diff --git "a/converted_dataset.csv" "b/converted_dataset.csv"
new file mode 100644--- /dev/null
+++ "b/converted_dataset.csv"
@@ -0,0 +1,74197 @@
+text
+"<s>[INST] 1st Draft Rewrite of Termination Due to Financially Contingent Situations.txt [/INST] Termination Due to Financially Contingent Situations and Resource Allocation
+
+Termination of a tenured faculty member or, prior to the end of the term of appointment, of a tenure-track faculty member may occur because of the declaration of a financially contingent situation as described below. 
+
+	
+
+	Criteria
+
+The criteria to be employed in financially contingent situations in allocating resources to University programs and services fall under three headings: Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality. These will at times compete and at other times converge. If and when Ohio Wesleyan University meets contingencies that require institutional contraction and reorganization, these sets of criteria will be used in complementary fashion as guidelines. The order of their enumeration should not be taken to indicate their order of priority. Neither should it be presumed that all three will be weighed equally in making particular decisions. Particular circumstances may encourage the assignment of greater weight to one or another in particular cases, even though in financially contingent situations it is to be expected that fiscal pressure may emphasize reference to the criterion of cost effectiveness. What is important is that the campus community, in considering contingency reductions, identify and grapple directly with what are likely to be very difficult choices from among options that all carry significant costs and/or benefits in terms of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality. The objective must be to arrive at wise judgments.
+
+	MISSION
+
+Because Ohio Wesleyan University is a specific private university with a specific heritage, a major consideration associated with any reduction or change in size will be to preserve its essential character by maintaining those programs and activities judged to be more central to that character. To do so will require reference to several questions. How closely does the program or service in question fit the stated mission of Ohio Wesleyan University? How importantly does it contribute toward a non-curricular campus ambience vital to Ohio Wesleyan's liberal arts heritage? Is it essential in serving other programs?
+
+	COST EFFECTIVENESS & MARKETABILITY
+
+Attentiveness to the cost effectiveness and marketability of programs and services is a key characteristic of a well-run institution. Cost-effectiveness must be one guideline in determining staffing levels and whether or not to maintain programs or services. The University must therefore be sensitive to the constituencies it serves and to their preferences. While Ohio Wesleyan cannot mindlessly add or subtract staff or programs or services to track short-term fluctuations in cost effectiveness, neither can it ignore longer term or more profound shifts as it decides which subject areas, programs, or services to maintain and at what staffing levels. The following non-prescriptive questions related to cost effectiveness and marketability must be asked: What is the relationship between direct expenses and revenues in a given area? What is the actual and relative cost of a graduation unit (or, in the case of non-academic areas, other service unit)? What is the trend line for both, and for enrollments and student/staff ratio? Is the program or service a ""native recruiter?"" Is it duplicative?  What is the present and future demand for the program among existing and potential student populations as measured by internal data sets (e.g., enrollments, numbers of majors, programs served, etc.), labor market projections, external stakeholder feedback, and national and state policy/economic projections and placement data?
+
+	QUALITY
+
+Since the primary purpose of Ohio Wesleyan University is to provide excellent instruction in the liberal arts and selected career options, and comparable quality in non-academic services, it must consider program or service quality in making program, service, and faculty staffing decisions. In dealing with any financially contingent situation, it will seek to retain its best personnel, programs, and services, as one top priority. It will strive to adjust programs and services and retain or retrain individuals so as to maintain the best possible teaching and learning environment. Major issues associated with this guideline are complex and difficult. Among them are the following: Is the program or service and its staff faculty generally perceived by Faculty (staff, where non-academic services may be involved), students, and alumni to be of high quality? Do students, in or associated with it, perform throughout the University at average or higher levels? Is the staff faculty versatile as well as strong?
+
+	The guidelines of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality are contradictory. Any one of them used exclusively could lead to very serious imbalances in the focus and operation of the University. Recognition that each of these three needs to be considered and that each provides an outward boundary for the decision process will encourage an intelligent and equitable response to financially contingent situations as well as to ordinary conditions.
+
+	Making Contingency Decisions
+
+If financially contingent situations require reductions in personnel and/or academic departments or programs resulting in the termination of faculty appointments or services , the University will balance a need for timely action with the need for shared decision-making.  In both determining whether such a situation exists and in shaping difficult decisions that contingencies might require, the President will engage in extensive consultation with appropriate faculty committees, administrators, and where conditions allow, students, before making a recommendation to the Board of Trustees as follows:  
+
+Determination of Financial Contingency
+
+When a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent that might require reductions in academic departments or programs, the President will present to the Committee on University Governance evidence supporting the President’s assessment that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent and that reasonable means for coping with the situation have been exhausted without resorting to the elimination of faculty positions.  The Committee on University Governance will review the evidence within the time prescribed by the President and transmit to the President and Board of Trustees either: 
+
+An endorsement of the President’s assessment; or 
+
+Its own assessment, explicitly stating its point(s) of disagreement with the President. 
+
+The Board of Trustees will not make a determination on whether a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent until it has received the report from the Committee on University Governance or the deadline prescribed by the President has elapsed.  These determinations and resulting document(s) shall be considered private and confidential unless the Board of Trustees agrees to make all or portions of them public. 
+
+After completing the above steps, the Board of Trustees shall determine whether a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent and retains ultimate authority for declaring that a financially contingent situation exists or is imminent.
+
+
+
+Framing of Proposal to Address Financial Contingent Situation
+
+Responsibility for framing a proposal for program or services and/or personnel reductions to deal with a financially contingent situation will rest with the President.  The proposal, when it pertains to academic programs and/or personnel, will be referred to the Committee on Academic Programs as to curricular impact, to the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee as to the implications for the academic plan, to the Faculty Personnel Committee as to personnel implications, and to the affected programs. When the proposal pertains to non-academic programs, services, and/or personnel, it will be forwarded to the Governance Committee and the Senior Leadership Team Cabinet for consideration. These bodies will hold hearings as part of their deliberations. At the discretion of the President, an advisory student committee may also be created. These groups will severally consider the proposal(s) and in doing so may consult widely with faculty, students, and, where appropriate, with staff. They are to complete their deliberations within 30 calendar days of receipt of the President's proposal(s) and report their findings and recommendations to the President immediately upon finishing their deliberations. They may recommend acceptance, alteration, or otherwise, of the President's proposal(s). If and when they are unable to achieve concurrence with the President, and the President yet judges that reductions must be made, the President will report to the Board of Trustees the proposed course of action. If there is a difference of views between the President and the committees, the President will ensure that the committees' proposals are forwarded to the Trustees  with the President’s proposal(s). The Board of Trustees retains ultimate authority for approving proposals as to program and position reductions and terminations responding to a financially contingent situation.
+
+After the completion and implementation of decisions for institutional contraction to deal with a financially contingent situation, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.
+
+In the event that the Board of Trustees declares that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent, the President shall be responsible for framing a proposal for addressing the situation.  If the proposal might require reductions in academic departments or interdisciplinary programs and the termination of faculty positions, the President, prior to framing the proposal, shall engage in an extensive academic program review process.
+
+Academic Program Review Process
+
+Step 1: The initial step in the Academic Program Review process will be the development by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness of a Dashboard that provides extensive quantitative data relating to all academic programs at the University. The Dashboard will be made available transparently to all faculty. 
+
+Step 2. Following the publication of the Dashboard, each academic department will be charged by Academic Affairs to complete self-studies, following criteria set by the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee (APAC). 
+
+Step 3. Following receipt of the department self-studies, APAC will evaluate each department in relation to Mission, Cost-Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality (see above) and issue a report to the President.
+
+Step 4. The President shall convene a Joint Committee comprised of eight faculty members elected by the faculty (or appointed by the Executive Committee if an election is unsuccessful) from individuals serving on each of the following faculty committees: University Governance Committee (UGC), Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC), Committee on Academic Programs (CAP), and Academic Planning and Allocation Committee (APAC).  In addition, the Joint Committee shall include the Provost and appropriate academic administrators responsible for data and curriculum as designated by the Provost.  
+
+After considering the department self-studies and APAC report, the Joint Committee shall:
+
+Develop recommendations for the appropriate number and size of departments and interdisciplinary programs, as well as the appropriate number of majors and minors;
+
+Identify opportunities for program enhancement; and
+
+Suggest the optimal configuration of departments and interdisciplinary programs. 
+
+In addressing these areas, the committee’s recommendations may include (a) the discontinuation and/or reduction of departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors; (b) the elimination of faculty positions; (c) recommendations about reconfiguring departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors by reassigning positions; (d) enhancement of programs, and (e) changes in policies and procedures that would improve the functioning or efficiency of the academic program. 
+
+The President, in consultation with the Executive Committee of the Faculty, will determine the date by which the Joint Committee’s recommendations to the President must be provided.  Following its deliberations, the Joint Committee shall issue its formal recommendations in writing to the President.  
+
+Step 5. The President will review the Joint Committee report and issue a written proposal to the members of the faculty addressing the financially contingent situation.  The President’s written proposal will also be referred to CAP as to curricular impact, to APAC as to the implications for the academic plan, to the FPC as to personnel implications, and to the affected programs identified in the proposal, each of which will have the opportunity to hold hearings over a 30-day period. The manner in which the hearings are held are at the discretion of the respective committees.  
+
+Step 6. Following the hearings, the respective committees and programs may submit to the President written recommendations for changes to the proposal.  The President will consider the recommendations. If consensus can be reached regarding the final proposal, the President will forward to the Board of Trustees a final report reflecting that consensus. If consensus cannot be reached, the President will transmit to the Board of Trustees both the President’s final proposal and the alternative proposal(s) prepared by the faculty committees and program.  The Board of Trustees shall approve the final plan to address the financial contingent situation and retains ultimate authority for approving proposals as to department or interdisciplinary program and position reductions and terminations responding to a financially contingent situation.
+
+Step 7. If the Board approved plan includes the discontinuation and/or reduction of departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors, the Faculty Personnel Committee, in consultation with the Provost, shall recommend to the President which individual positions, and therefore appointments, should be terminated. In developing recommendations, the committee will be guided by following sequence:
+
+Consideration of attrition resulting from resignation, retirement, or other severance actions. 
+
+Termination of Part-time and Visiting faculty positions within the affected department(s) or interdisciplinary program(s). 
+
+Termination of tenure-track and/or tenured positions within the affected department(s) or interdisciplinary program(s).  In the case of a reduction of a department or interdisciplinary program, as opposed to a discontinuation, the appointment of a faculty member with tenure within the same department or program will not be terminated in favor of retaining a full-time tenure-track faculty member, except in circumstances where a serious distortion of the department or interdisciplinary program would otherwise result.  
+
+In making recommendations, the following criteria, in no particular order of priority, will be considered by the Faculty Personnel Committee: 
+
+Education and professional credentials; 
+
+The length of the faculty member’s service to the University;
+
+The quality of the faculty member’s service to the University;
+
+The abilities of the individual faculty member in relation to the needs of the University and the potentially affected department or interdisciplinary program.
+
+Step 8. The President shall render the final decision on terminations for reasons of financial contingency and notify the faculty member(s) involved in accordance with the Notification provisions below. 
+
+Step 9. After the completion and implementation of decisions for institutional contraction to deal with a financially contingent situation, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.
+
+Notification
+
+Notification of termination will be sent from the President to the faculty member. The notice will specify the reasons for such termination, the effective date of termination, the faculty member's right to retraining (if applicable), and right to an appeal.
+
+In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial exigency, full-time non-tenure faculty members will be given notice or severance salary in accordance with Section 3.13.3.1.  Tenured faculty will be provided with termination payments in accordance with Section 3.13.5.1.
+
+Appeals
+
+If the administration issues notice to a particular faculty member of an intention to terminate the appointment because of financial exigency, the faculty member will have the right to file a grievance in accordance with Section 3.14.3. The issues in this hearing may include the following:
+
+The existence and extent of the condition of financial exigency. The burden will rest on the administration to prove the existence and extent of the condition. The findings of a faculty committee in a previous proceeding involving the same issue may be introduced.
+
+The validity of the educational judgments and the criteria for identification for termination; but the recommendations of a faculty committee on these matters will be considered presumptively valid.
+
+Whether the criteria are being properly applied in the individual case.
+
+Reassignment and Retraining
+
+Subject to a review of qualifications (see Section 3.4.5 - Faculty Qualification) and retraining possibilities (see Section 3.10.3 – Retraining Leave), tenured and tenure track faculty members in positions to be eliminated will be considered for suitable vacancies at the University in administrative or teaching positions. See Section 3.13.5.1 below.
+
+Reinstatement Rights
+
+When a tenured faculty position is terminated for a financial contingent situation, the position will not be filled by a new appointee with the same areas of specialization as the terminated faculty member within a period of three years, unless the released faculty member has been offered reinstatement and at least thirty days in which to accept or decline it.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] 1st Draft Rewrite Program Discontinuation.txt [/INST] 2.	Program or Department Discontinuance Due to Educational Decisions
+
+Termination of an appointment with tenure, or of a tenure track faculty member before the end of the specified term, may occur as a result of a bona fide formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction due to educational considerations not related to a financially contingent situation.  
+
+	Criteria
+
+The decision to discontinue an academic program or department of instruction will be based on long-range judgements that the educational mission of the University as whole will be enhanced by the discontinuance of an academic program or department.  Such a decision will not be based upon cyclical or temporary variations in enrollment.
+
+For purposes of this policy, academic programs and departments are defined as an academic department or program offering majors and minors that existed prior to the decision to discontinue them. The term program means a group of courses leading to a major or minor, a sequence of courses with a common prefix, a service, or support area, or any curriculum area identified as such.
+
+	Making Academic Program or Department Discontinuation Decisions
+
+A proposal to discontinue formally a program or department of instruction may be initiated by the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee, the Committee on Academic Programs, the Provost, or the President.
+
+The decision to discontinue a program or department of instruction will be based essentially upon educational considerations, as determined according to the Academic Program Review Process procedures in the Termination Due to Financially Contingent Situations and Resource Allocation Policy (see Section 3.13.5(2)(b)(2) above).  
+
+Reassignment and Retraining
+
+Before the President issues notice to a tenure line faculty member of the University’s intention to terminate an appointment because of a formal discontinuance of a program or department, the University will, subject to a review of qualifications (see Section 3.4.5 - Faculty Qualification) and retraining possibilities (see Section 3.10.3 – Retraining Leave), consider the faculty member for suitable administrative or teaching position vacations within the University.  See Section 3.13.5.1 below for additional information.
+
+When a suitable position is not available within the University, with or without retraining, and the faculty member is not agreeable to any optional alternative courses of action (i.e., change in status to part-time), the faculty member’s appointment may be terminated.
+
+Notice
+
+Notification of termination will be sent from the President to the faculty member. The notice will specify the reasons for such termination, the effective date of termination, the faculty member's right to retraining (if applicable), and right to an appeal.
+
+Full-time non-tenured faculty members will be given notice or severance salary in accordance with Section 3.13.3.1.  Tenured faculty will be provided with termination payments in accordance with Section 3.13.5.1.
+
+Appeal
+
+If the administration issues notice to a tenure line faculty member of an intention to terminate the appointment because of the formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction due to educational considerations, the faculty member will have the right to file a grievance in accordance with Section 3.14.3. 
+
+-End Alternative Text-</s>"
+"<s>[INST] 2.13 Review Team Meeting Proposed Agenda.txt [/INST] Agenda – 2.13 Meeting
+
+
+
+Barbara’s Suggesting re: Timeline
+
+Meetings for Separation
+
+Meeting for FMLA/Parental Leave
+
+Attorney or HR Rep Present
+
+*NO NEED FOR ADDITIONAL OPEN MEETINGS.  WILL DO FACULY SURVEY
+
+* Communication from Team on this?
+
+Committee Service Expectations and Chair Stipend Suggestion
+
+See John’s 2/3 Email and SL’s Response
+
+2/4/6 Evaluation Model
+
+Pre-Tenure Faculty Meeting
+
+Workload/Remote Teaching
+
+Barbara’s Comments?
+
+Department Chair Stipends – “may”
+
+Salary Scale and Equity Issues – See Anonymous Spreadsheet
+
+Contract
+
+APAC Comments
+
+Table Program Review?
+
+3.14.1 Appeals Procedure in Non-Renewal
+
+Review “Hybrid” Rewrite
+
+3.13.4 – Dismissal for Cause
+
+Remove “Charge Involving Moral Turpitude”
+
+Step 3: Reverse Order of Listing
+
+Step 6: Modify Panel Composition? 
+
+Thomas More Example: 
+
+The committee of faculty members to conduct the hearing and reach findings of fact and recommendations to the President shall be appointed by the Faculty Coordinating Committee within five (5) academic days of the President’s submission of charges.  The committee shall consist of five (5) impartial senior members of the faculty.  The choice of members of the hearing committee shall be on the basis of their objectivity and competence and of the regard in which they are held in the academic community.  The committee shall elect its own chair.
+
+Move Panel Member Challenges Text from Step 8 to 6?
+
+Step 13: Add back the AAUP Rep Text?
+
+Step 14: Strike University Text from Next Draft?
+
+3.13.5: Revise Alternative Text to Give FM Advance Notice
+
+Article IV of Faculty Bylaws: Staffing Ad Hoc Committees
+
+See Sections 4 and 5.
+
+3.6.1.6 - Presence on Campus
+
+See Barbara’s 2.14 email
+
+Phased Retirement
+
+Remove Heading?</s>"
+<s>[INST] 2.4 IT Policies (2nd Draft).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] 2.9 Review Team Meeting Proposed Agenda.txt [/INST] Agenda – 2.9 Meeting
+
+
+
+Barbara’s Suggesting re: Timeline
+
+Meetings for Separation
+
+Meeting for FMLA/Parental Leave
+
+Attorney or HR Rep Present
+
+Committee Service Expectations and Chair Stipend Suggestion
+
+See John’s 2/3 Email and SL’s Response
+
+APAC Comments
+
+Table Program Review?
+
+3.14.1 Appeals Procedure in Non-Renewal
+
+Review “Hybrid” Rewrite
+
+3.13.4 – Dismissal for Cause
+
+Remove “Charge Involving Moral Turpitude”
+
+Step 3: Reverse Order of Listing
+
+Step 6: Modify Panel Composition? Thomas More Example: The committee of faculty members to conduct the hearing and reach findings of fact and recommendations to the President shall be appointed by the Faculty Coordinating Committee within five (5) academic days of the President’s submission of charges.  The committee shall consist of five (5) impartial senior members of the faculty.  The choice of members of the hearing committee shall be on the basis of their objectivity and competence and of the regard in which they are held in the academic community.  The committee shall elect its own chair.
+
+Move Panel Member Challenges Text from Step 8 to 6?
+
+Step 13: Add back the AAUP Rep Text?
+
+Step 14: Strike University Text from Next Draft?
+
+3.13.5: Revise Alternative Text to Give FM Advance Notice
+
+Article IV of Faculty Bylaws: Staffing Ad Hoc Committees
+
+See Sections 4 and 5.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] 2022.02.16 Proposal A 4.1.1 (SS Comments & Revisions)-1-1.txt [/INST] February 16, 2022
+
+
+
+To: 	Faculty Welfare Committee
+
+From: 	Jamie Caridi, Interim President
+
+	Joe Lane, Provost
+
+	Bill Kiefer
+
+RE: 	Manual Revision #1 – 4.0 and 4.1.1
+
+
+
+Purpose – To clarify the opening section of the Manual regarding the classifications of faculty and the privileges and duties of each group.  In particular, the proposed section will clarify the status of faculty with administrative duties and “pro rata” faculty hired to contracts for specific programs and purposes.  It is intended to cover certain faculty members who would be hired under contract for the proposed graduate programs.  
+
+
+
+Presented as a replacement to existing language.
+
+
+
+NB: Throughout these sections, the language regarding the Chief Academic Officer language has been changed to replace references to the Vice President for Academic Affairs with references to the Provost (and Dean of the Faculty).  This change reflects current usage at Bethany and would be applied throughout the manual to provide consistency.  We hope this change would be considered editorial and uncontroversial.  
+
+
+
+Proposed Language
+
+
+
+Introduction
+
+Volume IV contains general policies and procedures relating to faculty members and faculty status which are intended to guarantee for the institution a faculty of as high a quality as possible and for the individual faculty member a maximum degree of fairness.  The policies and procedures herein result from action by the Board of Trustees, the Administration and the faculty acting through the Faculty Welfare Committee.  It is expected that faculty members will be aware of the contents of Volume IV and will make a conscientious effort to abide by the information contained therein.
+
+
+
+Effort has been made in this Volume IV to avoid duplication of information which appears in other documents, viz. Volumes II, III, V, VI and VII.  Faculty members shall become familiar with the contents of those documents that have significance for their professional performance.
+
+This Volume IV is incorporated by reference into the individual faculty appointment agreements of each faculty member.  Where the terms and provisions of an individual appointment agreement of a faculty member are inconsistent with the general policies contained herein, the provisions of the individual appointment agreement shall control.  
+
+
+
+Otherwise, the provisions of this Volume IV will remain in effect until changed by the procedures contained in this Volume IV.  Should there be any misapplication, misinterpretation or violation of specific provisions in this Volume, the faculty member involved should report the circumstance to the Provost.  
+
+
+
+The administrative or staff responsibilities of faculty members with administrative or staff duties are specified in the individual appointment letters of such faculty members. Faculty members with substantive administrative duties may include senior administrators (the President, Provost, Directors, or others), librarians or members of the Learning Center administration with appropriate credentials, or other members of the College staff who have appropriate credentials, teach classes as part of their assigned duties, or previously held academic appointments at other institutions.  
+
+Definition of Faculty Status, Faculty Rank and Criteria for Advancement in Rank
+
+Faculty Status
+
+Full-time Faculty
+
+A full-time faculty member is any full-time employee of Bethany College who is qualified for and currently holds an appointment to one of the academic ranks listed in Subsection 4.1.2.  A full-time faculty member fulfills the duties and responsibilities of a faculty member and ordinarily has:
+
+teaching and academic advising duties, which are enriched by scholarship, creative, and professional development, and service activities in support of the mission of the College (see Section --) equivalent to a full-time teaching load (see Section --- ); or
+
+teaching and other duties (e.g., research, academic administration, counseling, library duties, athletic department duties) equivalent to a full-time teaching load and equivalent to a full-time teaching load (see Section ---).
+
+A full-time faculty member who has continuously taught at Bethany College for at least six years is eligible to apply for sabbatical (see Subsection 4.10.2).  All full-time faculty members are considered full voting members of the faculty and may be appointed pursuant to a term, notice (tenure track or non-tenure track), or tenure agreement (see Subsection 4.2.1). 
+
+Pro-rata Faculty
+
+A pro-rata faculty member is a contractual employee of the College appointed pursuant to a term or notice appointment (see paragraphs 4.2.1.1 and 4.2.1.2, respectively), who is qualified for appointment to one of the academic ranks listed in Subsection 4.1.2 and whose primary duties are defined by the teaching of a course load determined by the Department Chair and/or the Provost.  The appropriate course-load is normally specified in the faculty member’s letter of employment and may include graduate or undergraduate teaching (or a mixture thereof), but the sum total of duties assigned to such faculty would normally be equivalent to at least a half-time appointment.  
+
+
+
+A pro-rata faculty member is not an Adjunct/Per-course faculty member.  A pro-rata faculty member has pro-rata contractual rights and may be eligible for advancement in rank and fringe benefits.  A pro-rata faculty member may have, on a pro-rata basis, responsibilities for advising, serving on committees, and other responsibilities of full-time faculty members as well as eligibility for a sabbatical, all as set forth in his or her employment agreement with the College.
+
+Adjunct Faculty/Per Unit/Per Course Faculty
+
+An Adjunct, Per Unit, or Per Course faculty member is employed pursuant to a short-term appointment (see paragraph 4.2.1.1) and carries no rank.  A Per-course faculty member may carry as many as eight or fewer credit hours per semester at the College and no more than twelve credits on an adjunct basis in any given year (a full-time teaching/advising load is defined as at least 12 hours per semester).  An Adjunct, Per Unit, or Per Course faculty member usually has no other faculty duties or responsibilities (i.e., committee obligations, advising, research, etc.), except for those specified by the department and agreed to by the faculty member accepting the Adjunct, Per Unit, or Per Course appointment.  An Adjunct, Per Unit, or Per Course faculty member does not accrue time towards sabbatical.
