Department of Finance & Financial Services Bylaws
Approved: February 3, 2003
Section I. Introduction
A. These Bylaws
- Provide
for faculty participation in the operations of the Department of Finance and
Financial Services, in accordance with the Agreement between the American Association
of University Professors – Wright State University Chapter, hereafter referred
to as the agreement, and the Board of Trustees of Wright State University.
- Are
subject to and consistent with the Bylaws of the Raj Soin College of Business
(RSCOB).
- May
be amended in accordance with the Collective Bargaining agreement.
- Include
duties of each department standing committee.
B. The purpose of these Bylaws is as follows:
The department faculty (here and elsewhere referring to full-time
faculty) seek to promote and sustain effective teaching (undergraduate and
graduate), scholarship, and service, and to participate fully in the governance
of the College of Business and the University, as allowed by the Collective
Bargaining Agreement.
Section II. Procedures by which bargaining Unit Faculty give
advice and make recommendations
A. Faculty Appointment, Reappointment
and Dismissal
- Faculty
Appointment: Members of the Department Faculty are to be involved in
the recruitment and selection process for new faculty. Faculty of the
Department will be chosen by the Chair to serve on the Search Committee.
All members of the Department Faculty will be provided the opportunity to:
(1)
interview, individually and/or in small groups, those candidates who are
brought to campus; (2) participate in presentations made by the candidates;
(3) provide written feedback to the Search Committee for each faculty candidate.
The search committee and the Department Faculty may make recommendations
regarding
whom to hire to the Department Chair and the Dean after all candidates have
been interviewed.
- Faculty
Reappointment: Faculty reappointment from an outside department to this
department will only occur after the recommendation of the department bargaining
unit faculty is obtained including a secret ballot taken at
a department meeting. This recommendation will be presented to the
Dean. The reasoning behind the recommendation will be derived from
the discussion prior to the vote.
- Faculty
Dismissal: The dismissal of probationary tenure-track faculty may not
occur until the Dean has sought the recommendation of the department’s Promotion
and Tenure (P&T) committee. The department bargaining unit faculty
will be allowed full discussion of the dismissal case but only the P&T
committee will vote, in a secret ballot, on whether or not to dismiss the
probationary faculty. The P&T committee’s written recommendation
and the results of the vote on whether or not they are in favor of dismissing
the probationary faculty will be conveyed to the Dean. The written
recommendation will allow for the expression of minority opinions.
B. Promotion and Tenure
- To
Tenured Associate Professor: The P&T committee will review the faculty
member’s promotion and tenure file at a special P&T committee meeting.
The department’s representative to the RSCOB P&T committee will chair
the meeting and will have a vote at the department level. Furthermore,
the department Chair may participate in the discussion as a non-voting member
of the committee. An elected secretary will take notes of the discussion
so that the reasoning behind the committee’s recommendation may be summarized
in a written letter. The letter should include the finalized results
of the secret ballot. The P&T committee will consist of all department
Bargaining Unit Faculty Members (BUFMs) who hold the rank of tenured associate
professor or tenured professor. If there are not at least three BUFMs
at the rank of associate professor or professor, other faculty at this rank,
from within the college or outside the college as necessary, who would be
qualified to evaluate the tenure file will be invited by the committee to
join the committee. The committee will review and approve the letter
summarizing the P&T committee vote and the reasoning for the vote before
it is sent to the RSCOB P&T committee.
- To
Tenured Full Professor: The procedures are similar to that described
in Section II, B.1 above but the group of department faculty present and
voting will be restricted to those who hold the rank of tenured professor.
If there are not at least three department BUFMs at the rank of professor
eligible
to vote, the committee will invite faculty at this rank from other departments
or outside the college as necessary who would be qualified to evaluate a
faculty member’s file to join the committee. The committee will review
and approve the letter summarizing the vote and the reasoning for the vote
before it is sent to the RSCOB P&T committee.
C. Professional Development.
The P&T committee is responsible for giving advice and
recommendations to the Chair on matters related to professional development
including the mentoring of new faculty.
