Show More


Personnel Policies

(Some sections by faculty action; others by administrative decision; and some sections developed mutually.)

DePauw University strongly affirms the principles of academic freedom and tenure as stated in the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, with 1970 Interpretive Comments of the American Association of University Professors. (See AAUP Redbook, 9th Edition, pp. 3-7.)

  1. Appointment

    The University appoints each faculty member to one of the following types of faculty positions each year. Each faculty member will be afforded the rights and privileges consistent with the position designated in that faculty member's letter of appointment and with other provisions of these Personnel Policies. Faculty members who work more than half time in a given fiscal year (which runs from July 1 to June 30) taking into account both faculty responsibilities and other responsibilities are eligible for certain benefits as set forth in the University’s Employee Handbook.

    (Article written by the administration. Last revised August 1, 2005.)

    1. Part-Time Faculty Positions
      1. Types
        1. Part-time Faculty Positions with Academic Rank. These positions carry titles of "Part-time Instructor," "Part-time Assistant Professor," "Part-time Associate Professor," or "Part-time Professor." “Part-time” in the title may be replaced by “Adjunct” at the discretion of the Vice President for Academic Affairs. “Part-time” in the title may be replaced by “Senior Professor” for those formerly tenured faculty members in the semesters in which they teach part-time after retirement. This category includes those appointed by the University who perform only part-time teaching duties as well as those employed full- or part-time for other duties at the University who are also assigned part-time teaching duties. Normally, these positions carry instructional duties (teaching, service and professional growth) corresponding to less than half the instructional workload of a full-time faculty member. The University will make such appointments in a department or several departments, in the School of Music, or in a program. Appointments are made for a specified period, typically either for a semester or an academic year, and there is no guarantee of continued employment beyond the period specified. These positions are subject to the provisions of the Personnel Policies Articles IA, IIA, VI, and VII (note: as the Personnel Policies are a document relating only to faculty members, the Sections cited apply only to thefaculty portion of an appointment). In addition, Article VII of the Personnel Policies applies to persons appointed to such positions only with regard to grievances concerning dismissal or release from faculty duties. Persons holding these types of position are subject only to the parts of the Personnel Policies cited in this paragraph.
        2. Part-time Faculty Positions with Nominal Rank. These positions carry titles of "with rank of Part-time Instructor," "with rank of Part-time Assistant Professor," "with rank of Part-time Associate Professor," or "with rank of Part-time Professor." “Part-time” in the title may be replaced by “Adjunct” at the discretion of the Vice President for Academic Affairs. This category includes those appointed by the University who perform only part-time teaching duties as well as those employed full- or part-time for other duties at the University who are also assigned part-time teaching duties. Normally, these positions carry instructional duties (teaching, service and professional growth) corresponding to less than half the instructional workload of a full-time faculty member. The University will make such appointments in a department or several departments, in the School of Music, or in a program. Appointments are made for a specified period, typically either for a semester or an academic year, and there is no guarantee of continued employment beyond the period specified. These positions are subject to the provisions of the Personnel Policies Articles IA, IIA, VI, and VII. (Note: as the Personnel Policies are a document relating only to faculty members, the Articles cited apply only to the faculty portion of an appointment.) In addition, Article VII of the Personnel Policies applies to persons appointed to such positions only with regard to grievances concerning dismissal or release from faculty duties. Persons holding these types of position are subject only to the parts of the Personnel Policies cited in this paragraph.
      2. Policies And Guidelines For Part-Time Faculty Members
        Part-time faculty members are recognized as members of the faculty and are accorded some of the rights and privileges pertaining to faculty status. However, part-time faculty may not be granted tenure as long as they are part-time,and they may not serve on the faculty's coordinating or executive committees, though they may be appointed to certain other regular and ad hoc committees and subcommittees (when specified). In principle, part-time appointments should meet emergency needs and certain on-going needs of the schools and departments which may require special expertise or routine assistance where tenure or term appointments may be unwarranted.

        Part-time teachers should be current in their credentials and expertise in their fields and they should pursue professional development in their fields.
        1. Appointment.
          Appointments shall be made by the President or the Vice President for Academic Affairs after consultation with the dean of the school, department chair, or program coordinator who requests such appointments. Each appointment should carry with it a designation of rank and should be for a specific semester or academic year. No announcement of courses to be staffed by part-time faculty members should be made without prior approval of the Vice President for Academic Affairs. Contracts stating conditions of appointment should be executed in all cases, and these should make provision for possible cancellation of classes and appointment based upon low registration. The contract should include a provision for compensation for preparation time for courses that have been cancelled by the University. Appointments or contingency plans should be made in time to allow adequate course preparation, and contracts should be executed as soon as possible after agreement has been reached. A person may receive reappointment at a higher rank consistent with degree status, teaching effectiveness, professional development, and quality of service.
        2. Compensation.
          The basis for compensation of part-time faculty members should reflect both prevailing market conditions and the levels of compensation paid to faculty members in tenure-track or term positions holding the same rank and having comparable experience. This basis for compensation as defined by the President of the University should be consistently applied; however, in cases of special need for tutorial courses, compensation may be below the defined standard. The standard for a minimum course enrollment should be the same for course taught by tenure-track, term and part-time teachers. Part-time teachers who must commute more than 50 miles (one way to the campus) should receive a travel allowance according to a policy defined by the President of the University.
        3. Continuation of Employment.
          The University, by employing a part-time faculty member once or repeatedly, is not undertaking a commitment to provide future employment. Nevertheless, a part-time teacher who has satisfactorily performed prior contractual obligations, should receive special consideration when the University next seeks a part-time faculty member with that specialty; and such part-time teachers should be informed as early as possible about the probability of continued or repeated employment
        4. Evaluation, Reappointment, Promotion.
          The dean of school, program coordinator, or the department chair is responsible for annual evaluation of part-time faculty members. Student opinion surveys shall be administered every semester; copies of these surveys will be sent to the faculty member, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the dean of school, program coordinator or department chair to be placed in the faculty member’s departmental personnel file. Peer evaluations, professional activities, service to the University and participation in faculty development should also figure in the annual evaluation. In determining the impact of the evaluation, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will consult with the department chair, program coordinator, or dean of school concerned, but, in view of the limited term of part-time teachers and of the fact that they are ineligible for tenure, the decision of the Vice President for Academic Affairs about compensation, continued employment, and promotion is final.
        5. Rights and Privileges.
          With regard to faculty governance, the faculty will define rights and privileges of part-time faculty members. Part-time teachers may apply for funds for professional development, including faculty development and travel funds according to guidelines determined by the Internal Grants Committee and the administration. They are also entitled to participate in other faculty development programs and activities. They should be given the same initial instruction and continuing information concerning academic and community affairs as is given to faculty members in tenure-track and term positions. Each should have access to the university's instructional services, including office space, telephone, secretarial aid and library and information technology support.

    2. Full-time Faculty Positions
      1. Types
        1. Full-time Faculty Positions with Academic Rank.Those appointed to such positions are granted such titles as "Instructor," "Assistant Professor," "Associate Professor," or "Professor.” Appointments made by the University to positions of this type are to departments or interdisciplinary programs which offer a major in the College of Liberal Arts or to the School of Music, although some duties or obligations may be specified in the letter of appointment as being within interdisciplinary programs or administrative areas. Ordinarily, the duties of someone appointed to this type of position include a full range of faculty responsibilities (teaching,service and scholarly and artistic work), though some duties may be replaced by administrative responsibilities at the discretion of the President. Normally, this status is granted only to those employed for at least one academic year. There are two subcategories of full-time faculty positions with academic rank: Tenure-track positions and term positions, as described below.
          1. Tenure-track Positions with Academic Rank
            1. Tenured positions. These positions are held without limit of time unless otherwise specified at the time of appointment. The time limit is subject to the provisions of Article VI in the Personnel Policies. These positions are subject to the provisions of the Personnel Policies Articles IBIIA & D, III, IV, VVI and VII. Persons holding these types of position are subject only to the parts of the Personnel Policies cited in this paragraph.
            2. Probationary tenure-track positions (also called probationary positions). Such positions are identified at the time of appointment by the University as those that may lead to tenure. Probationary tenure-track appointments are for the period of time specified in the faculty member's letter of appointment, and there is no guarantee of continued employment beyond the period specified. These positions are subject to the provisions of the Personnel Policies Articles IB, IIAB & C, III, IV, VVI and VII. Persons holding these types of position are subject only to the parts of the Personnel Policies cited in this paragraph.
          2. Term Positions with Academic Rank. Persons holding term appointments are not eligible for tenure. Recognizing the policies and principles of the AAUP regarding tenure, the University will not appoint a person to more than a total of six years in a term position, except that this limit shall not count years in which significant administrative duties make a person holding such a term position ineligible for tenure as specified in the letter of appointment. Term positions are for the period of time specified in the letter of appointment, and there is no guarantee of continued employment beyond that period. These positions are subject to the provisions of the Personnel Policies Articles IBIIA & E, III, IV, VVI and VII. Persons holding these types of position are subject only to the parts of the Personnel Policies cited in this paragraph.
        2. Full-time Term Positions with Nominal Rank. These positions carry titles of "with rank of Instructor," "with rank of Assistant Professor," "with rank of Associate Professor," or "with rank of Professor." These positions carry significant administrative duties and typically carry less than half of the normal instructional duties of full-time faculty members with academic rank. Persons holding term appointments are not eligible for tenure. The University makes such appointments for specified periods of time and there is no guarantee of continued employment beyond the periods specified. These appointments are made to a department, an interdisciplinary program that offers a major, the School of Music, or the library. These positions are subject to the provisions of the Personnel Policies Articles IB, IIAIIE (except that Librarians shall be subject instead to Article IIF), III, IVV, VI and VII. Persons holding these types of position are subject only to the parts of the Personnel Policies cited in this paragraph.
      2. Policies And Guidelines For Full-Time Faculty Members
        1. Recruitment

          Schools or departments are the primary agencies in recruitment to fill tenure-track and term positions (see Article IV.A.5.b (Search Committee) & c (Full-time Position Request Committee) in the Faculty By-Laws). After consultation with the Committee on Faculty the Vice President for Academic Affairs appoints search committees for term positions with significant administrative responsibilities and search committees for appointments with nominal rank. Such search committees will include representation from the relevant academic unit (department, school, program, or library).

        2. Notice of Terms

          Financial contracts are for one fiscal year only. In addition to this contract, a written statement of the precise terms of appointment shall be given to the appointee before the appointment is consummated.

        3. Time Limits and Renewal
          1. In the final year of the probationary period, the faculty member in a tenure-track position must be either granted tenure or given a one-year terminal contract.
          2. The conditions of possible renewal of term appointments shall be specified at the time of initial appointment.
        4. Probationary Period and Tenure

          Faculty members appointed to tenure-track positions are given a specified probationary period (six years or less as stated in the initial letter of appointment) and are normally considered for tenure in the final year of the probationary period. The initial letter of appointment shall specify the years of credit for prior experience elsewhere granted toward time to be served before review for tenure.

