REPORT, R. Jacobsen (3 mins) E. Council of Graduate Students – NO REPORT, E. Ronchetto (3 mins) IV. Reports of Standing and Special Committees A. Rules, Procedures, and Agenda, M. Fitch (2 mins) B. Curricula, T. Schuman (5 mins) C. Information Technology / Computing, T. Vojta (5 mins) D. Tenure, B. McMillan for M. Davis (10 mins) E. Public Occasions, M. Zawodniok for S. Sedighsarvestani (2 mins) F. Personnel, L. Acar (5 mins) V. Old Business VI. New Business and Announcements A. Evaluation of Ability to Work VII. Adjourn

Agenda

III. Campus Reports and Responses

A. President’s Report M. Bohner

B. Administrative Reports i) R. Marley for C. Schrader ii) R. Marley C. Staff Council Report D. Student Council S. Lewis R. Jacobsen E. Council of Graduate Students -NO REPORT E. Ronchetto

October 23, 2014

President’s Report Faculty Senate Meeting October 23, 2014

President's Report 5

Administrative Assistant

• Ashley McCarter • Jeannie Werner • Barbara Palmer

October 23, 2014 President's Report 6

Administrative Changes

• VPAA office disappeared on September 30.

• Phil Whitefield is again Chair of Chemistry.

• Klaus Woelk is again Associate Chair of Chemistry.

• All VPAA staff was moved elsewhere and is currently employed somewhere on campus.

October 23, 2014 President's Report 7

Bylaw Changes

• 84 valid ballots were counted.

• An FS officer was present when ballots were counted.

• 2/3 of 84 is 56.

• Amendment 1: 34 No, 50 Yes.

• Amendment 2: 38 No, 46 Yes.

• Both Amendments fail.

October 23, 2014 President's Report 8

Bylaw Changes

• Two open forums were held on September 25 and September 26.

• Main discussion point is selection process for the position of Vice Provost and Dean.

• Only Faculty on Hiring Committee might not be appropriate (too many faculty).

• Half Faculty on Hiring Committee might not be appropriate (too few faculty).

• Hiring Committee should be diverse.

October 23, 2014 President's Report 9

State of University Address

• State of University Address was on October 8.

• S&T has received 2.5 times of traditionally received state appropriations.

• $3.047,550 Strategic Initiative Funding for doctoral student recruitment (about 70 new positions) and retention.

• $1,493,300 Strategic Initiative Funding for investment in signature areas.

October 23, 2014 President's Report 10

Board of Curators’ Meeting

• Board of Curators’ meeting was in Kansas City on October 2 and October 3.

• New Curator: David L. Steelman (Rolla).

• Title IX (student related CRR changes) was handled by Curator Phillips.

• The Board of Curators approved the CRR changes but allowed the President to modify the language – changes are still possible.

October 23, 2014 President's Report 11

MAFS Meeting

• MAFS (Missouri Association of Faculty Senates) meeting was in Jefferson City on October 13 and October 14.

• Representative, Alternate, and 2 additional current or former Faculty Senators.

• Strengthening the faculty component of college and university governance.

• Sharing information, concern, and governance procedures.

October 23, 2014 President's Report 12

MAFS Meeting

• Providing leadership training for people involved in faculty governance.

• Working with the government agencies for the betterment of higher education.

• Reports by AAUP, COPHE, DHE, MNEA, Legislature (Commissioner for Academic Affairs).

• http://mafs.org

October 23, 2014 President's Report 13

Intercampus Faculty Council

• Last IFC Meeting was on September 25.

• Faculty titles (mainly UMKC, MU, UMSL).

• Evaluation of Ability to Work (see later).

• Title IX Discussion: Mandated reporters: Read 600.020 (determine in which one of the three categories you fall).

Put information that you are a mandated reporter ahead of time (e.g., in syllabus).

Raise awareness.

October 23, 2014 President's Report 14

Intercampus Faculty Council

• Title IX Faculty related changes: It’s not just the four words!

• An IFC Subcommittee to rewrite CRRs concerning Faculty was created. Melanie Mormile is our representative on this subcommittee.

• Timeline for this: Fast, should be done by February Board of Curators’ meeting).

October 23, 2014 President's Report 15

Intercampus Faculty Council

IFC Subcommittee will work closely with • Hank Foley (Executive Vice President of Academic Affairs), • Deborah Noble-Triplett (Assistant Vice President for Academic Affairs), • Marsha Fisher Counsel’s Office).

(Counsel, General

October 23, 2014 President's Report 16

Agenda

III. Campus Reports and Responses

A. President’s Report M. Bohner

B. Administrative Reports

R. Marley for C. Schrader

ii) R. Marley C. Staff Council Report D. Student Council –NO REPORT S. Lewis R. Jacobsen E. Council of Graduate Students –NO REPORT E. Ronchetto

FACULTY SENATE

CHANCELLOR’S REPORT

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

OCTOBER 23, 2014

Strategic Initiative Funding

Doctoral student recruitment and retention $3,047,550 Investment in signature areas $1,493,300 Total $4,540,850

STATE APPROPRIATIONS GROWTH 17% increase in state appropriations since FY13

46 44 42 40 52 50 48 FY13 FY14 FY15

HUMAN RESOURCE SERVICES, AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION

Agenda

III. Campus Reports and Responses

A. President’s Report M. Bohner

B. Administrative Reports

i) R. Marley for C. Schrader

ii)

R. Marley

C. Staff Council Report D. Student Council S. Lewis R. Jacobsen E. Council of Graduate Students –NO REPORT E. Ronchetto

PROVOST’S REPORT

October, 23, 2014

OVERVIEW

• Faculty Recognition • Quarterly Updates • OSP • Undergraduate Studies • Graduate Studies • Admissions & Enrollment Mgmt.

• Library • College Updates • CASB • CEC

OTHER

• VPAA • Provost Office Staff • Student Success “Retention”

Congratulations to Dr. Yew San Hor

• Listed in Thomson Reuters’ “The World’s Most Influential Scientific Minds 2014,” for publishing the greatest number of highly cited papers (top 1% by citation), 2002-2012.

Office of Sponsored Programs

• Summary of FY15 activities and year-over-year comparison through the end of August – Proposals awarded in total dollars: $9.4M (up 10.5%) – Number of proposals awarded and amendments: 57 (down 24%) – Proposals submitted in total dollars: $19.7M (up 29.5%) – Number of proposals submitted: 73 (down 9.9%) – Total expenditures: $9.1M (down 15.1%) – Net grant and contract expenditures: $6.4M (down 19.6%) – F&A recovered: $1.5M (down 16.4%) – Number of active awards: 589 (down 3.9%)

Office of Undergraduate Studies

Experiential Learning Award

• 1 faculty and 1 staff awarded • Due November 21, 2014

Service Learning Award

• 1 faculty and 1 staff awarded • Due November 21, 2014

Center for Educational Research and Teaching Innovation (CERTI)

• Curators’ Teaching Summit – “Great Expectations: Bridging the Gap Between Instructor and Student Expectations,” Sept. 27, Oct. 13 and Nov. 12 • “Making Group Work, Work,” Oct. 31

Student Design and Experiential Learning Center

• Formula SAE team hosted intercollegiate autocross event in St Charles, MO, Sept 27th • Mars Rover team outreach at STL-area Boy Scout weekend Sept 27 th event • Solar Car Team opted out of AbuDhabi partnership race

Office of Undergraduate Studies

Learning Enhancement Across Disciplines (LEAD)

• LEAD has significantly expanded this semester setting

several new records

, including: • 75 courses provided with LEAD learning assistance • 60 courses with LEAD Learning Centers • 36 Courses with Tutoring Sessions • Launched all LEAD tutoring and most LCs

by the second week of classes

• Implementation of our

new sign-in system

• Created a new

“Marketing”

position (undergraduate John Gettemeyer)

Writing Center

•

Tutor Training -

Largest ever cohort of new tutors fully trained and actively tutoring by third week of semester.

•

Innovations Grant -

Grant received to purchase 5 iPads and related resources for use during tutoring sessions.

•

Growing Demand -

Number of tutoring sessions increased by 36% over same period last year. •

Phase II Renovations -

Plans underway for further renovations to improve traffic flow and increase capacity.

Office of Undergraduate Studies

Math Assistance Where Success Happens (MASH)

• Nine one-hour-long, active-learning session are held weekly for Math 1120 Students • Approximately 69% of student in Math 1120 took advantage of the program during the first three weeks MASH was held (102 students out of 147 enrolled)

South-Central Regional Professional Development Center (SC RPDC)

• • • • • •

October primary learning sessions include: (broken into 6 consultant-types)

Special Education (SpEd) Positive Behavior Supports (PBS) Consultants Professional Learning Communities (PLC) Collaborative Work (CW) Curriculum & Instruction Consultants Leadership Consultants

Consultants are cross-trained in most areas to provide on-going support and coaching to the 63 school districts in our region.

Office of Graduate Studies

• FS14 Graduate enrollment: 2114 • Graduate Leadership Program held at UMSL in September; meeting scheduled at S&T on November 13-14.

• Dealing with minor course renumbering issues, but working with the Registrar’s Office to resolve them quickly.

• Technical Editing: 116% increase in student submissions from FS 13 (12) to FS 14 (26).