+
+
+
+Reappointment of Adjunct, Per Unit, or Per Course faculty is at the discretion of the College and successive reappointments do not confer continuing employment status and imply no employment rights beyond the duration of the term of employment set forth in the faculty member’s short-term appointment agreement.
+
+Appointment to an Adjunct, Per Unit, or Per Course position does not confer membership in the Faculty.  Accordingly, Adjunct, Per Unit, or Per Course Faculty are not considered full voting members of the faculty.  They are, however, invited to attend the meetings of the Faculty, with voice, but not vote. In addition, Adjunct, Per Unit, or Per Course faculty do not normally participate in the Faculty or University Standing or ad hoc committee structure.
+
+
+
+Because student enrollment and Full-time Faculty loads may not be determined until after the date that an Adjunct, Per Unit, or Per Course faculty member signs an appointment agreement, an Adjunct, Per Unit, or Per Course faculty member’s appointment is contingent upon sufficient student enrollment for the course to be taught and upon that course not being assigned as part of a Full-time Faculty member’s required teaching load.  If there is insufficient course enrollment or the course is assigned as part of a Full-time Faculty member’s required teaching load, the University reserves the right to void the Adjunct, Per Unit, or Per Course faculty member’s appointment.
+
+Administrators with Faculty Rank
+
+An Administrator with Faculty Rank is a full-time or pro-rata employee who functions in an instructional capacity outside the classroom (e.g., some librarians and learning resources faculty), or performs a combination of faculty, staff, and professional duties.  An Administrator with Faculty Rank is subject to all responsibilities and standards of teaching performance that apply to other full-time or pro-rata faculty and receives the same academic freedom as other faculty members.  With regard to the non-academic aspects of an administrator’s duties, an administrator is governed by the provisions of Volume V (Personnel Policies for Staff) of the Policy Manual.
+
+
+
+4.1.1.5	President and Provost
+
+
+
+Duly appointed officers of the College holding the positions of President and Provost (or Dean of the Faculty, Vice President of Academic Affairs, or other title for the Chief Academic Officer) hold their faculty ranks by Board appointment as specified in the By-Laws of Bethany College and Manual 1.6.  Normally the President carries the title of the M.M. Cochran Professor of Leadership Studies and the Provost carries the title of the Sarah B. Cochran Professor of the appropriate academic discipline.  These positions may be hired with tenure at the discretion of the Board.  
+
+Special Appointment Faculty
+
+Special Appointment Faculty participate in one of the College’s academic programs and make a substantial contribution to the academic activities of the University’s various academic department, but whose professional activities do not span the full range of responsibilities of the Full-time Faculty.  
+
+Special Appointment Faculty are temporary employees of the College and perform those duties and responsibilities as stated in their respective appointment agreements.  Reappointment of Special Appointment Faculty is at the discretion of the College and successive reappointments do not confer continuing employment status and imply no employment rights beyond the duration of the term of employment set forth in the appointment agreement.
+
+Special Appointment Faculty shall fulfill those duties and responsibilities related to teaching, as well as other duties as stated in the faculty member’s individual term appointment agreement.  The use of a rank designation for Special Appointment Faculty shall not be construed as eligibility for promotion in rank; Special Appointment Faculty are ineligible for promotion in rank.
+
+Appointment to a Special Appointment Faculty position does not confer membership or voting rights in the Full-tine Faculty.  A Special Appointment Faculty are, however, invited to attend the meetings of the Faculty, with voice, but not vote. In addition, Special Appointment Faculty do not participate in the Faculty or University standing or ad hoc committee structure.
+
+A Special Appointment Faculty member may apply for a posted full-time Ranked Faculty position with the University in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 4.3.1(3).  If a Special Appointment Faculty member applies for a posted Full-time Faculty position and is offered the position, the Special Appointment may negotiate credit for full-time time service at Bethany College.  In accordance with University policy, the individual must meet the minimum residency requirement as a Full-time Faculty member at the College before applying for promotion to a higher rank or tenure as applicable.
+
+
+
+Artist/Writer/Scholar-in-Residence/Visiting Ranked Faculty
+
+Bethany College may appoint artists, writers, scholars, and other distinguished individuals to the special faculty status of Artist/Writer/Scholar-in-Residence/Visiting Ranked Faculty.  Such appointments are awarded for a specific period of time and may be full-time or pro-rata depending upon the needs of Bethany College.  An Artist/Writer/Scholar-in-Residence/Visiting Ranked faculty member is appointed by the President in consultation with the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of Faculty.  The appointment is made pursuant to a term agreement for a limited period of time with no intent of on-going employment.  The appointment may be full-time, pro-rata, or per-course based on the needs of the College. 
+
+Replacement Faculty
+
+The College may appoint a replacement faculty member to full-time status for a specific period of time.  Time served under the appointment does not count towards promotion in rank or sabbatical leave unless so indicated by the President of the College at the time of hire or at the time of conversion to a tenure-track appointment.  A temporary replacement may be appointed for a faculty member who is on sabbatical, on leave, or who has retired or resigned.  The replacement faculty member may be appointed on a full-time, pro-rata, or per-course basis until such time as the regular faculty member returns or a permanent replacement is found.
+
+Emeriti Faculty
+
+In recognition of unusual and meritorious service to the College, on the recommendation of the Faculty, Retention, Tenure and Promotion Committee and the Provost and the President of the College, and subject to the approval of the Board of Trustees, a faculty member upon retirement from active full-time faculty service may receive Emeritus rank.
+
+							Specific eligibility criteria and procedures for application may be found in 1.6.3.1.1
+
+							The following materials shall be reviewed by the Faculty, Retention, Tenure and Promotion Committee:
+
+							Nomination by a current faculty member, including a rationale for consideration, highlighting significant contributions to the College, and
+
+							Current vitae.
+
+							Emeritus Rank will entitle holders to the privileges listed in section 1.6.3.1.1.
+
+Visiting Appointments
+
+Visiting appointments are reserved for faculty members of other institutions, professors emeriti, and persons distinguished in their fields.  Visiting faculty members are appointed by the President of the College after consultation with the Provost and Dean of Faculty.  Visiting faculty members will carry the rank they hold from their most recent employer or will be assigned a rank based on the criteria listed in Subsection 4.1.2.  Visiting appointments may be held for no more than three consecutive academic years.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] 2022.02.16 Proposal C 4.2.1 (SS Comments).txt [/INST] February 16, 2022
+
+
+
+To: 	Faculty Welfare Committee
+
+From: 	Jamie Caridi, Interim President
+
+	Joe Lane, Provost
+
+	Bill Kiefer
+
+RE: 	Manual Revision C – Proposed Language for new language in section 4.2.1 regarding types of contracts, terms of appointment, and conversion from contract positions to the tenure track
+
+
+
+Purpose: The proposed section clears up several areas of recent confusion, provides rules to govern contracts and re-appointment of pro-rata faculty members (as that category is expanded in proposal for 4.1), and clarifies the process for moving from a contract appointment to the tenure track. 
+
+
+
+The proposed language below also alters sections of 4.3.1.3 regarding search procedures.  
+
+
+
+Proposed Language
+
+
+
+Policies Pertaining to Faculty Appointments
+
+Types of Faculty Appointments
+
+
+
+Term Appointments
+
+Term appointments are issued for a clearly defined, limited period to pro-rata, adjunct/per-unit/per-course, visiting and special appointment faculty members.  Term appointments may also be issued to full-time faculty members in special circumstances with the approval of the President of the College for short-term curricular needs of the College.  
+
+
+
+Term appointments do not confer upon a faculty member an expectation for continued employment after the term specified in the contract expires.  No notice or action by the College is required to effectuate such expiration.  Re-employment of the faculty member after expiration of the term of the appointment is solely within the discretion of the College and no other procedures apply.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Notice Appointments
+
+Faculty members with notice appointments may expect the appointment to be renewed pursuant to the progressive schedules described below unless otherwise notified pursuant to the terms of the applicable appointment agreement.  The initial appointment is for one year. Notice appointments are subject to the policies and procedures found in Section 4.8 (Separation) of the Policy Manual, or other specific provisions with regard to Separation contained in their appointment, which specific provisions shall supersede the provisions of Section 4.8 of the Policy Manual.
+
+Appointment, Tenure Track
+
+A full-time faculty member with a terminal degree or a professional background that may be considered equivalent to a doctorate or terminal degree, who is hired into a tenure track position, may expect the appointment to be renewed annually unless otherwise notified pursuant to the terms of the applicable appointment agreement.  A person on a tenure track appointment is eligible to apply for tenure after completing a tenure track period of six years (See Section 4.7).  The tenure track period may be reduced by the President of the College after receiving the recommendation of the Faculty, Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee and the Provost.  A faculty member on a tenure track appointment is subject to annual review according to established procedures and criteria outlined under Section 4.5 – Faculty Evaluation.
+
+
+
+If tenure is not granted or the faculty member elects not to apply for tenure after completing a tenure track period of six years, the faculty member is to be given notice of release and a one-year terminal appointment.
+
+Appointment, Non-tenure Track
+
+															The College offers notice appointments to full-time and pro-rata faculty members appointed to Non-Tenure Track positions.  Faculty members receiving a non-tenure track appointment agreement are not eligible to apply for tenure status. 
+
+															
+
+															Faculty members with a non-tenure track notice appointment may expect the appointment to be renewed unless otherwise notified pursuant to the terms of the applicable appointment.  An initial non-tenure track notice appointment may be for a period of one or more academic years at the discretion of the College.  Thereafter, additional appointments of one or two years may follow. 
+
+															
+
+															Non-tenure-track, full-time, pro-rata faculty members continuing beyond the first six years of service at the College (or as otherwise set forth in the appointment) are eligible to receive successive three-year notice appointments beginning in their seventh year of employment at the College.  All notice appointments are subject to the policy and procedures found in Section 4.8 (Separation) of this Policy Manual, except to the extent that the conclusion of their most recent three-year contract or specific circumstances defined in their letter of appointment provide otherwise.  Non-tenure track faculty members are also subject to the evaluation provisions of Section 4.5.
+
+Moving to Tenure Track
+
+If an appropriate tenure-track position opens at Bethany, a non-tenure track faculty member may apply for that position.  The position would normally be expected to be filled in accordance with the Search and Appointment procedures as specified in Subsection 4.3.1.  In the event that the department chair of the relevant program and the Provost concur that a demonstrated record of successful teaching, advising, service, and scholarship support the conclusion that the immediate conversion of a current non-tenure track faculty to a tenurable line will serve both the program and the College well, they may prepare a recommendation to that effect and ask the Faculty Retention, Tenure, and Promotion (FRTP) Committee to conduct an interview with that faculty member and to make a recommendation on whether that faculty member should be converted to tenure-track.  The recommendations of the department chair, Provost, and FRTP should be forwarded to the President who may make then authorize the Provost to make such a conversion to a tenure-track line.  The Provost will communicate this decision to the faculty member and department chair.  The tenure track appointment will officially commence in the next academic year.  
+
+
+
+If a sitting faculty member is converted into a tenure track appointment, whether after a good faith search has been conducted or at the conclusion of the process described above, some or all of the faculty member’s years of service at the College may, at the discretion of Provost, on written notice from the faculty member, count toward the time by which a tenure decision is due.  If a transfer is granted, application for tenure must be made when the faculty member becomes eligible.  If tenure is not granted or the faculty member elects not to apply for tenure after completing a tenure track period of six years, the faculty member is to be given notice of release and a one-year terminal appointment
+
+
+
+Tenure
+
+Tenured faculty members are entitled to annual appointment renewal and shall be subject to the terms and conditions of employment that exist at the time of each annual renewal and are further subject to the separation policies in Section 4.8. 
+
+Terminal Appointment
+
+A terminal appointment is the final appointment issued to a faculty member in the case of denial of tenure, non-renewal, resignation or cases of mutual agreement, including retirement.
+
+
+
+4.3.1.3 
+
+	In the event that there is an acceptable candidate already holding a faculty appointment, and if the Department Chair, the Provost, and the President concur that this candidate should receive the appointment, such acceptable candidate may be appointed to fill the vacancy without a search, eliminating the need for the steps set forth in paragragh 4 through 6 hereof.  Otherwise the position is advertised in appropriate academic media.  Any such advertisements are to be in accordance with Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity guidelines (see Volume II, Subsection 2.1.1).</s>"
+"<s>[INST] 2022.02.16 Proposal D 4.2.3 (SS Comments).txt [/INST] February 16, 2022
+
+
+
+To: 	Faculty Welfare Committee
+
+From: 	Jamie Caridi, Interim President
+
+	Joe Lane, Provost
+
+	Bill Kiefer
+
+RE: 	Manual Revision #4 – Proposed Language for new language in section 4.2.3 regarding the dates of appointment letters
+
+
+
+Purpose: The proposed section changes the release date for faculty appointment letters and contracts to reconcile the internal tension in the current language.  Recent years have repeatedly demonstrated that the April 15 date cannot be met if letters are going to be “pursuant to a Board-approved budget” as the language indicates.  
+
+
+
+Under the new terms, the Board will be responsible for passing a budget by their early May meeting each year.  Contracts will follow immediately thereafter and no later than the end of May so that agreements may be returned by no later than June 14 (10 business days after their delivery to faculty members).  
+
+
+
+It is essential that contracts be secured by no later than mid-June to assure that the College can appropriately plan for course coverage for the Fall semester.  
+
+
+
+A clause has been added to indicate that potential COLA, raises, and merit pay (but only increases in salary) may be issues after the Fall Census to be effective on January 1.  Moving future increases to a calendar year basis will make it possible to adjust salaries when sufficient enrollment makes such increases possible.  
+
+
+
+Proposed Language
+
+
+
+Issuance and Receipt of Appointment Agreements
+
+Ranked, full-time faculty appointment offers for an upcoming academic year are normally to be issued on or before May 31 and become void if not signed and returned within ten working days.
+
+
+
+Pro-rata appointments are generally issued on this date, but they may be issued on other schedules on an individual basis as the necessity arises.  
+
+
+
+All per-course adjunct appointments are issued on an individual basis by the Provost in advance of the semester for which they are required.
+
+
+
+Salaries of the members of the faculty other than the President of the College shall be fixed by the President of the College within the Board of Trustees’ approved budget for the upcoming academic year.  The appointment becomes official when the written agreement offered by the President of the College to the prospective faculty member is signed in triplicate by both parties.  A copy is retained on file in the Office of Human Resources, the second copy is retained on file in the Office of Provost, and the third copy is returned to the appointee.
+
+
+
+Increases in salary for members of the faculty may be issued with the annual contracts in May, but increases (whether COLA, across-the-board increases, or merit increases for particular faculty members) may be based on the Fall semester census and released following the Board of Trustees fall meeting.  Such increases will normally be effective on January 1 of the academic year for which they are issued and will be considered to increase the expected base pay for subsequent academic years unless otherwise specifically noted.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] 2022.02.16 Proposal E 4.8 (Layoff) (SS Comments).txt [/INST] February 16, 2022
+
+
+
+To: 	Faculty Welfare Committee
+
+From: 	Jamie Caridi, Interim President
+
+	Joe Lane, Provost
+
+	Bill Kiefer
+
+RE: 	Manual Revision #5 – Proposed Language for new language in section 4.8 regarding academic reorganization, order of lay-offs, etc.
+
+
+
+Purpose: The revision of this section is intended to provide an orderly process by which the administration may initiate an orderly process for assessing academic programs in cases in which changes may be needed without risking the reputational damage to the College that declarations of exigency or enrollment emergency may incur.  
+
+
+
+The proposed revisions are aimed to provide a fair process, timely decisions, and relatively expedited resolution of any necessary separations.  
+
+
+
+Proposed Language
+
+
+
+4.8.5. Layoffs
+
+Layoff is a severance action by which the College terminates the services of a faculty member before the expiration of the faculty member’s current appointment, without prejudice as to the faculty member’s performance.
+
+
+
+Decisions about layoffs are recommended by the President of the College to the Board of Trustees.  The Board of Trustees may also mandate or recommend such changes, under its fiduciary responsibility, through the President of the College.  Such mandate or recommendation will proceed in consultation with the Provost, the appropriate Department Chair, and the Faculty Welfare Committee in cases of enrollment emergency and financial exigency.
+
+4.8.5.1 Curricular Changes or Academic Program Reorganization
+
+Layoff of a full-time academic unit faculty member appointed pursuant to notice or tenure appointment agreements may occur as a result of a curricular change, including reorganization or discontinuation of a curricular requirement or an academic program in whole or in part.  The Provost will make decisions regarding such changes after consultation with the Department Chair of the impacted department(s).
+
+															The decision to implement a curricular change that results in the layoff of full-time faculty member rests with the Board of Trustees.  Such a decision will be based upon educational considerations that reflect long-range judgments that the mission of the College as a whole will be served by the curricular change.
+
+															In reaching such a decision, the President will consult with the Faculty Welfare Committee, the Provost, and others to form a task force to review the academic program offering(s) and make recommendations regarding the aligning of programs and faculty staffing.  The task force shall normally complete its review within 120 days of formation (excluding the period [June 15-August 15]) unless an extension is agreeable to both the President and Faculty Welfare Committee and is expressed in writing.  The task force report will advise the Provost, who in turn will prepare a program and staffing strategy to guide personnel decisions.  The Provost’s staffing report will be forwarded to the Faculty Welfare Committee, President of the College, and Board of Trustees, with final approval resting with the Board.
+
+When systemic disruptions in the College’s enrollment patterns, total enrollment (current or expected), and operating environment requires substantial and immediate curricular changes resulting in the reorganization or discontinuation of an academic program(s), the President may modify the timelines or procedures set forth above for good cause shown. In such cases, the President must communicate clearly with the Faculty Welfare Community and any affected departments to explain the reasons for the curricular changes or program reorganization.  
+
+Individual layoff decisions impacting full-time faculty resulting from curricular changes will follow the “Order of Layoff procedures” described in paragraph 4.8.5.4 below.
+
+Full-time Faculty that are laid off under a curricular change will receive notice according to the schedule in paragraph 4.8.5.4.  Faculty on a tenure appointment will receive one year’s notice or an appropriate financial agreement equal to or greater than one year’s salary as deemed appropriate by the President and the Board.  The College will, except in unusual circumstances, end such program and the faculty member’s relationship with the College at the end of an academic semester or year. 
+
+Faculty laid off under this paragraph have the same rights as those terminated under Enrollment Emergency or Financial Exigency policies as delineated in paragraphs 4.8.5.2 and 4.8.5.3.
+
+Enrollment Emergency
+
+An enrollment emergency is an unplanned decline in student enrollment, the detrimental financial effects of which are either too great, too systemic, or too rapid to be offset by normal procedures outlined in Volume IV of this Policy Manual.  When a decline in enrollment, or loss of funding in whole or in part are of such a nature that the College’s projected budget for a given academic year or future academic years as determined by reasonable projections cannot be balanced and clearly indicates that no other alternatives except by academic program reorganizations or cuts, the President of the College, after consultation with the Provost and Faculty Welfare Committee, will make a written recommendation to the Board of Trustees whether an internal declaration that the College is in a state of enrollment emergency should be declared.  An enrollment emergency is based upon the number of FTE students as calculated by the Registrar’s Office.  The Board of Trustees to declare an enrollment emergency rests with the Board of Trustees.
+
+Once the Board of Trustees decides that an enrollment emergency exits, the President of the College, in consultation with the Provost, the Department Chairs, and the Faculty Welfare Committee, and after receiving approval from the Board of Trustees, shall recommend appropriate action in terms of individual layoff decisions.  Layoff decisions resulting from a financial exigency will normally follow the “Order of Layoff” procedures described in paragraph 4.8.5.4.
+
+
+
+The President of the College and the Board of Trustees have final authority in all matters related to enrollment emergencies after following the procedures listed herein.
+
+
+
+Financial Exigency
+
+“Financial Exigency” is an urgent need to reorder the nature and magnitude of financial obligations due to an imminent financial crisis in such a way as to restore or preserve the financial ability of the institution and which cannot be alleviated by less drastic means.  
+
+
+
+“Financial ability,” as defined by the College, means the ability to provide from current income, both cash and accrued, the funds necessary to meet current expenses, including current debt payment and reserves, without invading or depleting capital. 
+
+
+
+The Board of Trustees, upon recommendation of the President of the College, who will previously have consulted with the Provost and the Faculty Welfare Committee, shall advise if a financial crisis that meets the criteria of a financial exigency exists and should be declared.  The above groups shall also advise the Board of Trustees of suggested options to alleviate this condition.
+
+
+
+Once the Board of Trustees decides that a financial exigency exits, the President of the College, in consultation with the Provost, the Department Chairs, and the Faculty Welfare Committee, and after receiving approval from the Board of Trustees, shall recommend appropriate action in terms of individual layoff decisions.  
+
+
+
+Layoff decisions resulting from a financial exigency will normally follow the “Order of Layoff” procedures described in paragraph 4.8.5.4.
+
+
+
+The President of the College and the Board of Trustees have final authority in all matters related to financial exigency after following the procedures listed herein.
+
+Order of Layoff within a Department
+
+The President of the College, in consultation with the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of Faculty and the Faculty Welfare Committee, shall determine the layoff of specific faculty members in a particular department according to the guidelines outlined below.  The President of the College makes the final decision.  Such action shall be grounded in educational considerations and attention to maintaining the quality instruction and the programmatic integrity of the academic curriculum should be a primary consideration.
+
+
+
+In making a decision about ending the appointment of a faculty member, program integrity is paramount.  Rank and seniority will also be considered.  When qualifications are equal, time of service from the date of original appointment will determine which faculty members are laid off.  The original appointment shall mean the date of the first appointment to College service followed by continuous and uninterrupted service within the College up to the time of reduction and abolishment of positions.  Authorized leave of absence shall not be deemed an interruption of service within the College.  In the event a faculty member believes such date has been incorrectly determined, the faculty member shall so advise the College and indicate the appropriate date.
+
+
+
+Prior to layoffs, the institution, with faculty participation, will make a demonstrated and documented effort to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position within the institution.  Further, voluntary measures shall be considered, such as the possibility of voluntary, early, or phased retirements.  If the institution terminates appointments pursuant to Subsection 4.8.5, it will not at the same time make new appointments except in extraordinary circumstances where a serious distortion in the academic program would otherwise result.  
+
+Faculty will be laid off according to the following guidelines, except as necessary to avoid distortion of department or academic program integrity:
+
+						All administrators with faculty rank shall be laid off from teaching within the department, except as necessary to avoid distortion of program integrity.
+
+						All faculty members with term appointments shall then be eliminated within the department, except as necessary to avoid distortion of program integrity.
+
+						Next, non-tenure track faculty members shall be terminated within the department, except as necessary to avoid distortion of program integrity.
+
+													A faculty member with tenure will not be terminated in favor of retaining a faculty member without tenure, except in demonstrated extraordinary circumstances where a distortion of the department or academic program would otherwise result.  The recommendation of extraordinary circumstance to the President of the College will be made by the Provost.
+
+						The Provost shall provide the Faculty and interested parties with appropriate documentation supporting program integrity, as well as rank, degrees, and seniority.
+
+General Notice Procedures Regarding Layoff
+
+	Layoff of Non-Tenured Faculty
+
+If the College determines to terminate the appointment of a notice faculty member pursuant to Subsection 4.8.5, the faculty member shall be notified, to the extent feasible, in accordance with the following guidelines: 
+
+						In the case of termination due to financial exigency or enrollment emergency, not fewer than 180 calendar days after the effective date of the financial exigency or enrollment emergency; and 
+
+						In the case of termination due to reorganization, elimination, or curtailment of academic programs of the College, not fewer than 180 calendar days after the effective date of the reorganization, elimination, or curtailment. 
+
+In all cases, faculty members affected will be able to complete the semester in which notice is given.