D. Teaching Assignments
and Class Schedules, Including Summer and
Overloads:
Department faculty will have the opportunity to provide the
Chair with a list of their preferences for courses and times for each quarter. Faculty
may request from the Chair information regarding what courses have been taught
each quarter, at what times they have been taught each quarter, and enrollments
in each section over the past year. Faculty may also ask the Chair to
provide information regarding scheduling of courses and class times. Faculty
may recommend to the Chair ways to resolve course and scheduling conflicts. Summer
or overload teaching will not be forced upon any faculty member.
In the event there are insufficient classes or projected insufficient
enrollments to fill all the requests made by bargaining unit faculty for upcoming
summer, the most senior faculty (by rank and time in rank) will receive the
first opportunity to fill their summer teaching schedules. Bargaining
unit faculty denied summer teaching because of insufficient classes or enrollments
will be given first priority to teach in the following summer.
E. Graduate and Undergraduate Curriculum:
The department curriculum committee will review and make
recommendations on proposed new department courses, suggested modifications
to existing department courses, and proposed changes in requirements for all
majors and minors offered by the department.
F. Advice given by Department Faculty in
Naming of Chairs:
The department faculty may provide the Dean with a written
recommendation for the naming of a Chair.
G. Issues Affecting the Department:
Issues which affect the department should be presented to
the faculty by the Chair or other members of the department faculty and recommendations
from the faculty solicited.
Section III. Annual Evaluation of BUFMs
A. Procedures for Annual Evaluation
- Submission
of Materials for Annual Evaluation.
Faculty will submit to the department Chair a summary of
their accomplishments in Teaching, Scholarship and Service for the preceding
year (January 1 to December 31st) by February 7th of
each year. It is the responsibility of each faculty member to make
the case for the rating expected in each category.
Also by February 7th of each year, all faculty
submitting teaching portfolios in accordance with the peer evaluation section
of these bylaws should forward these materials to the department's P&T
committee and the department chair to become part of the evaluation process.
Persons who have been on Professional Development
Leave within the calendar year should submit materials pertaining to accomplishments
in scholarship throughout the entire period along with materials pertaining
to teaching and service for those quarters spent on campus during this review
period.
- Merit
Rating Formula.
The formula for the determination of the merit rating is
based on the rating for teaching, scholarship, and service. An Unsatisfactory
rating is awarded a score of ‘0’; an adequate rating is awarded a score of ‘1’;
a Meritorious rating is awarded a score of ‘2’; an Outstanding rating is awarded
a score of ‘3’; and an Extraordinary rating is awarded a score of ‘4’. These
scores are then weighted by category.
The weight assigned for each category 1) must fall into
the following range and 2) must sum to 100
Teaching 30%-
50% or your merit evaluation must be for teaching.
Scholarship 30%-50%
of your merit evaluation must be for scholarship
Service
Assistant
Professor 10%-20% of your merit evaluation must
be for service
Associate
Professor 10%-30% of your merit evaluation must be for service
Professor 20%-30%
of your merit evaluation must be for service
The Department Chair will evaluate each area of each faculty
member’s professional activity and assign an integer to that area guided by
the criteria stated below. The Chair will then assign to each area a
percentage from the range above that gives the faculty member the maximum possible
overall average.
The Chair may assign a different weighting from
that defined above in any of the following situations:
- The
faculty member has work assignments that differ from those of other faculty.
- The
Chair is imposing discipline pursuant to the contract.
- The
Chair is acting to correct a pattern of substandard performance extending for
more than one year.
- Peer Evaluation of Teaching.
Peer evaluation will be conducted annually for
all untenured BUFMs . Peer evaluation will also be conducted for any
full-time BUFM who specifically requests it. The Department P&T committee
will be responsible for the peer evaluation of teaching. Peer evaluation
for this department will normally consist of review of the teaching portfolio. The
portfolio will include: (1) syllabi for each course taught; (2) where appropriate,
a representative sample of examinations administered; (3) where appropriate,
a representative sample of student papers/projects completed; (4) the written
comments by students on the student evaluation of instruction form; (5) a numerical
summary from the student evaluation of instruction form (untenured BUFMs);
and, (6) any other materials the individual chooses to include to demonstrate
teaching effectiveness.