• Working with graduate programs to host Q&A webinars for prospective graduate students.

• 100 S&T undergraduate students attended the Graduate Fair on October 1.

Student Enrollment % Change

First-time, degree-seeking college New Transfer 1,291 460 New Graduate Out-of-state Distance or On-line International Underrepresented Minority Female Credit Hours

Total enrollment

532 3,011 1,066 1,516 706 1,955 104,907 8,642

Numbers reflect enrollment as of Sept. 22, 2014

2.2% 7.7% -11.0% 8.7% 8.2% 18.6% 8.4% 6.3% 6.8% 6.3%

Geographic Origin of All Students - Fall 2014 l l WASHINGTON 59 OREGON 16 CALIFORNIA 50 NEVADA 4 IDAHO 3 ARIZONA 22 6 ALASKA UTAH 12 MONTANA 5 WYOMING 4 COLORADO 42 NEW MEXICO 12 6 HAWAII NORTH DAKOTA 3 SOUTH DAKOTA 5 NEBRASKA 37 KANSAS 114 TEXAS OKLAHOMA 54 MINNESOTA 1 MAINE VT 20 IOWA 32 WISCONSIN MISSOURI 5,680 ARKANSAS 41 LA 24 ILLINOIS 521 80 NEW YORK MICHIGAN 25 IN 36 16 KENTUCKY PENNSYLVANIA 8 42 NJ OHIO 22 7 WV DC VIRGINIA 12 MA CT 2 12 DE MD 4 16 DC 2 RI 2 MS 6 TENNESSEE 21 GEORGIA NO. CAROLINA 12 SO.

CAROLINA 11 ALABAMA 13 14 Legend 50 or more students 135 7 10 – 49 students 30 1 - 9 students FL All Students, Totals No students United States 7,316 Other Countries 1,326 Total 8,642 Note: Geographic Origin is defined as student's legal residence at time of original admission to Missouri S&T. Source: Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) frozen files, end of 4 th week of classes. Revised 9-23-14.

PUERTO RICO 3 Armed Forces Pacific & Europe 1

Curtis Laws Wilson Library Successes

New furniture installed on the first floor and receiving positive comments from students.

Area for the visualization wall has undergone re-modeling, and we are ready for MinerView.

Curtis Laws Wilson Library Challenges

Suggested cuts to journals have been submitted to LLRC and to department liaisons.

College of Arts, Sciences, and Business

Student Highlights •

1,293 students

– up 7.8% from 2013-14 AY – up 12% from 2012-13 AY •

588 women (45.5% of total enrollment; up from 43.3% in 2013-14 AY)

–

Amy Ketterer -

2014 Diane Feldman Technical Editing Undergraduate Scholarship from the Technical Editing Special Interest Group of the Society for Technical Communication –

Sarah Jones -

Curtis E. Huntington Scholarship in recognition of her academic achievements in actuarial science •

CASB Open House was held October 8

– 37 prospective students and their families attended

College of Arts, Sciences, and Business

Faculty Highlights •

2 faculty promoted to Professor: Diana Ahmad, Robert Paige

•

7 faculty tenured and promoted to Associate Professor: Eric Bryan, Richard Dawes, Cassandra Elrod, Audra Merfeld-Langston, Jorge Porcel, John Singler, Alexey Yamilov

• • •

Major Awards and Honors Patrick Joseph Huber

, 46th annual ASCAP Foundation Deems Taylor/ Virgil Thomson Award for his article “Black Hillbillies: African American Musicians on Old-Time Records, 1924 1932.” In

Hidden In the Mix: African American Country Music Traditions

, ed. by Diane Pecknold, Duke University Press.

Larry Gragg

, Western Writers of America Spur Award, Finalist in Best Western Nonfiction Contemporary,

Bright Light City: Las Vegas in Popular Culture

, University Press of Kansas

College of Arts, Sciences, and Business

College Staffing Update •

Associate Dean of Academic Affairs

–

Four finalists being interviewed and screened

•

Associate Dean of Research and External Relations

–

Application period closes today

• •

Executive Director of Development

–

Three finalists interviewed Finance and Budget Officer

–

Screening applicants now

•

Administrative Assistant

–

Four finalists interviewed; offer ready pending HR approval

College of Engineering and Computing

• The sixteen academic programs associated with the College of Engineering and Computing successfully completed ABET accreditation, October 3-6th.

• A number of reoccurring themes associated with continuous improvement, course prerequisites and institutional support were observed for a number of programs.

Agenda

III. Campus Reports and Responses

A. President’s Report M. Bohner B. Administrative Reports i) R. Marley for C. Schrader ii) R. Marley

C. Staff Council Report

D. Student Council –NO REPORT

S. Lewis

R. Jacobsen E. Council of Graduate Students –NO REPORT E. Ronchetto

2014 – 2015 Officers

Sara Lewis (Student Financial Aid), Staff Council Chair Joe Boehm (Custodial & Building Maintenance), Vice Chair Stephane Menand (International Affairs), Treasurer Michelle Vannatta (Facility Operations), Secretary

Staff Fall Appreciation

October 31 – At the Puck 9:00 am to 10:30 am

In appreciation for your hard work and dedication to Missouri S&T, we would like to invite you to join us for

FREE

hot chocolate and hot apple cider!

(Staff ID required – sponsored by Staff Council)

PUMPKIN CARVING CONTEST!

Drop off your carved pumpkins between 8:30 and 8:45 to our tent at the puck. They will be voted on and a $30 gift card for S&T Bookstore will be given!

Staff Council will also be selling long-sleeve t-shirts for $13. Buy one at the tent (cash or check) or contact Patti Adams at [email protected]

to place an order.

Agenda

III. Campus Reports and Responses

A. President’s Report M. Bohner B. Administrative Reports i) R. Marley for C. Schrader ii) R. Marley C. Staff Council Report

D. Student Council

–NO REPORT

S. Lewis

R. Jacobsen

E. Council of Graduate Students –NO REPORT E. Ronchetto

Agenda

III. Campus Reports and Responses

A. President’s Report M. Bohner B. Administrative Reports i) R. Marley for C. Schrader ii) R. Marley C. Staff Council Report D. Student Council –NO REPORT S. Lewis R. Jacobsen

E. Council of Graduate Students – NO REPORT E. Ronchetto

Agenda

IV. Reports of Standing and Special Committees

A. Rules, Procedures, and Agenda

M. Fitch

B. Curricula C. Information Technology / Computing D. Tenure T. Schuman T. Vojta B. McMillan for M. Davis E. Public Occasions F. Personnel M. Zawodniok for S. Sedighsarvestani L. Acar

RP&A Report Oct 23, 2014

Special Election to empty committee memberships Library and Learning Resources Committee (one, elected by the Faculty Senate from the list of department nominees) • Minsu Choi • Pourya Shamsi • Mehdi Ferdowsi Facilities Planning (one, elected from and by the Faculty Senate) • {Frank Liu – not from FS} Parking, Security, & Traffic (3, elected by the Faculty Senate from the list of department nominees) • [No nominees]

RP&A Report Sept 18, 2014

Potential Motion Referred to CCC: The registrar shall, prior to the first class day, • notify students lacking prerequisites and • shall drop students lacking prerequisites or instructor’s permission at the end of the second week of the semester.

Agenda

IV. Reports of Standing and Special Committees

A. Rules, Procedures, and Agenda M. Fitch

B. Curricula

C . Information Technology / Computing D. Tenure

T. Schuman

T. Vojta B. McMillan for M. Davis E. Public Occasions F. Personnel M. Zawodniok for S. Sedighsarvestani L. Acar

Campus Curricula Committee Report

23 October 2014



1 Degree Change (DC) form

» File 237 Biomedical Engineering: Biomedical Engineering Minor

Campus Curricula Committee Report

23 October 2014



21 Course Change (CC) forms

File #1778.1 Business 4111: Business Negotiations File #1411.1 Business 6111: Advanced Business Negotiations File #963.1 File #474.4 Chemistry 2289: Organic Chemistry Lab Chemistry 3410: Chemical Thermodynamics I File #1641.4 Chemistry 3419: Physical Chemistry Laboratory I File #2095.4 Chemistry 3420: Chemical Kinetics I File #2624.4 Chemistry 3429: Physical Chemistry Laboratory II File #268.7 Chemistry 3430: Introduction to Quantum Chemistry File #2518.1 Chemistry 4410: Chemical Thermodynamics II File #1492.1 Chemistry 4420: Chemical Kinetics II File #1467.1 Chemistry 5410: Advanced Chemical Thermodynamics File #1746.1 Chemistry 5420: Advanced Chemical Kinetics File #2436.1 Chemistry 5430: Elemental Quantum Chemistry File #4097 File #4105 File #4109 File #4103 Computer Science 5402: Data Mining & Machine Learning Computer Science 6203: Network Information Analysis Enterprise Resource Planning 5130: ERP in Small & Mid-Size Enterprises Math 5604: Introduction to Numerical Methods for Differential Equations File #1903.1 Metallurgical Engineering 3220: Introduction to Extractive Metallurgy File #2573.1 Psychology 6610: Advanced Leadership Theory & Practice File #1918.1 Speech & Media Studies 3283: Business and Professional Communication File #2488.1 Theatre 3243: Entertainment Design

Campus Curricula Committee Report

23 October 2014



The Campus Curricula Committee moves for the approval of the CCC report’s DC and CC form actions