+
+	Layoff of Tenured Faculty
+
+If the College determines to terminate the appointment of a tenured faculty member pursuant to Subsection 4.8.5, notice shall be given, to the extent feasible, in accordance with the following guidelines: 
+
+						In the case of financial exigency or enrollment emergency, where short notices and effective action are necessary, all tenured faculty will receive one semester of notice from the date of officially receiving the decision of the Board of Trustees;
+
+						In the case of a curricular change, including reorganization or discontinuation of a curricular requirement or an academic program in whole or in part, all tenured faculty will receive one year’s notice from the date of officially receiving the decision of the Board of Trustees;
+
+						Tenured faculty who have been laid off shall be offered a severance package that will include at least one year of salary in remuneration.  
+
+						The College will attempt to, and document efforts to, assist displaced tenured faculty to find employment in industry, government, or in other educational institutions.
+
+	Content of Notice
+
+The notice shall specify the cause of the layoff, provide a summary description of the facts relied on by the College, and reference the faculty member’s right to file an exception or exceptions through Section 4.13.  Notice shall be sufficient if placed in the U.S. mail, First Class, postage prepaid, and addressed to the faculty member at the last address provided by the faculty member to the Director of Human Resources.  It shall be the duty of a laid off faculty member to keep the College informed of the faculty member’s current address.
+
+Transfer Eligibility 
+
+Faculty members who are laid off will be eligible to transfer to any other vacant position on the faculty for which the faculty member is qualified, subject to the terms and conditions of employment attendant to that position.  A faculty member’s qualification for a formally advertised position shall be reviewed by the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of Faculty based on the job description for the position, after consultation with the appropriate Department Chair.
+
+A faculty member who exercises the rights accorded under this paragraph and who is determined by the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of Faculty to be qualified shall be eligible for the position over any other applicant except another faculty member exercising eligibility accorded under this paragraph who is also qualified and has greater length of service with the College.  Length of service will be equivalent to the years of service credited to the faculty member by the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of Faculty.
+
+Re-employment
+
+If a faculty member is to be laid off for reasons described in this Subsection 4.8.5, the place of the faculty member concerned will not be filled by a replacement within a period of three years, unless the released faculty member has been offered reappointment under conditions comparable to those held at the time of layoff.  A faculty member laid off shall be offered re-employment in the same or similar position provided that the opening occurs within a three- year period and that the faculty member is qualified by fitness and ability.  The faculty member must accept such offer, which shall be sent by Certified Mail, within fifteen days after such offer is extended or the College can revoke the offer.
+
+Appeals on Layoff
+
+If the College issues notice to a particular faculty member of an intention to non-renew or layoff a faculty member because of the reasons discussed in paragraphs 4.8.5.1, 4.8.5.2 and 4.8.5.3, the faculty member will have the right to an appeal pursuant to the grievance procedures set forth in Section 4.13.  In such a hearing, the College’s determination that a financial exigency or enrollment emergency exists or that an academic program is to be reduced or discontinued due to educational considerations will be considered presumptively valid; but unlike a typical grievance hearing where the burden of proof rests with the grievant, the burden of proof on whether the procedures in the Layoff Policy were adhered to will rest on the College.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] 2022.02.16 Proposal F (Dismissal) 4.8.5 (SS Comments).txt [/INST] February 16, 2022
+
+
+
+To: 	Faculty Welfare Committee
+
+From: 	Jamie Caridi, Interim President
+
+	Joe Lane, Provost
+
+	Bill Kiefer
+
+RE: 	Manual Revision #6 – Proposed Language for new language in section 4.8.6 and 4.13 regarding the appeal of grievances and disputes
+
+
+
+Purpose: The proposed changes are designed to clarify causes for dismissals as well as to provide for a fair and orderly process for resolving related disputes without lengthy internal processes that may be difficult to complete with current staffing and course of unnecessary conflict and confusion.  
+
+
+
+Proposed Language
+
+Dismissal for Cause
+
+Dismissal for cause is a severance action by which Bethany College terminates its appointment with the faculty member for cause.  Any faculty member is subject to action under this subsection.  Dismissal for cause must be directly and substantially related to the fitness of a faculty member to continue their professional capacity.  Dismissal shall not be used to restrain a faculty member’s academic freedom.
+
+Grounds for Dismissal
+
+Dismissal for cause may be effected by the institution in specific circumstances that must be documented. 
+
+
+
+Some examples of “cause” are:
+
+						Consistent failure to discharge responsibilities, including but not limited to professional incompetence, documented failure to perform expected duties, or repeated failures to comply with institutionally approved improvement plans.  
+
+						Violations of academic freedom of others.
+
+						Active and voluntary participation in activities deliberately and specifically designed to discredit the College.
+
+						Obvious and repeated misconduct or failure in the performance of academic duties, in spite of oral and written warnings or development plans.
+
+						Holding a full-time academic appointment at another academic institution.
+
+						Serious personal misconduct; including but not limited to committing of a criminal act, harassment or other discriminatory behavior, including violations of the Title IX Policy* of the College, or any federal or state laws related to the prohibition of discrimination
+
+						Academic misconduct; including but not limited to, plagiarism or theft of intellectual property.
+
+						Deliberate and serious violation of the rights and freedoms of fellow faculty members, administrators, or students. Statements that may be fairly construed as threats to the safety, rights, and freedoms of fellow faculty members, administrators, students, or members of the community may constitute such a violation.  
+
+						Admission or conviction of a crime related to the faculty member’s fitness to effectively serve as a member of the Bethany College faculty. If the crime is a felony or punishable by incarceration for more than one year are by definition crimes that are to be violative of this clause.  
+
+						Serious failure to follow the professional ethics of the individual’s academic discipline.
+
+						Falsification of credentials and experience; and/or failure, after oral and written warnings, to follow standards of Bethany College as designated in the Policy Manual.
+
+						Flagrant violations of or persistent neglect to comply College and/or department policies, procedures, rules, or regulations.
+
+Inability to perform an essential functions of the faculty position, given reasonable accommodation if requested pursuant to the College’s ADAA Policy;.
+
+					Loss of professional licensure if licensure is required for the performance of the faculty member’s duties.
+
+					Note: The above listing is not intended to be exhaustive.
+
+													*Allegations of discrimination, harassment, and sexual and gender-based misconduct against a faculty member will be investigated and resolved pursuant to the College’s Title IX Policy.  
+
+					
+
+Dismissal Proceedings
+
+	Removal proceedings may be initiated by the President of the College and the Provost, or the department through its chair.  The dismissal action will be preceded by discussion between the faculty member, the chair, and appropriate administrative officers (the faculty member always being involved in the discussions) with the object of finding a mutual settlement.  The matter may be terminated by mutual consent at this point.  If a resolution does not result, the President of the College shall submit to the faculty member a written statement of charges framed with reasonable particularity.
+
+	When the above procedure fails to resolve the issue, (except in cases arising under 4.8.6.1 subsection 6, which matters are subject to the College’s Title IX procedure and not this section, or where there has been a determination by trial or guilty plea, plea of nolo contender, or an Allen Plea to a criminal matter, which matters shall not be subject to this section) the President of the College (or designee) or the faculty member may request that the matter be referred to an appropriate arbitrator selected from a list of trained arbitrators from a list provided by the American Arbitration Association or the Federal Mediation and Reconciliation Board.  Both the College and the faculty member will provide the arbitrator with requested information and cooperation.
+
+	The appointed arbitrator will submit their written findings of fact and recommendations to the President and the faculty member.  Findings of fact and recommendations will be based solely on the hearing record and the rulings of the arbitrator.  The ruling of the arbitrator will be considered final and binding.
+
+	The President of the College may then accept the ruling of the arbitrator, in which case the process is concluded, or may refer the case to the Board of Trustees for final decision with the full record of the arbitrator’s proceedings and the President’s own recommendation in writing.  The faculty member will be provided with a copy of the President’s communication to the Board, and if the faculty member disagrees with the findings, the faculty member may submit to the Board of Trustees a written statement.
+
+	The Board of Trustees will consider the written record, the findings and recommendations of the arbitrator, the recommendations of the President of the College, and any statement submitted by the faculty member.
+
+	If the Board decides to remove the faculty member, its decision shall be final and the faculty member’s termination shall be effective on that date of the Board’s decision.  If the Board decides against removing the faculty member, it shall reinstate the individual.
+
+	Unless there has been a finding that deliberate misconduct justified dismissal, the faculty member will receive salary or notice in accordance with the schedule of notice to which the faculty member is entitled under paragraph 4.8.3.2, or if the faculty member has tenure, for no more than one year.  
+
+	If at any point the faculty member should institute legal proceedings, the procedure outlined herein will nonetheless continue to its normal conclusion.
+
+	
+
+Model #1
+
+
+
+4.8.6.2 - Dismissal Proceedings 
+
+Removal of full-time faculty proceedings may be initiated by the President of the College and the Provost or the department through its chair. The dismissal action will be preceded by discussion between the faculty member, the chair, and appropriate administrative officers (the faculty member always being involved in the discussions) with the object of finding a mutual settlement. The matter may be terminated by mutual consent at this point.  If a resolution does not result, the President of the College may elect to submit to the faculty member a written statement of charges framed with reasonable particularity. 
+
+Within five (5) academic days of the President’s submission of charges, the Faculty Welfare Committee shall appoint three full-time tenured faculty members from outside the faculty member’s department to an Ad Hoc Hearing Committee, which shall conduct a hearing during which the faculty member shall be entitled to be present. Service of notice of hearing with specific charges in writing will be made at least ten business days prior to the hearing. 
+
+The Committee shall adopt procedures that it deems appropriate. 
+
+No administrative officer or faculty member serving as an administrative officer shall serve on the Ad-Hoc Faculty Hearing Committee. 
+
+The Faculty will provide for alternatives or for some other means of filling vacancies resulting from disqualification, challenges without stated cause, illness, resignation, or other reason. 
+
+A member shall self-disqualify for bias or interest. Members of the individual’s department will be deemed to have an interest and therefore will be disqualified to sit as a member of the Committee for a hearing. Each party will have a maximum of two challenges without stated cause. 
+
+At any time during the Dismissal process, the President of the College may suspend the faculty member, with pay, pending the procedure listed below if (1) immediate harm to the faculty member, the College, or others is threatened by the individual’s continuance or (2) the faculty member’s continued functioning in the position would substantially impair or disrupt the regular functions of the College. 
+
+Hearings will be conducted in private and the individuals involved will make no public statements during the course of the hearings or thereafter except that nothing in this paragraph shall restrict the right of either party to pursue public legal proceedings against the other or to make statements in the course of those proceedings. 
+
+A documented and demonstrable effort will be made to obtain the most reliable evidence available; however, the Committee will not be bound by evidentiary rules applicable in courts of law.  The Committee may make such rulings and orders as the interests of justice and the College community may require.  The determination of the Committee, however, shall have no value as precedent within the College. 
+
+A verbatim record of the hearing or hearings will be taken and a copy will be made available to the faculty member without charge upon request. A copy of the record will be filed in the Office of the President at the conclusion of the hearing. 
+
+At the discretion of the Ad-Hoc Faculty Hearing Committee, the testimony may include that of qualified faculty members from this or other institutions of higher education. At the request of the faculty member, the Administration, or the Committee, a representative of a responsible educational association shall be permitted to attend the proceedings as an observer.  However, participation by legal counsel at the hearing for either party is not permitted.
+
+Within five (5) academic days of conclusion of the hearing, the Ad-Hoc Faculty Hearing Committee will submit its written findings of fact and recommendations to the President and the faculty member. Findings of fact and recommendations will be based solely on the hearing record. 
+
+The committee report must contain written findings of fact and a recommendation based on the preponderance of the evidence standard .
+
+The committee’s written findings of fact and recommendation shall be based on a simple majority vote.
+
+Any dissenting opinions will be included with the committee’s written findings of fact and recommendation.
+
+Within five (5) academic days after receipt of the committee’s findings and recommendations, the President, using the preponderance of the evidence standard, will issue an independent written decision on the matter, with copies to the committee, the faculty member, and the Provost.
+
+If the President concludes that the administration has not established adequate cause for dismissal by the preponderance of the evidence, the matter will be dismissed.
+
+If the President concludes that the administration has established adequate cause for a dismissal by the preponderance of the evidence, but that a sanction(s) less than dismissal would be more appropriate, the sanction(s) will be stated in the President’s letter with supporting reasons.
+
+If the President concludes that the administration has established adequate cause for dismissal by the preponderance of the evidence, the President’s letter will state the effective date and terms of the dismissal.
+
+If the President determines that additional consideration by the committee is necessary, the President will remand the case back to the committee with specifications for further findings and recommendations.
+
+In matters where the faculty member is not tenured, the President’s written decision shall be final.  In matters involving allegations rendered against a Tenured Faculty member, the President’s letter will include text indicating that the faculty member may file an appeal with the Board of Trustees within ten (10) working days of delivery.
+
+Notes: 
+
+The Provost, after consultation with the affected faculty member, may modify the timelines set forth above in extraordinary circumstances and for good cause shown to achieve a full and fair evaluation or resolution of the matter.  In addition, the timeframes provided above may be extended by the Provost for good cause based on factors such as, but not limited to, schedule and availability of witnesses, holidays or semester breaks, etc.
+
+If at any point the faculty member should institute legal proceedings, the procedure outlined above will nonetheless continue to its normal conclusion.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Appeal to Board of Trustees
+
+							If a tenured faculty member elects to file an appeal with the Board, the President will transmit the faculty member’s written request, as well as the record of the case, to the Chair of the Board of Trustees.
+
+							The tenured faculty member’s written request for review by the Board of Trustees must be based on one or more of the following reasons:
+
+								Material procedural irregularity governing the termination for cause process as specified in this Volume IV of the Policy Manual; and/or
+
+								Inadequate consideration of evidence.  Determining whether “inadequate consideration” was given refers to procedural rather than to substantive issues.  
+
+								Inadequate consideration occurs if the hearing committee or President (i) violated the stated procedures for including relevant evidence or using that evidence as a basis for judgment in the review and (ii) it is reasonably probable that a result more favorable to the appellant would have been reached had adequate consideration been given to the proper evidence.  
+
+								Alternatively, inadequate consideration occurs when a decision is not supported by substantial evidence in the record.
+
+							The Board of Trustees’ review (or committee thereof) will be based on the record of the committee recommendation and the President’s decision.
+
+							The Board of Trustees’ review (or committee thereof) will endeavor to render a final decision on the matter within 15 working days of receipt of the appeal.
+
+If the Board decides to remove the faculty member, its decision shall be final and the faculty member’s termination shall be effective on that date of the Board’s decision. 
+
+If the Board decides against removing the faculty member, it shall reinstate the individual. 
+
+							If, in reviewing the matter, the Board of Trustees (or committee) determines that there is need for additional evidence, it may return the case to the ad hoc hearing committee for further consideration.  
+
+							If remanded, the Board of Trustees (or committee) shall make a final decision whether to reverse or modify the termination after considering the revised report of the ad hoc hearing committee.  Throughout this process, the VPAA may serve as adviser to the Board of Trustees if the Board so desires.  
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+The President of the College will then refer the case to the Board of Trustees for final decision with the President’s own recommendation in writing. The faculty member will be provided with a copy of the President’s recommendation. If the faculty member disagrees with the findings, the faculty member may submit to the Board of Trustees a written statement. The Board of Trustees will consider the written record, the findings and recommendations of the Committee, the recommendations of the President of the College, and any statement submitted by the faculty member. 
+
+If the Board decides to remove the faculty member, its decision shall be final and the faculty member’s termination shall be effective on that date of the Board’s decision. If the Board decides against removing the faculty member, it shall reinstate the individual. 
+
+Unless there has been a finding that deliberate misconduct justified dismissal, the faculty member will receive salary or notice in accordance with the schedule of notice to which the faculty member is entitled under paragraph 4.8.3.2, or if the faculty member has tenure, for at least one year. On the recommendation of the Ad-Hoc Faculty Hearing Committee and/or the President of the College, the Board of Trustees in determining what if any payments will be made beyond the effective date of dismissal, may take into account the length and quality of service of the faculty member. 
+
+The Committee may, as the result of its deliberations, recommend suspension for a stated period with an appropriate reduction in salary as a legitimate lesser measure than dismissal. 
+
+If the report of the Committee does not recommend dismissal or other disciplinary action, and if the President of the College does not disagree with the Committee’s report, the findings of the Committee will be accepted as final and the President will give notice to the faculty member of such determination. 
+
+If at any point the faculty member should institute legal proceedings, the procedure outlined herein will nonetheless continue to its normal conclusion. 
+
+Model #2
+
+
+
+As noted in my email. I developed a streamlined policy for the University of St. Thomas recently.  Please see Section 3.7.4 in the following link: https://www.stu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Faculty-handbook-final-2020.pdf.  If the College would like to consider this model, please let me know and I will tailor the policy to Bethany.
+
+	
+
+
+
+
+	Grievance Policy
+
+Procedures
+
+Step 1
+
+The person considered to be the aggrieved party (the complainant) shall bring the matter to the attention of the person or committee considered to be causing the grievance (the respondent) by initiating a discussion of the issues involved.  Should this discussion fail to resolve the issues in dispute, the complainant may seek resolution by referring the grievance to the respondent’s immediate supervisor.  When the respondent is a committee of the faculty, the respondent’s immediate supervisor is considered to be the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of Faculty.  If the respondent is the President of the College, the grievance may be submitted at this point to the Faculty Welfare Committee (as outlined in Step 3). The discussion required in this paragraph shall be documented by a dated written response from the respondent within 10 days following the discussion between complainant and respondent on the grievance.
+
+Step 2
+
+The complainant’s presentation of the grievance to the respondent’s supervisor must be in writing and must be delivered within 10 days of receipt of the dated written response from respondent referred to in 4.13.2.1 Step 1 above.  A copy of this document must also be delivered to the respondent.  The presentation shall explain the nature of the dispute and its significance and request intervention by the supervisor.  Supporting materials may be attached.  
+
+
+
+Within three days of receiving the copy of this document, the respondent may also write to the supervisor responding to the complainant's presentation.  After reviewing the written presentations, the supervisor may seek additional information from the parties involved or from other College personnel.  Within ten days of receiving the complainant’s presentation, the supervisor must decide on the issues and present to the parties involved a written statement of the decision and the reasons for it.  If the complainant is not satisfied with the decision, a request may be made to appoint an arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute.  The arbitrator should be selected from a list  from a list provided by the American Arbitration Association or the Federal Mediation and Reconciliation Board.  The arbitration should be scheduled as soon as possible, but no later than the date on which the request is communicated to the President of Bethany College.  
+
+
+
+.Step 3
+
+The appointed arbitrator is to make a recommendation for the final disposition of the grievance within two weeks of the conclusion of any hearings or consideration they deem appropriate.  A report from the arbitrator is to be transmitted to the President of the College.  The report is to include the statement of findings and recommendations in written form, all materials collected on the matter, the file of documents collected during consideration of the matter, and the recording of any testimony offered to the arbitrator.  Copies of the statement of findings and recommendations are to be transmitted at the same time to the complainant and respondent.
+
+.Step 4
+
+	The final disposition of the grievance is to be made by the President of the College within ten days of receiving the report from the arbitrator.  The President’s decision to accept or revise the decision of the arbitrator is to be formulated in writing. Copies are to be transmitted to the complainant and the respondent.  The decision of the President of the College may be appealed to the Board of Trustees.  The Board of Trustees will consider the written record, the findings and recommendations of the arbitrator, the recommendations of the President of the College, and any statement submitted by the faculty member. The decision of the Board is binding and final.  
+
+
+
+The recorded proceedings of the hearing and all written documents pertaining to the arbitration of a grievance in the possession of the President of the College at the time the final disposition of the grievance is made are to be filed in the President’s Office for a period of seven years, and then destroyed.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] 2022.02.16 Proposal G 4.11.1 (SS Comments).txt [/INST] February 16, 2022
+
+
+
+To: 	Faculty Welfare Committee
+
+From: 	Jamie Caridi, Interim President
+
+	Joe Lane, Provost
+
+	Bill Kiefer
+
+RE: 	Manual Revision #7 – Proposed Language for new language in section 4.11.1. regarding teaching loads
+
+
+
+Purpose: The proposed changes are meant to clarify and provide flexibility in the calculation of teaching load to allow more flexibility in the assignment of instructors to a variety of duties and support faculty members who carry heavy student credit hour teaching loads.  
+
+
+
+Proposed Language
+
+
+
+4.11Faculty Workload and Working Conditions Policies
+
+Faculty Workload Policies
+
+Normal Teaching Assignments 
+
+Full-time members of the faculty normally expected to carry a teaching load equivalent to 10-12 credit-hours of instruction each semester.  Faculty members who teach two semesters per year on nine-month contracts are normally expected to complete 21-24 credit hours each contract year.  Faculty members who teach three semester per year on a twelve-month contract are generally expected to complete 32-34 credit hours each contract year.  
+
+ 
+
+
+
+Credit hours within range should reflect substantive courses taught.  Normally, sections with fewer than five students enrolled may not be considered a full course.  In disciplines in which lower enrollment courses are necessary at the 300- and 400-level, average class sizes may be considered.  
+
+
+
+Normally, faculty members with fewer than 120 student credit hours taught per semester (a threshold which may be pro-rated if the assigned course load is lower for administrative duties) are normally not eligible for overload pay.   
+
+
+
+As part of the teaching load, the faculty member will be expected to undertake, relative to the faculty member’s academic rank and professional goals, the following activities:
+
+																										Academic advising activities;
+
+																										College service activities, including but not limited to:
+
+																										Active membership on a standing committee or task force; and 
+
+																										Attendance at college and department faculty meetings.
+
+																										Community service activities.  
+
+																										Scholarly, creative, and professional activities.
+
+Additionally, this normal teaching load also includes supervising senior projects and directing independent studies.  The principal factors considered in determining the teaching loads of individual faculty members are general College needs, curricular needs of the students, department needs, faculty interests, total number of preparations, and number of students enrolled in courses.
+
+
+
+The Provost may authorize reductions of the teaching load in writing on a probationary basis for new faculty members in their first year of hire as well as for faculty members assigned specific administrative, recruiting, or advising duties that are determined to be equivalent in contractual non-classroom activities.
+
+
+
+The formula for determining teaching credit hours for laboratory courses will be 1 credit hour for each section the faculty member supervises and ½ credit hour for each in-class hour beyond one hour that course normally meets per week.  E.g., A lab normally scheduled for three hours per week will count as 2 credit hours taught.  
+
+
+
+When an equivalency is not pre-established, the Provost, after receiving and considering the recommendation of the appropriate Department Chair, and in consultation with the INSERT NAME OF FACULTY Committee, determines teaching equivalencies for service load assignments according to the following considerations:
+
+The number of student contact hours and extent of faculty preparation required;
+
+The number of student course credits generated;
+
+Curricular requirements in effect, such as internships, practicums, and field experiences;
+
+Standards promulgated by accrediting agencies, professional organizations, or disciplinary bodies; and
+
+Responsibility for organized instructional activities.
+
+
+
+Teaching Overload 
+
+Occasionally a member of the full-time faculty may teach a course which increases the teaching load beyond twelve credit-hours in a semester.  This is permissible with the written recommendation of the Chair of the department in which the course is offered and the written approval of the Provost.  Faculty overloads are calculated on the same basis as are normal loads.  
+
+
+
+Overloads (and underloads) may be offset by agreement with the Provost to correct the balance in a specifically designated future semester. 
+
+
+
+When the needs of the College require that a course be assigned to a member of the faculty beyond the normal teaching load (and the faculty member agrees), the Provost will authorize additional compensation for the excess beyond the normal twelve credit-hours at the standard rate at the time.  Currently the standard rate is $1000 per credit-hour.
+
+
+
+Normally, faculty members who receive release time for administrative duties and other duties should not be simultaneously combined with overload pay.</s>"
+<s>[INST] 2022.10.13 Clean Copy.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] 2nd Draft Rewrite of Termination Due to Financially Contingent Situations.txt [/INST] Termination Due to Financially Contingent Situations and Resource Allocation
+
+Termination of a tenured faculty member or, prior to the end of the term of appointment, of a tenure-track faculty member may occur because of the declaration of a financially contingent situation as described below. 