The P&T committee will evaluate the teaching portfolios
for a faculty member:
- To determine the consistency of syllabi with
topics to be covered in the course
- To determine the consistency of examinations
with topics listed on syllabi.
- To assess the appropriateness of projects/papers
for the course.
- To identify areas from the student evaluation
suggesting positive teaching practices.
- To identify areas from the student evaluation
suggesting a need for improvement in teaching practices.
- To identify areas of innovation in
teaching applied by the faculty member.
- To identify teaching accomplishments.
If the P&T committee review of these materials indicates
that there may be problems in teaching, a class visitation by one or more members
of the P&T committee may be arranged.
The P&T committee will provide the Chair and
each individual evaluated with written feedback regarding peer evaluation to
include a suggested rating for the teaching component of the annual evaluation. This
feedback should address points a-g, above. If a class visitation is performed,
a written report will follow.
- Annual Evaluation.
The chair will consider all submitted materials when deriving
an evaluation for each facet of faculty performance. A written summary
of this evaluation will be provided to each faculty member in a timely manner.
- Faculty Review of Annual Evaluation:
Faculty will review the annual evaluation
prepared by the department Chair and the reasons given for the ratings. The
faculty member will sign a copy of the evaluation and return it to the department
Chair. The signature on the evaluation only acknowledges receipt of the
evaluation. If the faculty member disagrees with the evaluation, s/he
may prepare a rebuttal, which should be submitted to the Chair. This
rebuttal must be attached to the evaluation and forwarded to all entities seeing
the annual evaluation.
- Teaching
The evaluation of a faculty member's teaching is the responsibility
of the department Chair. All BUFMs shall be evaluated according
to the following criteria:
- Unsatisfactory. A
faculty member will be assigned a rating of Unsatisfactory for teaching if
s/he fails to meet the requirements for a rating of Adequate.
- Adequate. A
faculty member will be assigned a rating of Adequate when s/he adheres to the
following except in exceptional circumstances:
- Participates
in department assessment,
- Course
content is consistent with the college and department curricular missions,
- Student
evaluations do not show a preponderance of negative responses,
- Adheres
to provisions of the collective bargaining agreement related to faculty responsibility
regarding teaching.
- Meritorious. Meritorious
teachers meet the requirements for adequate and demonstrate the following:
- Peer
evaluations, if conducted, and student evaluations are generally positive,
and provide evidence that the instructor aids in the understanding of the material
- Evidence
of at least one extra effort activity on behalf of students and/or the department's
teaching mission (for examples of extra effort activities see section III.B.1.f),
- Evidence
of participation in a process of continual improvement
- Outstanding. Outstanding
teachers meet the requirements for adequate and demonstrate the following:
- Peer
evaluations, if conducted, and/or a significant majority of student evaluations
are positive,
- Evidence
of significant extra effort on behalf of students and/or the department’s teaching
mission (i.e. 3 or more of the activities listed in section III.B.1.f),
- Evidence
of participation in a process of continual improvement
- Extraordinary. An extraordinary
teacher clearly exceeds the requirements for outstanding (four
or more of the activities listed in section III.B.1.f). Demonstration
of this level of excellence requires that:
- Peer
evaluations and/or student comments are overwhelmingly positive,
- And/or
the individual wins a college or university teaching award or achieves a major
teaching accomplishment.
- Examples
of extra effort activities
Examples of extra effort activities include, but are not
limited to the following:
- Effectively
supervising independent study projects
- Creating
innovative projects and assignments
- Teaching
a larger than normal number of preparations or section sizes
- Conducting
review sessions
- Effective
use of educational technology
- Serving
as a teaching mentor for other faculty
- Effective
involvement in student placement activities
- Being
readily available to students beyond required office hours
- Developing
a new course
- Developing
a new teaching area
- Mentoring
students
- Scholarship
The evaluation of a faculty
member’s scholarship is the responsibility of the department Chair. The
most important scholarship is that appearing in peer-reviewed publications. For
purposes of evaluation, the date of acceptance is considered the date of
publication.