          1. A faculty member in a tenure-track position who is appointed for a seventh year is entitled to tenure unless the seventh-year contract specifies the appointment that year is a terminal appointment.
          2. The probationary period for a person appointed initially as associate professor shall normally be no longer than three years.
          3. Initial appointment at the rank of professor may carry tenure, but normally the appointment involves a probationary period of no longer than three years.
          4. If a faculty member in a term position at DePauw University is appointed to a tenure-track position, the years spent in the term appointment shall count in the probationary period unless the job descriptions are substantially different. At this time, a faculty member may negotiate for shortening the time in rank required for tenure and/or promotion based on prior service at other institutions.
          5. When the time served at DePauw is less than five years, prior service elsewhere may also be considered in the tenure review.
          6. In exceptional cases, and if a candidate has served at least five years in rank at DePauw or elsewhere, a recommendation for early tenure may be made at the time of the interim review.
        5. Qualifications for Rank and Promotion

          Appointments shall carry rank appropriate to the degree and experience of the appointee. The initial letter of appointment shall specify the years of credit for prior experience elsewhere granted toward time in rank for promotion.

          Faculty members in tenure-track and term appointments shall be eligible for consideration for initial rank and promotion according to the following schedule.

          1. Normally an instructor must have the M. A., M. S., or equivalent degree. Promotion to Assistant Professor will take effect immediately upon completion of requirements of the doctorate or the appropriate terminal degree for the field or discipline.
          2. Normally, an assistant professor must have the Ph.D. or equivalent terminal degree. (See Appendix 2: Terminal Degrees. Exceptions may be made for temporary appointments and when there are compensating factors.) When an assistant professor is reviewed for tenure, that review will also include a review for promotion according to the criteria in Section V; if tenure is granted without promotion, specific reasons for doing so must be made clear to all parties. When a tenured assistant professor is reviewed for promotion the criteria will be those of Section V. An assistant professor may not be reviewed for promotion prior to the tenure review. The review of an assistant professor for promotion should consider performance over all prior years of service at DePauw regardless of rank, and, if the faculty member has served fewer than five years at DePauw, evidence of immediately prior years of immediately prior service at other institutions also may be included at the discretion of the candidate so that the span of time considered in the performance review is at least five years.
          3. Normally, an associate professor must have the Ph.D. or equivalent degree. (See Appendix 2: Terminal Degrees. Exceptions may be made when there are compensating factors.) To be considered for timely promotion to Professor, an Associate Professor must have completed seven years in rank at DePauw unless this time is shortened by the initial letter of appointment. In cases of exceptional performance promotion may be granted earlier. When the time in rank at DePauw is less than seven years, prior service elsewhere may also be considered in the promotion review.
          4. Normally, a professor must have the Ph.D. or equivalent degree. (See Appendix 2: Terminal Degrees. Exceptions may be made when there are compensating factors.) There is no promotion beyond the rank of professor.

            For promotion of persons with term appointments with administrative responsibilities the time sequence may differ from this schedule owing to differences in continuity and extent of service and in patterns of career development. Consideration of these persons for promotion shall be conducted in a manner similar to that for faculty members in tenure-track and term appointments, except that bodies or persons other than the department personnel committee and the Committee on Faculty shall evaluate the administrative performance of the faculty member.

        6. Teaching duties

          The normal teaching duties of a full time member of the DePauw faculty shall be equivalent to twelve contact hours per week each semester and the whole range of attendant duties involved in teaching (preparation, evaluation, and reflection) necessary to support these twelve hours. Departments are responsible for determining, with the approval of the Vice President for Academic Affairs, what counts as a normal teaching load under this general guideline. Faculty members also must teach periodically in the Winter Term program. (See Article XXXII of the General Policies.)

  2. Periodic Evaluation (Article written and approved by the faculty)
    1. Annual Consultation

      For purposes of departmental self-study, the school dean or department chair shall confer annually with individual members of the school or department about their role in, and expectations for, the school's or department's mission in the University. With tenure-track faculty members between interim review and tenure decision, this consultation provides opportunity to review progress toward tenure. (See statement on department chairs.)

    2. Peer Observation of Faculty Members in Probationary Tenure-Track Positions

      See also Classroom Observation Policy for Faculty Members on Full-Time Term and Part-Time Appointments (See Article XIII of the General Policies.)

      In the first year, peer observations are voluntary. If done, observations shall be initiated and arranged by the probationary faculty member. After visiting a class or classes, the observing faculty member should arrange a meeting with the first-year faculty member to provide feedback. Any written materials provided to the first-year faculty member based on these class observations shall be under the sole control of the first-year faculty member.

      Peer observations are required after the first year of the probationary period. Required course observations shall be conducted by tenure-track faculty members who are appointed by the department chair in consultation with the DPC. Observers shall be from the probationary faculty member's department; in exceptional cases, as deemed appropriate by the chair, faculty members from outside the department may be chosen for this purpose. No single faculty member shall do a majority of the observations. At least half of the observations shall be done by tenured faculty. The timing of classroom observations shall be arranged by the department chair in consultation with the faculty member being observed. The courses observed should reflect the range and type of courses* normally taught by the observed faculty member. Each observation should cover an entire session of the class. Following the observation of each course, the observing faculty member shall provide both written and oral feedback in a timely fashion to the observed faculty member. The observer will also provide a copy of the written feedback to the chair and the Vice President for Academic Affairs to be placed in the observed faculty member's personnel file and in the decision file for interim and tenure reviews.

      In the second year, two courses shall be observed in each semester.

      In the third, fourth, and fifth years of the probationary period, a total of four courses (at least one course each year) taught by the probationary faculty member shall be observed.

      Probationary faculty can always request additional observations. Departments wishing to conduct more classroom observations than the required number shall do so only with the written consent of the probationary faculty member.

      If the probationary period is three years or fewer, peer observations will be required in the first year and will follow the process outlined for the second year.

      * In the sciences, labs may count for one of the course observations

      (Revised and effective November 3, 2003)

    3. Evaluation of Faculty Members in Probationary Tenure-Track Positions
      1. Following the end of each academic year of a faculty member's probationary period, he or she shall submit to the Dean of the school or the department chair, a written annual report providing a self-reflective evaluation of his or her performance for that year relative to the criteria for tenure. A written response to the faculty member shall be made by the dean or chair following the consultation and written report.
      2. At the end of each semester of the probationary period, faculty members shall arrange to have student opinion surveys conducted in each course, according to procedures approved by the Committee on Faculty and the administration. These surveys will be kept with the personnel file used by the Committee on Faculty and the Vice President for Academic Affairs. Copies will be sent to the faculty member, the chair of the department, and the Vice President for Academic Affairs.
      3. Requests for special leaves; reassigned time for research, service, and innovative teaching programs; and grants for research projects, equipment, and continuing education are reviewed by designated faculty committees and approved by appropriate university officers if they lead toward professional development of the faculty member and further the goals of the University.
      4. Interim evaluation. At the mid-point of the probationary period, an interim evaluation shall be made according to the following schedule.
        Probationary Period......Interim Review
        • 6 years..........3rd year
        • 5 years..........3rd year
        • 4 years..........2nd year
        • 3 years.........At the faculty member's option unless requested by the chair,
          the Committee on Faculty, or the Vice President for Academic Affairs
      5. Tenure evaluation. In the final year of the probationary period, the tenure evaluation and decision are made, according to stated procedures and criteria.
    4. Evaluation of Faculty Members in Tenured Positions
      1. (In mandating merit awards, the Board of Trustees at its 1994 October meeting authorized the administration to change or supersede this paragraph. For current administration policy on evaluation see the special notice distributed by the Vice President for Academic Affairs.) Every third semester, the tenured faculty member shall arrange to have student opinion surveys conducted in each course, according to procedures approved by the Committee on Faculty and the administration. These surveys shall be returned to the faculty member for his or her own personal development and improvement.
      2. Promotion evaluations (for associate professor and professor ranks) shall be carried out for candidates nominated for promotion to associate and full professor, using the stated guidelines, procedures, and criteria for promotion. (See below.)
      3. Requests for sabbatical and special leaves; released time for research, service, and innovative teaching programs; and grants for research projects, equipment, and continuing education are reviewed by designated faculty committees and approved by appropriate university officers if they lead to toward professional development of the faculty member and further the goals of the University.
    5. Evaluation of Faculty Members in Full-Time Term Appointments

      Such faculty shall be evaluated according to similar requirements for periodic evaluation as faculty members in tenure-track positions. Those having completed two years of service and being considered for reappointment to another term shall be evaluated in a manner similar to the interim review of faculty members in probationary tenure-track positions. (See II.C.4 above.)

      Those term positions that combine both instructional and administrative responsibilities shall be evaluated as follows:

      1. In their capacity as instructors or classroom teachers, these faculty shall be evaluated in a manner similar to the interim review of faculty members in tenure-track positions.
      2. In their administrative capacities, these faculty shall be evaluated by their superiors in accordance with their job descriptions.
      3. Requests for special leaves; reassigned time for research, service, and innovative teaching programs; and grants for research projects, equipment, and continuing education are reviewed by designated faculty committees and approved by appropriate university officers if they lead toward professional development of the faculty member and further the goals of the University.

       

    6. Evaluation of Librarians Serving in Renewable Term Faculty Positions.

      Effective with the 2014-15 Academic Year, librarians shall be evaluated as follows:

      - 3rd Year Term Review
      - 7th Year Term and Promotion to “with rank of Associate Professor” review
      - After completing seven years in “with rank of Associate Professor,” a librarian is eligible for timely promotion review to “with rank of Professor”
      - After promotion to “with rank of Professor,” librarians are no longer subject to a formal review

      The Vice President for Academic Affairs appoints a review committee consisting of the Dean of Libraries, all full-time professional librarians (excluding the candidate under review and those in their first year of service), and two faculty members from outside the library. The librarian develops a file for review in the same way as do full-time faculty members. The committee submits a report and recommendation to the President through the Committee on Faculty and the Vice President for Academic Affairs. The Dean of Libraries and associate director are reviewed in this manner to evaluate their work as librarians; the Vice President for Academic Affairs separately reviews their administrative performance.

      If a librarian has taught a credit-bearing course, the annual report shall include reflection about the teaching of that course which will be reviewed by the Vice President for Academic Affairs in consultation with the Committee on Faculty if necessary.