+
+	Criteria
+
+The criteria to be employed in financially contingent situations in allocating resources to University programs and services fall under three headings: Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality. These will at times compete and at other times converge. If and when Ohio Wesleyan University meets contingencies that require institutional contraction and reorganization, these sets of criteria will be used in complementary fashion as guidelines. The order of their enumeration should not be taken to indicate their order of priority. Neither should it be presumed that all three will be weighed equally in making particular decisions. Particular circumstances may encourage the assignment of greater weight to one or another in particular cases, even though in financially contingent situations it is to be expected that fiscal pressure may emphasize reference to the criterion of cost effectiveness. What is important is that the campus community, in considering contingency reductions, identify and grapple directly with what are likely to be very difficult choices from among options that all carry significant costs and/or benefits in terms of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality. The objective must be to arrive at wise judgments.
+
+	MISSION
+
+Because Ohio Wesleyan University is a specific private university with a specific heritage, a major consideration associated with any reduction or change in size will be to preserve its essential character by maintaining those programs and activities judged to be more central to that character. To do so will require reference to several questions. How closely does the program or service in question fit the stated mission of Ohio Wesleyan University? How importantly does it contribute toward a non-curricular campus ambience vital to Ohio Wesleyan's liberal arts heritage? Is it essential in serving other programs?
+
+	COST EFFECTIVENESS & MARKETABILITY
+
+Attentiveness to the cost effectiveness and marketability of programs and services is a key characteristic of a well-run institution. Cost-effectiveness must be one guideline in determining staffing levels and whether or not to maintain programs or services. The University must therefore be sensitive to the constituencies it serves and to their preferences. While Ohio Wesleyan cannot mindlessly add or subtract staff or programs or services to track short-term fluctuations in cost effectiveness, neither can it ignore longer term or more profound shifts as it decides which subject areas, programs, or services to maintain and at what staffing levels. The following non-prescriptive questions related to cost effectiveness and marketability must be asked: What is the relationship between direct expenses and revenues in a given area? What is the actual and relative cost of a graduation unit (or, in the case of non-academic areas, other service unit)? What is the trend line for both, and for enrollments and student/staff ratio? Is the program or service a ""native recruiter?"" Is it duplicative?  What is the present and future demand for the program among existing and potential student populations as measured by internal data sets (e.g., enrollments, numbers of majors, programs served, etc.), labor market projections, external stakeholder feedback, and national and state policy/economic projections and placement data?
+
+	QUALITY
+
+Since the primary purpose of Ohio Wesleyan University is to provide excellent instruction in the liberal arts and selected career options, and comparable quality in non-academic services, it must consider program or service quality in making program, service, and faculty staffing decisions. In dealing with any financially contingent situation, it will seek to retain its best personnel, programs, and services, as one top priority. It will strive to adjust programs and services and retain or retrain individuals so as to maintain the best possible teaching and learning environment. Major issues associated with this guideline are complex and difficult. Among them are the following: Is the program or service and its staff faculty generally perceived by Faculty (staff, where non-academic services may be involved), students, and alumni to be of high quality? Do students, in or associated with it, perform throughout the University at average or higher levels? Is the staff faculty versatile as well as strong?
+
+	The guidelines of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality are contradictory. Any one of them used exclusively could lead to very serious imbalances in the focus and operation of the University. Recognition that each of these three needs to be considered and that each provides an outward boundary for the decision process will encourage an intelligent and equitable response to financially contingent situations as well as to ordinary conditions.
+
+	Making Contingency Decisions
+
+If financially contingent situations require reductions in personnel and/or academic departments or programs resulting in the termination of faculty appointments or services , the University will balance a need for timely action with the need for shared decision-making.  In both determining whether such a situation exists and in shaping difficult decisions that contingencies might require, the President will engage in extensive consultation with appropriate faculty committees, administrators, and where conditions allow, students, before making a recommendation to the Board of Trustees as follows:  
+
+Determination of Financial Contingent Situation
+
+The Board of Regents is solely authorized to determine that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent. Such decision shall be made only after a presentation of relevant financial data by the President to the Committee of University Governance (UGC) that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent and that reasonable means for coping with the situation have been exhausted without resorting to the elimination of tenured faculty positions. 
+
+Framing of Proposal to Address Financial Contingent Situation
+
+Responsibility for framing a proposal for program or services and/or personnel reductions to deal with a financially contingent situation will rest with the President.  The proposal, when it pertains to academic programs and/or personnel, will be referred to the Committee on Academic Programs as to curricular impact, to the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee as to the implications for the academic plan, to the Faculty Personnel Committee as to personnel implications, and to the affected programs. When the proposal pertains to non-academic programs, services, and/or personnel, it will be forwarded to the Governance Committee and the Senior Leadership Team Cabinet for consideration. These bodies will hold hearings as part of their deliberations. At the discretion of the President, an advisory student committee may also be created. These groups will severally consider the proposal(s) and in doing so may consult widely with faculty, students, and, where appropriate, with staff. They are to complete their deliberations within 30 calendar days of receipt of the President's proposal(s) and report their findings and recommendations to the President immediately upon finishing their deliberations. They may recommend acceptance, alteration, or otherwise, of the President's proposal(s). If and when they are unable to achieve concurrence with the President, and the President yet judges that reductions must be made, the President will report to the Board of Trustees the proposed course of action. If there is a difference of views between the President and the committees, the President will ensure that the committees' proposals are forwarded to the Trustees  with the President’s proposal(s). The Board of Trustees retains ultimate authority for approving proposals as to program and position reductions and terminations responding to a financially contingent situation.
+
+After the completion and implementation of decisions for institutional contraction to deal with a financially contingent situation, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.
+
+In the event that the Board of Trustees declares that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent, the President shall be responsible for framing a proposal for addressing the situation.  If the proposal might require reductions in academic departments or interdisciplinary programs and the termination of faculty positions, the President, prior to framing the proposal, shall engage in an extensive academic program review process.
+
+Academic Program Review Process
+
+Step 1: The initial step in the Academic Program Review process will be the development by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness of a set of common quantitative data for all academic programs at the University showing trends in course enrollments, student credits delivered, graduated majors, declared majors, direct instructional expense, and other performance metrics agreed upon by Academic Affairs, Academic Planning and Allocation Committee (APAC), and UGC. The data will be made available transparently to all faculty through appropriate means such as live data dashboards. 
+
+Step 2. Following the publication of the data, each academic department and interdisciplinary program will be charged by Academic Affairs to complete self-studies, following criteria set by APAC. 
+
+Step 3. Following receipt of the department and program self-studies, APAC will evaluate each department in relation to Mission, Cost-Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality (see above) and issue a report to the President.
+
+Step 4. The President shall convene a Joint Committee comprised of eight faculty members, six of which are elected by the faculty (or appointed by the Executive Committee if an election is unsuccessful) and two of which are appointed by the President from individuals serving on each of the following faculty committees: UGC, Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC), Committee on Academic Programs (CAP), and APAC.  In addition, the Joint Committee shall include the Provost and appropriate academic administrators responsible for data and curriculum as designated by the Provost.  
+
+After considering the department self-studies and APAC report, the Joint Committee shall:
+
+Develop recommendations for the appropriate number and size of departments and interdisciplinary programs, as well as the appropriate number of majors and minors;
+
+Identify opportunities for program enhancement; and
+
+Suggest the optimal configuration of departments and interdisciplinary programs. 
+
+In addressing these areas, the committee’s recommendations may include (a) the discontinuation and/or reduction of departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors; (b) the elimination of faculty positions; (c) recommendations about reconfiguring departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors by reassigning positions; (d) enhancement of programs, and (e) changes in policies and procedures that would improve the functioning or efficiency of the academic program. 
+
+The President, in consultation with the Executive Committee of the Faculty, will determine the date by which the Joint Committee’s recommendations to the President must be provided.  Following its deliberations, the Joint Committee shall issue its formal recommendations in writing to the President.  
+
+Step 5. The President will review the Joint Committee report and issue a written proposal to the members of the faculty addressing the financially contingent situation.  The President’s written proposal will also be referred to CAP as to curricular impact, to APAC as to the implications for the academic plan, to the FPC as to personnel implications, and to the affected programs identified in the proposal, each of which will have the opportunity to hold hearings over a 30-day period. The manner in which the hearings are held are at the discretion of the respective committees.  
+
+Step 6. Following the hearings, the respective committees and programs may submit to the President written recommendations for changes to the proposal.  The President will consider the recommendations. If consensus can be reached regarding the final proposal, the President will forward to the Board of Trustees a final report reflecting that consensus. If consensus cannot be reached, the President will transmit to the Board of Trustees both the President’s final proposal and the alternative proposal(s) prepared by the faculty committees and program.  The Board of Trustees shall approve the final plan to address the financial contingent situation and retains ultimate authority for approving proposals as to department or interdisciplinary program and position reductions and terminations responding to a financially contingent situation.
+
+Step 7. If the Board approved plan includes the discontinuation, reduction, and/or reconfiguration of departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors, FPC, in consultation with the Provost, shall recommend to the President which individual positions, and therefore appointments, should be terminated. In developing recommendations, the committee will be guided by following sequence:
+
+Consideration of faculty attrition resulting from resignation, retirement, or other severance actions. 
+
+Termination of Part-time and Visiting faculty positions within the affected department(s) or interdisciplinary program(s). 
+
+Termination of tenure-track and/or tenured positions within the affected department(s) or interdisciplinary program(s).  In the case of a reduction of a department or interdisciplinary program, as opposed to a discontinuation, the appointment of a faculty member with tenure within the same department or program will not be terminated in favor of retaining a full-time tenure-track faculty member, except in circumstances where a serious distortion of the department or interdisciplinary program would otherwise result.  
+
+In making recommendations, the following criteria, in no particular order of priority, will be considered by FPC: 
+
+Education and professional credentials; 
+
+The length of the faculty member’s service to the University;
+
+The quality of the faculty member’s service to the University;
+
+The abilities of the individual faculty member in relation to the needs of the University and the potentially affected department or interdisciplinary program.
+
+Step 8. The President shall render the final decision on terminations for reasons of financial contingency and notify the faculty member(s) involved in accordance with the Notification provisions below. 
+
+Step 9. After the completion and implementation of decisions for institutional contraction to deal with a financially contingent situation, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.
+
+Notification
+
+Notification of termination will be sent from the President to the faculty member. The notice will specify the reasons for such termination, the effective date of termination, the faculty member's right to retraining (if applicable), and right to an appeal.
+
+In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial exigency, full-time non-tenure faculty members will be given notice or severance salary in accordance with Section 3.13.3.1.  Tenured faculty will be provided with termination payments in accordance with Section 3.13.5.1.
+
+Appeals
+
+If the administration issues notice to a particular faculty member of an intention to terminate the appointment because of financial exigency, the faculty member will have the right to file a grievance in accordance with Section 3.14.3. The issues in this hearing may include the following:
+
+The existence and extent of the condition of financial exigency. The burden will rest on the administration to prove the existence and extent of the condition. The findings of a faculty committee in a previous proceeding involving the same issue may be introduced.
+
+The validity of the educational judgments and the criteria for identification for termination; but the recommendations of a faculty committee on these matters will be considered presumptively valid.
+
+Whether the criteria are being properly applied in the individual case.
+
+Reassignment and Retraining
+
+Subject to a review of qualifications (see Section 3.4.5 - Faculty Qualification) and retraining possibilities (see Section 3.10.3 – Retraining Leave), tenured and tenure track faculty members in positions to be eliminated will be considered for suitable vacancies at the University in administrative or teaching positions. See Section 3.13.5.1 below.
+
+Reinstatement Rights
+
+When a tenured faculty position is terminated for a financial contingent situation, the position will not be filled by a new appointee with the same areas of specialization as the terminated faculty member within a period of three years, unless the released faculty member has been offered reinstatement and at least thirty days in which to accept or decline it.</s>"
+<s>[INST] 2nd DRAFT TITLE IX.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] 2nd Pre-Draft Table of Contents.txt [/INST] Table of Contents
+
+CHAPTER ONE: UNIVERSITY GOVERNANCE	1
+
+1.1	Code of Regulations of the Trustees of the Ohio Wesleyan University	1
+
+1.2	The Faculty – Faculty Bylaws and Descriptions of Faculty Committees	2
+
+1.2.1	Faculty Bylaws	2
+
+1.2.2	Descriptions of Faculty Committees	6
+
+1.3	Academic Departments and Department Chairs	18
+
+1.3.1	Contractual Obligations of Department Chairs	18
+
+1.4	Amendments to the Faculty Handbook	18
+
+2	CHAPTER TWO: FACULTY PERSONNEL POLICIES	19
+
+2.1	Preamble and General Policy	19
+
+2.1.1	Faculty Committee Advice	20
+
+2.1.2	Sanction of Board of Trustees	20
+
+2.2	Kinds of Faculty Positions	20
+
+2.2.1	Tenure Track Faculty	21
+
+2.2.2	Term Faculty	21
+
+2.2.3	Adjunct Professors	22
+
+2.2.4	Administrative Faculty	23
+
+2.2.5	Professional Librarians	23
+
+2.2.6	Honorific Faculty	23
+
+2.3	Kinds of Appointments	24
+
+2.3.1	Full-time Appointments	25
+
+2.3.2	Part-time Appointments	26
+
+2.4	Faculty Contracts	32
+
+2.4.1	Annual Contract Period	32
+
+2.4.2	Contract Terms	32
+
+2.4.3	Area of Appointment	32
+
+2.4.4	Joint Appointments	33
+
+2.5	Faculty Recruitment, Initial Appointment, and Placement in Rank	34
+
+2.5.1	Rank and Salary of Initial Appointment	34
+
+2.5.2	Faculty Credentials	34
+
+2.5.3	Appointment of Foreign Nationals	34
+
+2.5.4	External Candidate Appointed as Provost and Granted Tenure with That Appointment	34
+
+2.6	Faculty Rights and Standards of Professional Conduct	35
+
+2.6.1	Academic Freedom	35
+
+2.6.2	Professional Ethics	36
+
+2.6.3	Statement on Plagiarism	37
+
+2.6.4	Observance of University Policies	37
+
+2.6.5	Conflict of Interest – Faculty Specific Activities	38
+
+2.6.6	Outside Activities	39
+
+2.6.7	Faculty-Student Relationships	41
+
+2.6.8	Prohibition of Harassment and Unlawful Discrimination	41
+
+2.6.9	Violations of Faculty Rights, Academic Freedom and Professional Ethics	42
+
+2.7	Contractual Obligations of a Faculty Member	42
+
+2.7.1	Teaching	42
+
+2.7.2	Scholarly or Creative Work Contributions	48
+
+2.7.3	Service to the University and Community	48
+
+2.7.4	Contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion	48
+
+2.8	Personnel Records	49
+
+2.9	Faculty Evaluation	50
+
+2.9.1	Evaluation Criteria for Personnel Decisions	50
+
+2.9.2	Evaluation Components and Review Materials	55
+
+2.9.3	Annual Evaluation for Reappointment	59
+
+2.9.4	Evaluation for Tenure	64
+
+2.9.5	Evaluation for Promotion	68
+
+2.9.6	Evaluation for Merit Increments	70
+
+2.9.7	Faculty Personnel Committee Minutes	70
+
+2.10	Faculty Professional Development	70
+
+2.10.1	Pre-Tenure Regular Paid (Sabbatical) Leave for Full-Time Faculty	70
+
+2.10.2	Regular Paid Leaves (Sabbatical) for Tenured Full-Time Faculty	71
+
+2.10.3	Special Released Time for Scholarly Production	72
+
+2.10.4	Retraining Leaves	73
+
+2.10.5	Professional Development Leave Without Pay	73
+
+2.10.6	Assistance With Travel and Other Professional Expenses	74
+
+2.11	Faculty Awards for Teaching and Scholarly or Artistic Achievement	75
+
+2.11.1	The Welch Meritorious Teaching Award	75
+
+2.11.2	The Sherwood Dodge Shankland Award for Encouragement of Teachers	76
+
+2.11.3	The Welch Award for Scholarly or Artistic Achievement	77
+
+2.12	Faculty Compensation, Benefits, and Leaves	77
+
+2.12.1	Salary	77
+
+2.12.2	Benefits	78
+
+2.12.3	Faculty Leaves	85
+
+2.13	Separation from Service	86
+
+2.13.1	Retirement and Voluntary Separation	86
+
+2.13.2	Nonrenewal of Appointment	86
+
+2.13.3	Policies and Procedures Governing Dismissal For Cause	86
+
+2.13.4	Policies and Procedures Governing Imposition of Sanctions Other than Dismissal for Cause*	90
+
+2.13.5	Termination	91
+
+2.14	Faculty Grievances	96
+
+3	Chapter Three: Part-time Faculty Personnel Policies	99
+
+3.1	Preamble and General Policy	99
+
+3.2	Academic Titles for Part-Time Faculty	99
+
+3.3	Recruitment and Initial Appointment of Part-Time Faculty	99
+
+3.3.1	Establishment of Need for Part-Time Faculty	99
+
+3.4	Terms of Part-Time Appointments	99
+
+3.5	Rights and Privileges of Part-Time Faculty	105
+
+4	Chapter Four: Allocation and Review of Faculty Positions	105
+
+4.1	Preamble and General Policy	105
+
+4.2	Initial Authorization of Positions	106
+
+4.3	Re-authorization of Vacant Positions	106
+
+4.4	Review of Tenure Track Positions	106
+
+4.5	Faculty Selected for Administrative Positions	108
+
+Appendices	111
+
+Appendix A: Faculty Personnel Forms	111
+
+Appendix B: Guidelines for Allocation and Review of Faculty Positions	111
+
+Appendix C: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Policy	111
+
+Appendix D. Policy Statement on Appointment of Librarians	111</s>"
+"<s>[INST] 3rd Draft Rewrite of Termination Due to Financially Contingent Situations.Rock's Edits and Questions.txt [/INST] Termination Due to Financially Contingent Situations and Resource Allocation
+
+Termination of a tenured faculty member or, prior to the end of the term of appointment, of a tenure-track faculty member may occur because of the declaration of a financially contingent situation as described below. 
+
+	Criteria
+
+The criteria to be employed in financially contingent situations in allocating resources to University programs and services fall under three headings: Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality. These will at times compete and at other times converge. If and when Ohio Wesleyan University meets contingencies that require institutional contraction and reorganization, these sets of criteria will be used in complementary fashion as guidelines. The order of their enumeration should not be taken to indicate their order of priority. Neither should it be presumed that all three will be weighed equally in making particular decisions. Particular circumstances may encourage the assignment of greater weight to one or another in particular cases, even though in financially contingent situations it is to be expected that fiscal pressure may emphasize reference to the criterion of cost effectiveness. What is important is that the campus community, in considering contingency reductions, identify and grapple directly with what are likely to be very difficult choices from among options that all carry significant costs and/or benefits in terms of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality. The objective must be to arrive at wise judgments.
+
+	MISSION
+
+Because Ohio Wesleyan University is a specific private university with a specific heritage, a major consideration associated with any reduction or change in size will be to preserve its essential character by maintaining those programs and activities judged to be more central to that character. To do so will require reference to several questions. How closely does the program or service in question fit the stated mission of Ohio Wesleyan University? How importantly does it contribute toward a non-curricular campus ambience vital to Ohio Wesleyan's liberal arts heritage? Is it essential in serving other programs?
+
+	COST EFFECTIVENESS & MARKETABILITY
+
+Attentiveness to the cost effectiveness and marketability of programs and services is a key characteristic of a well-run institution. Cost-effectiveness must be one guideline in determining staffing levels and whether or not to maintain programs or services. The University must therefore be sensitive to the constituencies it serves and to their preferences. While Ohio Wesleyan cannot mindlessly add or subtract staff or programs or services to track short-term fluctuations in cost effectiveness, neither can it ignore longer term or more profound shifts as it decides which subject areas, programs, or services to maintain and at what staffing levels. The following non-prescriptive questions related to cost effectiveness and marketability must be asked: What is the relationship between direct expenses and revenues in a given area? What is the actual and relative cost of a graduation unit (or, in the case of non-academic areas, other service unit)? What is the trend line for both, and for enrollments and student/staff ratio? Is the program or service a ""native recruiter?"" Is it duplicative?  What is the present and future demand for the program among existing and potential student populations as measured by internal data sets (e.g., enrollments, numbers of majors, programs served, etc.), labor market projections, external stakeholder feedback, and national and state policy/economic projections and placement data?
+
+	QUALITY
+
+Since the primary purpose of Ohio Wesleyan University is to provide excellent instruction in the liberal arts and selected career options, and comparable quality in non-academic services, it must consider program or service quality in making program, service, and faculty staffing decisions. In dealing with any financially contingent situation, it will seek to retain its best personnel, programs, and services, as one top priority. It will strive to adjust programs and services and retain or retrain individuals so as to maintain the best possible teaching and learning environment. Major issues associated with this guideline are complex and difficult. Among them are the following: Is the program or service and its staff faculty generally perceived by Faculty (staff, where non-academic services may be involved), students, and alumni to be of high quality? Do students, in or associated with it, perform throughout the University at average or higher levels? Is the staff faculty versatile as well as strong?
+
+	The guidelines of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality are contradictory. Any one of them used exclusively could lead to very serious imbalances in the focus and operation of the University. Recognition that each of these three needs to be considered and that each provides an outward boundary for the decision process will encourage an intelligent and equitable response to financially contingent situations as well as to ordinary conditions.
+
+	Making Contingency Decisions
+
+If financially contingent situations require reductions in personnel and/or academic departments or programs resulting in the termination of faculty appointments or services , the University will balance a need for timely action with the need for shared decision-making.  In both determining whether such a situation exists and in shaping difficult decisions that contingencies might require, the President will engage in extensive consultation with appropriate faculty committees, administrators, and where conditions allow, students, before making a recommendation to the Board of Trustees as follows:  
+
+Determination of Financial Contingent Situation
+
+The Board of Trustees is solely authorized to determine that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent.  The President shall present relevant financial data to and consult with the Committee of University Governance (UGC) that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent, and that reasonable means for coping with the situation have been exhausted without resorting to the elimination of faculty positions. 
+
+
+
+Framing of Proposal to Address Financial Contingent Situation
+
+Responsibility for framing a proposal for program or services and/or personnel reductions to deal with a financially contingent situation will rest with the President.  The proposal, when it pertains to academic programs and/or personnel, will be referred to the Committee on Academic Programs as to curricular impact, to the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee as to the implications for the academic plan, to the Faculty Personnel Committee as to personnel implications, and to the affected programs. When the proposal pertains to non-academic programs, services, and/or personnel, it will be forwarded to the Governance Committee and the Senior Leadership Team Cabinet for consideration. These bodies will hold hearings as part of their deliberations. At the discretion of the President, an advisory student committee may also be created. These groups will severally consider the proposal(s) and in doing so may consult widely with faculty, students, and, where appropriate, with staff. They are to complete their deliberations within 30 calendar days of receipt of the President's proposal(s) and report their findings and recommendations to the President immediately upon finishing their deliberations. They may recommend acceptance, alteration, or otherwise, of the President's proposal(s). If and when they are unable to achieve concurrence with the President, and the President yet judges that reductions must be made, the President will report to the Board of Trustees the proposed course of action. If there is a difference of views between the President and the committees, the President will ensure that the committees' proposals are forwarded to the Trustees  with the President’s proposal(s). The Board of Trustees retains ultimate authority for approving proposals as to program and position reductions and terminations responding to a financially contingent situation.
+
+After the completion and implementation of decisions for institutional contraction to deal with a financially contingent situation, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.
+
+In the event that the Board of Trustees declares that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent, the President shall be responsible for framing a proposal for addressing the situation.  If the proposal might require reductions in academic departments or interdisciplinary programs and the termination of faculty positions, the President, prior to framing the proposal, shall engage in an extensive academic program review process.
+
+Academic Program Review Process
+
+Step 1: The initial step in the Academic Program Review process will be the development by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness of a set of common quantitative data for all academic programs at the University showing trends in course enrollments, student credits delivered, graduated majors, declared majors, direct instructional expense, and other performance metrics agreed upon by Academic Affairs, Academic Planning and Allocation Committee (APAC), and UGC. The data will be made available transparently to all faculty through appropriate means such as live data dashboards. 
