Special Meeting

Faculty Senate Special Meeting Agenda I. Call to Order and Roll Call, B. Hale II. Public Occasions Report, S. Sedigh Sarvestani (5 mins) III. Changes to CR&R re: Diversity and Inclusion Audit, T. Schuman (5 mins) Changes to CR&R 310: Post Tenure Review, T. Schuman (5 mins) V. Administrative Review Process AY 2016-17, N. Stone (20 mins) VI. Adjourn

Faculty Senate Special Meeting Agenda I. Call to Order and Roll Call II. Public Occasions Report, S. Sedigh Sarvestani (5 mins) III. Changes to CR&R re: Diversity and Inclusion Audit, T. Schuman (5 mins) Changes to CR&R 310: Post Tenure Review, T. Schuman (5 mins) V. Administrative Review Process AY 2016-17, N. Stone (20 mins) VI. Adjourn

Dr. Sedigh Sarvestani Public occasions

Changes to Composition, Time, and Date of Commencement Ceremonies Proposed by the Office of the Registrar, at the Request of the Commencement Committee Approved by the Public Occasions Committee Presented to the Faculty Senate on Dec. 14, 2016

Presented to the Faculty Senate on Dec. 14, 2016 Summary Changes are proposed to commencement ceremonies from Spring 2017 onwards. They would like to award PhD, MS, and undergraduate degrees in both ceremonies. The departments corresponding to each ceremony will be selected to balance the number of graduates across the two events. They are asking that the afternoon ceremony be moved up to 3:30pm, to shorten the gap between the two ceremonies. Presented to the Faculty Senate on Dec. 14, 2016

Changes to SP 2017 Academic Dates and Deadlines Proposed change: Commencement ceremony for graduate and undergraduate degrees in designated departments: 10:00 am on Saturday, May 13 Commencement ceremony for graduate and undergraduate degrees in designated departments: 3:30 pm on Saturday, May 13 Original: Commencement ceremony for undergraduate degrees in arts, science, and business and all graduate degrees: 10:00 am on Saturday, May 13 Commencement ceremony for undergraduate degrees in engineering and computing: 4:00 pm on Saturday, May 13 Presented to the Faculty Senate on Dec. 14, 2016

Changes to FS 2017 Academic Dates and Deadlines Proposed change: Commencement ceremony for graduate and undergraduate degrees in designated departments: 10:00 am on Saturday, Dec. 16 Commencement ceremony for graduate and undergraduate degrees in designated departments: 3:30 pm on Saturday, Dec. 16 Original: Commencement ceremony for undergraduate degrees in arts, science, and business and all graduate degrees: 10:00 am on Saturday, Dec. 16 Commencement ceremony for undergraduate degrees in engineering and computing: 4:00 pm on Saturday, Dec. 16 Presented to the Faculty Senate on Dec. 14, 2016

Changes to SP 2018 Academic Dates and Deadlines Proposed change: Commencement ceremony for graduate and undergraduate degrees in designated departments: 10:00 am on Saturday, May 12 Commencement ceremony for graduate and undergraduate degrees in designated departments 3:30 pm on Saturday, May 12 Original: Commencement ceremony for undergraduate degrees in arts, science, and business and all graduate degrees: 10:00 am on Saturday, May 12 Commencement ceremony for undergraduate degrees in engineering and computing: 4:00 pm on Saturday, May 12 Presented to the Faculty Senate on Dec. 14, 2016

Faculty Senate Special Meeting Agenda I. Call to Order and Roll Call II. Public Occasions Report, S. Sedigh Sarvestani (5 mins) III. Changes to CR&R re: Diversity and Inclusion Audit, T. Schuman (5 mins) Changes to CR&R 310: Post Tenure Review, T. Schuman (5 mins) V. Administrative Review Process AY 2016-17, N. Stone (20 mins) VI. Adjourn

CR&R audit: Diversity and Inclusion Dr. Schuman CR&R audit: Diversity and Inclusion