  3. Guidelines for Term, Interim, Tenure and Promotion Reviews

    (Article mutually agreed to by the administration and faculty)

    1. Reviews shall serve the programs and purposes of the University as well as the particular missions of the various departments and schools within it.
    2. Criteria, particularly in regard to tenure, shall be regarded as long-term standards, and changes in the criteria may be made only after full discussion, agreement between the Faculty and the President, and ample time for adjustments.
    3. Membership exclusion based on Conflicts of Interest as covered by the policy established by the Committee on Faculty and the Administration and published in the Personnel Policies section (Appendix 3) of the Academic Handbook apply. A faculty member may not serve on the Committee on Faculty or the Grievance Committee for cases involving a member of their department or school.
    4. Each review shall be considered first by the Personnel Committee of the school or department (membership of the Personnel Committee is described in Article IV.A.5a (Personnel Committee) of the By-Laws) and second by the Committee on Faculty and Vice-President for Academic Affairs (procedures for Personnel Committees and the Committee on Faculty are defined in Articles IV.C and IV.D, respectively). Final decisions for term, interim and tenure appointments and for promotions rest with the President.
    5. All term, interim, tenure and promotion recommendations and decisions shall be based entirely and exclusively upon material in the candidate’s decision file (as defined in Article IV.B) with respect to the criteria stated in Article V and only those additional criteria clearly stated in the job description and the initial letter of appointment or established later by mutual consent.
    6. The reliability and credibility of those submitting information to a decision file shall be tested or capable of being tested in a procedure which preserves the maximum possible openness of evidence consistent with the need to maintain the confidentiality of the deliberative process. In the interest of protecting this confidentiality, each member of a Personnel Committee and the Committee on Faculty shall agree, by virtue of his or her service, to honor the confidentiality of the process and not to breach the obligation of confidentiality absent a legal obligation to do so.
      1. Each individual or committee placing a document in the decision file must be identified in order for that document to be considered.
      2. Each individual submitting a letter to the decision file must sign the letter.
      3. Personnel Committees and the Committee on Faculty may redact the names of interviewees from the record placed in the decision file (but not from the Personnel Committee or Committee on Faculty minutes). Such interviews must be recorded via an audio or video recording device in a manner specified by the Committee on Faculty. The committee conducting the interview will place the evidence or a summary of the evidence in the decision file and forward the recording of the interview to the Coordinator of the Committee on Faculty for storage until the case is resolved.
    7. The candidate shall have opportunity, prior to the recommendation of the committees considering the evidence, to respond in person and in writing to all testimony and evidence present in the decision file. If a candidate submits a written request for an interview with the Personnel Committee or the Committee on Faculty by the published deadline to respond to the testimony and evidence, that committee must honor the request prior to making its recommendation.
    8. Candidates have the right to appeal recommendations of the Committee on Faculty as defined in Article VIII.
  4. Procedures for Term, Interim, Tenure, and Promotion Reviews
    1. Preliminary Steps
      1. By no later than the third week of April the Vice-President for Academic Affairs will notify the chair of the Committee on Faculty of all candidates scheduled for term, interim and tenure reviews during the following academic year. In addition, for tenure reviews the Vice-President for Academic Affairs will indicate whether the candidate is eligible for timely promotion as defined in Article I.B.2e.
      2. In August the chair of the Committee on Faculty will call for nominations for promotion to be considered during the upcoming academic year. Any faculty member may nominate a colleague for promotion; self-nominations also are acceptable.
      3. The chair of the Committee on Faculty and the Vice-President for Academic Affairs shall meet with candidates preparing decision files to explain the process, to provide a schedule of deadlines and to answer questions. This meeting must occur no later than 20 in-session days before the close of the decision file, according to the schedule of deadlines provided to the candidate (see Article VIII.J.1 for an explanation of in-session days).
      4. Candidates for tenure may petition COF for a change in deadlines no later than the last day of the semester preceding the semester in which the review is originally scheduled. Exceptions may be made to the deadlines for such requests only in extraordinary circumstances.
      5. The chair of the Committee on Faculty shall make known to the University community the names of persons being considered for term, interim and tenure reviews and those who have accepted nomination for promotion and request that those with relevant information submit letters to the decision files.
    2. Preparation of Decision File

      A decision file is constructed for each personnel case according to the stated procedures of the Committee of Faculty. These procedures shall be distributed to candidates and chairs of departmental or school Personnel Committees, in accordance with scheduled deadlines provided by the Chair of the Committee on Faculty and the Vice-President for Academic Affairs as explained in A.3 above. With the exception of materials generated during investigative mode (as defined in C.3 and D.3 below), materials submitted to the decision file after the established deadlines are placed in a buffer file which is not available to the Personnel Committee. The candidate will be afforded an opportunity to view all materials added to the buffer file and provide a response to them in a reasonable period of time. The following persons or committees may submit materials to the decision file subject to the published deadlines:

      1. The Vice-President for Academic Affairs may transfer to the decision file materials from the candidate’s personnel file deemed by the Vice-President for Academic Affairs to be relevant to the review as stipulated in Article IIIE. The Vice-President for Academic Affairs shall include in the decision file the following required materials for the review of faculty members not holding tenure as specified in Article II: the faculty member’s annual reports, the chair’s or dean’s responses to the annual reports, peer observations, and student opinion forms. The Vice President for Academic Affairs shall include in the decision file the following required materials for the review of faculty members for promotion not linked to a tenure review: the student opinion forms from the last eighteen full credit courses (or equivalent), or all courses taught during the review period, if fewer than eighteen.
      2. Individuals with knowledge of the candidate’s performance in the areas under review may submit to the decision file information about and evaluation of the candidate’s performance. Faculty members who so desire may also request, in writing to the Chair of the Personnel Committee, an interview with the departmental or school Personnel Committee. The Personnel Committee will notify the Chair of the Committee on Faculty of the request and conduct the interview as described in Article III.F.3.
      3. The departmental or school Personnel Committee may solicit other relevant information to be included in the decision file from the following:
        1. a representative sample of students who have direct knowledge of the candidate’s teaching effectiveness,
        2. colleagues in the University whom Personnel Committee members consider qualified to judge the candidate’s teaching effectiveness, professional competence, or service, and
        3. persons outside the University whom Personnel Committee members consider qualified to judge an appropriate aspect of the decision file. The Personnel Committee must notify the candidate that it intends to seek letters from persons outside the University. The committee must limit its solicitation to external evaluators agreeable to both the candidate and the committee.
      4. The candidate should provide documentation to be placed in the decision file according to the criteria stipulated in Article IIIE.
      5. The Committee on Faculty or the Personnel Committee in investigative mode may add material to the decision file.
    3. Personnel Committee Procedure

      The Personnel Committee shall follow a standard procedure approved by the Committee on Faculty, the administration, and the faculty. It shall include the following steps.

      1. All members of the Personnel Committee shall read the entire decision file before reaching a recommendation and preparing a report.
      2. The Personnel Committee shall meet as a group and discuss the evidence in the decision file prior to arriving at its recommendation.
      3. If the Personnel Committee finds that it cannot reach a recommendation based on the contents of the decision file it may request to enter investigative mode. Such requests must be addressed to the chair of the Committee on Faculty and must state the specific information needed to reach a recommendation, the anticipated source(s) of that information and why the Personnel Committee believes investigative mode is appropriate to obtain that information. The chair of the Committee on Faculty will determine if the request is appropriate within the context of the review and make a decision as to whether to authorize such an investigation. The Personnel Committee may appeal the chair’s decision to the Committee on Faculty, whose decision will then be final. If an investigative mode is approved, following procedures and a schedule provided by the Chair of the Committee on Faculty the Personnel Committee will
        1. suspend its evaluation of the decision file,
        2. gather the requested information and place the evidence or a summary of the evidence in the decision file,
        3. allow the candidate to respond to the material added to the decision file, and
        4. recommence its evaluation of the decision file.
      4. In preparing its report the Personnel Committee shall detail its procedures, including actions taken to place evidence in the decision file prior to its closure and any investigations completed during investigative mode. In addition, the Personnel Committee will:
        1. In the case of a term review, make an assessment about the evidenced strengths and concerns with regard to the candidate's job performance, clearly stating areas of desirable or necessary improvements and a recommendation regarding an extension of the term, subject to the needs of the department or school.
        2. In the case of an interim review, make an assessment about the evidenced strengths and concerns of the candidate, clearly stating areas of desirable or necessary improvement.
        3. In the case of tenure or promotion, make a recommendation, stating clearly the evidence and the reasons for the recommendation.
        4. The Personnel Committee may make a recommendation for early tenure or promotion even though the candidate has not been nominated in accordance with the procedure given in Article IV.A.2.
          A consensus recommendation is strongly encouraged. However, if after prolonged discussion the Personnel Committee is unable to reach consensus, then the members will write and sign two or more separate reports, each stating the reason(s) for their recommendation. All members of the Personnel Committee shall have access to all reports, which together comprise the Personnel Committee’s report.
      5. The Personnel Committee’s report shall be sent to the Committee on Faculty and the Vice-President for Academic Affairs who will release it to the candidate.
    4. Committee on Faculty Procedure

      The Committee on Faculty shall meet with the Vice-President for Academic Affairs, and make a recommendation to the President for each candidate reviewed. In reaching its recommendation the Committee on Faculty shall follow a standard procedure that includes the following steps.

      1. The Committee on Faculty will interview any faculty member who has requested such an interview in a signed writing to the Chair of the Committee on Faculty according to the established schedule. The committee will complete the interview as described in Article III.F.3 and provide the candidate with a summary of the interview and an opportunity to respond.
      2. All members of the Committee on Faculty will read the report from the Personnel Committee and any response from the candidate. All members of the Committee on Faculty will read at least the core decision file before making recommendations. File guidelines established by COF clarify the core decision file includes everything except the scholarly and artistic work appendix.
      3. If the Committee on Faculty finds that it cannot make a recommendation it may proceed into investigative mode during which it can request information from the Vice-President for Academic Affairs, conduct interviews with any member of the university community whom the Committee on Faculty believes to have relevant information, request an evaluation by a person outside the university who is qualified to judge an appropriate aspect of the decision file (such individuals must be acceptable to both the candidate and the Committee on Faculty) or collect additional documentation from the candidate, other individuals or University offices. The Committee on Faculty will place the additional evidence or summary of the evidence into the decision file and provide the candidate with an opportunity to respond before resuming deliberations.
      4. The Committee on Faculty and the Vice-President for Academic Affairs will present their tentative conclusions to each other and discuss their respective reasons with openness to any opposing points of view.
      5. If the PC report is unanimous and positive, and if the evidence in the core decision file is sufficient for the Committee on Faculty to reach a positive recommendation, COF may proceed to examine the buffer file (see section IV.D.6 below) and finalize the recommendation. However, if even a minority of the Committee on Faculty reaches a negative conclusion based on the core file or if the PC report is not unanimously positive, all members of the Committee on Faculty must return to the decision file and read the appendices before COF examines the buffer file (see section IV.D.6 below) and finalizes the COF recommendation.
      6. Before reaching a final recommendation, the Committee on Faculty will examine the contents of the buffer file. Materials deemed relevant to the case will be transferred to the decision file.
      7. In preparing its report the following options are available to the Committee on Faculty.
        1. If the report of the Personnel Committee is judged inadequate, the Personnel Committee may be asked to reconsider and resubmit its report, at which time deliberation and decision recommence.
        2. If the consensus recommendation from a Personnel Committee is judged valid, the Committee on Faculty shall prepare a report endorsing the Personnel Committee’s recommendation.
        3. If the report from a Personnel Committee contains two or more separate recommendations, the Committee on Faculty shall determine which recommendation is valid (if either) and prepare a report endorsing that recommendation.
        4. If the Committee on Faculty does not concur with the Personnel Committee’s recommendation(s) it shall state its reasons and cite evidence in the decision file to support its own recommendation.
        5. The Committee on Faculty may make a recommendation for early tenure or promotion even though the candidate has not been nominated in accordance with the procedures described in Article IV.A.2.
      8. The chair of the Committee on Faculty shall communicate the action of the Committee on Faculty to the President, who may meet with the Committee on Faculty for further clarification.
      9. If the President is considering a decision against the recommendation of the Committee on Faculty, he or she shall communicate this fact and the underlying reasons to the Committee on Faculty. The Committee on Faculty shall respond to the President regarding the President’s tentative decision and reasoning.
      10. The President shall inform the candidate of the decision and reasoning in writing and share with the candidate the Committee on Faculty’s recommendation.
  5. Criteria for Decisions on Faculty Status (from 2004-05)