+
+Step 2. Following the publication of the data, each academic department and interdisciplinary program will be charged by Academic Affairs to complete self-studies, following criteria set by APAC. 
+
+Step 3. Following receipt of the department and program self-studies, APAC will evaluate each department in relation to Mission, Cost-Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality (see above) and issue a report to the President.
+
+Step 4. The President shall convene a Joint Committee comprised of eight faculty members, six of which are elected by the faculty (or appointed by the Executive Committee if an election is unsuccessful) from individuals serving on each of the following faculty committees: UGC, Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC), Committee on Academic Programs (CAP), and APAC; and  two of which are appointed by the President from the tenure-line faculty.  In addition, the Joint Committee shall include the Provost and appropriate academic administrators responsible for data and curriculum as designated by the Provost.  From the faculty membership, the President shall appoint the convener of the Joint Committee.
+
+After considering the department self-studies and APAC report, the Joint Committee shall:
+
+Develop recommendations for the appropriate number and size of departments and interdisciplinary programs, as well as the appropriate number of majors and minors;
+
+Identify opportunities for program enhancement; and
+
+Suggest the optimal configuration of departments and interdisciplinary programs. 
+
+In addressing these areas, the committee’s recommendations may include (a) the discontinuation and/or reduction of departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors; (b) the elimination of faculty positions; (c) recommendations about reconfiguring departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors by reassigning positions; (d) enhancement of programs, and (e) changes in policies and procedures that would improve the functioning or efficiency of the academic program. 
+
+The President, following consultation with the Executive Committee of the Faculty, will determine the date by which the Joint Committee’s recommendations to the President must be provided.  Following its deliberations, the Joint Committee shall issue its formal recommendations in writing to the President.  
+
+Step 5. The President will review the Joint Committee report and issue a written proposal to the members of the faculty addressing the financially contingent situation.  The President’s written proposal will also be referred to CAP as to curricular impact, to APAC as to the implications for the academic plan, to the FPC as to personnel implications, and to the affected departments and interdisciplinary programs identified in the proposal.  
+
+Each committee and affected department and interdisciplinary program will have a 30-day period to develop their recommendations to the President.  The manner in which the committees and affected departments and interdisciplinary programs arrive at their recommendations is at their respective discretion.
+
+Step 6. Following the hearings, the respective committees and affected departments and interdisciplinary programs may submit to the President written recommendations for changes to the proposal.  The President will consider the recommendations. If consensus can be reached among the respective committees and programs and Presidents regarding the final proposal, If the President adopts the recommendations, the President will incorporate them into the final plan submitted to the Board of Trustees. If the President does not adopt the recommendations, the President will transmit to the Board of Trustees both the President’s final proposal and the alternative proposal(s) prepared by the faculty committees and affected departments and interdisciplinary programs.  The Board of Trustees shall approve the final plan to address the financial contingent situation and retains ultimate authority for approving proposals as to department or interdisciplinary program and position reductions and terminations responding to a financially contingent situation.
+
+Step 7. The President shall render the final decision on terminations for reasons of financial contingency and notify the faculty member(s) involved in accordance with the Notification provisions below. 
+
+Step 8. After the completion and implementation of decisions for institutional contraction to deal with a financially contingent situation, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.
+
+Priorities 
+
+In making recommendations and final decisions on individual faculty reductions in accordance with the Academic Program Review Process procedures above, the following sequence and criteria shall apply:
+
+Sequence:
+
+Consideration of faculty attrition resulting from resignation, retirement, or other severance actions. 
+
+Termination of Part-time and Visiting faculty positions within the affected department(s) or interdisciplinary program(s). 
+
+Termination of tenure-track and/or tenured positions within the affected department(s) or interdisciplinary program(s).  The appointment of a faculty member with tenure within the same department or program will not be terminated in favor of retaining a full-time tenure-track faculty member, except in circumstances where a serious distortion of the department or interdisciplinary program would otherwise result.  
+
+Criteria: 
+
+The qualifications of faculty members as documented in official personnel files and as judged relative to the needs of the University and the potentially affected department or interdisciplinary program
+
+Given relatively equal standing as determined in a above, seniority as determined by length of service at the University
+
+
+
+Notification
+
+Notification of termination will be sent from the President to the faculty member. The notice will specify the reasons for such termination, the effective date of termination, the faculty member's right to retraining (if applicable), and right to an appeal.
+
+In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial contingency, full-time non-tenure faculty members will be given notice or severance salary in accordance with Section 3.13.3.1.  Tenured faculty will be provided with termination payments in accordance with Section 3.13.5.1.
+
+Appeals
+
+If the administration issues notice to a particular faculty member of an intention to terminate the appointment because of financial contingency, the faculty member will have the right to file a grievance in accordance with Section 3.14.3. The issues in this hearing may include the following:
+
+The existence and extent of the condition of financial contingency. The burden will rest on the administration to prove the existence and extent of the condition. The findings of a faculty committee in a previous proceeding involving the same issue may be introduced.
+
+The validity of the educational judgments and the criteria for identification for position elimination; but the recommendations of the Joint Committee or the faculty committees to the President on these matters during the Academic Program Review Process will be considered presumptively valid.
+
+Whether the criteria are being properly applied in the individual case.
+
+
+
+
+
+Reassignment and Retraining
+
+Subject to a review of qualifications (see Section 3.4.5 - Faculty Qualification) and retraining possibilities (see Section 3.10.3 – Retraining Leave), tenured and tenure track faculty members in positions to be eliminated will be considered for suitable vacancies at the University in administrative or teaching positions. See Section 3.13.5.1 below.
+
+Reinstatement Rights
+
+When a tenured faculty position is terminated for a financial contingent situation, the position will not be filled by a new appointee with the same areas of specialization as the terminated faculty member within a period of three years, unless the released faculty member has been offered reinstatement and at least thirty days in which to accept or decline it.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] 4th Draft Rewrite of Termination Due to Financially Contingent Situations.Rock's Edits and Questions.txt [/INST] Termination Due to Financially Contingent Situations and Resource Allocation
+
+Termination of a tenured faculty member or, prior to the end of the term of appointment, of a tenure-track faculty member may occur because of the declaration of a financially contingent situation as described below. 
+
+	Criteria
+
+The criteria to be employed in financially contingent situations in allocating resources to University programs and services fall under three headings: Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality. These will at times compete and at other times converge. If and when Ohio Wesleyan University meets contingencies that require institutional contraction and reorganization, these sets of criteria will be used in complementary fashion as guidelines. The order of their enumeration should not be taken to indicate their order of priority. Neither should it be presumed that all three will be weighed equally in making particular decisions. Particular circumstances may encourage the assignment of greater weight to one or another in particular cases, even though in financially contingent situations it is to be expected that fiscal pressure may emphasize reference to the criterion of cost effectiveness. What is important is that the campus community, in considering contingency reductions, identify and grapple directly with what are likely to be very difficult choices from among options that all carry significant costs and/or benefits in terms of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality. The objective must be to arrive at wise judgments.
+
+	MISSION
+
+Because Ohio Wesleyan University is a specific private university with a specific heritage, a major consideration associated with any reduction or change in size will be to preserve its essential character by maintaining those programs and activities judged to be more central to that character. To do so will require reference to several questions. How closely does the program or service in question fit the stated mission of Ohio Wesleyan University? How importantly does it contribute toward a non-curricular campus ambience vital to Ohio Wesleyan's liberal arts heritage? Is it essential in serving other programs?
+
+	COST EFFECTIVENESS & MARKETABILITY
+
+Attentiveness to the cost effectiveness and marketability of programs and services is a key characteristic of a well-run institution. Cost-effectiveness must be one guideline in determining staffing levels and whether or not to maintain programs or services. The University must therefore be sensitive to the constituencies it serves and to their preferences. While Ohio Wesleyan cannot mindlessly add or subtract staff or programs or services to track short-term fluctuations in cost effectiveness, neither can it ignore longer term or more profound shifts as it decides which subject areas, programs, or services to maintain and at what staffing levels. The following non-prescriptive questions related to cost effectiveness and marketability must be asked: What is the relationship between direct expenses and revenues in a given area? What is the actual and relative cost of a graduation unit (or, in the case of non-academic areas, other service unit)? What is the trend line for both, and for enrollments and student/staff ratio? Is the program or service a ""native recruiter?"" Is it duplicative?  What is the present and future demand for the program among existing and potential student populations as measured by internal data sets (e.g., enrollments, numbers of majors, programs served, etc.), labor market projections, external stakeholder feedback, and national and state policy/economic projections and placement data?
+
+	QUALITY
+
+Since the primary purpose of Ohio Wesleyan University is to provide excellent instruction in the liberal arts and selected career options, and comparable quality in non-academic services, it must consider program or service quality in making program, service, and faculty staffing decisions. In dealing with any financially contingent situation, it will seek to retain its best personnel, programs, and services, as one top priority. It will strive to adjust programs and services and retain or retrain individuals so as to maintain the best possible teaching and learning environment. Major issues associated with this guideline are complex and difficult. Among them are the following: Is the program or service and its staff faculty generally perceived by Faculty (staff, where non-academic services may be involved), students, and alumni to be of high quality? Do students, in or associated with it, perform throughout the University at average or higher levels? Is the staff faculty versatile as well as strong?
+
+	The guidelines of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality are contradictory. Any one of them used exclusively could lead to very serious imbalances in the focus and operation of the University. Recognition that each of these three needs to be considered and that each provides an outward boundary for the decision process will encourage an intelligent and equitable response to financially contingent situations as well as to ordinary conditions.
+
+	Making Contingency Decisions
+
+If financially contingent situations require reductions in personnel and/or academic departments or programs resulting in the termination of faculty appointments or services , the University will balance a need for timely action with the need for shared decision-making.  In both determining whether such a situation exists and in shaping difficult decisions that contingencies might require, the President will engage in extensive consultation with appropriate faculty committees, administrators, and where conditions allow, students, before making a recommendation to the Board of Trustees as follows:  
+
+Determination of Financial Contingent Situation
+
+The Board of Trustees is solely authorized to determine that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent.  The President shall present relevant financial data to and consult with the Committee of University Governance (UGC) that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent, and that reasonable means for coping with the situation have been exhausted without resorting to the elimination of faculty positions. 
+
+
+
+Framing of Proposal to Address Financial Contingent Situation
+
+Responsibility for framing a proposal for program or services and/or personnel reductions to deal with a financially contingent situation will rest with the President.  The proposal, when it pertains to academic programs and/or personnel, will be referred to the Committee on Academic Programs as to curricular impact, to the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee as to the implications for the academic plan, to the Faculty Personnel Committee as to personnel implications, and to the affected programs. When the proposal pertains to non-academic programs, services, and/or personnel, it will be forwarded to the Governance Committee and the Senior Leadership Team Cabinet for consideration. These bodies will hold hearings as part of their deliberations. At the discretion of the President, an advisory student committee may also be created. These groups will severally consider the proposal(s) and in doing so may consult widely with faculty, students, and, where appropriate, with staff. They are to complete their deliberations within 30 calendar days of receipt of the President's proposal(s) and report their findings and recommendations to the President immediately upon finishing their deliberations. They may recommend acceptance, alteration, or otherwise, of the President's proposal(s). If and when they are unable to achieve concurrence with the President, and the President yet judges that reductions must be made, the President will report to the Board of Trustees the proposed course of action. If there is a difference of views between the President and the committees, the President will ensure that the committees' proposals are forwarded to the Trustees  with the President’s proposal(s). The Board of Trustees retains ultimate authority for approving proposals as to program and position reductions and terminations responding to a financially contingent situation.
+
+After the completion and implementation of decisions for institutional contraction to deal with a financially contingent situation, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.
+
+
+
+In the event that the Board of Trustees declares that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent, the President shall be responsible for framing a proposal for addressing the situation.  If the proposal might require reductions in academic departments or interdisciplinary programs and the termination of faculty positions, the President, prior to framing the proposal, shall engage in an extensive academic program review process.
+
+Academic Program Review Process
+
+Step 1: The initial step in the Academic Program Review process will be the development by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness of a set of common quantitative data for all academic programs at the University showing trends in course enrollments, student credits delivered, graduated majors, declared majors, direct instructional expense, and other performance metrics agreed upon by Academic Affairs, Academic Planning and Allocation Committee (APAC), and UGC. The data will be made available transparently to all faculty through appropriate means such as live data dashboards. 
+
+Step 2. Following the publication of the data, each academic department and interdisciplinary program will be charged by Academic Affairs to complete self-studies, following criteria set by APAC. 
+
+Step 3. Following receipt of the department and program self-studies, APAC will evaluate each department in relation to Mission, Cost-Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality (see above) and issue a report to the President.
+
+Step 4. The President shall convene a Joint Committee comprised of eight faculty members, six of which are elected by the faculty (or appointed by the Executive Committee if an election is unsuccessful) from individuals serving on each of the following faculty committees: UGC, Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC), Committee on Academic Programs (CAP), and APAC; and  two of which are appointed by the President from the tenure-line faculty.  In addition, the Joint Committee shall include the Provost and appropriate academic administrators responsible for data and curriculum as designated by the Provost.  From the faculty membership, the President shall appoint the convener of the Joint Committee.
+
+After considering the department self-studies and APAC report, the Joint Committee shall:
+
+Develop recommendations for the appropriate number and size of departments and interdisciplinary programs, as well as the appropriate number of majors and minors;
+
+Identify opportunities for program enhancement; and
+
+Suggest the optimal configuration of departments and interdisciplinary programs. 
+
+In addressing these areas, the committee’s recommendations may include (a) the discontinuation and/or reduction of departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors; (b) the elimination of faculty positions; (c) recommendations about reconfiguring departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors by reassigning positions; (d) enhancement of programs, and (e) changes in policies and procedures that would improve the functioning or efficiency of the academic program. 
+
+The President, following consultation with the Executive Committee of the Faculty, will determine the date by which the Joint Committee’s recommendations to the President must be provided.  Following its deliberations, the Joint Committee shall issue its formal recommendations in writing to the President.  
+
+Step 5. The President will review the Joint Committee report and issue a written proposal to the members of the faculty addressing the financially contingent situation.  The President’s written proposal will also be referred to CAP as to curricular impact, to APAC as to the implications for the academic plan, to the FPC as to personnel implications, and to the affected departments and interdisciplinary programs identified in the proposal.  
+
+Each committee and affected department and interdisciplinary program will have a 30-day period to develop their recommendations to the President.  The manner in which the committees and affected departments and interdisciplinary programs arrive at their recommendations is at their respective discretion.
+
+Step 6. Following the hearings, the respective committees and affected departments and interdisciplinary programs may submit to the President written recommendations for changes to the proposal.  The President will consider the recommendations. If the President adopts the recommendations, the President will incorporate them into the final plan submitted to the Board of Trustees. If the President does not adopt the recommendations, the President will transmit to the Board of Trustees both the President’s final proposal and the alternative proposal(s) prepared by the faculty committees and affected departments and interdisciplinary programs.  The Board of Trustees shall approve the final plan to address the financial contingent situation and retains ultimate authority for approving proposals as to department or interdisciplinary program and position reductions and terminations responding to a financially contingent situation.
+
+Step 7. The President shall render the final decision on terminations for reasons of financial contingency and notify the faculty member(s) involved in accordance with the Notification provisions below. 
+
+Step 8. After the completion and implementation of decisions for institutional contraction to deal with a financially contingent situation, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.
+
+Priorities 
+
+In making recommendations and final decisions on individual faculty reductions in accordance with the Academic Program Review Process procedures above, the following sequence and criteria shall apply:
+
+Sequence:
+
+Consideration of faculty attrition resulting from resignation, retirement, or other severance actions. 
+
+Termination of Part-time and Visiting faculty positions within the affected department(s) or interdisciplinary program(s). 
+
+Termination of tenure-track and/or tenured positions within the affected department(s) or interdisciplinary program(s).  The appointment of a faculty member with tenure within the same department or program will not be terminated in favor of retaining a full-time tenure-track faculty member, except in circumstances where a serious distortion of the department or interdisciplinary program would otherwise result.  
+
+Criteria: 
+
+The qualifications of faculty members as documented in official personnel files and as judged relative to the needs of the University and the potentially affected department or interdisciplinary program
+
+Given relatively equal standing as determined in a above, seniority as determined by length of service at the University
+
+
+
+Notification
+
+Notification of termination will be sent from the President to the faculty member. The notice will specify the reasons for such termination, the effective date of termination, the faculty member's right to retraining (if applicable), and right to an appeal.
+
+In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial contingency, full-time non-tenure faculty members will be given notice or severance salary in accordance with Section 3.13.3.1.  Tenured faculty will be provided with termination payments in accordance with Section 3.13.5.1.
+
+Appeals
+
+If the administration issues notice to a particular faculty member of an intention to terminate the appointment because of financial contingency, the faculty member will have the right to file a grievance in accordance with Section 3.14.3. 
+
+Reassignment and Retraining
+
+Subject to a review of qualifications (see Section 3.4.5 - Faculty Qualification) and retraining possibilities (see Section 3.10.3 – Retraining Leave), tenured and tenure track faculty members in positions to be eliminated will be considered for suitable vacancies at the University in administrative or teaching positions. See Section 3.13.5.1 below.
+
+Reinstatement Rights
+
+When a tenured faculty position is terminated for a financial contingent situation, the position will not be filled by a new appointee with the same areas of specialization as the terminated faculty member within a period of three years, unless the released faculty member has been offered reinstatement and at least thirty days in which to accept or decline it.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] 5 ARTICLES V & VI - Wheaton College Bylaws (Recommendations to SG) (1.23).txt [/INST] Article V Visiting Faculty Appointments and Provisions
+
+This Article sets forth policies, responsibilities, duties, rights, and privileges pertaining to Visiting faculty.  
+
+Visiting Faculty Academic Titles
+
+The College should continue to use the following ranks: Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Professor.  ““Assistant”” and ““Lecturer” should have special uses under condition which normally preclude the assignment of regular ranks. [May 13, 1963, p. 2715; Minutes of the Board of Trustees meeting, October 26, 1963, pp. 1055-57; November 18, 1963, pp. 2728-29] 
+
+The Visiting Faculty title is used with one of the four academic ranks (i.e., Visiting Instructor, Visiting Assistant Professor, Visiting Associate Professor, Visiting Professor).  
+
+The initial title for each Visiting faculty member shall be determined by the Provost in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair/Program Coordinator. [May 29, 1980, p. 3469; May 3, 1985, p. 3678] 
+
+The Provost, in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair/Program Coordinator, shall determine whether or not an individual Visiting Faculty member’s appointment constitutes half-time teaching (i.e., an appointment with a teaching load that is fifty percent or more, but less than one hundred percent of full-time teaching as defined in the Employee Handbook for Faculty). Each letter of appointment or reappointment shall clearly state the results of this determination. 
+
+Voting Rights 
+
+Members of the faculty who teach at Wheaton less than half-time have no vote at department or faculty meetings. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641] 
+
+Visiting Faculty members who have taught at Wheaton half-time or more for three consecutive years are eligible for service on faculty committees and have a full vote in department or academic program and faculty meetings. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641] 
+
+Duration of Appointment and Notice of Termination
+
+1. The College will observe the following guidelines for Visiting Faculty ranks and duration of appointments:
+
+··Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Visiting Instructors. Those who have completed their professional training will ordinarily be appointed Visiting Assistant Professors. Visiting Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Visiting Assistant Professor effective the following academic year.
+
+··The initial appointment of Visiting Faculty will be for one semester, one, two or three years. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641]  Full-time Visiting Faculty will be appointed annually pursuant to a term contract for a semester or a year, for a period not to exceed two years.  Part-time Visiting Faculty will be appointed pursuant to a term contract to teach on a part-time or per-course basis.  Issuance of another term contract is solely within the discretion of the College and no other procedures apply.
+
+··Replacements for faculty members on leave and other temporary personnel will receive appointments of appropriate rank and duration.
+
+··Visiting faculty members who have taught at Wheaton half-time or more for five years are entitled to contracts ranging from two to five years in length. Other part-time faculty may be given a one- year terminal appointment. In such a case, the standards of notification as described in Paragraph 2 below will be observed. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641]
+
+2. The following paragraph applies to reappointment of Visiting Faculty, excluding those who are replacements for faculty on leave or are appointed to teach a single course in one semester or are on terminal contracts. 
+
+By March 1 of the last year of contract, part-time teaching personnel shall receive letters informing them of their reappointment or non-reappointment. If the College cannot provide them with this information by March 1, they will receive a letter that explains why the reappointment decision has not yet been reached and provides a date by which the decision will be made. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641] 
+
+Resignation 
+
+Professional ethics obligate the individual faculty member to notify the College as early as possible of an his or her intention to resign. [April 9, 1976, p. 3237] 
+
+Compensation 
+
+Compensation for Visiting Faculty is determined at the time of hire by the Provost [May 4, 2007, p. 4642] 
+
+Benefits 
+
+Prorated Benefits for eligible faculty members are determined by Human Resources guidelines. [May 4, 2007, p. 4642]
+
+Policies and Procedures Respecting Recruitment and Appointment, Reappointment, and Termination of Visiting Faculty
+
+	Recruitment, Appointment, Reappointment, and Evaluation
+
+For recruitment of full-time Visiting Faculty, the procedures for recruitment and appointment of full-time faculty shall be followed, except that the Chair of the Search Committee may limit advertisement provided that a suitable pool of applicants is obtained in keeping with the College’s policy as an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer. 
+
+	For such appointments, the Chair may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73In all cases where a Visiting Faculty member is retained for more than one year, the Department Chair/Program Coordinator shall review the faculty member’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to perform. 
+
+
+
+Promotion: Criteria: Procedures and Responsibilities for Carrying them On
+
+Promotion of part-time faculty members shall be by the same procedures as those for full-time faculty members. The Provost, in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair, shall determine when a part-time faculty member shall be eligible for consideration for promotion.
+[May 29, 1980, p. 3469; May 3, 1985, p. 3678] 
+
+	Termination of Visiting Faculty Appointments by the College
+
+If the College seeks a dismissal for adequate cause prior to the expiration of the faculty member’s contract term, the procedures specific in Article IV, Section 8.2.1 shall be followed. 
+
+	Academic Freedom and Responsibility 
+
+All members of the Faculty, whether tenured or not, are entitled to academic freedom as set forth in the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, formulated by the Association of American Colleges and the American Association of University Professors, and as modified by the 1970 Interpretive Comments developed by representatives of the same two bodies.  See Article III, Section 1.
+
+All members of the Faculty are expected to conduct themselves in accordance with the 1966 Statement on Professional Ethics formulated by the American Association of University Professors.  See Article III, Section 2.
+
+	Miscellaneous Visiting Faculty Grievances
+
+1. A Visiting Faculty member who feels that he or she has cause for grievance may have such grievance reviewed in accordance with the College’s then current “Review and Appeals Procedures for Certain Faculty Grievances” (see Article IV, Section 9). [May 4, 2007, p. 4643] 
+
+2. The Policies and Procedures set forth herein shall go into effect in accordance with the Enabling Section, as separately provided. 
+
+3. The Faculty may at any time or from time to time amend or revise the Policies and Procedures herein set forth, subject to each instance to the approval of the President of the College and of the Board of Trustees. 
+
+4. The Board of Trustees has final authority for acts under the Policies and Procedures herein set forth, subject to the delegations of authority to the Faculty under this legislation and to the President under the By-Laws; Article III. [March 17, 1978, pp. 3354-63] 
+
+
+
+
+Article VI. Amendments to Faculty Bylaws
+
+The Faculty Bylaws Policies and Procedures set forth herein shall go into effect in accordance with the Enabling Section, as separately provided. 
+
+The Faculty may at any time or from time to time amend or revise these Faculty Bylaws the Policies and Procedures herein set forth.  Amendments or revisions to Articles II through VI of these Faculty Bylaws are subject in each instance to the approval of the President of the College and of the Board of Trustees. 
