Minutes: FACAS Meeting, 8/30/07
Time and Location: 10:30 – 11:30 am, KL 533
Present: D. Biers, G.
Doyle (chair),
Absent: T. Lasley, C. Letavec, D. Sink,
1. The minutes of 8/23/07 were approved.
2. Information was passed out concerning the 2008 health care program. Increases in the premiums, co-pays, deductibles, and prescription plan were noted. These changes place UD in the position of paying 85% of the health cost, the employee 15%. The median at other institutions is 75%/25%.
3. The Promotion and Tenure Policy was discussed briefly. Dave Biers will announce the informational sessions and election procedure at the Faculty meeting on September 7. Open discussions will he held at the senate meeting on September 14 and also at special open meetings on September 11 and 12. Balloting will occur during the week of September 17. At the Academic Leadership Conference in the spring there was some concern about the faculty writing letters to a dean or the Provost bringing forth information that was previously not considered during promotion or tenure proceedings. The new policy allows for this procedure, which has been the practice in the past.
4. The philosophy of the Post-tenure Review policy was discussed. It was thought that the review was primarily to suggest further developmental paths for faculty.
The following list was suggested for discussion.
a. There was some thought that we should make a statement that the policy is in line with Catholic-Marianist principles. On the other hand, such a statement should be worded carefully so as not to be “intimidating” to some faculty.
b. There was a good agreement on the concept of making the review purely developmental. The faculty member would be informed by the review team that he or she is “competent,” and may suggest processes by which he or she could develop further. Such suggestions may include summer research or teaching grants. A list is needed.
c. If the faculty member is judged to be competent, the chair will be informed that the review had taken place, and there was no need of administrative action. The review will not be made public.
d. When reviewing a faculty member, teaching, scholarship and service will be addressed. However, the faculty member’s performance in these three areas will depend on his or her goals, which may change during a career. The department must have a reasonable amount of flexibility in establishing competency. For example, in a given year or semester it is possible that a faculty member may want to concentrate on contract research and avoid committee work and do only a minimum of teaching. The review committee will have to judge if the goals and performance of the faculty member contribute substantially to the department, college/school, university, community, or profession.
e. If the review team finds the faculty member’s competency questionable, the chair/dean shall be notified and other processes would “kick in.” A list of “incompetencies” must be developed so that there is consistency across the university.
f. Some thought was given to the review committee makeup. Random selection in department, assigned by chair, chosen by faculty member, a member outside of the department, etc.
5. The next meeting will be at 10:30 am on Thursday, September 6, 2007 in KL 505.