    (Article mutually agreed to by administration and faculty. Amended September 13, 2004. This change will take effect in the fall of 2004 for those faculty members hired to begin teaching in the 2004-05 academic year; for current faculty members it will take effect after their next satisfactory promotion review. See "Criteria for Decisions on Faculty Status (prior to 2004-05).")

    Decisions should express judgments about a candidate's merit using the principles of equity, which considers each individual faculty member in terms of his or her unique talents, abilities, and accomplishments in relation to the criteria for personnel decisions, and quality. A large amount of activity per se does not necessarily contribute to a superior academic environment. Criteria for possible dismissal (Article VI. B. below) are also applicable to decisions on faculty status.

    • Term review.Required: Strong teaching during the period under review, promise of accomplishment in the scholarly and artistic work category, and service. Candidates who have not yet completed the terminal degree must show clear progress toward completion of the terminal degree for a satisfactory review as noted in Appendix 2 of the Personnel Policies.
    • Interim review.Required: Strong teaching during the probationary period, promise of accomplishment in the scholarly and artistic work category, and service. Candidates who have not yet completed the terminal degree must show clear progress toward completion of the terminal degree for a satisfactory review as noted in Appendix 2 of the Personnel Policies.
    • Tenure decision.Required: Strong teaching, including teaching in the school or department in which tenure will be granted, demonstrable achievement or unquestioned promise of accomplishment in the scholarly and artistic work category; and adequate contributions in service.
    • Promotion to associate or full professor. Required: continued strong teaching; significant achievement or contribution in either scholarly and artistic work or service and at least adequate performance in the other category.
    1. A. Teaching
      Strong teaching is essential for a positive personnel decision. Candidates are required to provide broad-based and representative evidence of strong teaching.
      Candidates are required to show evidence in all of the following:
      1. Professional Competence Completion of a terminal degree in the field (see Appendix 2: Terminal Degrees). Continued professional mastery of content, critical scholarship, and methodologies of teaching in areas of responsibility. Evidence may include: professional activities to stay current in the field combined with evidence of use of such current materials in courses; attendance at meetings or workshops on content or teaching methodologies, combined with evidence of use of that material and experience.
      2. Content and rigor
        1. Content: evidence to be drawn from course goals, syllabi, examinations and assignments, course materials, such as handouts, primary and secondary textual sources, textbooks and other course materials. Such evidence can also include meetings/workshops attended relative to the content of the courses taught. The evidence should demonstrate that courses meet standards appropriate to the level of the course.
        2. Rigor: evidence to be drawn from quizzes, tests, examinations, paper assignments, marked and graded material, distribution of grades as submitted to department chairs by the Office of Institutional Research, etc.. The evidence should demonstrate that the course requirements are sufficiently challenging for the level of the course.
      3. Teaching methods:evidence to be drawn from teaching philosophy, course goals, syllabi, examinations and assignments, other course materials, etc.; evidence should demonstrate that teaching methods are appropriate, given the contexts of the discipline, topic, and specific characteristics of a given class. Such evidence can also include meetings/ workshops attended related to teaching methods
      4. Effectiveness: evidence to be drawn from student opinion surveys, peer observations, annual reports, etc.; evidence should demonstrate that the candidate has been successful in implementing her or his teaching methods, has treated students with professional fairness and integrity, and has established relations with students that are conducive to the learning process.
    2. B. Scholarly and Artistic Work
      Scholarly and artistic work shall be given full consideration in personnel decisions. In scholarship we recognize all categories identified by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching: the scholarship of discovery, the scholarship of integration, the scholarship of application, and the scholarship of teaching. [Boyer, Ernest L. 1990. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate, Chapter 2. Princeton, NJ: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.]
      Candidates are required to show:
      1. Continued development as a scholar or artist in one's broadly defined field(s) or discipline(s). The evidence might include participation in learned societies, professional organizations, and attendance at conferences, as well as supporting documents in area 2 and similar activities.
      2. Between the following areas (2.a. and 2.b.), more activity in one category may compensate for less in another, but not to the exclusion of activity in either category.
        1. Intellectual liveliness outside the university:
          1. Scholarly outreach. Evidence might include publications, presentations at conferences, public performances and exhibits outside of DePauw, writing grant proposals for external funding, scholarship related to teaching and other activities of a similar nature.
          2. Professional contributions. Evidence might include organizing conferences or competitions, reviewing manuscripts and grant proposals, giving master classes outside of DePauw, and scholarly work for publication houses, institutes, and governmental agencies, etc. Evidence related to professional service should not be included in this area (See C.3. below.)
        2. Intellectual liveliness within the university community. Evidence might include workshops, participation at university, school, or departmental forums, panel discussions and presentations, on-campus recitals.
    3. C. Service
      Adequate service to both the department (or school) and the university is necessary for positive personnel decisions. In establishing a record that goes beyond adequate service the candidate is free to provide further evidence of service to the department (or school) or to the university or to provide evidence for service to the profession. The three areas of service are defined below. More activity in category 3 can compensate for less activity in categories 1 and 2, but not to the exclusion of departmental and university service.
      1. Departmental Service.Evidence might include effective participation in departmental governance, including committee assignments; effective advising of majors and minors; participation in curriculum and course development; resource acquisition, laboratory supervision, maintenance of office and lab equipment or musical instruments; and similar activities.
      2. University Service.Evidence might include effective participation in university governance, including committee assignments; effective advising of first year students and/or student organizations related to the academic life; effective work in developing interdisciplinary or general education programs; administrative assignments and appointments; participation in community outreach programs affiliated with the university; and similar activities that show a commitment to the good of the university.
      3. Professional Service. Beyond scholarly activities directly related to participation in learned societies, a candidate could supply evidence of service to professional societies, journals, institutes, governmental agencies, and the like. Evidence might include chairing conference sessions, being a juror at competitions, visiting schools for accreditation reviews, holding office in professional societies or foundations, and similar service activities which are related to the individual's fields as either a scholar or teacher.
    4. D. Librarians serving as renewable term faculty are evaluated in the areas of teaching, professional development, and service, with the following difference: in the evaluation of teaching, the evaluation has a primary focus on library effectiveness. Librarians may also show evidence related to teaching (Article V. A), but they must show evidence in at least two of the following areas of library effectiveness:
      1. reference services for the university community;
      2. development of library collections and information resources;
      3. provision of bibliographic organization and control over library collections;
      4. instruction in the use of information resources and services including workshops, library and information instruction sessions, and research consultations;
      5. creation of instructional materials and tools on the use of information resources and services including catalogs, bibliographies, and indexes.
  6. Criteria for Decisions on Faculty Status (prior to 2004-05)

    (Article mutually agreed to by administration and faculty. Includes clarifications adopted by vote of the faculty and agreed to by administration, April 5, 2004. For faculty members hired to teach full time prior to 2004-05, this Article will be in effect until after the first satisfactory promotion review following August 2004. See "Criteria for Decisions on Faculty Status (from 2004-05)".)

    Decisions should express judgments about a candidate's merit using the principle of equity, which considers each individual faculty member in terms of his or her unique talents, abilities, and accomplishments in relation to the criteria for personnel decisions, and quality. A large amount of activity per se does not necessarily contribute to a superior academic environment. Criteria for possible dismissal (Article VI. B. below) are also applicable to decisions on faculty status.

    • Interim review. Required: good teaching during the probationary period, satisfactory professional growth, and service.
    • Tenure decision. Required: good teaching, including teaching in the school or department in which tenure will be granted, demonstrable achievement or unquestioned promise of accomplishment in the professional development category; and adequate contributions in service.
    • Promotion to associate or full professor. Required: continued good teaching; significant achievement or contribution in either professional growth or service since the initial appointment to the preceding rank and at least adequate performance in the other category.

    A. Teaching

    Good teaching is essential for a positive personnel decision. Candidates are required to provide broad-based and representative evidence of good teaching.

    Candidates are required to show evidence in all of the following:

    1. Content and rigor
    a. Content: evidence to be drawn from course goals, syllabi, examinations and assignments, course materials, such as handouts, primary and secondary textual sources, textbooks and other course materials. The evidence should demonstrate that courses meet standards appropriate to the level of the course.

    b. Rigor: evidence to be drawn from quizzes, tests, examinations, paper assignments, marked and graded material, distribution of grades as submitted to department chairs by the Office of Institutional Research, etc. The evidence should demonstrate that the course requirements are sufficiently challenging for the level of the course.

    2. Teaching methods:evidence to be drawn from teaching philosophy, course goals, syllabi, examinations and assignments, other course materials, etc. The evidence should demonstrate that teaching methods are appropriate, given the contexts of the discipline, topic, and specific characteristics of a given class.

    3. Effectiveness: evidence to be drawn from student opinion surveys, peer observations, annual reports, etc.; evidence should demonstrate that the candidate has been successful in implementing her or his teaching methods, has treated students with professional fairness and integrity, and has established relations with students that are conducive to the learning process.

    B. Professional Growth

    Continued professional growth is necessary for a positive personnel decision. Candidates are required to show:

    1. Continued development of professional competence in the field(s) or discipline(s). The evidence might include participation in learned societies, professional organizations, course development based on scholarly activity, and attendance at conferences; also from supporting documents in area 2 and similar activities. The evidence can be used to demonstrate development as a researcher (performer) or teacher, or both.