+
+Amendments to the Faculty Bylaws may be initiated by either the Faculty, the President (or the President’s delegee), or the Administration.  A proposal from a member of the Faculty or standing committee to amend the Faculty Bylaws will be referred to the Committee on Committees and Agenda.
+
+The Committee on Committees and Agenda will publish all proposed amendments to the Faculty, which will then vote on the matter after a period of deliberation.  If a proposed amendment to Articles II through VI of the Faculty Bylaws is initiated by the President or other member of the Administration, the Faculty shall vote on the matter within 120 days of receiving the proposed amendment (excluding the period of time between the end of the traditional nine-month full-time faculty contract period and the beginning of the new nine-month full-time faculty contract period), unless an extension is agreeable to both the President or Board of Trustees and the Committee on Committees and Agenda and is expressed in writing.  A proposed amendment that was initially referred by the President or member of the Administration and not voted upon by the Faculty within the time prescribed or that was not approved by Faculty may, at the option of the President, move forward to the Board of Trustees.  In such a case, both the Faculty and the President shall have the right to provide the Board of Trustees with memoranda setting forth their positions on the proposed amendment.
+
+An affirmative vote of more than one-fourth of the entire voting faculty at duly constituted meeting of the Faculty is required to approve a proposed amendment.
+
+The Board of Trustees has final authority for acts under Articles II through VI the Faculty Bylaws Policies and Procedures herein set forth, subject to the delegations of authority to the Faculty under this legislation and to the President under the Bylaws; Article III. [March 17, 1978, pp. 3354-63]
+
+Conflict with Federal, State or Local Law: If any provision of the Faculty Bylaws is in conflict with federal, State, or local law, or is otherwise illegal, the remainder of the Faculty Bylaws shall not be affected.  The Faculty shall make it a priority to meet and resolve the conflict in conjunction with the Administration.
+
+
+
+		Wheaton College Faculty Bylaws – Page 2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] AAUP 1940 Statement on Academic Freedom and Tenure.txt [/INST] AAUP 1940 Statement on Academic Freedom and Tenure
+
+
+
+In the United States, academic freedom is generally defined by the ""1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure,"" jointly authored by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) and the Association of American Colleges and Universities. 
+
+These principles state that Teachers are entitled to:
+
+freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject; and 
+
+freedom in research and in the publication of the results. 
+
+The principles further states that Tenure is the primary means of protecting academic freedom.
+
+Principles then sets forth baseline procedures to protect tenure:
+
+The probationary period
+
+Dismissal for adequate cause, and 
+
+Termination due to financial exigency (must be demonstrably bona fide).  
+
+
+
+
+
+Common Practice Data
+
+
+
+OWU’s current Faculty Handbook adopts the principles set forth in the 1940 AAUP Statement of Principles of Academic Freedom and Tenure.
+
+
+
+Consistent with Higher Ed Practice:
+
+
+
+Endorsed by more than 250 disciplinary societies and educational associations
+
+Per 2020 study of over 250 Faculty Handbooks/Faculty Bylaws: 
+
+73% of four-year institutions with a tenure system base their academic freedom policy directly on the 1940 Statement, and 
+
+more than half cite the AAUP specifically as the source. 
+
+Recommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure
+
+
+
+AAUP publishes model Regulations outlining recommended institutional processes that enable institutions to protect academic freedom, tenure, and to ensure academic due process.
+
+The Recommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure sets forth proposed rules are derive from the chief provisions and interpretations of the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure 
+
+
+
+My guess is that the faculty will be pushing for the adoption of some of the recommended regulations set forth in the financial exigency section of the AAUP’s Recommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure.
+
+Current OWU Termination Policy allows termination of tenure due to Financial Contingencies but does not define financial contingency.
+
+
+
+2020 AAUP Study
+
+95 percent of four-year institutions with a tenure system have financial exigency policies that allow for the termination of appointments 
+
+55 percent of institutions do not define those conditions and simply state that appointments can be terminated for “financial exigency,” “fiscal emergency,” or similar conditions 
+
+AAUP Financial Exigency definition found in 13 percent of handbooks and contracts
+
+Other definitions that often provide less protection than the definition provided by the AAUP can be found at 33 percent of institutions</s>"
+"<s>[INST] AAUP Related Text.txt [/INST] AAUP Related Text
+
+
+
+However, in cases where differences occur between the Saint Mary's College Faculty Handbook and procedures and policies of the AAUP, the Saint Mary's College Faculty Handbook takes precedence. 
+
+Santa Clara
+
+3.11 Revisions of the Faculty Handbook 
+
+Any revisions of Chapter 3, the contractual section of this Handbook, must be reviewed by the Faculty Senate and approved by both the President and the Board of Trustees. 
+
+See U of Pacific Faculty Authority/Shared Governance
+
+
+
+
+
+Benefits
+
+
+
+Holy Cross - https://www.holycross.edu/statutes-faculty/chapter-v-faculty-benefits-and-privileges
+
+
+
+Full-time faculty are entitled to faculty and College benefits during the term of their appointment. At the termination of their appointment the College has no continuing obligation with respect to these benefits.
+
+ 
+
+Faculty fringe benefits and College employee benefits can be found in the Faculty Handbook and on the Human Resources website. Any changes to these benefits will be communicated to faculty at least one month in advance of the effective date of the change.
+
+ 
+
+At the termination of their appointment, faculty members should consult with the Benefits coordinator in Human Resources to determine what legal rights they might have to continue some of these benefits at their own expense.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Academic Division Evaluation Guidelines.txt [/INST] [Academic Divisions or Colleges/Schools] are responsible for providing approved guidelines that define levels of performance in the four evaluation categories that inform the evaluation of candidates for promotion and tenure. The division guidelines will be used by the department faculty, Chair, Dean, ART Committee, Provost, President, and Board in their respective evaluation of candidates.
+
+Establishment and Approval of Academic Division Evaluation Guidelines 
+
+The Faculty and Dean of each academic division are responsible for adopting, reviewing, and publishing division evaluation guidelines that define levels of performance in the four evaluation categories that inform the evaluation of candidates for promotion and tenure.  
+
+The guidelines developed by the division Faculty and Dean must be flexible and allow a range of options for meeting each evaluation category.  Moreover, the guidelines must be compatible with the University-level evaluation criteria published in the Faculty Policies Handbook and delineate what the discipline values in teaching, advising/mentoring, scholarship/creative endeavor (i.e., the number and/or type of publications, presentations, exhibitions, shows, or performances that are expected of candidates seeking tenure and/or promotion; listing of discipline-specific peer-reviewed journals, presses, or creative venues; etc.), and service.  In developing the guidelines, the division Faculty and Dean are encouraged to take into consideration California Lutheran University’s mission, the applicable College or School’s mission, the academic division’s mission, principles of academic freedom, and, if appropriate, accepted practices in professional discipline-specific associations.
+
+Adopted division guidelines are reviewed by the ART Committee and Provost to ensure appropriate consistency in protection of academic freedom, rigor, equity, and balance across academic divisions.  If necessary, the ART Committee and Provost may elect to return the guidelines to the appropriate Dean with questions and/or suggestions for revisions.  The ART Committee and Provost shall strive to provide joint recommendations to the President whenever possible, but if disagreement exists, separate recommendations and supporting information should be provided to the President.  The Provost will forward the proposed division guidelines, decisions, and related information to the President for final approval.
+
+The President will authorize the final version of the division guidelines. 
+
+Distribution of Division Guidelines 
+
+The Provost is responsible for distributing approved division guidelines to the respective Deans and Department Chairs, as well as the Office of Faculty Affairs and the ART Committee..
+
+The Dean shall provide a copy of the division guidelines to each faculty member at the time of appointment 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Effective Dates for Changes in Evaluation Criteria 
+
+Approved by Academic Council, Provost, Faculty; revised April 16, 2014, Revised and approved by Academic Council on November 10, 2016, by the Faculty on December 13, 2016 and by the Provost on February 14, 2017 
+
+If a change in the standards occurs prior to the year of a candidate's tenure and/or promotion review, the decision will be based on the standard at date-of-hire unless professional accreditation of programs require a prompt change or the candidate chooses the new standards. Promotion to full professor review will follow the new standards if changes to standards occur outside of the two years prior to the candidates promotion to full professor. This policy also applies to approved revisions of unit guidelines. When changes are made either at the University level or at the unit level, the unit must assist faculty to make the transition to the new standards in an equitable manner.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] ACCEPTABLE USE OF COLLEGE COMPUTER AND NETWORK SYSTEMS POLICY.txt [/INST] ACCEPTABLE USE OF COLLEGE COMPUTER AND NETWORK SYSTEMS POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+May 8, 2017
+
+Policy Number:
+
+II – 2.4.1
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Chief Information Officer
+
+Applicability:
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+
+
+All students, staff, faculty, contractors, consultants, and other workers at Canisius college, including all personnel affiliated with third parties. This policy applies to all college-owned or college-leased information systems, including but not limited to, computer and network systems.
+
+History:
+
+ 
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to outline the acceptable use of the college’s information systems, including but not limited to, its computer and network systems and to promote the efficient, ethical, and lawful use of the college’s information systems and equipment.
+
+POLICY
+
+Canisius College information systems, including but not limited to its computer and network systems (hereinafter collectively referred to as “information systems”), are intended for use in college-related research, instruction, learning, enrichment, and administrative activities. Authorized Users must use only those information systems that they are authorized to use and are permitted to use them only in the manner and to the extent authorized. Ability to access such systems does not, by itself, imply authorization to do so. Authorized Users are responsible for ascertaining what authorizations are necessary and for obtaining them before proceeding. See the Access Control Policy for additional information.
+
+Further, the college expects college employees, students, and other Authorized Users to utilize the college’s information systems and resources in a lawful and responsible manner consistent with the college’s mission of education, research, and service. While the college makes its information systems available primarily for use in college-related research, instruction, learning, enrichment, and administrative activities, it realizes the need for personal use of its systems for the convenience of the campus community. Any personal use of these systems may not violate any college practice or policy, including but not limited to the procedures and policy guidelines set forth in this policy. Moreover, the use of the college’s systems by employees for purposes unrelated to their college positions, however, must be limited and not interfere with their official responsibilities or college functions. It is the responsibility of college employees to consult their supervisors if they have any questions in this respect.
+
+The college recognizes that Authorized Users may use personal devices when conducting college business or accessing the college���s information systems. Authorized Users are still responsible for following the Acceptable Use Policy when using personal devices. See also the Mobile Device and Support Policy for more information.
+
+If an Authorized User is not clear as to what constitutes an appropriate use, the user should contact the college’s chief information officer to determine whether a particular activity is permissible.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Authorized User—are all individuals, including, but not limited to, employees, temporary employees, faculty, students, alumni, trustees, campus visitors, contractors, vendors, consultants and their related personnel, and other individuals authorized by the college to access a college computer, the college network(s), or information systems that collect, process, maintain, use, share, disseminate or dispose of College Data.
+
+Cardholder Data - full magnetic stripe or the Primary Account Number (PAN) plus any of the following: cardholder name; expiration date; service code; CVC2/CVV2/CID (a three- or four-digit number displayed on the signature panel of the card or, in the case of American Express, on the face of the card.
+
+College Data— any information collected, manipulated, stored, reported, or presented in any format, on any medium, at any location by any department, program or office of the college in support of the college’s mission.
+
+College Information System—a set of information resources organized expressly for the collection, processing, maintenance, use, sharing, dissemination, or disposition of information.  The term system is used throughout this policy to represent all types of computing platforms that can process, store, or transmit College Data.
+
+
+
+College Personnel—Canisius College trustees, executive officers, administrators, faculty, staff, student employees, contractors, and others who act on behalf of the college.
+
+Computer and Network Systems—any college-owned or leased computer, mobile device, or software, as well as any part of the college’s computer, data, voice or video networks (including all information systems) physically located on any college owned, leased, or rented property or located on the property of any third-party with the permission of the college. This includes devices on such networks assigned any routable and non-routable IP addresses and applies to the college’s wireless network and the network serving the college’s student residence housing and any other vendor supplied network made available to the college community.
+
+Covered Data and Information—means all Non-Public Personnel Information of customers required to be protected under the Title V of the Gramm Leach Bliley Act of 1999 (“GLBA”), including Student Financial Information.  In addition to this coverage, which is required under federal law, the college chooses as a matter of policy to also include in this definition any Cardholder Data received in the course of business by the college, whether or not such Cardholder Data is covered by GLBA.  Covered Data and Information includes both paper and electronic records.  Covered Data and Information is classified as Private, Highly Restricted College Data pursuant to the Data Classification Policy.
+
+Data Custodians—the custodian of College Data is generally responsible for the processing and storage of College Data.  The custodian is responsible for the administration of controls as specified by the Data Owner.  By definition, Data Custodians are also Authorized Users.
+
+Data Owners—the owner of a collection of College Data is usually the manager responsible for the creation of that data or the primary user of that information.  This role often corresponds with the management of department.  In this context, ownership does not signify proprietary interest, and ownership may be shared.  By definition, Data Owners are also Authorized Users.
+
+Media—includes, but is not limited to, paper, hard drives, random access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), disks, flash drives, memory devices, phones, Mobile Devices, networking devices, and all-in-one printers.
+
+Members of the College Community—includes any person who is a student, college employee, volunteer, trustee, alumni, as well as college organizations, clubs, groups, and teams.  This definition also includes all college departments, offices and programs.
+
+Mobile Device— any handheld or portable computing device including running an operating system optimized or designed for mobile computing.  Any device running a full desktop version operating system is not included in this definition.
+
+Non-Public Personal Information—any personally identifiable financial or other personal information, not otherwise publicly available, that the college has obtained from a customer in the process of offering a financial product or service; such information provided to the college by another financial institution; such information otherwise obtained by the college in connection with providing a financial product or service; or any list, description, or other grouping of customers (and publicly available information pertaining to them) that is derived using any information listed above that is not publicly available.  Examples of personally identifiable financial information include names, date and place of birth, mother’s maiden name, biometric records, addresses, telephone numbers, bank and credit card account numbers, income and credit histories, tax returns, asset statements, and social security numbers, both in paper and electronic form.
+
+Personally Identifiable Information or PII—any information about an individual that (i) can be used to distinguish or trace an individual’s identity, such as name, date and place of birth, mother’s maiden name or biometric records, (ii) is linked or linkable to an individual, such as medical, educational, financial and employment information, which if lost, compromised or disclosed without authorization, could result in harm to that individual; and (iii) is protected by federal, state or local laws and regulations or industry standards.
+
+Private College Data—any College Data classified as Private-Highly Restricted and Private-Restricted pursuant to this policy.  By definition, Private College Data includes, but is not limited to, Covered Data and Information, Student Financial Information, Personally Identifiable Information, Student Education Records, Human Subjects Research Data or Other Sensitive Research Data, Protected Health Information, Cardholder Data, and Sensitive Authentication Data.  See the College Data Classification Policy for additional information.
+
+Public College Data—College Data that by law are available to the public upon request, and that the loss of the data would not cause significant personal, institutional, or other harm.
+
+Sensitive Authentication Data—Full track data (magnetic strip data or equivalent on a chip, CAV2/CVC2/CVV2/CID, and PINs/PIN blocks.
+
+Software—any programs used to operate computers and related devices. Software is frequently divided into two categories: system software and application software. System software includes the operating system and the utilities that enable the computer or device to operate. Application software consists of programs that perform productive work for users. Application software includes such items as word processors (e.g., Word, WordPerfect), spreadsheets (e.g.: Excel), graphic and data management programs (e.g.: Photoshop, Access), and statistical packages.
+
+Student Education Records—as defined by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), student education records are all records which contain information directly related to a student and maintained by the college, including those files, documents, and other materials (in handwriting, print, computer media, video or audio tape, film, microfilm, and microfiche) that contain information directly related to a student which are maintained by the college or by a person acting for the college pursuant to college or department policy.  Information that is captured as a result of a student’s various activities at the college is part of the student record.  This information includes, but may not be limited to, logs, databases or other records of: websites the student has visited, purchases made at college facilities, entry day/time into college facilities, library use and biometric records.
+
+Student Financial Information—information the college or its affiliates have obtained from a student in the process of offering a financial product or service, or such information provided to the college by another financial institution.  Offering a financial product or service includes offering student loans to students, receiving income tax information from a student’s parent when offering a financial aid package, and other miscellaneous financial services as defined in 12 CRF §225.28.  Examples of student financial information include addresses, phone numbers, bank and credit card account numbers, income and credit histories and Social Security numbers, in both paper and electronic format.
+
+
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+I.	Conditions of Use
+
+In using the college’s information systems, Authorized Users agree to the following conditions of use:
+
+Authorized Users of the college’s information systems do so subject to applicable laws and the college’s policies and procedures;
+
+The college will endeavor to safeguard the confidentiality of Authorized Users and the possibility of loss of information within the college’s information systems but will not be liable to the user in the event of any such loss. The user must take all reasonable measures to further safeguard against any loss of information within the college’s information systems;
+
+Authorized Users of the college’s information systems recognize that when they cease to be formally associated with the college (e.g., no longer an employee, student, contractor, or visitor to the college), their information/data may be removed from the college’s information systems without notice. Exceptions will be reviewed by the chief information officer;
+
+The college reserves the right to limit permanently or restrict any Authorized User’s usage of the college’s information systems; to copy, remove, or otherwise alter any information/data or system that may undermine the authorized use of the college’s information systems; and to do so with or without notice to the user in order to protect the integrity of the college’s information systems against unauthorized or improper use, and to protect authorized users from the effects of unauthorized or improper usage;
+
+The college, through authorized individuals, reserves the right to periodically check and monitor its information systems, including but not limited to the right to review, access, audit and monitor files/messages on Authorized Users’ assigned computers, mobile devices, and emails;
+
+The college reserves the right to take emergency action to safeguard the integrity and security of its information systems. This includes but is not limited to the termination of a program, job, or on-line session, or the temporary alteration of Authorized User account names and passwords. 
+
+Canisius College disclaims any responsibility and/or warranties for information and materials residing on non-college information systems or available over publicly accessible networks, except where such responsibility is formally expressed. Such materials do not necessarily reflect the attitudes, opinions, or values of the college, its employees, or students.
+
+II.	Acceptable Uses 
+
+A.	General Guidelines
+
+General guidelines for the acceptable use of college information systems are based on the following principles and Authorized Users are expected to:
+
+Behave in a manner consistent with the college’s mission and comply with all applicable laws, regulations, and college policies, as well as applicable licensing and contractual agreements;
+
+Behave responsibly and respect the name of the college and the integrity and security of college information systems at all times;
+
+Respect the rights and property of others, including privacy of person-to-person communication in all forms, including voice (telephone), text (electronic mail and file transfer), and images (graphics and video), confidentiality, and intellectual property (e.g. do not violate copyright laws or use software procured with academic use licenses for commercial applications or development, unless the license explicitly permits such use);
+
+Use college information systems for the activities or purposes for which they are assigned (e.g., college information systems are not to be used for personal commercial purposes without written authorization from the college);
+
+Guard against abuses that disrupt or threaten the viability of any college information systems, including those at the college and those on networks to which the college’s information systems are connected or accessible;  
+
+Abuses include but are not limited to the use of unauthorized equipment such as wireless access points, wireless routers, cable routers, etc. or utilizing shared resources such as CPU cycles or network bandwidth to a degree that adversely impacts academic or research activities;
+
+Comply with information technology security policies and associated controls employed by the college and protect assigned accounts and non-public College Data from unauthorized access by others; and
+
+Report violations of this policy to the chief information officer.
+
+If an Authorized User is not clear on what constitutes an appropriate use, the user is expected to contact Information Technology Services (“ITS”) to determine whether a particular activity is permissible.
+
+B.	Security Habits
+
+In addition to the above, Authorized Users are expected to adhere to reasonable and necessary security habits when using college resources.  These habits include:
+
+Accessing Private College Data only to conduct college business and only as authorized by the applicable Data Owner;
+
+Keeping account information, including passwords, confidential;
+
+Logging out of computers or using a password-protected screensaver when leaving the office;
+
+Running college-provided antivirus and antispyware software;
+
+Installing operating system updates when prompted;
+
+Using caution when opening email attachments and other unexpected data; 
+
+Storing Private College Data, whenever feasible, on a centrally managed server, rather than a local hard drive or portable device (see the Media Protection Policy);
+
+In cases when an Authorized User must create or store Private College Data on a local hard drive or a portable device such as a laptop computer, tablet computer, smart phone, or other mobile device, the Authorized User must ensure the data is encrypted in accordance with System and Communication Protection, Media Protection, and Mobile Device Use and Support policies;
+
+Encrypting Private College Data during transmission over an unsecured network;
+
+Email sent to and received from college email accounts are automatically encrypted. ITS provides tools and processes for Authorized Users to send encrypted data over unsecured networks to and from other locations;
+
+Authorized Users who store College Data using commercial cloud services must use services provided or sanctioned by College, rather than personally obtained cloud services;
+
+Disconnecting devices determined by ITS to lack required security software or otherwise pose a threat to college information systems;
+
+Returning all college information systems that are no longer being used productively for college business to ITS for reallocation, repair, or disposal.  
+
+Authorized Users may not directly give, lend, rent, donate, or dispose of college information systems. See also the Media Protection and Mobile Device Use and Support policies;
+
+Authorized Users in units approved to accept and/or access Cardholder Data or utilize devices or systems that store or access Cardholder Data must adhere to the standards and controls;
+
+Adhering to the standards and controls set forth in the Payment Card Information Security Policy; and
+
+Adhering to the standards of outside resources accessed from the Canisius network.
+
+III.	Privacy and Personal Use 
+
+Since the college’s communication systems are the property of the college, all communications are subject to review by appropriate and authorized employees at any time. Data may be retained in backup systems, even after its apparent deletion.
+
+Users should be aware that personal privacy in their use of the college’s information systems sent to or from, or stored in, the college’s systems cannot be guaranteed in the event of legal or disciplinary proceedings.
+
+Authorized Users are responsible for exercising good judgment regarding the personal use of the college’s information systems. If there is any uncertainty regarding personal use of the college’s information systems, users should consult the ITS Help Desk. College personnel may also consult with their supervisor or manager. At no time should the college’s information systems be used in a way that is at odds with college policy or applicable state or federal law.
+
+IV.	Unacceptable Use 
+
+Certain actions are strictly forbidden when an Authorized User is granted access to a college information systems.  Under no circumstances shall a user of the Canisius College’s information systems:
+
+Engage in any illegal activity using college information systems assets;
+
+Engage in any activity contrary to college policy using College information systems assets;
+
+Introduce malicious software into the campus information systems;
+
+Reveal college information or allow the unauthorized use of college information systems by people outside of the Canisius community;
+
+Attempt to breach, disrupt, eavesdrop on, circumvent the security of, or otherwise tamper with network communications, the personal devices of others in use at the college, or technology external to the college;
+
+Access a college information systems using another user’s account information;
+
+Use college information systems to violate intellectual property laws;
+
+Use Canisius College information systems assets for personal commercial or for-profit activities, or to promote political causes;
+
+Use Canisius equipment or network resources for viewing or exchanging pornography or sexually explicit materials except when engaged in the study of such material as part of an approved academic activity;
+
+Acquire college information systems assets on behalf of the college, whether by purchasing, licensing, or subscribing to them, or by donating or accepting donations, whether their use is for a fee or free. In addition, users may not unilaterally dispose of college technology resources. See the Computer Asset Disposal and Computer Replacement policies for more information;
+
+Contact information technology vendors seeking additional products or services on behalf of the college except for individuals authorized to do so as part of an approved ITS project or activity and faculty exploring instructional technologies to enhance individual courses. All additions and changes to college information systems (especially systems and software) are to be governed by an organized methodology;
+
+Attempt to modify or repair college information systems, or arrange with technology vendors or private individuals for modifications or repairs. Authorized Users must contact the ITS Help Desk promptly to report problems with technology;
+
+Connect personal equipment (e.g. networking equipment, keyboards, monitors, printers, scanners, etc.) to information systems assets at college locations, with the exception of external storage devices;
+
+Give, loan, or relocate college information systems assets without ITS approval;
+
+Use any software on personal devices connected to college information systems that provides network or file services to others (such as web servers, file servers, network protocols);
+
+Use the college’s information systems to assume the identity of another (e.g., by sending forged electronic mail);
+
+Utilize the college’s information systems to interfere with the proper functioning or the ability of others to make use of such systems, of others’ personal technology, or of technologies external to the college;
+
+Utilize the college’s information systems to engage in any conduct that is likely to result in retaliation against the information systems, the personal devices of others, or technology external to the college, including engaging in behavior that results in any server being the target of a denial of service attack; and
+
+Attempt to decrypt encrypted information unless they are authorized staff performing security reviews or investigations. The use of network “sniffers” is restricted to authorized system administrators or contractors tasked with solving network problems or conducting security audits. Network tools must not be used to monitor or track any individual’s network activity except under special authorization by the chief information officer.