Campus Curricula Committee Report

23 October 2014

- Informational Only -

 6 Experimental Course (EC) forms » File #4110 Chemistry 6001: Advanced NMR Experiments » File #4104 Chemical Engineering 5001: Computational Fluid Dynamics for Chemical Engineers » File #4098 Computer Science 6001: Machine Learning in Computer Vision » File #4106 Computer Science 6001: Network Coverage Problems » File #4101 Metallurgical Engineering 2001: Ferrous Microstructures » File #4112 Technical Communication 6001: Special Topics

Agenda

IV. Reports of Standing and Special Committees

A. Rules, Procedures, and Agenda M. Fitch B. Curricula T. Schuman

C

. Information Technology / Computing

T. Vojta

D. Tenure B. McMillan for M. Davis E. Public Occasions F. Personnel M. Zawodniok for S. Sedighsarvestani L. Acar

ITCC Report to Faculty Senate, October 2014

•

Google Services enhancement:

unlimited storage on Google Drive coming in near future IT will add information under http://it.mst.edu/services/google-apps/ http://it.mst.edu/services/file-storage/google-drive •

Security Awareness Training:

51% of the campus completed training, so far deadline is end of this year penalty for not completing training – cut off access, with prior warnings •

Password syncing?

campus and Google passwords will need to be managed separately (due to recent UM System security audit) •

Further discussions:

research support services, updates on Peoplesoft evaluation and data center consolidation,

Agenda

IV. Reports of Standing and Special Committees

A. Rules, Procedures, and Agenda M. Fitch B. Curricula C . Information Technology / Computing

D. Tenure

T. Schuman T. Vojta

B. McMillan for M. Davis

E. Public Occasions F. Personnel M. Zawodniok for S. Sedighsarvestani L. Acar

Promotion & Tenure Procedures

(marked up version)

Promotion and Tenure Procedures

Promotion and/or Tenure Procedures for Tenure-track and Tenured Faculty I. General

A.Guidelines for all policies and procedures affecting recommendations for promotion and/or tenure of tenure-track and tenured faculty shall be consistent withfall within the principles, policies, and procedures set forth in the University of Missouri Collected Rules and Regulations Sections 310.020 Regulations Governing Application of Tenure and 320.035 Policy and Procedures for Promotion and Tenure, Policy Memorandum Number II-10 (revised version, January 1, 2008), or its equivalent.

B.Any additional University and/or campus-wide guidelines not coveredreferenced in Section I.A. above shall be made available by the Provost to the faculty at the beginning of each academic year.

C.In the event of inconsistency between the provisions of any of the Collected Rules and Regulations referenced above or the above-referenced campus procedures, the inconsistency shall be resolved by giving precedence to Board of Curators regulations over executive orders issued by the President and campus procedures established by the Chancellor or other campus officials and by giving precedence to executive orders issued by the president over campus procedures established by the Chancellor or other campus officials.

II. Procedure

A. Department Level 1.Recommendations for promotion and/or tenure for persons holding rank in an academic department shall be initiated in that department described in Section 320.035A.1.a of the Collected Rules and Regulations (hereafter “CRR”) .

as 2.Each department chairperson shall assure there exists prepare a departmental review procedure which shall provide for faculty participation consistent with those University- wide policies and campus-wide policies referenced in I.A. above.the University of Missouri Collected Rules and Regulations 320.035 Policy and Procedures for Promotion and Tenure.

In the promotion and/or tenure review process, the department chairperson shall attach to each dossier a copy of the departmental facultyreview procedure s with specific references to faculty participation. The department may establish special criteria for recommending promotion and/or tenure, providing that such special criteria conform to the general guidelines faculty.

listedreferenced in Section I above . The department chairperson shall make the procedures and criteria available to the 3.All evidenceinformation relevant to a recommendation for promotion and/or tenure shall be directed to the department chairperson.

4.The

files dossiers on candidates as assembled by the department chairperson shall at all times be available to the candidate (with the exception of confidential matter) and to the appropriate review committees at the college and campus level. A reasonable period of time in advance of his/her action on the recommendations, the department chairperson shall advise all candidates so that the candidate may ensure the currency of information made available to the department chairperson. The promotion and/or tenure files dossiers as assembled in the department shall be considered complete (and closed) at the time of the chairperson’s action. The candidate may add no further documents to the dossier. In the case of an appeal, the candidate must state his/her case based solely on the record already present in the dossier at the time the dossier was closed upon leaving the department, unless the dossier is amended according to Section II.B.4.c or section II.B.5.

5.After receiving the recommendation of the departmental promotion and tenure committee, Tt he department chairperson shall then review all data submitted or received in regard to the proposed recommendation, including the recommendations of the departmental promotion and tenure committee. The department chairperson shall communicate, in writing, the recommendations of the departmental promotion and tenure committee to the candidate. In the event of a negative recommendation by the departmental promotion and tenure committee , the chairperson shall communicate in writing the reason(s) for that recommendation to the candidate, and the candidate shall have the option of preparing a rebuttal as described in Section III of this document.

6.After reaching his/her recommendations, whether favorable or unfavorable, the department chairperson shall advise in writing each candidate of the action takenrecommendation with respect to their candidacy. Further the department chairperson shall offer to discuss with the candidate involved any decisionrecommendation regarding promotion or tenure. In the event of a negative recommendation, the candidate shall have the option of preparing a rebuttal as described in Section II.A.4 and Section III of this document.

7.All recommendations by the department chairperson along with all documentation and attachments shall be forwarded to the Provost’s office. Each dossier shall follow the general outline available from the office of the Provost. Appendices of supporting material may be submitted, but should be assembled in a separate package.

B. Campus Level 1.There shall be a campus review committee consisting of one faculty member from each academic department. Elected faculty members shall be elected by a vote of their department and serve for a two-year period.

Membership of the campus review committee shall consist of full-time tenured full professors. Any administrator with promotion and/or tenure decision-making authority over faculty members including, but not limited to, department chairs, provosts (as well as vice provosts), and the chancellor, shall not serve on the campus review committee.

Departments with an insufficient number of eligible full professors may substitute tenured associate professors who shall recuse themselves from voting on tenure for full professors and promotion to full professor. Departments with an insufficient number of tenured professors must find a tenured faculty member to represent the department candidate as suggested by the University of Missouri Collected Rules and Regulations 320.035 Policy and Procedures for Promotion and Tenure.

The campus review committee is further organized into area subcommittees whose membership is defined in Section II.B.8 of this document.

The Provost's office will provide administrative support to the campus review committee.

2.At the start of the preceding spring semester, the Provost shall establish deadlines for the departmental recommendations, area subcommittee and campus review committee meetings, and responses in conformance with General Guidelines as defined in II.B.4.aI.A.

of this document.

3.The campus review committee shall elect its own chair and shall establish procedures for reviewing recommendations brought to it by the Provost.

a.Each area subcommittee shall review the relevant dossiers and provide a report including a vote to the area committee’s respective Vice Provost and Dean (VP&D). If the recommendation of the area subcommittee is negative, the VP&D shall inform the candidate in writing of this recommendation, together with the reason(s) for the recommendation, and the candidate shall then have a reasonable period of time to send an appeal to the Provost’s office. The Provost’s office will insert the rebuttal/appeal into the dossier before submitting the dossier to the VP&D. Regardless of whether the area subcommittee’s recommendation is positive or negative, the case proceeds to the VP&D for review and recommendation.

b.When the Vice Provost and Dean has completed his/her review of the dossiers and prepared recommendations, the dossiers proceed to the campus committee for further review and recommendation. If the recommendation of the VP&D is negative, the VP&D shall inform the candidate in writing of this recommendation, together with the reason(s) for the recommendation, and the candidate shall then have a reasonable period of time to send an appeal to the Provost’s office. If the recommendation is positive, then the VP&D shall inform the candidate of this recommendation. The Provost’s office shall then submit the candidate’s dossier, including the four previous review recommendations and any appeals/rebuttals, to the campus committee for its review and recommendation.

If the candidate does not file an appeal, the dossier still proceeds to the campus committee for further review.

4.The campus review committee shall first ascertain that all procedures and criteria used within the respective department conform to the General Guidelines listed in Section I.

a.If the procedures and criteria used within the respective department do not conform to the General Guidelines, the campus review committee shall inform the department chair in writing and state what specific action the department must take and shall return all recommendations from the department without prejudice to any individual's recommendation , rebuttal or appeal. The campus review committee shall then allow a reasonable period of time for compliance with or appeal to its decision.

b.When the procedures and criteria used within the respective department conform to the General Guidelines, the campus review committee shall review each recommendation and/or appeal request.

c.The campus review committee may solicit whatever additional information its members deem appropriate, from within and outside the University, to evaluate the candidate under consideration in the areas of teaching, research, and service. Any new information deemed appropriate by any member of the campus review committee for possible inclusion in the dossier after the dossier has left the department but before the campus review committee has sent its report to the Provost shall be submitted for consideration to the entire campus review committee. If the campus review committee by a majority vote agrees that the material seems sufficiently important to warrant inclusion in the dossier, the candidate's dossier with the new material will be sent back to the department for review of the dossier including the new material and recommendation as to the modified dossier . The modified dossier will then again proceed up the promotion/tenure evaluative hierarchy.

