Professional Responsibilities and Procedures Committee (PRPC)

Report to Faculty Senate Executive Committee (FSEC)

December 19, 2005

1. Electronic participation in tenure and promotion meetings. Code change approved in

December Faculty Senate meeting to define acceptable electronic participation for both tenure and promotion meetings (Attachment 1).

2. Ombudsperson attendance at field-based Extension personnel tenure advisory committee meetings. Addition code is proposed to allow an ombudsperson to participate electronically in the special circumstance of tenure and promotion advisory committee meetings for field-based Extension personnel (Attachment 2).

3. Exclusion from external review of lecturers. After review of the code defining the lecturer ranks [401.5.2(1) Attachment 3] draft code pertaining to outside review during promotion has been revised (Attachment 4) to reflect the fact that lecturers are appointed to teaching positions.

4. Senate committee meeting policy. In response to a charge from the Faculty Senate, code is proposed to assure appropriate meetings of Senate committees (Attachment 5).

5. Items requiring a charge from Faculty Senate to PRPC to draft code:

5.1 Concern that some colleges continue to utilize dean’s tenure advisory committees to review tenure packets although these committees are not specified as part of the tenure and promotion process. The initial response of PRPC is that if deans in large colleges need assistance from a college-based tenure advisory committee in reviewing candidates’ files, members of such a committee should report their recommendations in writing with a copy provided to the candidate, as is the case with other such reports [Code 405.7.1(2) and 405.7.2(2) Attachment 6].

5.2 Concern that “cessation of extramural funding” is listed as a reason for non-renewal of tenure-track faculty (Attachment 7). The initial response of PRPC is to add the qualifier “cessation of extramural funding that is required for a substantial portion of the salary support of the faculty member,”.

5.3 Concern that policy regarding extensions of the pre-tenure probationary period when no leave of absence is taken needs to be clearly stated in the code. The proposed addition to the code (Attachment 8) has been reviewed by the Provost.

5.4 Concern that the date of notification of non-renewal (particularly with regard to third year candidates) is the only information in the code relevant to date of separation from the university (Attachment 9). Date of separation resulting from non-renewal should be clearly stated in the code. A request for clarification of practice has been made to the Provost.

6. Items in review by PRPC:

6.1 Clarification of wording regarding annual review of role statements and role of tenure advisory committee in wording and revision of role statements

6.2 Concerns about unwritten expectations, guidelines or standards for tenure at all levels – tenure advisory committee, departmental, college and central committee