Site Index

[The following recommendations were approved by the Faculty Senate on May 7, 2001.]

Recommendations
from the Faculty Affairs Committee to the
Faculty Senate for Consideration at the May 7 Meeting

Recommended Changes in the Manual for Faculty Evaluation:
Part IV­Cumulative Review of Tenured Faculty

That the following sentence be added on page 36 at the end of Section C, Part 1on Review Process: All members of the peer review committee must be tenured faculty at the same or higher rank.

That the following words be added on page 37 under Responsibilities of the Department Head at the end of the fourth bulleted item: ,with all members of the peer review committee being tenured faculty at the same or higher rank.

That the words "by all three evaluating entities (the peer review committee, the department head, and the dean)" be inserted after the words "to be unsatisfactory" and that the words "a single" be struck and the words "the same year's" be inserted in their place in the phrase "in a single cumulative review" on page 38 under Unsatisfactory Performance in the second sentence which states, "A rigorous and thorough review shall be made of any faculty member whose performance is deemed to be unsatisfactory in a single cumulative review or in two consecutive annual performance-and-planning reviews."

That the words "by all other evaluating entities (the peer review committee and the department head) in the same year's cumulative review" be inserted after the words "unsatisfactory cumulative review" on page 38, Part 1 in the first sentence which states, "A Review Committee shall be convened by the department head within thirty days of the dean's concurrence with an unsatisfactory cumulative review or...."

That the words "by all three evaluating entities (the peer review committee, the department head, and the dean)" be inserted after the words "to be unsatisfactory" and that the words "a single" be struck and the words "the same year's" be inserted in their place in the phrase "in a single cumulative review" on page 35 under General Information, paragraph three, sentence two which states, "A faculty member whose performance is deemed to be unsatisfactory in a single cumulative review shall be reviewed further in accordance with the provisions concerning unsatisfactory performance."

That the words "by all three evaluating entities (the peer review committee, the department head, and the dean)" be inserted after the words "to be unsatisfactory" and that the words "same year's" be inserted before the word "cumulative" in the phrase "in the cumulative review" on page 37 under Responsibilities of the Department Head at the end of the next to last bulleted item which states, "Initiating the process described in the section Unsatisfactory Performance for any faculty member whose performance is deemed to be unsatisfactory in the cumulative review."

That the words "or in two consecutive annual performance-and-planning reviews" be struck from page 38 in the second sentence under Unsatisfactory Performance.

That the words "or a second consecutive unsatisfactory annual review" be struck from page 38 in Part 1 under Unsatisfactory Performance.

Recommended Change in the General Appeals Procedures in the Faculty Handbook for Referral to a Committee

That the words "after consultation with The Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs" be struck from the Faculty Handbook in Section 3.2 on General Appeals Procedures, Part 2 on Faculty Affairs Committee Channel in the second sentence which states, "When it has been determined after consultation with The Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs that the grievance lies within the jurisdiction of the Committee, the chairperson will discuss the grievance with the Committee to determine appropriate action."

Recommendation to Strengthen Senate Communication with the Faculty