5.The campus review committee shall submit its promotion and/or tenure recommendations to the Provost. The Provost shall communicate, in writing, the recommendations of the campus review committee to the candidate. In the event of a negative recommendation from the campus review committee, the candidate shall have the option of preparing a rebuttal as described in Section II.A.4 and Section III of this document.

If an appeal is submitted to the Provost, the Provost may solicit additional information on his/her own. If the Provost discovers something that he/she deems of sufficient importance to include in the dossier, he/she will inform the campus review committee, and the modified dossier shall be referred back to the candidate’s department for review and recommendation and then proceed up the evaluative promotion/tenure hierarchy.

6.The Provost's review shall be consistent with the requirements of the University-wide and campus-wide policies referenced in Section I.A. above.University of Missouri Collected Rules and Regulations 320.035 Policy and Procedures for Promotion and Tenure.

provide written notification to each candidate of the action The Provost shall takenProvost’s recommendation with respect to his/her candidacy. Further the Provost shall offer to discuss with the candidate involved any decisionrecommendation regarding promotion and/or tenure. In the event of a negative recommendation, the candidate shall have the option of preparing a rebuttal as described in Section II.A.4 and Section III of this

document. The Provost provides a written recommendation back to the campus review committee, which in turn, has the discretion to submit a supplemental report to the chancellor. The Provost shall transmit to the Chancellor his/her promotion and/or tenure recommendations along with appropriate forms and supporting information. If the Provost or Chancellor disagrees with any of the majority recommendations of the campus review committee, he/she may discuss the case(s) with the committee. The purpose of such a meeting would be to increase mutual understanding of the case(s) in question, but in any event the decision to call or not call a meeting rests solely with the Provost or Chancellor.

7.Recommendations from the campus review committee and decisions from the Chancellor follow the procedures described in the University wide and campus-wide policies referenced in Section I.A. above.University of Missouri Collected Rules and Regulations Sections 310.020 Regulations Governing Application of Tenure and 320.035 Policy and Procedures for Promotion and Tenure.

8. Procedures for the Establishment and Maintenance of Areas a.Area Subcommittees shall be proposed/reviewed by the Tenure Committee and submitted to the Faculty Senate (FS) b. The FS makes a recommendation to the Provost based on the proposal/review.

c.The Provost refers the recommendation to the Council of Department Chairs for review.

d.The Council of Department Chairs (CDC), by their own procedures, finalizes area membership and reports to the Provost for inclusion in the P&T Procedures.

e.On a yearly basis, the Tenure committee reviews the area membership and files a report with FS. On a five year cycle, the Tenure committee proposes area changes (if any) -- Refer to Paragraph 8.a. New departments/programs or merger of departments/programs shall warrant immediate area committee reconsideration.

Area Subcommittees as of Spring Semester 2014 The indicated departments shall comprise the following area subcommittees: •

Social Sciences:

Business and Information Technology, Psychological Science, Economics.

•

Sciences:

Biological Sciences, Chemistry, Mathematics and Statistics, Physics.

•

Engineering:

Aerospace Engineering, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Engineering Management/Systems Engineering.

•

Arts and Humanities:

Arts Languages and Philosophy, English and Technical Communication, History and Political Science.

III. Appeal Policy and ProcedureRequests for Reconsideration, Rebuttal or Appeal Policy and Procedure

Requests for reconsideration or rebuttal of recommendations for promotion or tenure, sometime referenced as “appeals” in this document will Appeals of tenure decisions follow procedures outlined in the University-wide and campus-wide policies referenced in Section I.A. above.University of Missouri Collected Rules and Regulations 310.020 Regulations Governing Application of Tenure. Appeals of recommendations from subcommittees, committees, department chairs, Vice Provost and Deans, and the Provost follow the following procedure: A candidate who receives a negative recommendation from any administrative officer II of this document will be informed by letter from the appropriate administrator or committee or committee in the procedures described in of Section giving the recommendation, together with the reason(s) for the recommendation. The candidate may request a hearingmeeting beforewith said administrative officer or committee making the recommendation. The candidate will have a reasonable period of time to write a rebuttal to this letter in accordance with the conditions set forth above in Section.II.A.4. In the case of a negative recommendation, any letter recommendationof appeal goes to the Provost’s office for inclusion in the dossier. The requesting reconsideration or rebutting the modified dossier then goes to the area subcommittee for review and recommendation. If the recommendation of the area subcommittee is negative, the candidate may file an appeal with the Provost’s office for inclusion in the dossier. The dossiers then proceed to the respective Vice Provost and Deans for review and recommendation. If the recommendation of the Vice Provost and Dean is negative, the candidate may seek reconsideration or submit a letter of rebuttal appeal to the full campus committee; that appeal is sent to the campus committee through the Provost. If the campus committee recommendation is negative, the candidate may seek reconsideration by or submit a letter of rebuttal appeal to the Provost. The Provost at his/her discretion may ask a candidate appealingseeking reconsideration or submitting a rebuttal to a recommendation of the campus review committee to appear before the campus review committee to state his/her case before the campus review committee, and the Provost, if he/she so chooses, may participate in that appeal session. If the ruling recommendation of the Provost is negative, the candidate may seek reconsideration or submit a rebuttal appeal in a forth above in Section II.A.4).

letter to the Provost with a copy to the Chancellor (again in accordance with the conditions set Regardless of whether the recommendation is positive or negative at any step, the dossier and rebuttal, if any, will move forward to the next step unless the faculty member wishes to withdraw from the process.

After the candidates are notified of the Chancellor's decisions about their respective cases for promotion and/or tenure, the Provost or Chancellor will provide input (within the constraints of confidentiality) to each department chair whose recommendation was overridden in the Chancellor's decision. The purpose of this procedure is to provide the chairs with information which might be helpful when handling future promotion/tenure cases.

Promotion & Tenure Procedures

(clean version with no revisions)

Promotion and Tenure Procedures

Promotion and/or Tenure Procedures for Tenure-track and Tenured Faculty I. General

A.Guidelines for all policies and procedures affecting recommendations for promotion and/or tenure of tenure-track and tenured faculty shall be consistent with the principles, policies, and procedures set forth in the University of Missouri Collected Rules and Regulations Sections 310.020 Regulations Governing Application of Tenure and 320.035 Policy and Procedures for Promotion and Tenure, Policy Memorandum Number II-10 (revised version, January 1, 2008), or its equivalent.

B.Any additional University and/or campus-wide guidelines not referenced in Section I.A. above shall be made available by the Provost to the faculty at the beginning of each academic year.

C.In the event of inconsistency between the provisions of any of the Collected Rules and Regulations referenced above or the above referenced campus procedures, the inconsistency shall be resolved by giving precedence to Board of Curators regulations over executive orders issued by the President and campus procedures established by the Chancellor or other campus officials and by giving precedence to executive orders issued by the president over campus procedures established by the Chancellor or other campus officials.

II. Procedure

A. Department Level 1.Recommendations for promotion and/or tenure for persons holding rank in an academic department shall be initiated in that department as described in Section 320.035A.1.a of the Collected Rules and Regulations (hereafter “CRR”).

2.Each department chairperson shall assure there exists a departmental review procedure which shall provide for faculty participation consistent with those University-wide policies and campus-wide policies referenced in I.A. above. In the promotion and/or tenure review process, the department chairperson shall attach to each dossier a copy of the departmental review procedure with specific references to faculty participation. The department may establish special criteria for recommending promotion and/or tenure, providing that such special criteria conform to the general guidelines referenced in Section I above. The department chairperson shall make the procedures and criteria available to the faculty.

3.All information relevant to a recommendation for promotion and/or tenure shall be directed to the department chairperson.

4. The dossiers on candidates as assembled by the department chairperson shall at all times be available to the candidate (with the exception of confidential matter) and to the

appropriate review committees at the college and campus level. A reasonable period of time in advance of his/her action on the recommendations, the department chairperson shall advise all candidates so that the candidate may ensure the currency of information made available to the department chairperson. The promotion and/or tenure dossiers as assembled in the department shall be considered complete (and closed) at the time of the chairperson’s action. The candidate may add no further documents to the dossier. In the case of an appeal, the candidate must state his/her case based solely on the record already present in the dossier at the time the dossier was closed upon leaving the department, unless the dossier is amended according to Section II.B.4.c or section II.B.5.

5.After receiving the recommendation of the departmental promotion and tenure committee, the department chairperson shall then review all data submitted or received in regard to the proposed recommendation, including the recommendations of the departmental promotion and tenure committee. The department chairperson shall communicate, in writing, the recommendations of the departmental promotion and tenure committee to the candidate. In the event of a negative recommendation by the departmental promotion and tenure committee, the chairperson shall communicate in writing the reason(s) for that recommendation to the candidate, and the candidate shall have the option of preparing a rebuttal as described in Section III of this document.

6.After reaching his/her recommendations, whether favorable or unfavorable, the department chairperson shall advise in writing each candidate of the recommendation with respect to their candidacy. Further the department chairperson shall offer to discuss with the candidate involved any recommendation regarding promotion or tenure. In the event of a negative recommendation, the candidate shall have the option of preparing a rebuttal as described in Section II.A.4 and Section III of this document.

tenured professors must find a tenured faculty member to represent the department as suggested by the University of Missouri Collected Rules and Regulations 320.035 Policy and Procedures for Promotion and Tenure.