The evaluation of scholarship should reflect the quantity
of the input and the quality of the contribution. Collaborative efforts
will be fully credited to the individual authors.
- Unsatisfactory. A scholarship
rating of unsatisfactory will be assigned if the faculty member fails to meet
the requirements for a rating of adequate.
- Adequate. A scholarship rating
of adequate will be assigned if the faculty member has one peer-reviewed scholarly
publication on a business or economics topic within the last five years and
evidence of continuing scholarly activity during the evaluation period.
- Meritorious. A meritorious
scholarship rating is awarded for having one peer-reviewed journal article
published on a business or economics topic in the past three years or two such
articles in the past five years plus evidence of continuing scholarly activity
during the evaluation period. (Note the publication of one scholarly
book substitutes for one peer-reviewed article.)
- Outstanding. An outstanding
scholarship rating is awarded for having one peer-reviewed journal article
published on a business or economics topic in the current year or two peer-reviewed
journal articles in the past three years with evidence of continuing scholarly
activity during the evaluation period. (Note the publication of one scholarly
book substitutes for one peer-reviewed article.)
- Extraordinary. An
extraordinary scholarship rating is awarded for two peer-reviewed journal articles
published on a business or economics topic in the current year or one peer-reviewed
article published in the current year with two other peer-reviewed journal
articles in the past three years. (Note the publication of one scholarly
book substitutes for one peer-reviewed article.)
- Evidence of continuing scholarly
activity
Evidence of continuing scholarly activity includes but is not limited to the
following:
- The
completion of a working paper
- The
submission of a scholarly article to an appropriate outlet
- Submission
of cases, chapters, comments or invited articles
- Subsequent
editions of previously published books
- Submission
of a book review
- Presentation
of a working paper at a seminar or symposium
- Other
intellectual contributions appropriate to the College’s and Department’s mission
- Submission
to non-refereed outlets within the field of business and economics
- Service
The evaluation of a faculty member’s service is the responsibility
of the department Chair. The evaluation of service must reflect
both the quality and the quantity of the effort and the significance of the
output. Service includes contributions to the department, the college,
the university, the profession, and to the community.
- Unsatisfactory. An
unsatisfactory service rating will be assigned to any faculty member who fails
to meet the requirements of an Adequate rating.
- Adequate. An
adequate service rating will be assigned to associate and full professors who
meet the standards listed below. Assistant professors meeting i.
and ii. will be rated adequate. Attendance at department meetings, college
meetings, university meetings and service organization meetings predicates
on the compatibility of the faculty’s schedule for teaching and office hours
with the meeting times.
- Active
participation in department meetings,
- Regular attendance
at college meetings,
- Actively serving
on a department committee,
- Serving on one
college/university committee,
- Attending
commencement ceremonies at least once every two years.
- Meritorious. A
meritorious service rating will be assigned to associate and full professors
who meet the requirements for an adequate rating and document the following:
- Active
participation in one local professional or service organization,
- One
other activity from the list in III.B.3.f
A meritorious service rating will be assigned to an assistant
professor who meets the requirements for an adequate rating and documents the
following:
- Actively
serving on a department committee,· Attending
commencement ceremonies at least once every two years.
- Outstanding. An
outstanding service rating will be assigned to BUFMs who meet the requirements
for a meritorious rating and document a total of three (3) significant additional
service activities or the equivalent. (For examples of other activities see
section III.B.3.f) The faculty member must show evidence of taking an active
role in each of these service activities.
- Extraordinary. An
extraordinary service rating will be assigned to faculty members who clearly
exceed the requirements for an Outstanding rating. Evidence of this might
include:
- Winning
a college or university service award
- A
total of six (6) items from the list in III.B.3.f
- A
major leadership accomplishment
- Service
Activities
The
following may be used as evidence of service.
Institutional Service
i. Effectively
serving as advisor to an active club or student organization where a significant
time commitment is required.
ii. Serving
effectively as a program director.
iii. Effectively
chairing or effectively serving on an active university or college or department
committee or task force.
iv. Working
on special projects at the department, college or university level.
v. Effectively
working on student placement or recruitment activity
vi. Teaching
overload courses or teaching in off-campus programs
vii. Student advising
efforts
viii Alumni relations/fund
raising activity.