      Between the following areas (2.a. and 2.b.), more activity in one category may compensate for less in another.

    2. Intellectual liveliness

      a. Intellectual liveliness outside the university:

      i. Scholarly outreach. Evidence might include publications, presentations at conferences, public performances and exhibits outside of DePauw, writing grant proposals for external funding, and other activities of a similar nature.

      ii. Professional contributions. Evidence might include organizing conferences or competitions, reviewing manuscripts and grant proposals, giving master classes outside of DePauw, and scholarly work for publication houses, institutes, and governmental agencies, etc. Evidence related to professional service should not be included in this area (See C. 3. below.)

      b. Intellectual liveliness within the university community: Evidence might include workshops, participation at university, school, or departmental forums, panel discussions and presentations, on-campus recitals, teaching roundtables etc.

    C. Service

    Effective service to the department (school) or the university is necessary for positive personnel decisions. Evidence is not required in all categories, and unless there are special departmental requirements or responsibilities stated in the job description, a candidate is free to decide what area and categories of service should be documented to show effective service.

    1. Departmental Service. Evidence might include effective participation in departmental governance, including committee assignments; effective advising of majors and minors; participation in curriculum development; resource acquisition, laboratory supervision, maintenance of office and lab equipment or musical instruments; and similar activities.
    2. University Service. Evidence might include effective participation in university governance, including committee assignments; effective advising of first year students and/or student organizations related to the academic life; effective work in developing interdisciplinary or general education programs; administrative assignments and appointments; and similar activities that show a commitment to the good of the university.
    3. Professional Service. Beyond scholarly activities directly related to participation in learned societies, a candidate could supply evidence of service to professional societies, journals, institutes, governmental agencies, and the like. Evidence might include chairing conference sessions, being a juror at competitions, visiting schools for accreditation reviews, holding office in professional societies or foundations, and similar service activities which are related to the individual's fields as either a scholar or teacher.

    D. Librarians serving as renewable term faculty are evaluated in the areas of teaching, professional development, and service, with the following difference: in the evaluation of teaching, the evaluation has a primary focus on library effectiveness. Librarians may also show evidence related to teaching (see Article V. A), but they must show evidence in at least two of the following areas of library effectiveness:

    1. reference services for the university community;
    2. development of library collections and information resources;
    3. provision of bibliographic organization and control over library collections;
    4. instruction in the use of information resources and services including workshops, library and information instruction sessions, and research consultations;
    5. creation of instructional materials and tools on the use of information resources and services including catalogs, bibliographies, and indexes.
  7. Standards and Procedures for Termination: Release, Dismissal and Non-reappointment

    (Article mutually agreed to by the faculty and administration. Updated October 2004.)

    The President may not terminate or otherwise punish a faculty member for exercising his or her academic freedom or for exercising freedoms such as speech, assembly, and association as they would apply in the federal constitutional context. Terminations should represent deliberate exercise of professional judgments in the particular institutional circumstances. Such terminations fall into three categories: Release, dismissal, and non-reappointment before the end of a specified period of employment, as detailed below.

    A. Release

    This termination is based on factors outside the control of the faculty member who is released, and occurs prior to the end of a faculty member's appointment. The action takes effect at the end of the semester during which the release occurs.

    1. Bases for Release:

      (a) Release of a tenured faculty member must be based on either: (1) bona fide financial exigency or (2) discontinuance of program, school or department.

      (b) Release of any other faculty member from faculty responsibilities must be based on one or more of the following reasons: (1) substantial change in the institution's academic program requiring a change in the job description under which the faculty member was hired; (2) bona fide budgetary constraints requiring elimination of the faculty member's position; or (3) discontinuance of program, school, or department.

       

    2. Procedure for Release

      The President may release a faculty member after consulting with the Vice President for Academic Affairs and either the chair of the department or the dean of the school of the faculty member affected. The faculty member has the right of appeal as outlined in the Article IX of the Personnel Policies.

    B. Dismissal

    The President may dismiss any faculty member prior to the stated end of the faculty member’s appointment for one or more of the reasons stated below. A dismissal may take effect either during a semester or at the end of a semester as determined by the President.

    1. Bases for Dismissal: Dismissal must be based on one or more of the following:

      (a) dishonesty in teaching or research;

      (b) substantial and clear neglect of duty including violation of stated University policies;

      (c) personal conduct which substantially impairs the individual's fulfillment of institutional responsibilities;

      (d) conviction of a felony or of a serious misdemeanor of a type that reflects adversely on the University or on the faculty member's ability to perform the responsibilities of his or her University position;

      (e) performance which falls distinctly below the standards which the University may justly expect in terms of the criteria for personnel decisions on tenure and promotion (Article V of these Personnel Policies); or

      (f) inability to perform the duties of the appointment due to sustained or recurrent incapacity without expectation of timely resumption of duties.

       

    2. Procedure for Dismissal

      A recommendation to the President for dismissal may arise as part of the personnel review process outlined in Article IV of the Personnel Policies. Alternatively, a recommendation to the President for dismissal may result from a complaint registered with or by the Vice President for Academic Affairs following procedures outlined in Article VI. D below.

    C. Non-reappointment before the end of a term appointment or before the end of the probationary period of a tenure-track position. The President may decide not to re-appoint a faculty member prior to the stated end of a faculty member's term of employment for one or more of the reasons stated below. The action will take effect no sooner than at the end of the semester in which the non-reappointment decision occurs.

    1. Bases for Non-reappointment

      Non-reappointment before the end of a specified period of employment must be based upon one or more of the following: (a) failure to meet conditions set forth in the letter of appointment (for example, failure to attain a terminal degree by a specified date); (b) unsatisfactory performance; or (c) any of the bases for dismissal stated in sections B.1a-B.1d (not serious enough to warrant immediate dismissal).

       

    2. Procedure for Non-reappointment

      A recommendation to the President for non-reappointment may arise as part of the personnel review process outlined in Article IV of the Personnel Policies. Alternatively, a recommendation to the President for non-reappointment may result from a complaint registered with or by the Vice President for Academic Affairs following procedures outlined in Article VI. D below.

    D. Procedures for Dismissal or Non-reappointment Based on Complaints

    1. All complaints that are sufficiently serious to warrant the possibility of dismissal or non-reappointment are to be directed to the Vice President for Academic Affairs who will conduct a preliminary investigation, including consultation with the faculty member who is the subject of the complaint. The Vice President for Academic Affairs will reach a conclusion as to whether the complaint is without merit, warrants only minor sanction, or justifies further investigation.

       

    2. If the Vice President for Academic Affairs decides that further investigation is warranted, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will inform the Committee on Faculty which will conduct a hearing according to its established procedures (see Appendix A of the Personnel Policies section of this handbook) and provide its recommendation to the President.

       

    3. The President may dismiss a faculty member or not reappoint a faculty member before the end of the specified period of employment after receiving the recommendation made by the Committee on Faculty after it completes its hearing process. If the Committee on Faculty should fail to provide its advice to the President in accordance with the schedule established in its hearing procedures following a request by the Vice President for Academic Affairs for it to hold a hearing, the President may notify the Committee on Faculty in writing of the President's intention to act without its advice. The President may then proceed to act without the advice of the Committee on Faculty if the Committee's recommendation is not received within five (5) in-session days (as defined in Article VIII. J.1) of the date the President sends notification of intent to act to the Committee.

       

    4. All decisions about release of information about the decision shall rest with the President.

    E. Faculty members who have been released, dismissed, or not re-appointed have an opportunity for reconsideration or review in accordance with the Faculty Grievance Procedure described in Article VIII of the Personnel Policies.

    F. The President may suspend a faculty member effective immediately, with pay, pending conclusion of hearing proceedings described in these Personnel Policies.

    G. In the event of release, dismissal, or non-reappointment before the end of a stated term, salary in addition to that earned as of the date of notice of the action shall be paid according to the following schedule, notwithstanding the effective date of the release, dismissal, or non-reappointment:

    1. Faculty members in their first academic year of service shall receive three months' salary from the date of notice of the release, dismissal, or non-reappointment unless notice of action that is to be effective at the end of the academic year is given by March 1, in which case the faculty member shall receive salary through the end of the academic year.

       

    2. Faculty members in their second year of academic service shall receive six months' salary from the date of notice of the release, dismissal, or non-reappointment unless notice of action that is to be effective at the end of the academic year is given by the prior December 15, in which case the faculty member shall receive salary through the end of the academic year.

       

    3. Faculty members who have more than two years of academic service shall receive 12 months’ salary from the date of notice of the release, dismissal, or non-reappointment.
  8. Reconsideration and Review in Release, Dismissal, and Non-Reappointment Cases

    (Article mutually agreed to by administration and faculty)

    Even with the best standards and procedures, faculty who have been released, dismissed, or not reappointed may believe that they have been improperly judged or unfairly treated and may wish a reconsideration or review of the case. Such faculty shall have such an opportunity, and the reconsideration or review shall be in accordance with the faculty grievance procedure.

  9. Faculty Grievance Process

    (Article written and approved by the faculty. Revised February, 2005)

    Note: Full descriptions of the following areas are available as follows:

    • Section H: Grievance Committee Membership and Selection
    • Section I: Conflicts of Interest
    • Section J: Committee and Panel Operating Rules
    • Section K: Grievance Procedure Interpretation

    A. Overview of the Faculty Grievance Process.The Faculty Grievance Process provides eligible faculty members an opportunity for review of recommendations of the Committee on Faculty (COF) regarding their employment with the University, or of other personnel decisions such as changes in job status or responsibilities that directly relate to their employment with the University. The Grievance Committee operates through three-member Mediation Panels and five-member Appeals Panels, on which its members serve. Mediation Panels attempt to facilitate mutually agreeable resolutions of matters brought before them. Appeals Panels review COF recommendations and direct the COF to reconsider a recommendation if circumstances warrant.

    B. Persons Covered by the Faculty Grievance Process

    1. Full-Time Faculty Members.This Article applies to all full-time faculty members (i.e., those holding positions described in Article I.B.1 of the Personnel Policies.)

       

    2. Part-Time Faculty Members. This Article applies to part-time faculty members (i.e., those holding positions described in Article I.A.1 of the Personnel Policies) only with regard to grievances concerning release or dismissal from faculty responsibilities. Any other type of complaint by a part-time faculty member must be taken up directly with the Vice President for Academic Affairs whose decision is final.

    C. Petition for COF Review of Actions That Were Not Previously the Subject of a COF Recommendation.A faculty member may request COF review of a certain personnel action that was not previously the subject of a COF recommendation under the following procedure.

    1. Types of Actions Subject to Review
      a. Full-Time Faculty. Full-time faculty members as defined in section B.1 above may request review of personnel decisions that directly relate to that faculty member's employment with the University that were not the subject of a COF recommendation, such as changes in job status and responsibilities.
      b. Part-Time Faculty. Part-Time Faculty members as defined in section B.2 above may request COF review only of decisions releasing or dismissing them from faculty responsibilities.