The campus review committee is further organized into area subcommittees whose membership is defined in Section II.B.8 of this document.

The Provost's office will provide administrative support to the campus review committee.

3.The campus review committee shall elect its own chair and shall establish procedures for reviewing recommendations brought to it by the Provost.

If the candidate does not file an appeal, the dossier still proceeds to the campus committee for further review.

4.The campus review committee shall first ascertain that all procedures and criteria used within the respective department conform to the General Guidelines listed in Section I.

in writing and state what specific action the department must take and shall return all a.If the procedures and criteria used within the respective department do not conform to the General Guidelines, the campus review committee shall inform the department chair

recommendations from the department without prejudice to any individual's recommendation, rebuttal or appeal. The campus review committee shall then allow a reasonable period of time for compliance with or appeal to its decision.

b.When the procedures and criteria used within the respective department conform to the General Guidelines, the campus review committee shall review each recommendation and/or appeal request.

c.The campus review committee may solicit whatever additional information its members deem appropriate, from within and outside the University, to evaluate the candidate under consideration in the areas of teaching, research, and service. Any new information deemed appropriate by any member of the campus review committee for possible inclusion in the dossier after the dossier has left the department but before the campus review committee has sent its report to the Provost shall be submitted for consideration to the entire campus review committee. If the campus review committee by a majority vote agrees that the material seems sufficiently important to warrant inclusion in the dossier, the candidate's dossier with the new material will be sent back to the department for review of the dossier including the new material and recommendation as to the modified dossier. The modified dossier will then again proceed up the promotion/tenure evaluative hierarchy.

6.The Provost's review shall be consistent with the requirements of the University-wide and campus-wide policies referenced in Section I.A. above. The Provost shall provide written notification to each candidate of the Provost’s recommendation with respect to his/her candidacy. Further the Provost shall offer to discuss with the candidate involved any recommendation regarding promotion and/or tenure. In the event of a negative recommendation, the candidate shall have the option of preparing a rebuttal as described in Section II.A.4 and Section III of this document. The Provost provides a written recommendation back to the campus review committee, which in turn, has the discretion to submit a supplemental report to the chancellor. The Provost shall transmit to the Chancellor his/her promotion and/or tenure recommendations along with appropriate forms and supporting information. If the Provost or Chancellor disagrees with any of the majority

recommendations of the campus review committee, he/she may discuss the case(s) with the committee. The purpose of such a meeting would be to increase mutual understanding of the case(s) in question, but in any event the decision to call or not call a meeting rests solely with the Provost or Chancellor.

7.Recommendations from the campus review committee and decisions from the Chancellor follow the procedures described in the University-wide and campus-wide policies referenced in Section I.A. above.

c.The Provost refers the recommendation to the Council of Department Chairs for review.

d.The Council of Department Chairs (CDC), by their own procedures, finalizes area membership and reports to the Provost for inclusion in the P&T Procedures.

Area Subcommittees as of Spring Semester 2014 The indicated departments shall comprise the following area subcommittees: •

Social Sciences:

Business and Information Technology, Psychological Science, Economics.

•

Sciences:

Biological Sciences, Chemistry, Mathematics and Statistics, Physics.

•

Engineering:

Chemical and Biochemical Engineering, Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering, Computer Science, Geological Sciences and Engineering, Materials Science and Engineering, Mining and Nuclear Engineering, Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Engineering Management/Systems Engineering.

•

Arts and Humanities:

Arts Languages and Philosophy, English and Technical Communication, History and Political Science.

III. Requests for Reconsideration, Rebuttal or Appeal Policy and Procedure

Requests for reconsideration or rebuttal of recommendations for promotion or tenure, sometime referenced as “appeals” in this document will follow procedures outlined in the University-wide and campus-wide policies referenced in Section I.A. above.

A candidate who receives a negative recommendation from any administrative officer or committee in the procedures described in Section II of this document will be informed by letter from the appropriate administrator or committee giving the recommendation, together with the reason(s) for the recommendation. The candidate may request a meetingwith said administrative officer making the recommendation. The candidate will have a reasonable period of time to write a rebuttal to this letter in accordance with the conditions set forth above in Section.II.A.4. In the case of a negative recommendation, any letter requesting reconsideration or rebutting the recommendation goes to the Provost’s office for inclusion in the dossier. The modified dossier then goes to the area subcommittee for review and recommendation. If the recommendation of the area subcommittee is negative, the candidate may file an appeal with the Provost’s office for inclusion in the dossier. The dossiers then proceed to the respective Vice Provost and Deans for review and recommendation. If the recommendation of the Vice Provost and Dean is negative, the candidate may seek reconsideration or submit a letter of rebuttal to the campus committee through the Provost. If the campus committee recommendation is negative, the candidate may seek reconsideration by or submit a letter of rebuttal to the Provost. The Provost at his/her discretion may ask a candidate seeking reconsideration or submitting a rebuttal to a recommendation of the campus review committee to appear before the campus review committee to state his/her case before the campus review committee, and the Provost, if he/she so chooses, may participate in that session. If the recommendation of the Provost is negative, the candidate may seek reconsideration or submit a rebuttal letter to the Provost with a copy to the Chancellor (again in accordance with the conditions set forth above in Section II.A.4).

Regardless of whether the recommendation is positive or negative at any step, the dossier and rebuttal, if any, will move forward to the next step unless the faculty member wishes to withdraw from the process.

Title IX & Tenure Document

Title IX and Tenure Document The Tenure Policy Committee views with deep concern the suggested removal of the words "Either extreme or repeated" (sexual harassment or discrimination) from the CRR regulations governing the possible loss of tenure. CRR (310.020; #3) currently guarantees that any removal of tenure be for a very serious breach of conduct, but the suggested change--i.e., removing any qualifier such as "very serious" before the offenses--would open the door to removal of a faculty member's tenure for even minor infractions, including inadvertent or merely perceived ones. This is certainly not the intent of the proposed change, but it is a very real unintended consequence.

The relevant CRR passage is: "Cause for dismissal may include but is not limited to the following: ...Either extreme or repeated Sexual harassment or racial, gender or other discriminatory practices." Of course the faculty rejects sexual harassment and discrimination, but the punishment should fit the offense, and the extreme punishment of removal of tenure should be reserved for extreme cases of misbehavior, e.g. physical assault. Indeed a basic principle of UM's sexual harassment training is that reported offenses call for a warning to the alleged offender in order to prevent a recurrence of the offending behavior. Sample from the video: a male supervisor putting his hand on the shoulder of an uncomfortable looking secretary.

Again, it is essential that a qualifier be included before the mention of sexual harassment or discrimination offenses. Once "Either extreme of repeated" is removed without any replacement qualifier, any controversial or unpopular faculty member would be open to the loss of tenure for an almost infinite variety of possible minor infractions. Controversial topics in the Liberal Arts would become especially risky and hence to be avoided, even though many students could benefit precisely from discussing them. But even our scientists and engineers are not immune. One engineer stated at a recent Faculty Senate meeting that he had used the word "voodoo" in describing something in engineering that he regarded as totally lacking seriousness; afterwards, an African student in the class (from a country where voodoo is practiced) told the teacher that that reference was offensive to him.

The proposed change would therefore have a chilling effect on the free and open exchange of ideas at the university, raising political correctness to such a high level that a faculty member could have his/her life severely upset due to a minor, unintended or even merely perceived infraction. If any group wants to get rid of a faculty member, the proposed change would make it much easier to do so. But such removal would be a clear case of combatting one injustice (e.g., racial discrimination) by inflicting another, at least equally severe, injustice.

We therefore respectfully urge the Board of Curators not to accept the proposed elimination of "Either extreme or repeated" from the present CRR passage. At the very least, a satisfactory replacement qualifier should be found.

Agenda

IV. Reports of Standing and Special Committees

A. Rules, Procedures, and Agenda M. Fitch B. Curricula C . Information Technology / Computing D. Tenure T. Schuman T. Vojta B. McMillan for M. Davis

E. Public Occasions

M. Zawodniok for S. Sedighsarvestani

F. Personnel L. Acar

Academic Calendar Dates for AY 2016-2017

Proposed by Registrar Approved by Public Occasions Committee Presented to Faculty Senate on Oct. 23, 2014

FALL SEMESTER 2016

International Student Orientation Freshman Orientation Begins Transfer Student Orientation Open Registration Ends Fall semester opens 8:00 a.m.

Classwork begins 8:00 a.m.

Labor Day Holiday Mid-Semester Thanksgiving vacation begins 8:00 a.m.

Thanksgiving vacation ends 8:00 a.m.

Last Class Day Final Examinations begin 8:00 a.m.

Final Examinations end 6:00 p.m.

December Commencement Non-Engineering Undergraduate & All Graduate Students December Commencement Engineering Undergraduate Students August 9, Tuesday August 14, Sunday August 18, Thursday August 21, Sunday August 22, Monday August 22, Monday September 5, Monday October 15, Saturday November 20, Sunday November 28, Monday December 9, Friday December 12, Monday December 16, Friday December 16, Friday December 17, Saturday 77

SPRING SEMESTER 2017

International Student Orientation Open Registration Ends Martin Luther King, Jr. Recognition Holiday Spring semester opens 8:00 a.m.

Classwork begins 8:00 a.m.