+
+Canisius College strongly protects the right of all members of the college community to be free from any form of electronic harassment or abuse. Members of the college community receiving any such unwanted or threatening electronic messages should immediately contact ITS so that appropriate disciplinary and/or legal action may be taken. In the event of an incident of Sexual or Gender-based Misconduct, the college’s Title IX coordinator may be contacted. Responsible Employees who become aware of such incidents are required to report the incident to the Title IX coordinator. See the college’s Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy for additional information, including confidential reporting procedures.
+
+V.	Withdrawal of Access
+
+Access to the college’s information systems, from both remote and on campus site, is a privilege granted to Authorized Users. Access to college’s information systems may be granted, limited, or withdrawn by the college at any time.  
+
+A partial list of possible factors for termination include:
+
+Observance of relevant college policies and associated controls, guidelines, laws, and contractual obligations;
+
+The requester’s need to know;
+
+The information’s sensitivity;
+
+System load;
+
+Availability of training;
+
+Risk of damage to or loss by the college; and 
+
+The person’s Authorized User’s previous history of use.
+
+The College reserves the right to monitor, extend, limit, restrict, or deny privileges and access to its information systems for any reason at any time.
+
+If it appears that the integrity, security, or functionality of the college’s information systems are at risk, Canisius College reserves the right to take any necessary action to investigate and remediate the problem. This action may include monitoring network activity, viewing user-generated files, and/or terminating access. In such cases, a written report of the findings will be forwarded to the appropriate college officials. In order to assure continuity for academic and administrative departments, similar procedures may be used after an employee is separated from the college or no longer able to perform required duties.
+
+VI.	Use of College Email Systems
+
+A.	Access to College Email System(s)
+
+1.	Account Creation
+
+College email accounts are created based on the official name of the employee as reflected in Human Resource records. Student and alumni accounts are created based on the name on file with the Registrar.  
+
+Requests for name changes to correct a discrepancy between an email account name and official college records will be processed, in which case the email account name will be corrected.  Requests for email aliases based on name preference, middle name, etc., are evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
+
+Employees or departments may request temporary email privileges for individuals outside of the college (i.e., guests, third-party contractors, volunteers).  Such requests must be approved in writing by the appropriate area vice president or designee.
+
+2.	Account Termination
+
+Individuals may leave the college for a variety of reasons, which gives rise to differing situations regarding the length of electronic mail privileges or expiration of electronic mail accounts.  Guidelines governing those privileges are set forth below. Notwithstanding the guidelines below, access to college’s email system(s) may be limited or withdrawn by the college at any time.
+
+Faculty who leave before retirement–full-time faculty who leave before retirement may keep their electronic mail account for one year from the end of the last term in which they taught. If such separation is for cause, email privileges may be immediately revoked without notice.
+
+Staff who leave before retirement– staff who leave the college will have email privileges removed effective on their last worked day. If such separation is for cause, email privileges may be immediately revoked without notice.
+
+Retired Faculty– full-time faculty who have retired from the college will be permitted to retain their email privileges if their account remains active. All email accounts that are inactive for a period of one year will be removed.
+
+Retired Staff–staff who have retired from the college will have email privileges removed effective on their last worked day.
+
+Volunteers and Guests-volunteers and guest who leave the college will have email privileges removed effective on their last day with the college. If such separation is for cause, email privileges may be immediately revoked without notice.
+
+Students who leave before graduation–students who leave the college without completion of their degree or other program may keep their email privileges for one academic year from the last term when they were registered.
+
+Expelled students-if a student is expelled from the college, email privileges will be terminated immediately.
+
+Alumni– students who have graduated from the college will be permitted to retain their email privileges if their account remains active. All email accounts that are inactive for a period of one year will be removed. Alumni wishing to reconnect with the college may request an account and one may be provided to them.
+
+B.	Acceptable Use of College Email Systems
+
+Authorized Users are expected to read their college email on a regular basis and manage their email accounts appropriately. Authorized Users are presumed to have received and read all email messages sent to their official college email account.
+
+Authorized Users must ascertain, understand, and to use their accounts in accordance with the acceptable use policies outlined above and other applicable college policies, as well as those laws, regulations, contracts, and licenses applicable to the use of email systems and accounts.
+
+To avoid confusing official college business with personal communications, college employees may not use non-college email accounts to conduct college business.
+
+Authorized Users must comply with security measures employed by the college and protect assigned electronic mail accounts from access by others.
+
+College email accounts may not be used to send mass emailing or commercial solicitations (a.k.a “spam”) to individuals, newsgroups, or mailing lists where such content is not part of the purpose of the group or list or for the purpose of college business (see the Mass Email Policy). 
+
+Microsoft Exchange email accounts are subject to the same retention policy as paper records and the college’s Email Retention Policy. Authorized Users who receive a notice of a legal hold are responsible for keeping copies of all relevant documents, including email.
+
+If an Authorized User is not clear on what constitutes an appropriate use, the user is expected to contact his/her supervisor or ITS to determine whether a particular activity is permissible.
+
+Note: Authorized Users who use email communications with persons in countries outside the United States should be aware that they may be subject to the laws of those other countries and the rules and policies on other systems and networks.
+
+C.	Unacceptable Uses of College Email Systems
+
+The following specific actions and uses of college email systems are improper:
+
+Any use of a college email account that interferes with college activities and functions or does not respect the mission, image, and reputation of the college;
+
+Alteration of a source or destination address of email;
+
+Use of a college email account for commercial or private business purposes that have not been approved in writing by the appropriate area vice president;
+
+Use of a college email account in violation of college policy or applicable laws and regulations;
+
+Use of a college email account to harass, threaten, incite violence, threaten violence, defraud, or defame other individuals;
+
+Use of a college email account to infringe on another person’s copyright, trade or service mark, patent, or other property right or is intended to assist others in defeating those protections;
+
+Email content that violates, or encourages the violation of, the legal rights of others or federal and state laws;
+
+Use of a college email account to intentionally distribute viruses, worms, Trojan horses, malware, corrupted files, hoaxes, or other items of a destructive or deceptive nature;
+
+Purposefully interfering with the use of the college’s email system(s), or the equipment used to provide the email services by customers, authorized resellers, or other Authorized Users;
+
+Purposefully altering, disabling, interfering with, or circumventing any aspect of the college’s email system(s);
+
+Testing or reverse-engineering the college’s email system(s) in order to find limitations, vulnerabilities or evade filtering capabilities;
+
+Use of a college email account to create a risk to a person’s safety or health, create a risk to public safety or health, compromise national security, or interfere with an investigation by law enforcement;
+
+Use of a college email account to improperly expose trade secrets or other confidential or proprietary information of another person;
+
+Sending unsolicited email messages, junk mail, spam, or advertising material to individuals who did not specifically request such material, as well as sending mass or chain messages in violation of the Mass Email Policy;
+
+Forging or the unauthorized use of email header information;
+
+Use of a college email account to unlawfully discriminate against another individual on the basis of age, race, religion or creed, color, sex, national or ethnic origin, sexual orientation, marital status, military status, genetic predisposition or carrier status, gender identity, gender expression, familial status, domestic violence victim status, pregnancy, citizenship or immigration status, disability, criminal conviction or any other status protected by local, state or federal law;
+
+Sending, viewing, or downloading offensive content of any kind, including pornographic material or messages of a sexist, obscene, harassing, threatening, or racist nature;
+
+Sending, viewing, or downloading messages of a political nature for the purpose of proselytizing and/or soliciting funds or donations;
+
+Creating or forwarding chain letters, Ponzi, or other pyramid schemes of any type;
+
+Transmitting Private College Data, including but not limited to Cardholder Data, without appropriate encryption protection (see the System and Communications Protection Policy); and
+
+Use of a college email account for illegal gambling.
+
+Authorized Users are responsible for the content of their email messages and must understand that others can use such content as evidence against them.
+
+Any questions as to whether the use of a college email account for academic, research, or educational purposes could violate the spirit of this policy should be brought to the attention of the user’s supervisor or ITS.
+
+VII.	Enforcement 
+
+ITS is responsible for the appropriate enforcement of this policy. During the course of any investigation of alleged inappropriate or unauthorized use, it may be necessary to temporarily suspend a user’s system privileges, but only after determining there is at least a prima facie case against the individual, as well as a risk to college’s information systems if privileges are not revoked. This is a necessary action taken to prevent further misuse and does not presume that the account holder initiated the misuse. Unsubstantiated reports of abuse will not result in the suspension of user account or network access unless sufficient evidence is provided to show that inappropriate activity occurred.
+
+Any employee found to have violated this policy may be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment.
+
+Any student found to have violated this policy will be subject to disciplinary action through the Community Standards.
+
+Visitors and others third party users who violate the provisions of the policy are subject to loss of access to the college’s information systems. They may also be subject to criminal and/or civil proceedings. In addition, the vice president for business and finance may administer other appropriate sanctions.
+
+VIII.	Notification
+
+Users must report any identified weakness in college computer security and any incident of possible misuse or violation of this policy to ITS.
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Access Control Policy
+
+Acquisition and Disposal Policy
+
+Audit and Accountability Control Policy
+
+Cloud Computing Policy
+
+Configuration Management Policy
+
+Copyright and Intellectual Property Policy
+
+Data Classification Policy
+
+Email Retention Policy
+
+Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Policy
+
+Identification and Authentication Policy
+
+Incident Response Policy
+
+Information Security Program
+
+Information Technology Personnel Security Policy
+
+Information Technology Physical and Environmental Protection Policy
+
+Information Technology Security Awareness and Training Policy
+
+Mass Email Policy
+
+Media Protection Policy
+
+Mobile Device Use and Support Policy
+
+Passwords Policy
+
+Payment Card Information Security Policy
+
+Peer-to-Peer File Sharing Policy
+
+Political Activities and Speakers Policy
+
+Record Retention and Disposal Policy
+
+Remote Access Policy
+
+Risk and Security Assessment Policy
+
+Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy
+
+Social Media Policy
+
+System and Data Integrity Policy
+
+Standards of Ethical Conduct
+
+Student Records (FERPA) Policy
+
+Wireless Access Points Policy</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Action Short of Dimissal.txt [/INST] https://hope.edu/offices/human-resources/employee/handbooks-policies/faculty.html
+
+
+
+Procedures for Disciplining Short of Dismissal
+
+Where disciplinary action short of dismissal for cause is sought, the dean, after consultation with the Provost, shall provide the faculty member with written notice of the cause for disciplinary action, the anticipated disciplinary action, and an opportunity to respond prior to a specific and reasonable deadline before the imposition of any disciplinary action.
+
+After receiving the response from the faculty member or if the faculty member fails to respond, the dean shall make a decision regarding the disciplinary action and notify the faculty member in writing. The faculty member may challenge the imposition of any disciplinary action by the dean by filing a grievance under provisions of the Faculty Grievance Policy and Procedure.
+
+Disciplinary action may include but is not limited to verbal or written reprimand; suspension with or without pay; reassignment of duties, office or lab space; denial of salary increase(s); denial of summer appointment(s); denial or revocation of a sabbatical leave; denial of travel or other University support or funds; and mandatory counseling and/or monitoring of behavior and performance. Suspension without pay during the academic year may not exceed one semester. Suspension without pay during the academic year would normally not be imposed until the grievance process is completed (if a grievance is filed).
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+A. MINOR DISCIPLINE
+
+The University recognizes that it is the unit administrator who has primary responsibility for supervising faculty members. It is the role of the unit administrator to monitor faculty performance and communicate concerns to faculty members and to the dean. However, the dean is primarily responsible for making disciplinary decisions and may impose discipline in place of the unit administrator according to the following process: 
+
+Where the unit administrator, in consultation with the dean, seeks to impose minor disciplinary action, the unit administrator shall first meet with the faculty member to discuss the administrator’s concern and the potential for discipline. The administrator will notify the faculty member during that meeting of the right and opportunity to request a consultation with the department/school faculty advisory committee, its chair, or the chair of the UCFA personnel subcommittee8 before the administrator proceeds with any disciplinary action. The purpose of such informal consultation is to reconcile disputes early and informally, when that is appropriate, by clarifying the issues involved, resolving misunderstandings, considering alternatives, and noting applicable bylaws.
+
+The unit administrator and faculty member, if requested by the faculty member, will consult with the department/school faculty advisory committee, its chair, or with the chair of the UCFA personnel subcommittee in a prompt fashion to discuss the administrator’s concern and the potential for discipline. 
+
+Should the unit administrator still wish to proceed with disciplinary action after that consultation, the administrator must consult with the dean and the Office of the Associate Provost to discuss the proposed disciplinary action. If the proposed discipline is authorized by those offices, the unit administrator shall provide the faculty member with written notice of the cause for disciplinary action in sufficient detail for the faculty member to address the specifics of the charges, and an opportunity to respond in writing prior to the imposition of any disciplinary action, within seven (7) days9 of receipt of the unit administrator’s written notice. The dean must be copied on the written notice. The written response by the faculty member, if any, will be provided to the unit administrator, the dean and the Office of the Associate Provost for further comment.
+
+The unit administrator, in consultation with the dean, and after considering the written response and further comments, if any, shall make a decision regarding the disciplinary action and notify the faculty member in writing. The discipline will then take effect.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] ADMISSION OF APPLICANTS WITH PRIOR HISTORY OF CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR OR DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR CONDUCT.txt [/INST] ADMISSION OF APPLICANTS WITH PRIOR HISTORY OF CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR OR DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR CONDUCT 
+
+Effective Date:
+
+
+
+Policy Number:
+
+V – 
+
+Supersedes:
+
+
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+
+
+Applicability:
+
+All persons enrolled or seeking admission to Canisius College.
+
+History:
+
+
+
+
+
+												PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to protect the college community where admission of an applicant with a prior history of criminal behavior or disciplinary action for conduct may endanger the health, safety or welfare of others.
+
+POLICY
+
+It is the policy of Canisius College to reserve the right to deny or place conditions on admission, continued enrollment, or re-enrollment of applicants, students or former students whose personal history and background, including their criminal record, indicates that their presence at the college may endanger the health, safety, welfare or property of members of the college community or interfere with the orderly and effective performance of the college's functions.
+
+Applicants for admission to the college are required to disclose any prior criminal convictions or pending criminal charges, as well as any past disciplinary suspensions or dismissals from higher educational institutions on the application for enrollment.  Additional review may be required for those applicants seeking admission to the following academic programs: 
+
+[LIST PROGRAMS THAT REQUIRE FORMAL SCREENING].
+
+Prior criminal or disciplinary actions are not an automatic bar to admission to the college. The college recognizes that automatically depriving past offenders of an education may not be in the best interest of the individual, the educational mission of the college, or society at large. However, this recognition must be balanced against the college’s need to carefully evaluate and determine the possibility that admission or presence of the student on campus may endanger the health, safety, welfare or property of members of the college community or interfere with the orderly and effective performance of the college's functions.  In determining whether or not to admit the applicant based on the evidence, the [ADMISSIONS DEPARTMENT OR ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE] will adhere to the procedures and factors set forth in the Procedures/Guidelines section of this policy.  While the [ADMISSIONS DEPARTMENT OR ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE] will exercise its judgment in a reasonable manner, the decision of the college as to whether or not to admit the applicant is in the college’s absolute and sole discretion.
+
+Applicants who fail to give complete and accurate responses to the conduct section of the admission application may be subject to denial of admission, disciplinary action, invalidation of credits or degrees earned and rescission of admission upon discovery of the misstatement or omission. 
+
+All records, reports, and proceedings are considered private by the college and shared only as reasonably necessary for review of the applicant’s request for admission, subject to any applicable state or federal laws that may compel disclosure of all or part of such records.
+
+The college reserves the right to deny admission to any applicant and to deny and/or rescind admission to any applicant consistent with college policies, including for applicants who provide false or misleading information to the college.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+I.	Review Procedures
+
+The [ADMISSIONS DEPARTMENT OR ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE] will review the information provided by the applicant and make a determination as to whether or not to offer admission to the applicant, assuming all other application requirements are satisfied. 
+
+Factors considered by the [ADMISSIONS DEPARTMENT OR ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE] as part of the past crime or disciplinary offense review process include, but are not limited to:
+
+Amount of time that has passed since crime or offense;
+
+Successful completion of sentence;
+
+Severity of the crime or offense;
+
+Nature of the crime or offense;
+
+Other educational programs attended since time of crime or offense; and
+
+Nature of the academic program in which the applicant seeks to enroll.
+
+Admission may be denied to an applicant based on prior criminal convictions, including but not limited to in instances where admission creates a risk to the safety or welfare of the college community, to specific individuals or to the public, or where admission poses a potential risk to property. 
+
+After evaluating all information provided by the applicant as well as other information available to the [ADMISSIONS DEPARTMENT OR ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE], the [ADMISSIONS DEPARTMENT OR ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE] will make a determination as to whether or not the applicant will be eligible to enroll to the college.  The applicant will be informed of the college’s decision in writing.  Applicants who are denied admission by the college may appeal the determination in accordance with Section IV below.
+
+II.	Conditions Applicable to all Applicants Determined Eligible to Enroll
+
+If the [ADMISSIONS DEPARTMENT OR ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE] decides the applicant is eligible to enroll, the following conditions apply to all applicants who enroll at the college:
+
+The applicant must not be charged with any further crimes pursued by a prosecuting jurisdiction;
+
+The applicant must complete all court ordered requirements (as applicable);
+
+The applicant must meet with the Senior Associate Dean of Students, no later than one week prior to the academic semester, to discuss and comply with any additional conditions.  Such condition may include, for example, the following:
+
+A probationary period for all or part of enrollment with or without stipulations;
+
+Participation in a drug and alcohol evaluation or counseling support; and
+
+Restriction on housing, activities, and/or employment on campus. 
+
+If an applicant fails to comply with these or any other admission conditions prior to enrollment, the college may revoke its prior determination and make the applicant not eligible to enroll. If the applicant fails to comply with admission conditions after enrollment, it is a potential violation of the Community Standards and the case will be referred to the Senior Associate Dean of Students.
+
+III.	Registered Sex Offenders
+
+If the college determines a registered sex offender is eligible to enroll, the [ADMISSIONS DEPARTMENT OR ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE] will determine whether the applicant is eligible to reside in college housing. Such decision will be communicated to the student in writing. If an admitted sex offender is allowed to reside on campus, individual must comply with any and all registration requirements per state law, in addition to registering with the college’s Public Safety Department.
+
+IV.	Appeals
+
+Applicants who are denied admission by the [ADMISSIONS DEPARTMENT OR ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE] may appeal this determination to the Vice President for Enrollment Management as follows: 
+
+An appeal must be submitted in writing to the Vice President for Enrollment Management within ten (10) days of receiving the [ADMISSIONS DEPARTMENT OR ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE]'s determination. 
+
+The appeal will be reviewed by the Vice President for Enrollment Management, additional potentially relevant information may be obtained, and a decision will be made within a reasonable amount of time given the individual circumstances. 
+
+The Vice President for Enrollment Management may consult with the Vice President for Student Affairs and other campus official as appropriate in reaching a determination. 
+
+The applicant will be informed of the outcome of the appeal in writing. 
+
+The Vice President for Enrollment Management’s decision is final and is not appealable.
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Community Standards</s>"
+<s>[INST] Albright Faculty Handbook Proposal - First Draft.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Alternative Academic Freedom Statement.txt [/INST] Alternative Academic Freedom Statement
+
+																										As an institution “forever be conducted on the most liberal principles, accessible to all religious denominations and designed for the benefit of our citizens in general,” Ohio Wesleyan University is committed to the belief that the essential purpose of an academic community is to promote knowledge through the search for truth and to express truth without interference or harassment.  In order that this purpose be clearly understood in the context of academic freedom and freedom of expression, the following policy shall apply:
+
+							Members of the Ohio Wesleyan University faculty are entitled to academic freedom in the classroom, in research and publication, and in all educational activities.  
+
+							In exercising academic freedom, the ideas of different members of the University community may conflict, but it is not the proper role of the University to shield individuals from ideas and opinions they do not agree with or find offensive. When exchanging ideas and opinions, faculty members share responsibility for showing due respect for others; however, concerns about mutual respect can never be used as a justification for limiting discussion of ideas. 
+
+							The freedom to exchange ideas and engage in meaningful debate does not mean that individuals may say whatever they wish, whenever they wish. The University may restrict expression that is illegal, defamatory, harassing or threatening, or violative of substantial privacy or confidentiality interests. Such exceptions, however, may not be used in a manner that is inconsistent with the University’s commitment to academic freedom or the free expression of ideas. 
+
+							As citizens engaged in a profession that depends upon freedom for its health and integrity, faculty have a particular obligation to promote conditions of free inquiry and expression. Although members of the University community are free to criticize and contest the views of others, they may not obstruct or otherwise interfere with the freedom of others to express views they reject. To this end, the University has a solemn responsibility not only to promote a lively and fearless freedom of debate and deliberation, but also to protect that freedom when others attempt to restrict it.
+
+Portions of this statement are reprinted from the University of Chicago Report of the Committee on Freedom of Expression.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Alternative approaches would be to.txt [/INST] Alternative approaches would be to: classify these faculty as “Visiting Faculty” and slightly modify the College’s current text to mirror Mary Washington’s definition (https://publications.umw.edu/facultyhandbook/section_3/visiting/); modify the notice of non-reappointment dates that is inconsistent with AAUP recommended policy the College currently adheres to; adopt a “Temporary” faculty classification; or adopt an Instructor/Clinical Faculty and/or Lecturer track(s) (have no scholarship responsibilities).  
+
+
+
+Temporary Faculty:  Temporary faculty are appointed pursuant to term appointments for short duration, usually a year.  Some schools will cap the renewal of such appointments to three years.  For example, DePaul allows the use of term appointments for full-time faculty for a variety of reasons, including staffing a new and developing academic program.  It should be noted that DePaul’s handbook clearly states that the use of term appointments should not be used to permanently replace a tenure-line position or avoid adding new tenure line positions 
+
+
+
+Examples:
+
+https://arts-sciences.und.edu/_files/docs/tempfacappt.pdf
+
+
+
+https://www.etsu.edu/senate/facultyhandbook/section2.php
+
+
+
+Instructor Faculty/Lecturers: There are representative examples of schools that issue term appointment contracts to the faculty appointed to these types of tracks.  
+
+
+
+Examples:
+
+https://www.albright.edu/academic/faculty-resources/faculty-handbook/contracts-and-ranks/ (See Section III.A.3)
+
+
+
+https://offices.depaul.edu/secretary/policies-procedures/policies/Documents/Appendices/Chapter%202%20(7-1-21%20Edition).pdf#page6: DePaul allows the use of term appointments for full-time faculty for a variety of reasons, including staffing a new and developing academic program.  These faculty are assigned the rank of Instructor or Lecturer.  It should be noted that DePaul’s handbook clearly states that the use of term appointments should not be used to permanently replace a tenure-line position or avoid adding new tenure line positions.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Alternative Dismissal Proceedings.txt [/INST] Alternative Dismissal Proceedings
+
+If the matter is not terminated by mutual consent, the President and the Advisory Committee will begin preliminary proceedings.  During these proceedings the role of the President (or the President’s delegate) is to represent the College as it brings possible charges against the faculty member; the role of the Advisory Committee is to represent the interests of the faculty at large and to assist the parties in finding a resolution.