Professional Service
ix. Effectively
serving on the editorial board of a journal.
x. Effectively
serving as an officer in or chairing a significant state or national or international
committee.
xi. Effectively
serving as a track chair at a national or international conference.
xii. Organizing
a conference workshop, session or panel for a regional, national or international
conference.
xiii. Reviewing
books, journals or other manuscripts.
xiv. Holding
an office in an active professional organization.
xv. Obtaining
and maintaining professional licenses and/or certifications.
xvi. Serving
as a guest speaker for area business, government or community organization.
xvii. Significant
external service to community programs and/or companies, either paid or unpaid,
including consulting, training, etc.
Community Service
xviii. Holding positions
of leadership in community organizations related to the profession.
xix. Involvement
in community outreach/community programs.
Section IV. Department Criteria for Promotion and
Tenure
A. To Associate Professor with Tenure:
There are three tracks that a faculty member may satisfy to be promoted
to the rank of Associate Professor: (1) a normal track, (2) an exceptional
teaching track, and (3) an exceptional scholarship track. The requirements
for each track are set forth below:
|
Category |
Normal Track
|
Exceptional Teaching Track
|
Exceptional Scholarship Track
|
|
Teaching
|
Very Effective
|
Exceptional
|
Effective
|
|
Scholarship
|
Very Effective
|
Effective
|
Exceptional
|
|
Service
|
Effective
|
Very Effective
|
Effective
|
The qualifications for effective, very effective and exceptional
for each category are explained below.
- Teaching:
To be considered an effective teacher, the faculty
member must show evidence of the following:
- Student
evaluations are generally positive .
- A
total of at least 7 extra effort activities on behalf of students or the department. Each
annual extra effort activity counts toward the total. (see III.B.1.f)
- Regular
participation in continuous improvement activities
- A
record of positive peer evaluations
To be considered a very effective teacher, the faculty
member must show evidence of all the following:
- A
significant majority of student evaluations are positive.
- A
total of at least 10 extra effort activities on behalf of students or the department. Each
annual extra effort activity counts toward the total.
- Very
positive peer evaluations
- A
commitment to continuous improvement
To be considered an exceptional teacher, the faculty
member must show evidence of the following:
- Student
evaluations are overwhelmingly positive
- Peer
evaluations are excellent
- A
total of 15 or more extra effort activities on behalf of students or the department. Each
annual extra effort activity counts toward the total.
- Scholarship:
To be considered an effective scholar, the faculty
member must have the following of which at least one publication must have
occurred while the faculty member was a Wright State University BUFM:
- A
minimum of four peer-reviewed journal articles (one scholarly book may be substituted
for a maximum of one peer-reviewed journal article).
- Favorable
letters from outside reviewers.
To be considered a very effective scholar, the faculty
member must have the following of which at least one publication must have
occurred while the faculty member was a Wright State University BUFM:
- A
minimum of five peer-reviewed journal articles (one scholarly book may be substituted
for a maximum of one peer-reviewed journal article).
- Favorable
letters from outside reviewers.
To be considered an exceptional scholar, the faculty
member must have the following of which at least one publication must have
occurred while the faculty member was a Wright State University BUFM:
- A
minimum of seven peer-reviewed journal articles, including one single authored
article and one in a nationally recognized journal (one scholarly book may
be substituted for a maximum of one peer-reviewed journal article).
- Favorable
letters from outside reviewers.
- Service:
The faculty member must demonstrate consistent/effective
participation in service activities.