Mid-Semester Spring Recess begins 8:00 a.m.

Spring Recess ends 8:00 a.m.

Spring Break begins 8:00 a.m.

Spring Break ends 8:00 a.m.

Last Class Day Final Examinations begin 8:00 a.m.

Final Examinations end 6:00 p.m.

Spring Semester closes 6:00 p.m.

May Commencement January 9, Monday January 15, Sunday January 16, Monday January 17, Tuesday January 17, Tuesday March 11, Saturday March 16, Thursday March 20, Monday March 26, Sunday April 3, Monday May 5, Friday May 8, Monday May 12, Friday May 12, Friday May 12, Friday Non-Engineering Undergraduate & All Graduate Students May Commencement May 13, Saturday Engineering Undergraduate Students 78

*SUMMER SESSION 2017

Open Registration Ends Summer session opens 8:00 a.m.

Classwork begins 8:00 a.m.

Independence Day Holiday (observed) Final Examinations begin 8:00 a.m.

Final Examinations end 12:30 p.m.

Summer Sessions closes 12:30 p.m.

June 4, Sunday June 5, Monday June 5, Monday July 4, Tuesday July 27, Thursday July 28, Friday July 28, Friday *Schedule shows the regular eight-week Summer Session. Other special four-week course sessions may be scheduled.

CLASS SESSIONS (EXCLUDING FINAL EXAMINATIONS)

Fall Semester M 14 TU 15 W 15 TH 14 F 15 S 15 Spring Semester Summer Semester 14 8 15 7 15 8 14 8 14 8 15 8 The faculty is reminded of the religious and other holidays that a substantial number of students may wish to observe.

Agenda

IV. Reports of Standing and Special Committees

A. Rules, Procedures, and Agenda M. Fitch B. Curricula C . Information Technology / Computing D. Tenure T. Schuman T. Vojta B. McMillan for M. Davis E. Public Occasions

F. Personnel

M. Zawodniok for S. Sedighsarvestani

L. Acar

Personnel Committee

Personnel Committee has considered three issues related to the NTT faculty.

• • •

Hiring Promotion Termination

Committee found out that there's an inconsistency in the intent of having NTT faculty and details of these processes.

• •

CRR 310.035.H clearly states that NTT faculty appointments are usually 1- year contracts and cannot be more that 3 years.

(This clause conveys a short-term association.)

• • • •

310.035.E states a hiring process that are (almost) identical to the tenured/tenure track faculty.

310.035.F states qualifications that are (almost) identical to the tenured/tenure track faculty.

310.035.I states performance evaluation procedures that are (almost) identical to the tenured/tenure-track faculty.

(These clauses convey long-term associations.)

• •

310.035.K states a detailed (336 words) promotion process that's similar to the tenured/tenured-track faculty.

(This clause also conveys a long-term association.)

• •

310.035.J states the termination process as a 3-month notice or less time under extenuating circumstances.

(This clause clearly conveys a short term association.)

The Personnel Committee's sentiment was that the inclusion of more protective steps during the termination would make the NTT and the regular faculty processes practically identical.

(In that case, the only difference becomes the range of their responsibilities.)

Committee decided to: 1) simplify the hiring and the promotion processes, 2) strengthen the termination process slightly by requiring an explanation, and 3) stress the point that the intent of hiring NTT faculty is to have short-term solutions to teaching and research needs, and tenured faculty should be sought for long-term strategic goals.

Postponed Motion from the June 19, 2014 Faculty Senate Meeting

Dr. Acar made a motion on behalf of the Personnel Committee to bring the proposed changes for section 310.035 to the attention of System as the will of the Faculty Senate.

Dr. Acar made a motion to add the word faculty in the 2 nd paragraph of section A. Dr. Fitch seconded the motion. With no opposition, the word was incorporated into the proposal.

It will now read as follows:

The intent of having non-regular faculty is to have short term solutions to teaching and research needs, and regular faculty should be sought for long-term goals. With a motion remaining on the floor, discussion ensued.

A motion was made to

postpone

. A second was received.

A couple of members spoke in favor of the postponement. Dr. Fitch asked if anyone wanted to speak against postponement. With no further discussion, a vote was taken.

The motion was postponed.

Chapter 310: Academic Tenure Regulations 310.035 Non-Tenure Track Faculty CRR 310.035

Executive Guideline No. 35, issued 11-16-06; revised 05-21-08, 04-12-10, 6-17-10, 02-04-11, 7-16-12, 5-1-13.

Academic Appointments Academic appointments at the University of Missouri currently are divided into two main categories: regular and non-regular.

Under this executive guideline, regular faculty shall be referred to as “tenured and tenure track” faculty, and this group shall continue to include the traditional faculty of the institution. Except with regard to the definitions listed herein, this guideline is applicable to full-time ranked non-regular faculty and is not designed to address academic appointments of any other type including, but not limited to, full-time unranked, part-time nonregular faculty, and tenured and tenure track faculty.

Non-regular faculty shall be divided into three groups: (1) full-time, ranked, non-regular faculty (non-tenure track (NTT) faculty); (2) full-time, unranked, non-regular faculty; and (3) part-time, non-regular faculty (adjunct faculty) [1].

The requirements distinguishing between a full-time, ranked non-regular faculty member and a full time, unranked non-regular faculty member shall be made at the campus level. While many of the full-time unranked non-regular titles will not be eliminated, it is implicit in this guideline that the individuals that meet the qualifications for NTT faculty should receive an appropriate NTT faculty title as described in the following section. In most circumstances, non-tenure track faculty members who have primary authority in research, or teaching, or clinical/professional practice, or extension duties should receive title changes appropriate to ranked NTT positions at the time of such reappointments [2]. This guideline applies to all newly-hired NTT faculty members and to those non-regular faculty who are reappointed into NTT faculty positions at the time of such reappointment.

Categories of (Ranked) Non-Tenure Track Faculty Defined There shall be six main types of full-time, ranked NTT faculty. Each should have primary responsibility in a single area: teaching, or research, or clinical/professional practice, or extension activities, or libraries. The titles should identify the area. Within each area, there shall be three ranks: 1.

Research faculty (Research Professor, Associate Research Professor, Assistant Research Professor) Teaching faculty (Teaching Professor, Associate Teaching Professor, Assistant Teaching Professor) 3.

Clinical/Professional Practice faculty (Clinical Professor, Associate Clinical Professor, Assistant Clinical Professor or Professional Practice Professor, Associate Professional Practice Professor, Assistant Professional Practice Professor) 4.

Extension faculty (Extension Professor, Associate Extension Professor, Assistant Extension Professor; Extension Professional, Associate Extension Professional, Assistant Extension Professional) 5.

Librarian faculty (Librarian I/II, Librarian III, Librarian IV) on campuses whose librarian faculty have opted for NTT status as a body, whose faculty council or faculty senate, as appropriate to the individual campus, has formally recognized librarian faculty as having NTT status as a body and whose Chancellor has approved such recognition.

Clinical Department faculty [3] (Professor of Clinical Department, Associate Professor of Clinical Department, Assistant Professor of Clinical Department) C.

Performance of NTT Faculty Unlike tenured and tenure track faculty, whose performance is evaluated

Chapter 310: Academic Tenure Regulations 310.035 Non-Tenure Track Faculty CRR 310.035 - CONTINUED

Performance of NTT Faculty Unlike tenured and tenure track faculty, whose performance is evaluated based on their contribution to research, teaching, and service, the performance of NTT faculty should be evaluated on the primary responsibility of the NTT appointment as well as service and professional activities related to that primary responsibility. There is no prohibition for NTT faculty to be involved in multiple duties related to research, teaching, or service. However, decisions regarding hiring, continuation of employment, and evaluation of NTT faculty performance should relate to the primary purpose of their appointment as defined by category and not be based on all three criteria. Only tenured and tenure track faculty should be hired, evaluated, and promoted based on all three criteria.

Nature of the Initial Appointment The nature of the initial appointment to a NTT position is important to both the NTT faculty member and the department [4].

Therefore the NTT faculty member’s primary department should be fully engaged in defining the nature of the NTT academic appointments. Since the NTT faculty member is expected to contribute to the department’s core mission, specific job responsibilities and expectations should be explicitly stated in a written job description developed by the department chair in conjunction with an appropriate department committee.

Searches for NTT Faculty Members Initial searches for NTT faculty should be conducted on a regional or national basis as appropriate with the involvement of a faculty-based search committee. NTT faculty should be selected using a process somewhat similar to one used for tenure track faculty members with interviews/presentations to division faculty, staff and students, and a full review of candidates’ dossiers. Student feedback is particularly important for all NTT teaching faculty.

Recommendations for hiring decisions remain under the purview of the department chair, dean or director [5].

NTT Faculty Attributes Those appointed to a NTT academic position should hold an earned doctoral degree, OR the appropriate terminal degree, OR have appropriate professional experience (i.e., teaching, research, clinical/professional practice, extension or library) as defined by the faculty of the academic unit. Evidence of the successful candidate’s abilities should be demonstrated through the resume, portfolio/dossier, reference letters, and through interviews with unit, department and/or college faculty members. The successful candidates should demonstrate potential for excellence in the primary area of their appointments (e.g., teaching, research, clinical/professional practice, extension or library) as well as in the service and professional aspects related to their disciplines and their positions.