       

    2. Procedure for Requesting COF Review
      a. Written Request. A petition requesting COF review must be in writing and include a specific description of the decision the Petitioner is asking the COF to review, along with copies of all other documents the Petitioner wishes the COF to consider regarding the subject of the grievance.
      b. Deadline for Request. The request for COF review must be submitted within 30 days after the Petitioner is advised of the decision that is the subject of the Petitioner's request. (See Calculation of Time, section J.1.)

       

    3. COF Discretion to Grant or Deny Review.The COF has discretion to grant or deny review in response to requests made under section C.2. If the COF denies review, the Petitioner's opportunity for review under this Article is concluded.

       

    4. COF Response and Review
      a. Deadline for Response. The COF has five days from the receipt of the Petitioner's request to respond to the Petitioner in writing, stating whether or not it will grant review.
      b. Deadline for Review. If the COF decides to grant review, it then has 10 days from the date of its decision to grant review to issue a written recommendation.

    D. Petition for COF Review of a COF Recommendation.A Petitioner may request review of a COF recommendation, including a recommendation issued under section C.4 above, under the following procedure.

    1. Consultation with Department Chair or Dean and Vice President for Academic Affairs.The Petitioner is encouraged, although not required, to consult with his or her Department Chair or Dean and the Vice President of Academic Affairs regarding the challenged recommendation before requesting COF review.

       

    2. Deadline for Petition.The Petitioner must submit to COF a written petition for review of its recommendation within 10 days of being informed in writing of the recommendation.

       

    3. Subjects of Mandatory and Discretionary Review.Upon timely written request, the COF must review recommendations regarding tenure or reappointment. Normally, in cases involving promotion, the COF will not review recommendations unless there has been a prolonged denial of promotion. The COF has discretion to deny review of other types of recommendations.

       

    4. Deadlines for COF Response.
      a. Denial of Review. If the COF exercises its discretion to deny review, it must advise the Petitioner in writing of the denial within five days of receiving the request for review. The Petitioner may then request review by the Grievance Committee. (See section E below.)
      b. Review. If review is mandatory based on the type of recommendation involved, or if the COF grants review, it must respond in writing to the petitioner within 10 days of receiving the petition.
      i. Reissuance of Original Recommendation. If the original COF recommendation stands, the COF response must give the reason(s) for the original recommendation.
      ii. Revision of Original Recommendation. If the COF's original recommendation is revised, the COF response must give the reason(s) for the revised recommendation and the procedure followed in arriving at the original and revised recommendations. If the Petitioner decides not to petition the Grievance Committee, the revised recommendation will then be forwarded to the President.
      iii. No Successive Requests for COF Review. If the Petitioner disagrees with a revised COF recommendation, he or she may not again petition the COF for review, but may proceed with appeal through the Grievance Committee as described in section E below.

    E. Petition to Grievance Committee

    1. Deadline for Petition.The Petitioner has three days after receiving notice of the COF's response per section D.4 above to submit to the Chair of the Faculty three copies of a request in writing for Grievance Committee review.

       

    2. Content of Petition.The Petitioner's request for Grievance Committee review must include a description of the subject matter of the grievance and the reasons for requesting review, along with an explicit waiver allowing disclosure to the Grievance Committee of the COF's grounds for recommendation.

       

    3. Grievance Committee Response and Deadline. The Chair of the Faculty will convene the Grievance Committee members and alternates within four days of receiving the petition for Grievance Committee review. The Grievance Committee will select by random lot from its membership a three-member Mediation Panel and a five-member Appeals Panel. Once the Mediation Panel members are selected, the Appeals Panel members are excused from the proceeding and will have no further involvement if the matter is resolved through mediation.

    F. Mediation Panel Process

    1. Submission of Statement Requesting Review to Panel.The Chair of the Faculty will provide the petitioner's statement requesting Grievance Committee review to the Mediation Panel at the time of the panel's selection.

       

    2. Meeting of Panel with Petitioner.The Mediation Panel will meet with the Petitioner within three days of the panel's selection and will decide at that meeting whether mediation efforts appear worthwhile.
      a. Submission of Documents by Petitioner. At this initial meeting of the Mediation Panel with the Petitioner, the Petitioner will provide the panel chair three copies of all documents the Petitioner wishes to submit in support of his or her written statement describing the subject matter of the grievance.
      b. Notification of Cessation of Mediation Efforts. If the Mediation Panel determines at this time, or at any later point in its proceedings, that mediation efforts (or further efforts) are unlikely to be worthwhile, the chair of the Mediation Panel will report in writing that conclusion within two days to the Petitioner, to the chair of the COF, and to the chair of the Appeals Panel. The chair of the Mediation Panel will also return all materials received in connection with the proceeding to the person or persons from whom they were received.

       

    3. Collection of Information from the COF.If the Mediation Panel decides to pursue mediation efforts it will, within one day of the initial meeting with the Petitioner, submit the Petitioner's statement describing the subject matter of the grievance to the COF. The COF will then, within three days of its next meeting provide the Mediation Panel with:
      a. A written response to the Petitioner's description of the subject matter of the grievance;
      b. A copy of the written statement of reasons for the original or revised recommendation that was previously given to the Petitioner, which would include the procedures followed and (if applicable) the revised recommendation (See section D.4 above);
      c. Copies of all documents considered in its deliberations leading to the original or revised recommendation. With Mediation Panel approval, the COF may first provide panel members access to these documents and ask the panel members to select documents they wish to have copied. The COF shall redact identifying material from documents it deems highly confidential so that sources are not disclosed.

       

    4. Mediation Effort.After reviewing the materials described in section F.1, 2a and 3 above, the Mediation Panel will try to resolve the matter through mutual agreement between the Petitioner and COF. This agreement may, but need not, take the form of a compromise. The Mediation Panel will act as a facilitator in this process rather than as an advocate for either the Petitioner or the COF.
      a.Mediation Panel Facilitation Meetings.As part of the facilitation process, the Mediation Panel may meet with the Petitioner and with the COF or its designated representative together and/or separately. However, individual Mediation Panel members may not meet with individual COF members regarding matters at issue in the proceeding unless both their respective bodies authorize them to do so.
      b.Attendance at Mediation Panel Proceedings.The only persons other than Mediation Panel members allowed to be in attendance during mediation efforts are the Petitioner, one or more designated COF representatives, and the Petitioner's adviser per section J.7 below. If the COF participates via a single designated representative, that representative may also have an adviser present per section J.7 below.

       

    5. Mediation Time Frame.The mediation time period should not exceed 10 days from the date the Mediation Panel received the documents described in section F.3 above from the COF. The mediation period may be extended by no more than five days by mutual agreement of the Petitioner and the COF or its designated representative(s).

       

    6. Communication of Result. At the conclusion of its work and no later than the end of the time period described in section F.5 above, the chair of the Mediation Panel will report in writing to the Petitioner, to the COF chair, and to the Chair of the Faculty whether mediation has achieved resolution of the grievance. The Mediation Panel may, at its discretion, also provide its own statement defining the nature of the grievance as the panel members understand it.

    G. The Appeals Panel Process

    1. Request for Appeals Panel Review.To request Appeals Panel review, the Petitioner must, within three days of receiving the notification described in sections F.2b or 6 above that mediation efforts are concluded, submit the following materials to the Chair of the Faculty and to the chair of the Appeals Panel:
      a. A written request for Appeals Panel review;
      b. A copy of the statement, previously provided the Chair of the Faculty in section E.2 above, detailing the description of the subject matter of the grievance and the reason for requesting review, or a copy of the Mediation Panel's statement defining the nature of the grievance (See section F.6) along with a written endorsement of that statement which includes any qualifications or exceptions the Petitioner wishes to make.

       

    2. Submission of Documentation to Appeals Panel.Within an additional three days, the Petitioner must submit to the chair of the Appeals Panel copies of all documents the Petitioner wishes to submit in support of that statement.

       

    3. Notification to COF and Submission of Documentation by COF.Within two days of receipt of materials from the Petitioner described in section G.2 above, the Appeals Panel chair will notify the COF in writing of the request for Appeals Panel review. Within three days of receiving this notification, the COF will send to the Appeals Panel the same documents described in section F.3 that it previously sent to the Mediation Panel.

       

    4. Appeals Panel meeting with Petitioner on Nature of the Grievance.Within three days of receipt of the materials from the Petitioner described in section G.2 above, the Appeals Panel will meet with the Petitioner to verify the Appeals Panel's understanding of the Petitioner's definition of the nature of the grievance. No arguments or evidence will be presented at the initial meeting of the Appeals Panel.

       

    5. Appeals Panel Meeting on Procedure.Within three days after the initial meeting with the Petitioner, Appeals Panel members will meet to discuss its procedures for review. The Petitioner and designated COF representative may attend this meeting and may each bring an adviser as described in section J.7 below. The Appeals Panel chair will describe the Appeals Panel's understanding of the grievance, and the Petitioner and COF representative may respond. Again, no arguments or evidence will be presented at this meeting. The Appeals Panel will establish and describe the procedures it plans to follow in conducting its review and will set a date when it will begin the review.

       

    6. Appeals Panel Review Meeting.No less than five or more than 10 days after the procedural meeting described in section G.5 above, the Appeals Panel will meet to allow the Petitioner and COF representative to present additional information. Copies of any documents to be submitted at this meeting by or on behalf of the Petitioner must be provided to the COF representative at least four days prior to the hearing, and, similarly, copies of documents to be submitted on behalf of the COF must be provided to the Petitioner at least four days prior to the hearing.
      a. Earlier Meeting by Mutual Agreement. This meeting may be held earlier than five days after the procedural meeting described in section G.5 above by mutual agreement of the Petitioner and COF representative that also includes an agreed-upon time frame for providing copies of documents to be submitted at the meeting.
      b. Consequence of Failure to Provide Documents in Advance. If a document is presented at the meeting that was not provided in advance in accordance with the above requirement, the person (Petitioner or COF representative) who did not receive the document within the required time frame may have a three-day recess for purpose of preparing a response.