To be considered effective in the area of service,
the faculty member must:
- Actively
participate in department meetings,
- Regularly
attend college meetings,
- Attend
commencement ceremonies at least once every two years,
- Actively
serve on a department committee
To be considered very effective in the area of service,
the faculty member must exceed the requirements above by documenting five additional
service activities as listed in section III.B.3.f:
B. To Professor: There are three tracks that
a faculty member may follow to obtain a department recommendation for promotion
to the rank of Professor of Finance: (1) a normal track, (2) an exceptional
teaching track, and (3) an exceptional scholarship track. The requirements
for each track are set forth below:
|
Category
|
Normal Track |
Exceptional Teaching Track
|
Exceptional Scholarship Track
|
|
Teaching
|
Very Effective
|
Exceptional
|
Effective
|
|
Scholarship
|
Very Effective
|
Effective
|
Exceptional
|
|
Service
|
Effective
|
Very Effective
|
Effective
|
The qualifications for effective, very effective and exceptional
for each category are explained below.
- Teaching:
To be considered an effective teacher, the faculty
member must show evidence of the following:
- Student
comments are generally positive
- At
least 7 extra effort activities on behalf of students or the department since
the last promotion. Each annual extra effort activity counts toward the
total. (see III.B.1.f)
- Regular
participation in continuous improvement activities
To be considered a very effective teacher, the faculty
member must show evidence of the following:
- A
significant majority of student evaluations are positive,
- A
total of at least 10 extra effort activities on behalf of students or the department
since the last promotion. Each annual extra effort activity counts toward
the total.
- A
commitment to continuous improvement
To be considered an exceptional teacher, the faculty
member must show evidence of the following:
- Student
evaluations are overwhelmingly positive
- A
total of 15 or more extra effort activities on behalf of students or the department
since last promotion. Each annual extra effort activity counts toward
the total.
- Scholarship:
To be considered an effective scholar, the faculty
member must have the following which must include a minimum of four refereed
journal articles since the last promotion and at least one since being hired
at Wright State University:
To be considered an exceptional scholar, the faculty
member must have the following which must include a minimum of four refereed
journal articles since the last promotion and at least one since being hired
at Wright State University:
- A
minimum of twenty peer-reviewed journal articles including five single authored
and four in nationally recognized journals (one scholarly book maybe substituted
for a maximum of one peer-reviewed journal article).
- Very
positive letters from outside reviewer
- Strong
evidence of being nationally recognized as an outstanding scholar
- Service
The faculty member must demonstrate consistent/effective
participation in service activities.
To be considered effective in the area of service,
the faculty member must:
- Actively
participate in department meetings,
- Regularly
attend college meetings,
- Attend
commencement ceremonies at least once every two years,
- Regularly
serve on a department committee
- Regularly
serve on one college/university committee
- Regularly
participate in a local professional or service organization
- Document
at least five activities from the list in section III.B.3.f since the last
promotion
To be considered very effective in the area of service,
the faculty member must exceed the requirements for effective by documenting
ten additional service activities from the list in section III.B.3.f:
C. Granting of Tenure when Hired as an Associate
Professor or Professor without Tenure
- Teaching: For a faculty member at
the rank of Associate Professor or Professor without tenure, the three tracks
outlined in section IV.A and IV.B respectively will apply. However, the
qualifications for effective, very effective, and exceptional teacher are modified
as follows.
To be considered an effective teacher, the faculty
member must show evidence of the following during the probationary period:
- Student
comments are generally positive based on total enrollment
- Regular
participation in continuous improvement activities
- A
record of positive peer evaluations
To be considered a very effective teacher, the faculty
member must show evidence of the following during the probationary period:
- A
significant majority of student evaluations are positive
- Very
positive peer evaluations
- A
commitment to continuous improvement
To be considered an exceptional teacher, the faculty
member must show evidence of the following during the probationary period:
- Student
evaluations are overwhelmingly positive
- Peer
evaluations are excellent
- Significant
extra effort on behalf of students
- Scholarship: For a faculty member
hired at the rank of Associate Professor without tenure and who desires to
be tenured at the rank of Associate Professor, the criteria specified in section
IV.A.2 will apply with one addition: at least one publication must list Wright
State University as the faculty member’s affiliation.
For a faculty member hired at the rank of Professor without
tenure and who desires to be tenured, the criteria specified in section IV.B.2
will apply with one addition: at least one publication must list Wright State
University as the faculty member’s affiliation.