Diversity and Inclusion CR&R Referrals AFS (academic implications, if any) No impact on academic freedom or standards Personnel Report summary following slide Student Affairs (student-admin relationships) (MET; NO REPORT) Student Conduct (although judicial in nature, familiar with process issues) (NO REPORT)

Personnel: Div and Incl Audit CR&R The Personnel Committee had notable objections to several suggested changes: In the hearing process review at 200.020.C.4.a (and likely elsewhere), there is no rationale that three business days, rather than five, is better. Pre-tenure Nondiscrimination statement in 200.020 and at 320.070.E – why is the statement here? This seems an odd location to give what should be an important umbrella statement in the CRR. This should be in Chapter 10, 20, 90, or make a Chapter 40. Diversity and inclusion also should be in a similar umbrella statement. 340.010.C.1. – the definition of eligible requires 50 employees within 75 miles, which seems to exclude some employees such as faculty at MSU. The prior wording did not have this limit. 340.010.C.11. The idea that a key employee may be terminated notes “among the highest paid ten percent of the work force within 75 miles of the place where the employee is employed”. This is directly from FMLA but had dropped FMLA’s statement that this is the work force “employed by the employer”. The proposed wording likely means every MU and S&T professor is a key employee. This should state the “University work force”, given that the federal interpretation is apparently “employed by the employer”. Separately, denial of re-employment at return is a stupid and evil policy – the employee should be notified immediately of likely termination. There should be categories or examples of key employees and a right of appeal process.

Personnel: Div and Incl Audit CR&R (cont’d) 340.010 vs 340.070 – the new version deletes protection against heavier work load that was at 340.070.B.2.c.(4) – an employee should enjoy such protection from heavier work load upon return. 600.040.B – add “…with agreement of the GRP panel…” such that this reads: “…the University shall have the authority to investigate and take appropriate action regarding each of the Complainant’s allegations pursuant to this equity resolution process with the agreement of the Grievance Resolution Panel (i.e. the Academic Grievance Procedure shall not apply).” Have a similar statement at 600.050.B, that to not have the grievance procedure apply, require the agreement of someone. 180.040 – the rest of the world works using the legal name, and if a student is not findable by legal name, how do we find them/their records? If faculty receive request for recommendation using a legal name and we don’t know that name, how do we know who the person is? Having a preferred name entry, yes, but show us both legal and preferred name in a single display unit (e.g. William (Eric) Showalter).

Faculty Senate Special Meeting Agenda I. Call to Order and Roll Call II. Public Occasions Report, S. Sedigh Sarvestani (5 mins) III. Changes to CR&R re: Diversity and Inclusion Audit, T. Schuman (5 mins) IV. Changes to CR&R 310: Post Tenure Review, T. Schuman (5 mins) V. Administrative Review Process AY 2016-17, N. Stone (20 mins) VI. Adjourn

CR&R: post-tenure review Dr. Schuman CR&R: post-tenure review

Post Tenure Review CR&R Referrals Tenure (Policy) committee Requests a “bit more time” MAE “too prescriptive and bureaucratic. We believe that annual and five-year review procedures should be developed by chairs and faculty of a department and college to create incentives for faculty growth and development. The proposed changes appear to be developed to address the behavior of a few low performing faculty and not to foster a creative, innovative environment necessary to establish and maintain a vibrant department.” I replied that “a simple ‘No’ was OK but I would prefer suggestions as to a better policy.” Tom Schuman has made a strong case that the legislature would like to see action taken concerning less-than-effective faculty. Committee reaction to the post-tenure review proposals has thus far has been mixed. The exact nature of the problem has not yet been defined; it might be limited to a few low-performing faculty, in which case the matter could possibly be handled at the campus level rather than by adding to the CRR.