Clearly Defined Expectations for Each Position Specific qualifications for each rank shall be determined

Chapter 310: Academic Tenure Regulations 310.035 Non-Tenure Track Faculty CRR 310.035 - CONTINUED

Clearly Defined Expectations for Each Position Specific qualifications for each rank shall be determined by the department and/or college with approval by the provost. The workload requirements for NTT faculty members should be spelled out in detail in advance. For teaching appointments, there should be clearly articulated teaching assignments and teaching loads including adjustments made for large classes or courses with multiple sections. Research appointments should spell out the specific roles, duties, grant projects and expectations for future funding. Clinical/professional practice, librarian, clinical department faculty appointments should clearly articulate the specific roles, responsibilities and performance expectations for delivering clinical/professional practice, librarian or clinical department faculty services. Extension appointments should describe the specific extension activities and outline relationships with the department.

Contract Length NTT faculty appointments shall begin at a specified date and terminate at a specified date. Such appointments are usually for a period of one academic year but may be for a longer or shorter period, except no single term appointment shall be for a period longer than three years. Such three-year appointments should be reserved for the highest qualified, highest performing NTT faculty members.

Guidelines for Performance Evaluation Each academic school, college or unit [6], with approval from the provost, should develop specific guidelines for the evaluation of performance. These guidelines should reflect the mission and needs of the school, college and university and cover only the primary area of the NTT appointment as well as service and professional activities related to that primary responsibility.

All NTT faculty should be reviewed annually by the appropriate unit supervisor. The standards for performance should be based on specific criteria outlined by the academic division in advance. The performance reviews should be a formal, documented process. Annual written evaluations should be provided to all NTT faculty members.

NTT appointees should compile a dossier of their activities, productivity, creativity and professional development to be reviewed on an annual basis. This material could also serve as the foundation for a dossier that could be used during the promotion process.

Reappointments Reappointments should be based, in part, on the performance expectations communicated at the time of appointment by the chair with the concurrence of the dean [5] and the provost.

Decisions to reappoint NTT faculty should generally be made in advance of the appointment end date. NTT faculty who will not receive a reappointment should be informed in writing at least three months in advance of the appointment end date unless extenuating circumstances exist.

Promotion of NTT Faculty Specified criteria for promotion and description of the process used for

Chapter 310: Academic Tenure Regulations 310.035 Non-Tenure Track Faculty CRR 310.035 - CONTINUED

Promotion of NTT Faculty Specified criteria for promotion and description of the process used for promotion in rank should be spelled out by the school, college or academic unit and approved by the provost in advance. The development of specific criteria and guidelines used to determine standards of excellence for promotion purposes should be the responsibility of the department/unit, subject to approval by a dean or director [5] and the provost.

Evaluation areas should be consistent with the established academic standards for each discipline. The decision to apply for promotion would be one the NTT faculty member could elect or not; annual reviews should be valuable indicators of the applicant’s readiness for promotion. The decision on a promotion application of a NTT academic appointment should not carry automatic rewards (apart from change in title) or penalties from the college, school or academic unit provided, however, that a Librarian I considered for promotion to Librarian II during his or her sixth year of employment as a Librarian I and who is not promoted to Librarian II may be subject to automatic nonrenewal.

Evaluation of the candidate’s application for promotion should focus on the specific area of appointment – teaching, research, clinical/professional practice, extension or library – as well as service and professional activities related to that primary responsibility.

In promotion considerations, the total contribution of the faculty member to the mission of the school, college or academic unit over a sustained period of time should be taken into consideration. This includes comprehensive documentation of the position, including a letter of appointment identifying home department or unit and the initial position description, communications detailing changes in position responsibilities, and any other statements regarding expected performance. Each campus shall adopt a promotion process that involves at least one faculty committee composed of one or more NTT faculty, at the promotable rank or above, and one or more tenured faculty, if such NTT faculty and tenured faculty exist. The committee or committees shall make recommendations to the Chancellor or designee who shall make the final decision.

Academic Freedom Prior to the stated ending date of their term appointments, NTT faculty members have the same academic protections regarding academic freedom as tenured and tenure track faculty.

Accordingly, adequate cause for dismissal prior to the stated ending date of their term appointments must be related directly and substantially to the faculty member's fitness or performance in the professional capacity as teacher, researcher, clinician, extension, librarian or clinical department faculty. More information can be found in CR&R 310.020 and related sections in the campus bylaws.

Participation in Faculty Governance NTT faculty members’ role in faculty governance shall be articulated by the individual campus within the limits of the University of Missouri Collected Rules and Regulations. The goal is to identify ways for the NTT faculty members to have a voice within their campus and college, school or academic unit and to be involved in faculty governance where appropriate.

Chapter 310: Academic Tenure Regulations 310.035 Non-Tenure Track Faculty CRR 310.035 - CONTINUED

[1] The categories of NTT, unranked, non-regular faculty, and part-time, non-regular faculty include different faculty titles associated with each category. Section B of this document lists the faculty titles associated with the NTT group. Titles associated with the unranked, non-regular faculty group include, but are not limited to, instructor, lecturer, senior lecturer and visiting professor. The title of visiting professor shall only be used for those faculty on temporary appointments. Part-time or courtesy appointments shall be considered adjunct appointments and include such titles as adjunct professor, adjunct instructor, etc.

[2] All other non-regular faculty members would receive the title of instructor (or equivalent full-time title), adjunct instructor (or equivalent part-time title), or other non-regular academic appointment titles that are not faculty titles (i.e., post doc, resident, etc.).

[3] Clinical Department faculty are titles limited to the Schools of Medicine at MU and UMKC.

[4] For purposes of this Guideline only, the term "department" shall be interpreted broadly to encompass any of the following: school, college, department, division, unit, center, institute or any other campus approved academic organizational unit for which the campus has approved the assignment of NTT faculty.

[5] On campuses with no schools or colleges and, therefore, no deans, there is no requirement for approval by the dean.

[6] As used in these Guidelines only, on campuses with no schools or colleges, the terms "school" or "college" shall be interpreted to mean the provost or such subordinate academic unit as specified by the provost.

Chapter 310: Academic Tenure Regulations 310.035 Non-Tenure Track Faculty CRR 310.035 - PROPOSED

Executive Guideline No. 35, issued 11-16-06; revised 05-21-08, 04-12-10, 6-17-10, 02-04-11, 7-16-12, 5-1-13.

Academic Appointments Academic appointments at the University of Missouri currently are divided into two main categories: regular and non-regular.

Under this executive guideline, regular faculty shall be referred to as “tenured and tenure track” faculty, and this group shall continue to include the traditional faculty of the institution. Except with regard to the definitions listed herein, this guideline is applicable to full-time ranked non-regular faculty and is not designed to address academic appointments of any other type including, but not limited to, full-time unranked, part-time non-regular faculty, and tenured and tenure track faculty.

The intent of having non-regular faculty is to have short term solutions to teaching and research needs, and regular faculty should be sought for long term strategic goals.

The requirements distinguishing between a full time, ranked non-regular faculty member and a full-time, unranked non-regular faculty member shall be made at the campus level. While many of the full-time unranked non-regular titles will not be eliminated, it is implicit in this guideline that the individuals that meet the qualifications for NTT faculty should receive an appropriate NTT faculty title as described in the following section. In most circumstances, non-tenure track faculty members who have primary authority in research, or teaching, or clinical/professional practice, or extension duties should receive title changes appropriate to ranked NTT positions at the time of such reappointments [2]. This guideline applies to all newly-hired NTT faculty members and to those non-regular faculty who are reappointed into NTT faculty positions at the time of such reappointment.

Research faculty (Research Professor, Associate Research Professor, Assistant Research Professor) 2.

Teaching faculty (Teaching Professor, Associate Teaching Professor, Assistant Teaching Professor) 3.

Extension faculty (Extension Professor, Associate Extension Professor, Assistant Extension Professor; Extension Professional, Associate Extension Professional, Assistant Extension Professional) 5.

Clinical Department faculty [3] (Professor of Clinical Department, Associate Professor of Clinical Department, Assistant Professor of Clinical Department)

Chapter 310: Academic Tenure Regulations 310.035 Non-Tenure Track Faculty CRR 310.035 – PROPOSED - CONTINUED

Performance of NTT Faculty Unlike tenured and tenure-track faculty, whose performance is evaluated based on their contribution to research, teaching, and service, the performance of NTT faculty should be evaluated on the primary responsibility of the NTT faculty position as well as the professional activities related to that primary responsibility. The NTT faculty should be involved in duties within their primary responsibilities, even though involvements in other duties are not prohibited.

Decisions regarding hiring, continuation of employment, and evaluation of NTT faculty performance should relate to the primary purpose of their position and rank as defined by the category and not be based on any other criteria. Only the tenured and tenure track faculty should be hired, evaluated, and promoted based on all three criteria.

Nature of the Appointment The nature of the appointment to a NTT faculty position is important to both the NTT faculty member and the department [4].

Therefore, the NTT faculty member’s primary department should be fully engaged in defining the nature of the NTT faculty positions.

Since the NTT faculty member is expected to contribute to the department’s core mission, specific job responsibilities and expectations should be explicitly stated in a written job description developed by the department chair in conjunction with an appropriate department committee.