- Service: In the case of an individual
hired at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor without tenure, the criteria
specified in the previous section (IV.A.3 and IV.B.3 respectively) will be
applied over the faculty member’s academic career. Emphasis will be placed
on the continuation of and/or the development of a strong service record while
at Wright State University.
Section V. Department Policies and Procedures
A. Membership of the Department Faculty
- The department faculty shall be comprised
of persons who hold full-time faculty appointments in the department.
- Individuals who are not members of the department
faculty may be invited to participate in the discussions of the department
faculty but shall not have voting rights.
B. Meetings of the Department Faculty
- Regular meetings of the department faculty
should be called at least once a term during the regular academic year and
at such other times as provided for in this document. The responsibility
for calling regular meetings shall reside with the Chair.
- Notice of regular faculty meetings should
be provided in writing to all full-time faculty members at least one week prior
to the meeting. An agenda of business to be conducted shall accompany
the notice.
- Special department meetings may be called
by the Chair or by a majority of the bargaining unit faculty. If called
by a majority of BUFMs, the meeting may be chaired by a BUFM selected by those
present.
- Regular meetings of the department faculty
shall be conducted by the Chair of the department.
- The principle of majority vote among those
department members present will prevail in all department faculty recommendations
unless otherwise agreed or on issues reserved for BUFMs only. A majority
of the department’s faculty eligible to vote on an issue will constitute a
quorum. In order to vote on any item, a quorum must be present.
- Proxy voting is not allowed.
- Minutes of the department faculty meetings
shall be taken by the department secretary or alternatively by a member of
the faculty. A written copy of the minutes shall be made available for
faculty review in a timely manner.
C. Department
Committees and Representatives
- Department
representatives to RSCOB standing committees shall be elected by department
faculty as appropriate and should represent the interest of the department.
Faculty may be appointed to ad hoc department or non-department committees
by the department Chair; the appointed faculty is expected to represent the
interest of the department. The department's representative to the
RSCOB P&T committee must hold the rank of tenured full professor.
- There
are three department standing committees: Curriculum Committee, P&T Committee
and Bylaws Review Committee.
- All department
full-time faculty members shall serve on the Curriculum Committee. This
committee is chaired by the department Chair who is a non-voting member of
the committee.
The
Curriculum Committee has the responsibility:
- for
making recommendations on all aspects of the graduate and undergraduate curriculum,
including assessment and student petitions
- for
making recommendations to the Chair regarding department scholarships and
awards, and
- to
meet no less than once a quarter during the academic year
- to
handle all student petitions
- The P&T committee is chaired by the department
representative to the RSCOB P&T committee and consists of all tenured bargaining
unit associate and full professors in the department. The department
Chair is a non-voting member of P&T committee.
The P&T
committee shall:
- Be
responsible for peer evaluation of teaching
- provide
annual feedback to all untenured BUFMs on progress towards promotion and tenure,
- make
recommendations for applications for graduate faculty membership
- make
recommendations on applications for promotion and tenure,
- make
recommendations regarding professional development proposals submitted by department
faculty,
- evaluate
all applications for graduate faculty status,
- appoint
a mentor for all non-tenured, full-time faculty,
- provide
all tenured Assistant & Associate professors in the Bargaining Unit an
annual statement on progress towards promotion, unless the individual requests
in writing for the review to be every three years.
- The Bylaws Review Committee is formed by
the election of three or more BUFMs. The primary responsibility of the
Bylaws Committee is the ongoing review of existing bylaws for consistency with:
College Bylaws, the Collective Bargaining Agreement, and changes within the
department. When
inconsistencies are found, the Bylaws Review Committee is responsible for drafting
changes to the Department Bylaws to rectify the inconsistencies. Proposed
changes must be approved by a majority of the department BUFMs. Once
approved at this level, they must be approved at the College Dean and the Faculty
Governance Committee levels before they can go into effect. The Bylaws
Review Committee is also responsible for reviewing suggested changes in the
bylaws provided by members of the Department. In response to these suggestions,
the committee is to explain why a suggested change may or may not be allowed
under existing rules, contracts etc. and draft changes where required.
- Department ad-hoc committees may be formed
at any time by the department Chair or by a majority vote of the BUFMs.
|