       

    7. Report of Appeals Panel Recommendation.Within three days after holding its review meeting (including, if necessary, continuance of that meeting following a recess as described in section G.6b above), the Appeals Panel will report its recommendation in writing to the Petitioner, to the COF, to the Vice President for Academic Affairs, and to the President. The report shall be accompanied by a statement of reasons for the recommendation.
      a. Correctable Procedural Error. If the Appeals Panel concludes that the COF made a correctable procedural error, it shall direct the COF in writing to correct the error and resume the recommendation process from the point of error, according to a time table set in consultation with COF. This does not necessarily mean modification or reversal of the original recommendation.
      i. The COF will report its reconsidered recommendation to the Appeals Panel and the Petitioner, along with a statement of reasons.
      ii. Within three days of receiving the COF's report according to section G.7.a.i above, the Appeals Panel will state in writing to the Petitioner, the COF, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the President its opinion as to whether or not the COF's reconsidered recommendation appropriately resolves the matter. The President will then make a final decision.
      b. Other Forms of Error. If the Appeals Panel concludes that the COF has made an error other than a correctable procedural error, it shall report its conclusion to the COF, to the Petitioner, to the Vice President for Academic Affairs, and to the President along with its recommendation to the President for retaining, modifying, or reversing the original recommendation. The President will then make a final decision. Such a conclusion of the Appeals Panel might be based on any of the following:
      i. Bias or prejudice;
      ii. Lack of availability of important documents or testimony;
      iii. A recommendation deemed inappropriate in light of the evidence; or
      iv. Violation of academic freedom. Cases involving academic freedom will be reviewed in accordance with the process described in Article VIII, applying principles of the American Association of University Professors as found in the "Recommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure (1999 revision)" and other AAUPP Policy Statements on Academic Freedom and Tenure.

       

    8. Appeals Panel Review Procedures.
      a. Scope of the Inquiry. During its review, as provided for in sections G.1-7 above, the Appeals Panel will restrict its inquiry to the following questions:
      i. Did the COF consider all important evidence in arriving at its recommendation? If not, would consideration of all such evidence have justified a different recommendation?
      ii. Did the COF consider any improper evidence in arriving at its recommendation? If such evidence had been disregarded, is it likely that a different recommendation would have been made?
      iii. Was the COF's recommendation or the process followed in arriving at that recommendation so inappropriate in any other respect that the COF should revisit that recommendation?
      b. Burden of Proof. The Petitioner will bear the burden of proof. As used herein, "burden of proof" means the responsibility for affirmatively proving, by a preponderance of evidence, disputed facts that bear on the recommendation under review.
      c. Closed Proceedings. The Appeals Panel proceeding attendance shall be limited to Appeals Panel members; the Petitioner; the Petitioner's adviser (if any, per section J.7 below); an observer of the petitioner's choice selected from the general faculty; the designated COF representative; the COF representative's adviser (if any, per section J.7 below); and an observer of the COF representative's choice selected from the general faculty. A witness giving testimony, other than the petitioner or the COF representative, will attend the proceedings only when giving that testimony or responding to questioning.
      d. Presentation of Testimony. The Petitioner and COF representative will have an opportunity to present oral testimony bearing on the case as defined, either personally or through witnesses, and to question any person presenting testimony.
      e. Confidentiality of Sources. No person testifying before the Appeals Panel will be required to disclose confidential sources. However, panel members may take into account the fact that an anonymous source is not available for questioning in arriving at their conclusions.
      f. Panel Member Testimony; COF Spokesperson. No member of the Mediation Panel will testify, and no member of the COF except its designated representative shall speak for the entire COF.
      g. Rules of Evidence and Basis for Conclusions. The Appeals Panel will not be bound by legal rules of evidence, but its findings will be based solely on information obtained as part of the review process.
      h. Record of Proceedings. A written or taped record shall be kept of Appeal Panel review proceedings, to which both the Petitioner and COF representative will have reasonable access. The chair of the Appeals Panel will keep two copies of this record under his or her control until final disposition of the case. After the Appeal Panel's recommendation to the President (See section G.7), both copies of the record of the proceedings and one copy of all documents received by the Appeals Panel as part of its review will be deposited in the University Archives for confidential storage consistent with usual archival procedures. These materials will be available to the President during consideration of the Appeals Panel's recommendation.

    H. Grievance Committee Membership and Selection.The Grievance Committee will consist of eight members and eight alternates, all elected from the full-time, tenured faculty (i.e., those holding positions described in Article I.B.1.a(1)(a) of the Personnel Policies). Each of the four University divisions will have two Grievance Committee members and two alternates, elected annually by the full-time faculty members within the division.

    1. Time of Election.Grievance Committee members and alternates will be elected at the time of spring faculty committee elections.

       

    2. Eligibility for Re-Election.Grievance Committee members and alternates are eligible for re-election without limit as to number of terms.

       

    3. Term of Office.Grievance Committee members and alternates will take office at the beginning of the spring semester of the academic year following the year of their election. If a new Grievance Committee takes office while a panel proceeding is pending or in progress, the outgoing Grievance Committee will decide whether to complete the proceeding or to hand it over to the newly-elected Grievance Committee.

       

    4. Balloting.In balloting, the two eligible candidates from each division who receive the highest number of votes within that division are elected as Grievance Committee members. The candidates ranking third and fourth in terms of number of votes received are elected as alternates.

       

    5. Equal Availability of Persons Elected.Once elected, all members are considered equally available to serve without regard to division or to number of votes received, and all alternates are equally available to serve as alternates without regard to division or to number of votes received.

       

    6. COF Members Ineligible. COF members may not serve as Grievance Committee members or alternates during their terms of membership on the COF.

    I. Conflicts of Interest. Membership exclusion based on Conflicts of Interestas covered by the policy established by the Committee on Faculty and the Administration and published in the Personnel Policies section (Appendix 3) of the Academic Handbook apply. Other Grievance Committee members, the faculty member who is seeking COF or Grievance Committee review under the procedures described below (the "Petitioner"), the COF, and/or the Vice President of Academic Affairs may request consideration of whether a Grievance Committee member or alternate should be excluded from participation in any particular matter due to a conflict of interest. The final determination whether a conflict of interest justifies the exclusion of a Grievance Committee member from participating in a particular matter will be made by the Chair of the Faculty. If the Chair of the Faculty is recused or challenged because of conflict of interest, then that role will be filled by the most recent past Chair of the Faculty in succession. Questions of conflict of interest may be raised at any time during a proceeding but must be raised prior to the conclusion of that particular proceeding.

    J. Committee and Panel Operating Rules

    1. Calculation of Time.All references to period of time in this Article shall be calculated on the basis of in-session days, defined as weekdays on which classes are scheduled during the spring and fall semesters. For actions that must be performed within a certain number of days after occurrence of a certain preceding event (such as receipt of a notification), the day of occurrence of the preceding event will not be counted in the calculation of time. The day on which the action is performed will be counted.

       

    2. Panel Member Absence.Mediation Panels may meet and conduct business if at least two of the three panel members are present. Appeals Panels may meet and conduct business if at least four of the five panel members are present.

       

    3. Panel Chairs.If a panel cannot select a chair by consensus or by majority vote, the Chair of the Faculty will appoint the chair of the panel.

       

    4. Panel Openings.Panel openings due to resignations, withdrawals, etc. shall be filled by alternates based on an order determined at the beginning of each committee year by random lot.

       

    5. Limit on Panel Service.No member or alternate shall serve on more than one Appeals Panel or two total panels at any one time.

       

    6. COF Representatives.The COF will be represented in proceedings by one or more then-current COF member(s) designated by the COF, preferably from members who were serving on the COF at the time of the challenged recommendation.

       

    7. Advisers.Both the Petitioner and the COF Representative, if there is only one such representative, may have an adviser to assist in the proceedings; these advisers may attend and provide advice, but not participate in the proceedings. The Petitioner may select as adviser any full-time or part-time faculty member who is not a COF member, a Grievance Committee member, or a Grievance Committee alternate who is serving on the Mediation or Appeals Panel for that Petitioner's grievance. If there is a single designated COF representative, that person may be assisted by a faculty adviser who is not a Grievance Committee member or a Grievance Committee alternate who is serving on the Mediation or Appeals Panel for that Petitioner’s grievance.

       

    8. Confidentiality.Panel members may not disclose information concerning particular panel proceedings, whether in documents or from discussion, outside of those proceedings at any time. Any panel member found to have breached this duty of confidentiality may be removed as a Grievance Committee member or alternate at the discretion of the Chair of the Faculty.

       

    9. Consequence of Failure to Meet Deadlines.
      a. Failure by Petitioner. A Petitioner who fails to comply with time periods specified in this Article forfeits his or her right for further review unless the Chair of the Faculty determines that the failure was for good reason beyond the Petitioner's control, such as serious illness.
      b. Failure by COF or a Panel. A Petitioner shall notify the Chair of the Faculty within three days of a failure by the COF or its designated representative or by a panel to comply with time frames specified in this Article. The Chair of the Faculty will review the reasons for the failure and, within three days of receiving the notification, establish an appropriately expedited schedule for completion of proceedings. Depending on the reason for the delay, the Chair of the Faculty has discretion to order replacement of one or more panel members or the COF's designated representative to avoid further delay.

    K. Grievance Procedure Interpretation. Matters of interpretation of this Faculty Grievance Process will be resolved by the Grievance Committee or its panels.

  10. Appendices to Personnel Policies
    1. Appendix 1: COF Hearing Procedures for Faculty Sanctions

      (written by Committee on Faculty; reported to faculty and included in the by-laws for informational purposes)

      If personnel problems are brought for its review, the Committee on Faculty will follow these procedures. In order to make a recommendation to the President concerning a faculty member, COF shall conduct a hearing to ascertain the facts relevant to the case, consider the circumstances both mitigating and aggravating, hear from all witnesses who have direct testimony to offer, test the evidence, and make a finding of fact. Further, based on the evidence obtained, COF is to deliberate and recommend either call for dismissal, or an alternative sanction, or a continuation of the appointment without further prejudice. The hearings will follow the rules of confidentiality that govern all COF personnel deliberations.

      Prior to its evidentiary sessions COF is to receive a statement of the charges from the chief administrator working on the case as well as any other related documents. The chief administrator can be the Vice President of Academic Affairs (VPAA) or another appropriate Vice-President. COF is to receive a complete report of the investigations undertaken by the chief administrator and/or other officials of the University, such as the Campus Police, Chair of the Department, etc. COF is to receive lists of witnesses and relevant evidence from both the chief administrator and faculty member. The faculty member may provide a written response to the materials provided by the chief administrator. COF will notify the chief administrator and the faculty member involved of the witnesses and evidence at least two days prior to the commencement of each evidentiary session. The witnesses are restricted only to those who may offer material evidence. Character witnesses are excluded from testifying.

      The faculty member and chief administrator will be given at least four in-session days notice before COF convenes its hearing. COF will consider legitimate reasons for delay, but only serious reasons, such as health difficulties should result in a delay.

      The hearing is to be conducted by the Chair of COF. For its evidentiary sessions an official tape recording is to be made by the COF Coordinator. This tape will be retained until the case is resolved. It shall be made available to the Appeals Board if it is convened. Once the case is resolved the tape will be destroyed. The following persons may attend the evidentiary sessions: the faculty members of COF; the faculty member who has been charged; an advisor to him or her, who may be anyone from the University community; the chief administrator; the Vice President of Academic Affairs (if not the chief administrator in the case); and the COF Coordinator. Witnesses are to wait in separate areas until they are called in for their testimony. Each witness may be accompanied by advisor selected from the University community. Once a witness has given her/his testimony he/she will be excused from the proceedings.

