MINUTES OF THE FACULTY HANDBOOK REVISION COMMITTEE
Monday, September 24, 2007; Mason Hall D1 – 11:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.
Present: Kevin Avruch, Associate Director and Professor of Conflict Resolution, Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution; Lorraine Brown, Professor of English, College of Humanities and Social Sciences; Rick Coffinberger, Associate Professor of Business and Legal Studies, School of Management, Chair; Dave Harr, Senior Associate Dean, School of Management; Suzanne Slayden, Associate Professor of Chemistry and Biochemistry, College of Science.
Ford, Senior Associate Dean,
2.8.4 Procedures for Promotion and Tenure
· Departmentalized or non-departmentalized schools or institutes.
· Locus of tenure resides in university, not individual school, college, or institute.
· Second-level review committee must be elected but can include people outside college, school, or institute.
BOLD = new
yellow strikethrough = removed text.
The prescribed procedure for considering promotion and tenure cases is as follows:
The two-level review process is carried out as follows:
In departmentalized schools,
or colleges, or
are subdivided into departments,
the first level of review is departmental and the second is carried out by a
peer-elected committee of the school or college. The second level review
committee can include elected members from outside the school, college, or
2. In non-departmentalized local academic units (i.e., schools, colleges, institutes) which are subdivided into programs, provided that no program faculty in the unit is smaller than the smallest department of the University, the first level of review is carried out by the program faculty to which the candidate belongs and the second level of review is carried out by a peer-elected committee of the school, college, or institute. The second level review committee can include elected members from outside the school, college, or institute. In order to qualify to operate under the provisions stated in this paragraph, however, the aforesaid program faculties cannot exist solely to make personnel evaluations.
3. In local academic units which do
not qualify under the provisions stated in paragraphs (1) or (2), the first
level of review is carried out by the local academic unit (i.e., the school,
college, or institute) and the second level of review is carried out by a
committee consisting of two peer-elected representatives from each of the local
academic units required to operate in accordance with this paragraph. In the
event the number of participating local academic units is insufficient to
provide a committee of at least ten members, the committee will be brought to
full strength by the addition of faculty members elected by (but not necessarily
from) the Faculty Senate.
(new “3”) The
and (3), but it is not exempt from the requirement for
· Phrase “at collegiate level” seems redundant. Noted that SOL operates like a department, not a school.
· Do not need to add institutes as covered elsewhere.
BOLD = new
yellow strikethrough = removed text.
Schools and colleges without departments provide
simultaneously for faculty governance at the collegiate level (as described in Section 1.3.3) and at
the local level. In carrying out their function as local academic units, such
schools and colleges will operate analogously to departments
and institutes (as
described in Sections
184.108.40.206 and 220.127.116.11).
From Mason Care: GMU’s Faculty Practice Plan (revised draft 6/12/07):
“ Faculty Designation: A new faculty category called “Clinical faculty” shall be available for fulltime faculty who are employed by the University to support a unit practice plan. This group of faculty members is the clinical component to the University designation of “Research Professor,” in which the individual is supported on income generated by research grants and contracts. In these cases, the Clinical Faculty member would be expected to support all or a significant portion of his or her income by clinical practice.
Regardless of the type of appointment, all individuals in a faculty
practice plan are bound by the general employment requirements at
· Provost asked Dean Shirley Travis (CHHS) to come up with a plan; applies beyond CHHS. Plan not limited to clinical medical staff.
· Whether in or out of scope of employment (i.e., consulting) is the big question.
· Use of “clinical faculty” as local term in SOL and likely in other places in context of term faculty appointment; practitioner-oriented (training).
· How does it impact agreed-upon ratios for Term Faculty on multi-year contracts and as a total percentage of full-time instructional faculty? If this becomes a problem, then will need to renegotiate in the future.
· After some discussion, our only response in Faculty Handbook is to establish clinical faculty as a category; let local units fill it in.
Revision: 2.1.3 Other Types of Full-Time Fixed Term Appointments- 2007 Revision
BOLD = new text;
yellow strikethrough = removed text.
