The Faculty Senate met at 3:15 p.m. in Union 237A with President Michael Bersin presiding.

ROLL CALL:
Twenty-two senators and two alternates were present. Alternates were Bryant for Ben Yates and Alkire for Bacon. Also present were Provost Carter and Dr. Waller.

MINUTES AND COMMITTEE NOTES of the December 12 Faculty Senate meeting were approved as printed.

ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Provost Carter announced that promotion and tenure dossiers were due in his office January 20. The winter planning retreat will take place in the Union ballroom on January 22. The focus will be the budget. Kala Stroup, Commission of Higher Education will be the guest speaker in the afternoon. The Governors State of the State address will be on January 23. There are no classes on January 22 in honor of Martin Luther King Day. Many activities are planned on January 22 and 23, including over 1,000 attending the scholarship dinner in the Multi. Ward/Edwards has opened but not complete yet. Carter received suggestions for faculty membership on the Strategic Planning & Resource Council. President Patton has approved the changes with faculty being elected by colleges. The President will appoint one additional faculty member. The chair of the FS University Budget Advisory Committee will also serve on the Council. Fifteen can vote out of the total 20 members. In response to Bob Yates’ question regarding a possible state of financial emergency being eminent, Carter said not as it is stated in the retrenchment document. But we will have tough times the next couple of years. In response to Limback, Carter said there is no intent to take off the table any increases promised for summer session faculty.

Bersin referred to the distributed information from a meeting he and Myers had with President Patton & Provost Carter, President’s Cabinet and Academic Council meetings. Bersin referred to the distributed response from President Patton regarding the faculty compensation motion FS 2001-2002-6, university budget analysis/reallocation process which was approved by the SPRC and SPRC charge modifications. (Carter reported that it has since been modified and will be available at the Retreat.) Bersin and Myers will meet with the President Patton monthly through April. Contact Bersin with concerns.

OLD BUSINESS:
Johnson moved, it was seconded and approved to act as a quasi-committee of the whole in which President Bersin would serve as chair to review the December 12 version of the Promotion & Tenure document. Suggestions were received from Arts and Sciences caucus as follows.

Modify page 3 under Criteria for Promotion. All candidates are expected to demonstrate excellence in teaching1 and achievements in both service and scholarship. Achievements in service and scholarship need not be balanced, but in toto they must demonstrate that a candidate is worthy of promotion to the next rank.

The three levels of professional rank should be thought of as a continuum of performance from the potential to the actual -- potential at the assistant level to actual at the full professor level. The following are the standards for each rank.

a. Assistant Professor. Promotion to assistant professor is based upon potential for professional development and excellence in teaching. A strong academic record should be present. There should be a clear indication that the individual has the aptitudes of a successful faculty member and will grow in stature and eventually qualify for the rank of associate professor.

b. Associate Professor. Promotion to associate professor is based upon actual performance as well as future potential. Above all, the individual should still be demonstrating excellence in teaching while developing professionally. A candidate for associate professor should be well on the way toward becoming a recognized contributor to his/her field of specialization. It is assumed that candidates meet all requirements of the assistant professorship prior to promotion to associate professor.

Faculty in each department shall specify in writing how these criteria are operationally defined within their specific disciplines, using their appropriate departmental, college, disciplinary, and/or interdisciplinary forums. These disciplinary and interdisciplinary operational definitions of criteria shall be given to all faculty in those areas and shall be used by departmental and college promotion and tenure committees and administrators at all levels in their deliberations.

[While the guidelines specified above indicate minimum requirements, meeting them does not guarantee promotion.] The faculty of individual colleges may adopt college guidelines that are consistent with but more rigorous or explicit than the university policy.

Best opened discussion regarding possible problems in some disciplines if the proposed striking of the sentence is approved. After Bob Yates, Kemp, Eason, Limback and Bersin if was agreed that professional judgement comes into play. Provost Carter suggested adding a statement regarding professional judgement. After comments by Joy, Johnson, Palmer, Atkinson, Lynch and Bersin, Small moved to keep the sentence but amend it to read "While the guidelines specified above indicate minimum requirements, departmental and college promotion committees are expected to utilize professional judgement in evaluating and recommending candidates for promotion." Seconded. After further discussion by Atkinson, Small, Morgan, Yates and Myers reference to page 1 item b.2, Small withdrew his amendment. The Arts and Sciences changes were approved with 22 yes votes and one abstention.

Under the Tenure section, page 14, under "d. Criteria for Awarding of Tenure"--end of this section

Rewrite the paragraph to read "All candidates are expected to demonstrate excellence in teaching1 and achievements in both service and scholarship. Achievements in service and scholarship need not be balanced, but in toto they must demonstrate achievement appropriate for someone at the candidate’s current rank."

Add the following paragraph.

"At the rank of instructor, a candidate for tenure is expected to demonstrate excellence in teaching, service to the university community, and evidence of keeping abreast with developments in the discipline. The last criterion could be demonstrated by such activities as attending conferences and updating course content and teaching techniques."

A vote to divide the two paragraph proposals was approved with 21 yes votes and 2 no votes.

After discussion regarding tiers and renewing one-year contracts, Atkinson’s call for the question failed. After further discussion regarding terminal degrees, accrediting agency requirements, tenure allowing academic freedom, and AAUP regulations with six-year limits, Bryant called for the question. Passed with 16 yes votes, 3 no votes and 3 abstentions. There was a unanimous vote to substitute the first paragraph.

A&S withdrew the motion of the added paragraph.

There were no objections to the following editorial changes:

Change the heading for the service section and all references to it to Service instead of Service and Professional Recognitions since we have put recognitions into the Teaching and Scholarship/Creative Activity sections as well.

Promotion section, page 4, & tenure section page 16, in the paragraph that begins NOTE:

The word "activities" needs to be added again at the end of the first sentence after the word "professional."

Page 16, tenure section, item e. (1) The last word of the first paragraph needs to be "tenure" not "promotion."

Page 18, tenure section, item k., the last sentence of the first paragraph. Omit the word "promotion" and the slash so that the sentence reads "Each review level must communicate its recommendation for or against tenure to each candidate in accordance with the deadlines described above."

Page 6, promotion section, item k., the last sentence of the first paragraph. Omit the word "tenure" and the slash so that the sentence reads "Each review level must communicate its recommendation for or against promotion to each candidate in accordance with the deadlines described above."

Page18, under the heading The Tenure Dossier, paragraph 1, sentence 2 should read

"The dossier represents both quantitative and qualitative data concerning the candidate’s total contribution to the advancement of the students, the academic community at Central Missouri State University and the candidate’s professional discipline."

Myers referred to the five implementation items for discussion noting that items #1 and #2 were already approved.

After Provost Carter expressed concern with promotion in #5 Myers amended it to read. The new tenure policy will apply immediately to all full-time non-tenure track faculty starting with the 2002-2003 academic year with accumulation of years of creditable service for tenure commencing in the 2002-2003 academic year. In response to Yates, Myers stated that starting 2002-2003 anyone applying needs to start at year one. Yates said there should be language to allow those already for tenure to continue. Small said six years from now there might be many instructors applying for tenure. Bersin said we would not want to go there, as it could be a legal issue.

Myers referred to item #4 that read. The Calendar for Promotion Consideration will apply immediately to all faculty.

Mihalevich moved to adjourn. The motion was seconded and passed.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:05 p.m.

Ginny McTighe, Faculty Senate Secretary

The next meeting will be on January 30, 2002.

Meeting 12 - Central Missouri State University - January 30, 2002

Faculty Senate Minutes 
(approved as corrected 2-6-02)

please click on the month names below to view the minutes from that month

January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December