      Both the chief administrator and the faculty member may call witnesses, COF may question both parties on any points relevant to the case. COF will determine the order of witnesses called. Witnesses may be questioned by the individual calling them and by COF members. The VPAA, if s/he is not the chief administrator, will be given the opportunity to ask questions of the witnesses. In situations in which a witness is not comfortable providing evidence in front of the faculty member, the evidence will be given without the faculty member present. However, the advisor will be present to hear the witness and the faculty member will hear the tape or a transmission of that portion of the proceedings. Such safeguards are particularly important in cases in which a student is a key witness and/or sensitive issues (e.g. sexual harassment, racism) are involved. Witness concerns should be communicated to the Chair of COF.

      If COF believes it is necessary to call additional witnesses, recall witnesses, or seek additional evidence as a result of its investigations, it may do so. COF may adjourn the evidentiary session at any time but shall reconvene at its earliest convenience.

      Following COF's usual procedures, the deliberations will take place in two phases. The initial deliberative session of the hearing will include the members of COF and the VPAA. After discussion of the evidence a straw vote will indicate COF's initial position. The VPAA will express her/his agreement or disagreement with COF's recommendations and explain his or her rationale. This is to ensure that both COF and the chief academic officer are aware of the issues considered by both sides and that communication of all issues and concerns has been clear and complete. Final deliberations will involve only the COF faculty members. COF will deliberate on the evidence and decide (a) on a finding of fact that either supports or denies the culpability of the faculty member and (b) on a recommendation to the President. The recommendation may either call for dismissal, or an alternative sanction, or a continuation of the appointment without further prejudice. The recommendation shall include the finding of fact in the written report. Copies of the complete recommendation will be sent to the faculty member and the VPAA. The VPAA will inform COF of her/his final recommendation to the President.

      The President may seek further clarification from COF on its recommendation. The Chair of COF will be responsible for communicating with the President. As with other personnel decisions, if the President decides against COF's recommendation, he or she shall communicate to COF explaining her or his rationale.

      If the decision by the President is for dismissal or other major sanctions, the faculty member will have four in-session days to call for a review of the COF recommendation. The review process will follow the procedures stated in Article VIII.D. of the Personnel Policies but will include, when appropriate, further consideration of the case in light of the communications from the VPAA and the President.

    2. Appendix 2: Terminal Degrees

      The terminal degree in a field is usually a doctorate in the field with the following exceptions: Studio Music – Masters in Music; Studio Art – Master in Fine Arts; Creative Writing – Master in Fine Arts; Theater Practice or Professional Theater – Master in Fine Arts; Accounting – Masters in Accounting or Masters in Business Administration; Library - a master's degree from a program accredited by the American Library Association; and other special cases specified at the time of initial appointment. Prior completion of the terminal degree is not required for an initial full-time faculty appointment; however, completion of the terminal degree is required for the granting of tenure. Completion of the terminal degree or satisfactory progress towards completion of the degree in advance of the tenure decision is required for a satisfactory interim review.

    3. Appendix 3: Conflict of Interest Policy and Procedures for Faculty Personnel Matters

      Approved by the Committee on Faculty and the Administration, Dec. 7, 2008.

      In order to ensure that faculty personnel processes are as fair as possible, DePauw University has adopted the following policy and procedures.

      INTRODUCTION

      At an institution such as DePauw, a variety of personal relationships may exist among faculty members which create the potential of a conflict of interest between a person who handles personnel matters (performance reviews, hiring requests, supervision) or a member of a committee that handles personnel matters (Full-Time Position Request Committee, Search Committee, Special Review Committee (for faculty librarians) or Department (or School) Personnel Committee referred to hereinafter as the “DPC”) or a member of the Committee on Faculty "COF" or the VPAA and a faculty member or job candidate under review. However, in the shared work environment, common interactions – e.g., friendships and antagonisms, likes and dislikes, concurrences and disagreements, and praise or criticisms – do not represent Conflicts of Interest if they fall within the bounds of University policies governing professional working relationships (1). It is also in the best interests of the University (and of the confidence that should be placed in the faculty personnel processes) that appropriate steps be taken to limit the appearance of Conflicts of Interest by excluding the participation of some who might otherwise serve, if there are reasonable alternatives to participation in a faculty review process (i.e., when others may fairly judge the relevant evidence). This policy is intended to alert faculty members to the types of concerns for which a Conflict of Interest may exist and to encourage members of the relevant committees and the VPAA, and faculty members under review, to avoid situations for which a potential conflict of interest exists. The successful application of this policy requires all faculty members to familiarize themselves with the contents of this policy. Anyone with a Conflict of Interest should request to be recused from the committee in question and from other personnel responsibilities. Further, any faculty member who has knowledge that a conflict of interest may exist, or is in doubt as to whether a conflict exists regarding an issue before one of these committees, should follow the procedures set out within this policy.

      DEFINITION

      A Conflict of Interest exists when a faculty member is in a position to exercise judgment on a personnel matter, either personally or as a member of a committee reviewing a faculty colleague or candidate and when that exercise of judgment could be (or is perceived to be) influenced by a current or past personal relationship (as defined herein). A Conflict of Interest may exist even though it may not be acknowledged by one or more of the parties.

      PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS SUBJECT TO THIS POLICY

      Circumstances that are of concern under this policy are those in which a person with personnel responsibilities has, or has the appearance of having, such a bias so strong as to undermine the presumption of fairness in the execution of those responsibilities. These circumstances include, but are not limited to, a situation of dependency or interdependency, or a commission of a policy violation in dealings with the faculty member to be affected by a pending committee recommendation. Examples of circumstances that could result in a conflict of interest, or the possibility of perceived conflict of interest, include, but are not limited to, the following:

      • shared financial interests;
      • familial relationship;
      • former or present marital, romantic, amorous, or other intimate relationships;
      • current co-living arrangement;
      • giving or receiving of substantial gifts or benefits;
      • employment relationship outside of DePauw; and
      • an incident involving violation of the harassment policy or the consensual relations policy.

      There may be other circumstances for which a faculty member believes that a colleague could not render an impartial judgment in a personnel matter. A faculty member concerned about a bias that might hinder impartiality due to any circumstance should report the situation or relationship to the Vice President for Academic Affairs (or to the designated prior chair of COF if the conflict involves the VPAA) for evaluation pursuant to these procedures. The designated prior chair of COF for matters of conflict of interest involving the VPAA shall be recorded on the annually published list of faculty members of committees.

      CONFLICT OF INTEREST PROCEDURES

      1. A faculty member who believing that his or her service in personnel matters will be affected by (or may be affected by) a Conflict of Interest should consult with the VPAA. In such circumstances the faculty member may request to be recused from service on these personnel matters. The VPAA will consider any request to be recused from work on personnel matters; and if the request is granted, the VPAA will notify the appropriate individuals about this recusal (such as the chair of the relevant committee).
      2. To report a conflict of interest of another faculty member, a faculty member should notify the Vice President for Academic Affairs confidentially of the existence of a conflict of interest as soon as practical after it is identified. However, to protect privacy, information regarding the nature of the circumstances leading to the conflict of interest (e.g., financial, family, romantic, etc,) need not be divulged beyond that information which the Vice President for Academic Affairs would reasonably require in order to determine whether a Conflict of Interest exists. If the Vice President for Academic Affairs is a party to the conflict of interest, then the most recent past chair of the COF who is not currently serving on COF and not on leave shall substitute for the roles designated in this policy for the Vice President.
      3. Once notified, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will exercise discretion in determining what are the prudent steps to take in order to determine whether a Conflict of Interest exists. The Vice President for Academic Affairs may investigate the conflict of interest through gathering information and interviewing relevant parties. While that determination is underway, the Vice President for Academic Affairs shall suspend the related work of the relevant committee if it has already begun. In assessing conflicts of interest, the Vice President for Academic Affairs should focus on whether the particular interest and/or personal circumstance of the faculty member are likely to compromise, or are likely to be perceived as compromising, a committee member's ability to function impartially.
      4. Once an assessment has been made, the Vice President for Academic Affairs must promptly share his or her decision by confidential memorandum to the faculty member about whom a question of conflict of interest has been raised. Where it has been decided that a Conflict of Interest exists, the Vice President for Academic Affairs must promptly instruct the person who has been determined to have a Conflict of Interest not to participate in the decisions regarding the affected faculty member with whom the Conflict of Interest exists. Depending on the nature of the Conflict of Interest, the exclusion of a member of a particular committee from personnel responsibility for another faculty member may apply for certain other personnel responsibilities and/or for a certain length of time as determined by the Vice President for Academic Affairs.
      5. The Vice President for Academic Affairs will also notify the chair of the relevant committee if a committee member is to be excluded for reason of Conflict of Interest. The Vice President for Academic Affairs shall also then authorize the committee to resume the review process; that authorization may include instructions returning the committee to an earlier point in its process so that the work is not influenced by the person (or persons) who has (have) been excluded, such as when a person determined to have a Conflict of Interest had already participated in part of the deliberations. The Vice President may also amend the evidence (such as in an application or decision file) on which the considerations are to be based in order to remove items that may have been influenced by the Conflict of Interest. For other personnel matters, the Vice President will take steps to reassign tasks and responsibilities as needed to re-create an impartial personnel process.
      6. Retaliation against any individual who discloses an actual or perceived conflict of interest is not permitted and may result in use of sanctions and disciplinary procedures for unprofessional conduct.
      7. Questions regarding this policy and/or its interpretation should be directed to the chair of the COF and the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

      CONFIDENTIALITY AND RECORDKEEPING

      It is imperative that all information regarding conflicts of interest be kept as confidential as circumstances permit. It is legitimate for those involved in resolving a conflict of interest to seek advice and/or guidance from other University officials or faculty members with relevant experience. Internal disclosure of information about potential or actual conflicts of interest should be limited strictly to those faculty members or employees who need to have access for official purposes. However, if through investigation of a potential conflict of interest the VPAA (or surrogate) discovers a violation of a University policy, then this information may require additional action and some level of confidentiality may be lost in that case. Details of matters relating to conflicts of interest shall be kept in confidential files held in the Office of Academic Affairs and access to such files will be restricted to the Vice President for Academic Affairs or others serving in a surrogate role as provided for in this policy. All records shall be kept for a period of at least ten (10) years with the actual duration of the record keeping to be determined by the Vice President for Academic Affairs or the surrogate.

      Notes

      (1). Whenever the phrase "conflict of interest" is used, it means not only actual conflicts but potential or perceived conflicts of interest as well; whenever the phrase is capitalized "Conflict of Interest" this refers to an actual conflict of interest.