Full-time instructional, research, and clinical faculty on fixed-term, non-tenure track appointments are known as Term Faculty. Service in such positions cannot be applied to consideration for tenure, although a faculty member holding this kind of appointment can subsequently be considered for a tenure-track or tenured appointment.
Term faculty whose assignments focus primarily on teaching are appointed as instructional faculty. Term faculty whose assignments focus primarily on research are appointed as research faculty. Term faculty whose assignments focus primarily on clinical practice are appointed as clinical faculty. Some specific administrative or service functions may also be attached to the teaching, research, or clinical focus.
Term faculty may be offered single-year or multi-year contracts, with the maximum contract length being three years for initial appointments and reappointments at the same rank. Such contracts automatically expire at the end of the contract period, and although they may be renewed, there is no guarantee or right to reappointment from one contract to the next, whether single-year or multi-year.
Term faculty appointments include appropriate academic rank as judged by the appointing local academic unit and subject to the approval of the appropriate Dean and Provost. Multi-year term faculty must hold a terminal degree. Term faculty with a terminal degree are eligible for promotion in rank after six years of service. Multi-year contracts offered after promotion in rank may be for three or five years.
Teaching-oriented term faculty may hold one of the following titles: Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor. Research-oriented term faculty may hold one of the following titles: Research Instructor, Research Assistant Professor, Research Associate Professor, or Research Professor. Clinical-oriented term faculty may hold one of the following titles: Clinical Instructor, Clinical Assistant Professor, Clinical Associate Professor, or Clinical Professor.
Term faculty on single-year appointments whose permanent employment is with another organization should be modified by the title “Visiting.”
By agreement with the Board of Visitors and the Faculty Senate, a maximum of 35% of all Term Faculty may be on multiyear contracts and a maximum of 25% of all full-time Instructional Faculty may be Term Faculty.
2.1.3 Other Types of Fixed Term Appointments – 1994 Handbook Text
appointment for full-time employment for a fixed term, in which service is not
applied to consideration for tenure. The University can, but is not required
to, renew such appointments for additional terms. The total duration of these
appointments is normally five years, but may be longer if dictated by
circumstances and the needs of the University. In all cases, the formal
qualifications of faculty on this type of fixed-term appointment must be
commensurate with their rank and title. A faculty member holding
this type of appointment can subsequently be considered for a probationary or
tenured appointment; however,
prior service on a fixed-term appointment is not applied to
consideration for tenure unless
this is specified in the letter of appointment to probationary status.
Faculty on fixed term
appointments may hold one of the following titles: Instructor,
Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor. These titles may be modified by
the terms Research or Visiting or Clinical or Field. A visiting appointment
denotes someone whose appointment is temporary, usually for one academic year.
A clinical appointment denotes someone whose major responsibility is to
supervise students in clinical instruction, whether within the University or in
another setting. A field appointment denotes someone whose major responsibility
is to supervise student field work, which may be geographically removed from
the University, and who does not normally undertake class responsibilities.
Discussion: Inconsistencies between 2.7.2 Length of Probationary Period contrasted with 2.8.3 Procedures for Non-Reappointment:
· Historically there have been varying lengths of tenure-track contracts such as 3-3, 3-2-2 etc. Later contracts 3-3 to allow longer time to consider body of work.
· What happens when candidate does not seek tenure in sixth year? Should they be given automatic one-year extension? Most people anticipate 7th year as opportunity to find another position.
· GMU was a different place when Faculty Handbook written, now striving to be a research university. In most places, if decline to go up for tenure, what would happen? Hesitate to take away wiggle room, to change accepted practice.
· Need to expressly decline to stand for tenure in writing vs. implicit decline.
· Two interpretations: Terminal one-year contract: a faculty member not granted tenure in 6th year is clearly no longer tenure-track in 7th year; automatically devolves to term faculty. Expectation of different workload, even reduction in teaching load. Second interpretation: “Track” as based on that track, even if no longer on track – place holder, not taken literally. To leave discrepancies at local unit level – may receive course reduction in 7th year to help search for another position; an awful year for anyone going through it.