Post Tenure Review CR&R Referrals Personnel committee The Personnel Committee, having reviewed the proposal, recommends that FS endorse the proposed changes to the CRR subject to grammar-level changes

Faculty Senate Special Meeting Agenda I. Call to Order and Roll Call II. Public Occasions Report, S. Sedigh Sarvestani (5 mins) III. Changes to CR&R re: Diversity and Inclusion Audit, T. Schuman (5 mins) Changes to CR&R 310: Post Tenure Review, T. Schuman (5 mins) V. Administrative Review Process AY 2016-17, N. Stone (20 mins) VI. Adjourn

Administrative Review Committee 2016-2017 members: Dr. Ali Hurson Dr. V. A. Samaranayake Dr. William Schonberg Dr. Nancy J. Stone, Chair

Academic Review Committee Who will be reviewed. Process of administering surveys. Use/disclosure of results. Tentative timeline and activities

Who Will be Reviewed October 24, 2016 ARC meeting Considered too soon to evaluate the Chancellor and Provost Agreed to follow review process proposed by 2015-2016 Administrative Review Committee after checking with RP&A and Faculty Senate President. Informed of “faculty consensus vote” to review Chancellor every year. Provost every two years. No written record of such “faculty consensus vote” Confirmed by Faculty Senate President and Past President after last Faculty Senate meeting. Only reference to timing of reviews of Chancellor and Provost found in ARC 2015-2016 Annual Report (July 5, 2016) “The committee, given the views shared by many in the Faculty Senate, recommends one amendment to the above schedule: the Chancellor and Provost be reviewed every two years.”

Who Will be Reviewed The committee moves: “The Vice Chancellors of: Global and Strategic Partnerships Human Resources, Equity and Inclusion Finance and Administration University Advancement, and Student Affairs are to be reviewed in the 2016-2017 academic year.”

Process of Administering Surveys Issues of trust. Considered third party, but will not use. Cheryl McKay will administer surveys. Qualtrics Security Individualized links Do not have to complete in one session. Can return on any machine, can go back/forward until final submit. Prohibit ballot box stuffing Can only submit once Anonymize Distribution list Pilot testing Distribution of surveys Will verify e-mail lists

Process of Administering Surveys Who will complete reviews* Tenured/tenure-track faculty, and non-tenure track full-time faculty members holding the rank of instructor or above, which includes full-time, ranked, non- regular faculty (non-tenure track (NTT) faculty) and full-time, unranked, non- regular faculty. Individuals who will not complete reviews: Staff. Visiting professors. Appointments to positions involving duties substantially different from those of regular appointees, such as academic field staff appointments in Extension; Lecturer, Assistant Instructor, Research Assistant, Research Associate, Graduate Research Assistant, Graduate Teaching Assistant, Extension Assistant, Extension Associate, Student Assistant, and others of like nature; coaches of intercollegiate athletics. *Descriptions of faculty from 300.030 Faculty Bylaws of the Missouri University of Science and Technology and 310.035 Non-Tenure Track Faculty and 310.020 Regulations Governing Application of Tenure

Process of Administering Surveys Type of data we will collect Discussion of questions ongoing. Currently, Approximately 15-20 items about individual’s performance 4-5 global measures with 3-4 more specific measures Written comments Discussed reliability and validity issues Type of data we do not plan to collect Information about respondents (e.g., college, sex, level, position)

Use/Disclosure of Results The results will be shared with the individual reviewed, then the immediate supervisor, and then the faculty senate officers.  Beyond these recipients of the results, the Administrative Review Committee members will maintain confidentiality of the results. The Administrative Review Committee cannot guarantee respondents confidentiality of individual comments, if the Faculty Senate chooses to disclose individual comments at some later time.

Tentative Timeline & Activities End of November Job descriptions due January 26, 2017 Questions to Faculty Senate for review/approval End of January Statement of accomplishments due February 23, 2017 Final approval of questions March Review administration (ending before spring break) April Results to Faculty Senate Officers

Agenda Adjourn