Searches for NTT Faculty Members Even though NTT faculty positions are short-term appointments, searches for NTT faculty should be conducted on a regional or national basis as appropriate with the involvement of a faculty-based search committee. The selection of a NTT faculty member should involve the division faculty, staff, and students, and a full review of candidate’s dossier. Student feedback is important for all NTT teaching faculty, and related tenured and tenure-track faculty feedback is important for all NTT research faculty.

Recommendations for hiring decisions remain under the purview of the department chair, dean or director [5].

NTT Faculty Attributes Those appointed to a NTT faculty position should hold an appropriate degree or should have an appropriate professional experience (i.e., teaching, research, clinical/professional practice, extension or library) as defined by the faculty of the academic unit. Evidence of the successful candidate’s abilities should be demonstrated through the resume, portfolio/dossier, reference letters, and through interviews with the academic unit, department, and/or college faculty members. The successful candidates should demonstrate potential for excellence in their primary area of responsibilities (e.g., teaching, research, clinical/professional practice, extension or library) as well as in the professional aspects related to their disciplines and their positions.

Chapter 310: Academic Tenure Regulations 310.035 Non-Tenure Track Faculty CRR 310.035 – PROPOSED - CONTINUED

Clearly Defined Expectations for Each Position Specific qualifications for each NTT Faculty position and rank shall be determined by the department and/or college with the approval of the dean or director [5] and the provost. The workload requirements for NTT faculty members should be described in detail in advance. NTT teaching faculty appointments should clearly articulate teaching assignments and teaching loads including adjustments made for large classes or for multi-section courses. NTT research faculty appointments should specify the responsibilities, the duties, project descriptions, and expectations. Clinical/professional practice, librarian, and clinical department faculty appointments should clearly articulate the specific roles, responsibilities and performance expectations for delivering clinical/professional practice, librarian or clinical department faculty services. Extension appointments should describe the specific extension activities and outline relationships with the department.

Contract Length NTT faculty members are expected to have short-term relationships with the institution. NTT faculty appointments shall begin and terminate at specified dates. Typical NTT faculty appointments are for a period of one academic year, but they may be for longer or shorter periods, except that no single term appointment shall be for a period longer than three years. Such three-year appointments should be reserved for the highest qualified and highest performing NTT faculty members.

Guidelines for Performance Evaluation Each academic school, college, or unit [6], with approval from the deans or director [5] and the provost, should develop specific guidelines for the evaluation of performance. These guidelines should reflect the mission and needs of the school, college, and the university and cover only the primary area of the a NTT faculty appointment as well as the professional activities related to that primary responsibility.

All NTT faculty should be reviewed annually by the appropriate academic unit supervisor designated at the time of appointment. The standards for performance should be based on specific criteria outlined by the academic division in advance. The performance reviews should be a formal and documented process. Annual written evaluations should be provided to all the NTT faculty members.

Every NTT faculty member should compile a dossier of his or her activities, productivity, creativity and professional development to be reviewed on an annual basis. This material could also serve as the foundation for a dossier that could be used during the promotion process.

Reappointments NTT faculty contract lengths are short term, but there can be reappointments. NTT faculty reappointments should be based, in part, on the performance expectations communicated at the time of appointment by the academic unit supervisor with the concurrence of the dean or director [5] and the provost. Decisions to reappoint NTT faculty should generally be made in advance of the termination date. A NTT faculty member who will not receive a reappointment should be informed in writing with explanations at least three months in advance of the termination date unless documented extenuating circumstances exist.

Chapter 310: Academic Tenure Regulations 310.035 Non-Tenure Track Faculty CRR 310.035 – PROPOSED - CONTINUED

Promotion of NTT Faculty A NTT faculty member can be promoted to a higher rank during a reappointment by the request of the faculty member. The promotion to a new rank should consist of the same criteria that are described in the attributions and the expectations for each position and rank by the academic school, college, or unit [6]. Annual written evaluations should be included in the portfolio/dossier of the faculty member. The promotion process should be similar to the initial search process, and the faculty-based search committee should contain one or more NTT faculty member, at the promotable rank or above, and one or more tenured faculty member; if such NTT and tenured faculty members exist.

The decision on a promotion application of a NTT faculty appointment should not carry automatic rewards (apart from a change in title) or penalties from the academic school, college, or unit [6] provided, however, that a Librarian I considered for promotion to Librarian II during his or her sixth year of employment as a Librarian I and who is not promoted to Librarian II may be subject to automatic non-renewal.

Academic Freedom Prior to their stated termination dates, NTT faculty members have the same academic protections regarding academic freedom as tenured and tenure-track faculty.

Accordingly, adequate cause for dismissal prior to the stated termination date must be related directly and substantially to the faculty member's fitness or performance in their primary responsibilities as teacher, researcher, clinician, extension, librarian or clinical department faculty. More information is in CR&R 310.020 and related sections in the campus bylaws.

Participation in Faculty Governance The role of NTT faculty members in faculty governance shall be articulated by the individual campus within the limits of the University of Missouri Collected Rules and Regulations. The goal is to identify ways for the NTT faculty members to have a voice within their campus and academic school, college, or unit and to be involved in faculty governance where appropriate.

[3] Clinical Department faculty are titles limited to the Schools of Medicine at MU and UMKC.

[5] On campuses with no schools or colleges and, therefore, no deans, there is no requirement for approval by the dean.

Agenda

I. Call to Order and Roll Call - Steven Grant, Secretary II. Approval of September 18, 2014meeting minutes III. Campus Reports and Responses A. President’s Report, M. Bohner (5 mins) B. Administrative Reports i. R. Marley for C. Schrader (5 mins) ii. R. Marley (5 mins) C. Staff Council Report, S. Lewis (3 mins) D. Student Council – NO REPORT, R. Jacobsen (3 mins) E. Council of Graduate Students – NO REPORT, E. Ronchetto (3 mins) IV. Reports of Standing and Special Committees A. Rules, Procedures, and Agenda, M. Fitch (2 mins) B. Curricula, T. Schuman (5 mins) C. Information Technology / Computing, T. Vojta (5 mins) D. Tenure, B. McMillan for M. Davis (10 mins) E. Public Occasions, M. Zawodniok for S. Sedighsarvestani (2 mins) F. Personnel, L. Acar (5 mins)

V. Old Business

VI. New Business and Announcements A. Evaluation of Ability to Work VII. Adjourn

Agenda

I. Call to Order and Roll Call - Steven Grant, Secretary II. Approval of September 18, 2014 meeting minutes III. Campus Reports and Responses A. President’s Report, M. Bohner (5 mins) B. Administrative Reports i. R. Marley for C. Schrader (5 mins) ii. R. Marley (5 mins) C. Staff Council Report, S. Lewis (3 mins) D. Student Council – NO REPORT, R. Jacobsen (3 mins) E. Council of Graduate Students – NO REPORT, E. Ronchetto (3 mins) IV. Reports of Standing and Special Committees A. Rules, Procedures, and Agenda, M. Fitch (2 mins) B. Curricula, T. Schuman (5 mins) C. Information Technology / Computing, T. Vojta (5 mins) D. Tenure, B. McMillan for M. Davis (10 mins) E. Public Occasions, M. Zawodniok for S. Sedighsarvestani (2 mins) F. Personnel, L. Acar (5 mins) V. Old Business

VI. New Business and Announcements A. Evaluation of Ability to Work

VII. Adjourn

October 23, 2014

Evaluation of the Ability to Work Faculty Senate Meeting October 23, 2014

President's Report 101

Evaluation of the Ability of Work

• System claims we currently have no policy to force a person to get help unless that person is an immediate threat.

• System says such a case occurs maybe once a year system wide.

• Evaluation panel contains two faculty appointed by FS President, together with two administrators.

October 23, 2014 President's Report 102

Evaluation of the Ability of Work

• If Evaluation panel determines ability of work, process ends.

• If not, a coordinator, elected from a panel of 6 faculty members (appointed by Provost in coordination with FS President) continues the investigation, then Provost makes the final decision.

• “Worst case”: Application for long term disability benefits, leave of absence.

October 23, 2014 President's Report 103

Evaluation of the Ability of Work

• http://facultysenate.mst.edu/media/campus support/facultysenate/documents/misc/Eval uationoftheAbilitytoWork10%2002%2014.p

df

104 October 23, 2014 President's Report

Agenda

I. Call to Order and Roll Call - Steven Grant, Secretary II. Approval of September 18, 2014 meeting minutes III. Campus Reports and Responses A. President’s Report, M. Bohner (5 mins) B. Administrative Reports i. R. Marley for C. Schrader (5 mins) ii. R. Marley (5 mins) C. Staff Council Report, S. Lewis (3 mins) D. Student Council – NO REPORT, R. Jacobsen (3 mins) E. Council of Graduate Students – NO REPORT, E. Ronchetto (3 mins) IV. Reports of Standing and Special Committees A. Rules, Procedures, and Agenda, M. Fitch (2 mins) B. Curricula, T. Schuman (5 mins) C. Information Technology / Computing, T. Vojta (5 mins) D. Tenure, B. McMillan for M. Davis (10 mins) E. Public Occasions, M. Zawodniok for S. Sedighsarvestani (2 mins) F. Personnel, L. Acar (5 mins) V. Old Business VI. New Business and Announcements A. Evaluation of Ability to Work

VII. Adjourn