Revision: 2.8.3 Procedures for Non-Reappointment
BOLD = new
yellow strikethrough = removed text.
Individuals on tenure-track
appointments who are not to be reappointed will be notified in writing by the
President according to the following standards:
C. At least twelve months before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years of full-time service in the institution.
probationary faculty member in the
sixth year of service will be notified in writing on or before July 1 by the
President of a decision not to recommend for tenure. A faculty member not
tenure in the sixth year of tenure-track probationary service or who declines to be considered
for tenure in the sixth year will be entitled to a contract for one
additional academic year.
If a faculty member fails to be reappointed, the appeal procedure outlined in Section 2.9 may be used.
If the University is responsible for a failure to meet
the deadlines indicated in parts (A), (B), (C), and (D) of this section, the
faculty member will be issued a contract for one more semester. The faculty
must address a written request to the Provost for this additional contract within
fifteen days of receipt of the notice of non-reappointment or non-reelection.
Except under these circumstances, a tenure-track
member may not serve more than seven consecutive years on a tenure-track
Revision: 2.7.2 Length of Probationary Period
BOLD = new text;
strikethrough = removed text.
Candidates in their sixth year of service at George Mason
University on probationary appointment
must stand for tenure at that time if they
wish to retain their position beyond the seventh year after the expiration of the
current contract (see Section 2.8.3
for policy on notification to faculty terminated for failure to receive
tenure). Earlier consideration is possible. Faculty hired on probationary
appointments from other institutions will not normally be expected to serve a
six-year probationary period. Credit toward tenure may be given for prior
faculty service at other institutions.
2.1.2 Tenure-Track Appointment examined for revision, decided to retain as is; faculty member decides whether to go up for tenure vs. administrative need for something to proceed.
Incorporation of New Policies Passed by the Faculty Senate into the Faculty Handbook:
(links copied from Faculty Senate website Oct. 4, 2007)
Misconduct in Research and Scholarship Policy Approved by the BOV Oct. 3, 2007.
Tenure Clock Extension Policy May 2, 2007
Policy on Employment of Family Members April 4, 2007
University Copyright Policy April 4, 2007
Waived-Search Hire Policy Feb. 21, 2007
Other addendums to Faculty Handbook as distributed in printed text include:
· The Tenure Clock Exception to Standard Procedures (effective July 1, 2001)
· Also to incorporate other reasons for stopping of tenure clock such as Leave of Absence, family necessity beyond birth or adoption of a child, military service etc. Often involve details such as reduced pay; need for accurate administrative records.
· Policy Statement on Full-Time Instructional Faculty Teaching at Other Institutions (adopted by Faculty Senate at its meeting March 20, 2002)
· Procedures for Renewal (Reappointment)* for Sections 2.8.2 and 2.8.3 (effective July 1, 2001)
· Procedures for Appointment and Reappointment of Term Faculty (effective July 1, 2003) already incorporated.
To request support of Faculty Matters Committee; experienced faculty developed several policies listed above – history of development for inclusion in Faculty Handbook.
Need to monitor future inclusion of policies passed by Faculty Senate, particularly once Handbook revision completed and committee disbanded. Some policies go to BOV promptly; not official policy until approved by BOV. Need to written step-by-step procedure with timelines; suggested that Organization and Operations Committee (a standing committee of the Senate) be charged with this responsibility. Importance of communication with administration with respect to policies developed of which the Faculty Senate was not informed and had no opportunity for input.
Discussion: Changes to Research Misconduct Policy approved by the Faculty Senate at its September 5, 2007 meeting: adding statement “...provided no provisions in this policy contravene the current Faculty Handbook.” Right now this means 1994 edition of Handbook. Change made without guile; problem emerged that it sets up a dual process. Dual process would have made entire process unworkable. Grievance process (now in FH) has no due process. Parallelism: FH grievance process – other policies such as Sexual Harassment also exist. Certain things are not grievable.
Clerk, Faculty Senate