+
+If the President believes that there are reasonable grounds to pursue the procedures of dismissal for cause, the preliminary proceedings begin with the President convening the Advisory Committee and presenting a written summary of the College's reasons, such summary having been previously given to the faculty member.  The Committee then undertakes an inquiry consisting of an informal meeting with the appropriate administrative officer, an informal meeting (without the presence of College administrative officers) with the faculty member unless the faculty member declines, and informal meetings with any others the Committee deems necessary. The chair of the Advisory Committee chairs this informal inquiry.  Any member of the Committee who is a member of the same department as the faculty colleague may not participate in the meetings. The completion of the informal inquiry must occur within five (5) working days of the date the President presented the summary to the Advisory Committee and will result in a resolution of the matter agreeable to all parties or, failing a resolution, recommendations to the President of ways to resolve the situation.  
+
+Within three (3) working days of receiving the Advisory Committee's recommendations, the President will either notify in writing the faculty member that no formal charges will be brought, or communicate those charges to the faculty member as described in (b)(1) below.  The President may seek the assistance of the Advisory Committee in formulating a statement of the charges. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Adequate cause for a dismissal will be related, directly and substantially, to the fitness of faculty members in their professional capacities as teachers or researchers. Dismissal will not be used to restrain faculty members in their exercise of academic freedom or other rights of American citizens
+
+ 
+
+Examples of conduct that may raise questions regarding a faculty member’s fitness as a teacher or researcher include, but not necessarily limited to: 
+
+demonstrated professional incompetence or dishonesty in teaching or research;
+
+continued neglect of faculty responsibilities as set forth in this handbook despite oral and/or written warnings; 
+
+serious personal misconduct which substantially impairs the individual’s fulfillment of institutional responsibilities;
+
+deliberate and serious violation of the rights and freedom of fellow faculty members, administrators, or students; 
+
+conviction of any felony; 
+
+conviction of a crime directly related to the faculty member’s fitness to practice their profession; 
+
+inability to perform the essential functions of the position despite reasonable accommodation (if requested pursuant to the University’s ADA Policy);*
+
+theft or willful destruction of property;
+
+serious failure to follow the canons and professional ethics of one’s discipline and those set down in the “Professional Ethics and Relations” section of this handbook; 
+
+falsification of credentials and experience; 
+
+failure to meet the performance standards set forth in the “Faculty Responsibilities” section of this handbook after oral and/or written warnings; 
+
+sexual harassment or unlawful discrimination of a student, University employee, or member of the University community (e.g., volunteer, vendor, etc.).** 
+
+
+
+* Dismissals because of a mental or physical disability for which no reasonable accommodation can be made are resolved pursuant to the Mental or Physical Disability Policy.
+
+** Allegations of unlawful discrimination, harassment, and sexual and gender-based misconduct against a faculty member will be investigated and resolved pursuant to the Policy on Sexual Harassment Prohibited by Title IX, HR Policy 006 - Harassment, Discrimination, Biased Conduct and Retaliation Prohibition or the Freedom from Harassment Policy, as may be applicable.
+
+b. Steps Prior to Dismissal: 
+
+Dismissal of a faculty member with continuous tenure, or with a probationary or other nontenured appointment before the end of the specified term, will be preceded by (1) discussions, including a documented history thereof, between the faculty member and appropriate administrative officers looking toward a mutual settlement (2) informal inquiry by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, which may, if it fails to effect an adjustment, determine whether in its opinion dismissal proceedings should be undertaken, without its opinion being binding upon the president; (3) a statement of charges, framed with reasonable particularity by the president or the president’s  delegate.
+
+(1) The Dean’s Consultation with the Faculty Member 
+
+If the faculty member’s Dean has evidence that the faculty member has demonstrated or is demonstrating conduct that may constitute adequate cause for dismissal as specified above, then the Dean will meet with the faculty member to discuss the concerns and to consider the faculty member’s response.  If requested by the faculty member, the Dean will provide the faculty member with a written statement of concerns. 
+
+The Dean may request further investigation into the matter by other appropriate University personnel (i.e., human resources, Title IX Coordinator, etc.) before or after meeting with the faculty member. However, before moving beyond this stage in these procedures, the Dean will afford the faculty member a reasonable opportunity to respond to any information that the Dean believes would constitute adequate cause for dismissal and, if possible, arrive at a mutually agreeable settlement. 
+
+(2) Informal Consultation with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee 
+
+If the matter cannot be resolved through consultation with the faculty member and if the Dean believes that adequate cause for dismissal exists, the Dean forwards a recommendation for dismissal or severe sanction to the Provost. The Provost may meet with the faculty member, at the Provost’s discretion.  At any time, if the Provost and the faculty member reach a mutually agreeable settlement, the matter will be concluded. 
+
+If the Provost believes that the faculty member has demonstrated or is demonstrating conduct that may constitute adequate cause for dismissal and a mutual settlement is not possible, the Provost will consult with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee to informally and confidentially consider the Dean’s recommendation for dismissal or severe sanction.  The faculty member will be notified of this action by the Provost. The role of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee is to consider the Dean’s recommendation and consult with the Provost regarding the allegations.  The committee does not serve a fact-finding role.
+
+No later than five academic days after consulting with the Provost, the Faculty Senate Executive Committee may recommend a settlement acceptable to both the faculty member and the Provost, administrative disciplinary actions short of dismissal, that no administrative action be taken, that further investigation be undertaken, or that dismissal proceedings be initiated. The Faculty Senate Executive Committee’s recommendation is not binding on the Provost.
+
+After considering the recommendations of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, the Provost notifies in writing the faculty member:
+
+that no action will be taken and the matter is concluded;
+
+that further investigation into the matter by other appropriate University personnel (i.e., human resources, Title IX Coordinator, etc.) is warranted;
+
+that the Provost intends to impose sanctions short of dismissal (see Alternatives to Dismissal section); or 
+
+that the Provost intends to issue a statement of charges that provides grounds for dismissal under the procedures specified below. 
+
+(3)	Statement of Charges
+
+If the Provost intends to seek the faculty member’s dismissal, the Provost will provide the faculty member with a written statement of charges, framed with reasonable particularity, indicating the charges that provide grounds for the proposed dismissal action. At the same time, the Provost will inform the faculty member that a formal review hearing before the Faculty Affairs Committee will be initiated as specified below. 
+
+
+
+c. Referral to Faculty Affairs Committee: A dismissal, as defined in Regulation 1a, will be preceded by a statement of charges, and the individual concerned will have the right to be heard initially by the Faculty Affairs Committee.10 Members of the committee deeming themselves disqualified for bias or interest will remove themselves from the case, either at the request of the chair of the committee or on their own initiative. When assembling the Dismissal Panel from the membership of the Faculty Affairs Committee, each party to the dismissal will have a maximum of one challenge without stated cause.11  After recusals and removals, the remaining members who will be adjudicating the case will hereafter be referred to as the hearing committee or Dismissal Panel.  If there are not enough remaining members to form a panel the chair of the Faculty Affairs Committee will contact the Committee on Committees to request additional members, ideally selected from faculty in elected positions.
+
+(1) Suspension: Pending a final decision by the hearing committee, the faculty member will be suspended, or assigned to other duties in lieu of suspension, by the President (or the President’s designee) only if immediate harm to the faculty member or others is threatened by continuance or the continued functioning of the faculty member in the position would substantially impair or disrupt the regular functions of the University. Except for emergency, life threatening situations, before suspending a faculty member, pending an ultimate determination of the faculty member’s status through the institution’s hearing procedures, the administration President (or the President’s designee) will consult with the Provost and Faculty Affairs Committee concerning the propriety, the length, and the other conditions of the suspension. A suspension that is intended to be final is a dismissal and will be treated as such. Salary will continue during the period of the suspension.
+
+(2) The hearing committee may, with the consent of the parties concerned, hold joint prehearing meetings with the parties in order to (i) simplify the issues, (ii) effect stipulations of facts, (iii) provide for the exchange of documentary or other information, and (iv) achieve such other appropriate prehearing objectives as will make the hearing fair, effective, and expeditious, including but not limited to setting additional time for the gathering of documentary or other evidence.
+
+(3) Service of notice of hearing with specific charges in writing will be made at least twenty days prior to the hearing. The faculty member may waive a hearing or may respond to the charges in writing at any time before the hearing. If the faculty member waives a hearing, but denies the charges or asserts that the charges do not support a finding of adequate cause, the hearing committee will evaluate all available evidence and rest its recommendation upon the evidence in the record. Prior to issuing a recommendation, the committee may obtain testimony from witnesses and documentary or other evidence.
+
+If the faculty member fails to attend the review hearing without reasonable cause and does not deny the charges or assert that the charges do not support a finding of adequate cause, then the hearing will not take place, the chair of the hearing committee will refer the matter to the President for final disposition, and the faculty member will have waived all grievance rights pertaining to the dismissal action.
+
+(4) The hearing committee, in consultation with the President and the faculty member, will exercise its judgment as to whether the hearing should be public or private.
+
+Alternative Text for Consideration
+
+The proceedings will be closed and confidential, subject only to the need of the faculty member or the administration to comply with the procedures specified herein or to present evidence concerning the case in other judicial or administrative proceedings. Except for such simple announcements as may be required, covering the time of the hearing and similar matters, public statements and publicity about the case by either the faculty member or administrative officers will be avoided so far as possible.
+
+(5) During the proceedings the faculty member will be permitted to have an academic adviser and counsel of the faculty member’s choice.  Neither the advisor nor legal counsel may actively participate in any aspect of the dismissal process (i.e., address the committee, question witnesses, raise objections, etc.), including but not limited to the hearing.  The President (or President’s designee) will appoint a non-attorney administrator(s) to present the University’s case for dismissal. 
+
+(6) At the request of either party or the hearing committee, a representative of a responsible educational association will be permitted to attend the proceedings as an observer.  
+
+(7) A verbatim record of the hearing or hearings will be taken, and a copy will be made available to the faculty member without cost, at the faculty member’s request. The [Office of Human Resources] shall be the repository of the record.  The record shall be considered confidential and only the parties to the case may access it.
+
+(8) The burden of proof that adequate cause exists rests with the institution and will be satisfied only by clear and convincing the preponderance of the evidence in the record considered as a whole.
+
+
+
+(9) The hearing committee will grant reasonable adjournments to enable either party to investigate evidence as to which a valid claim of surprise is made.
+
+(10) The faculty member will be afforded an opportunity to obtain necessary witnesses and documentary or other evidence. The administration Provost (or Provost’s designee) and other administrators as may be applicable will cooperate with the hearing committee in securing witnesses and in making available documentary and other evidence.
+
+(11) The faculty member and the administration administrator(s) appointed by the President to present the case for dismissal will have the right to confront and cross-examine all witnesses. Where the witnesses cannot or will not appear, but the committee determines that the interests of justice require admission of their statements, the committee will identify the witnesses, disclose their statements, and, if possible, provide for interrogatories.
+
+(12) In the hearing of charges of incompetence, the testimony will include that of qualified faculty members from this or other institutions of higher education.
+
+(13) The hearing committee will not be bound by strict rules of legal evidence and may admit any evidence which is of probative value in determining the issues involved. Every possible effort will be made to obtain the most reliable evidence available.
+
+(14) The findings of fact and the decision will be based solely on the hearing record.
+
+(15) Except for such simple announcements as may be required, covering the time of the hearing and similar matters, public statements and publicity about the case by either the faculty member or administrative officers will be avoided so far as possible until the proceedings have been completed, including consideration by the governing board of the University. The President, Provost, and the faculty member will be notified of the decision in writing and will be given a copy of the record of the hearing.
+
+(16) If the hearing committee concludes that adequate cause for dismissal has not been established by the evidence in the record, it will so report to the president. If the president rejects the report, the president will state the reasons for doing so, in writing, to the hearing committee and to the faculty member and provide an opportunity for the filing of a grievance response before transmitting the case to the governing board. If the hearing committee concludes that adequate cause for a dismissal has been established, but that an academic penalty less than dismissal would be more appropriate, it will so recommend, with supporting reasons.
+
+Alternative Text for Consideration
+
+Within [five (5) academic days of conclusion of the hearing, the Chair of the hearing committee will present to the President written findings of fact and recommendations as to the review of the faculty member's dismissal; copies must at the same time be sent to the faculty member and the Provost.
+
+The committee report must contain written findings of fact and a recommendation whether the dismissal for cause action was warranted in light of the documented evidence
+
+The committee’s written findings of fact and recommendation shall be based on a simple majority vote
+
+Any dissenting opinions will be included in the written findings of fact and recommendation
+
+President’s Independent Review and Decision
+
+Within five (5) academic days after receipt of the hearing committee’s findings and recommendations, the President, in light of the documented evidence and hearing record, will issue an independent written decision on the matter, with copies to the committee, the faculty member, and the Provost.
+
+If the President sustains the hearing committee recommendation that adequate cause to dismiss the faculty member does not exist, the matter will be concluded,
+
+If the President determines that additional consideration by the committee is necessary, the President will remand the case back to the committee with specific objections.
+
+If the President concludes that the administration has established adequate cause for a dismissal, but that a sanction(s) less than dismissal would be more appropriate, the sanction(s) and effective date of sanction(s) will be stated in the President’s letter with supporting reasons.
+
+If the President concludes that the administration has established adequate cause for a dismissal and agrees that dismissal is appropriate, the effective date of the dismissal will be stated in the President’s letter with supporting reasons.  The President’s decision will be final, pending the faculty member’s filing of a grievance in accordance with the Complaint and Grievance Procedures section of this handbook.
+
+Grievance Rights
+
+The President’s decision may be the basis of a formal grievance.  Such grievance shall be limited to questions of inadequate consideration and/or whether the procedures set forth in this Dismissal for Adequate Cause Policy have been followed in the faculty member’s case.  The grievance must be filed in writing within ten academic days of receiving written notification from the President of the final decision.  The grievance committee will not substitute its judgment on the merits of the case, but rather determine whether the decision was the result of adequate consideration.
+
+Action by the Governing Board
+
+If dismissal or other severe sanction is recommended, the president will, on request of the faculty member, transmit to the governing board the record of the case. The governing board’s review will be based on the record of the committee hearing, and it will provide opportunity for argument, oral or written or both, by the principals at the hearing or by their represen­tatives. The decision of the hearing committee will either be sustained or the proceedings returned to the committee with specific objections. The committee will then reconsider, taking into account the stated objec­tions and receiving new evidence, if necessary. The governing board will make a final decision only after study of the committee’s reconsideration.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Alternative Model - Required External Reviews.txt [/INST] Alternative Model – Required External Review for Tenure and Full Professor Reviews
+
+When members of the full-time faculty are evaluated for tenure or promotion to Full Professor, their scholarly or creative work must be reviewed by external evaluators who have professional knowledge of their academic field. 
+
+External letters are solicited by the Provost in accordance with the procedures set forth below.  External evaluators send their letter directly to the Provost for inclusion in the Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file without being reviewed by the faculty member.  The identity of the reviewer submitting the letter is not revealed to the faculty member being reviewed.  
+
+Procedures for Solicitation for External Letters
+
+In the academic year preceding evaluation for tenure or promotion to Full Professor, the faculty member shall produce a list of external scholars who have already agreed to serve as external reviewers. The list shall consist of at least five (5) scholars who are qualified experts from the faculty member’s area of specialty with whom there is no close personal or professional relationship (e.g., friend, family member, mentor, etc.).
+
+The faculty member shall send the list of potential external reviewers to the Provost by January 13 using the External Review Request Form. 
+
+The faculty member shall send to the Provost three copies of materials that will be sent to the external evaluators for review.
+
+Using the list submitted by the faculty member, the Provost will attempt to find at least two reviewers willing to submit a letter. 
+
+Reviewers will be asked to submit their letters by [INSERT DATE].
+
+The Provost will send to each reviewer the scholarly material provided by the faculty member, a copy of the faculty member’s CV, and a letter clarifying the scope of the desired information and that Ohio Wesleyan University does not seek the reviewer’s input or opinion as to whether the candidate should receive tenure or promotion. In addition, external reviewers will be sent a brief description of the University and the resources available to faculty, and the teaching load and service responsibilities of the faculty member.
+
+In the letter, the reviewer will be asked to address:
+
+if or how the reviewer knows the candidate;
+
+the quality and importance of the candidate’s scholarly or creative activity (publications, performances, professional engagement, etc.);
+
+the standards, quality, appropriateness, and standing of the venues in which the work was presented, displayed, performed, or published; and
+
+the significance of other contributions to the profession (leadership positions, editorships, etc.)
+
+Letters received as part of this process will be added to the faculty member’s personnel file, and the identity of those who submit letters will not be disclosed to the faculty member.
+
+Around May 1, the Provost will inform the faculty member of how many external review letters were received and added to their Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file.
+
+The faculty member continues to have the right to supplement the Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file using options 1 and/or 2 above. All letters must be submitted by mid-October.
+
+-End of Alternative Text-
+
+
+
+GLCA Research
+
+												Optional: Antioch, Allegheny, and Albion allow for optional external reviews similar to OWU’s current policy.  
+
+												
+
+												Mandatory: College of Wooster, Oberlin, Kenyon, Denison, Wabash, and Earlham each require external reviews.  
+
+												
+
+												Silent: Kalamazoo and Hope’s handbooks are unclear.  
+
+												
+
+Misc: DePauw requires an external review on committee request. 
+
+
+
+Text Examples of Required External Reviews
+
+Below are policy excerpts from GLCA schools that require external reviews.   Ursinus is also included.
+
+Wooster
+
+Below is text from Wooster’s handbook addressing external letters.
+
+LETTERS FROM EXTERNAL EXPERTS 
+
+Statements from external experts are helpful in evaluating faculty performance and potential. External reviewers are contacted by the Provost and requested to comment on the quality of the candidates’ scholarly work. At least one external evaluation is expected for faculty during their 4th-year review at the College (usually during the fourth year of service); and at least two evaluations are expected for faculty being considered for tenure and/or promotion to associate professor (usually during the sixth year of service). Faculty members are not expected to have an external evaluation during their 2nd-year review. 
+
+Faculty members undergoing their 4th-year review or a tenure and/or promotion review, are asked to submit a list of 8-10 experts in their field who can comment on the quality of their professional work and activity. Faculty are strongly encouraged to include, when possible, colleagues who already hold the same or higher rank as that for which you are applying, and people who have experience in a liberal arts college, as they may have a better idea of the many demands in such a setting. You may also wish to consider someone whose work is tied to your research who does not hold an academic appointment. Please note that the external reviewers will be asked to submit a c.v. along with their evaluation. Therefore, you should select experts whose c.v. will reflect a commensurate record of professional accomplishments. For each possible reviewer, faculty should include: 
+
+		Name and contact information (including current e-mail address and phone number) 
+
+		A brief description of why they believe each person is appropriate to evaluate their work, including their area of research and its relation to the candidate’s. Include recent noteworthy publications if this is not readily identifiable on the reviewer’s public web page. 
+
+		For each reviewer, an indication of the relationship the faculty has with them (e.g., met at a conference, served together on a panel, have not met but familiar with my work, have never met, etc.). 
+
+Faculty should not include their dissertation advisor, members of the dissertation committee, friends, untenured assistant professors, or previous or current collaborators. Faculty are not to contact their reviewers regarding this matter. The Provost will select and contact reviewers from the list to evaluate the materials submitted. For reviews of colleagues in joint positions or interdisciplinary hires, the Provost will aim to ensure that external letters represent multiple disciplinary perspectives. 
+
+Faculty should upload all materials they wish to provide to external reviewers to FacultyFolio in the folder corresponding to their current review, such as “[LastName] [Year] – 4yr External Reviewer Materials.” 
+
+These should include: 
+
+	Curriculum Vitae 
+
+	Published Research (such as articles, book chapters, encyclopedia entries, creative work) 
+
+As applicable, faculty may also wish to include: 
+
+	Book Proposals 
+
+	Submitted manuscripts (clearly indicating status of submission) 
+
+	Grant proposals 
+
+	Book Reviews 
+
+	Links to digital scholarship 
+
+If candidates wish to submit materials in hard copy due to the nature of the work, they should provide copies to Academic Affairs and indicate that they are for external review. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Denison
+
+Note: Denison’s Faculty HB does not clearly outline its external review process.  There are clauses throughout the “Procedures Pertaining to Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion” that reference the role of external reviews.  Those are reprinted below.
+
+b.	Responsibilities of the Candidate
+
+6. Candidates for tenure and promotion shall provide a list of individuals who can recommend external reviewers qualified to make expert and objective evaluations of the candidate's scholarship 
+
+d. 	Responsibilities of Department Chair
+
+9.	Department chairs are responsible for asking candidates for tenure and promotion to provide a list of individuals who can recommend external reviewers qualified to make expert and objective evaluation of the candidate's scholarship. The department chair and the candidate shall forward the list of individuals to the Provost. The candidate should also submit a list of people who are disqualified from serving as external reviewers because of their familiarity with the candidate. Reviewers should not include anyone whom the candidate knows personally or professionally in such a way that the reviewer's opinion of the candidate's work might be predicted on the basis of their relationship. 
+
+10. In cases of tenure and promotion where outside reviewers submit evaluations of scholarship or creative works, tenured members of the department may read those reviews, and department chairs must read those reviews, but only after the department letter is completed. Colleagues who, after reading these reviews, wish to write an amendment to their letters addressing issues raised by the external reviews may do so. However, these amendments must be submitted to the chair who must then write an amendment to the departmental letter, following the procedures for approval of the draft departmental letter and sharing the completed amendment with the candidate as described below. Candidates in turn may submit a response to the amendment through the chair. In other words, all amendments to individual and departmental letters must follow the same procedures as those for departmental letters. 
+
+
+
+
+Kenyon
+
+At Kenyon, external review letters are included in the promotion and tenure dossier.  Below is the clause addressing the inclusion of external review letters in the dossier.
+
+3. Three evaluators from outside the College. The candidate submits five names and addresses, along with a rationale for each selection. The rationale should provide a brief description of the expertise of the external reviewers, and should explain the nature and extent of the member's relationship with them, so that TPC members will be aware of this context when reading the external evaluations of scholarly/artistic engagement. Candidates should not nominate evaluators with whom they share close personal relationships, who have served as their direct supervisors, or with whom they have closely collaborated on a creative or scholarly project since their last review. The Associate Provost selects three outside evaluators from whom to solicit letters. Three letters are required to complete the dossier. Any questions about this process should be directed to the Associate Provost.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Oberlin
+
+Below is text from Oberlin’s Procedures for Tenure addressing the role of external reviews.
+
+The evaluation of a candidate for tenure is expected to proceed along the following steps: 
+
+a. The candidate completes a Personal Information Report, which includes an optional self- evaluation component, and assembles materials that will be part of the tenure dossier, including a current curriculum vitae and copies of any scholarly or artistic work that the candidate wishes to include for evaluation. 
+
+b. The candidate compiles a list of scholars who might serve as external evaluators of the candidate’s scholarship or artistic activity. The department creates its own, similar, list of external evaluators. Friends, former teachers, or close collaborators of the candidate may not be among the external evaluators. Any level of collaboration or friendship should be disclosed by the candidate. It is desirable, but not necessary, to include among the external evaluators at least one person with experience teaching at a liberal arts college. However, the primary consideration in selection of evaluators is their professional expertise and ability to assess the quality and importance of the work under review. 
+
+c. The candidate compiles a list of Oberlin College Faculty outside of the candidate’s department who might serve as observers of the departmental deliberations concerning the tenure case. These observers will have complete access to materials used by the department and are to receive copies of the Department Report and the Chair’s Report (see paragraph h below). They are to submit, independently, letters to the Dean attesting to the fairness of the departmental process, or noting any manner in which the department may have failed to follow proper procedure in considering the tenure case. It is not the role of these outside observers to comment on the merits of the tenure case. Any tenured member of the Faculty (excluding those serving on the College Faculty Council or the General Faculty Council) may serve in the role of observer. The candidate should discuss the choice of observers with the chair or with the Dean. The two observers must be mutually acceptable to the candidate and the department. 
+
+d. The Dean meets with the candidate and the Chair of the department to discuss the tenure evaluation process, giving special attention to the materials to be included in the dossier. If the process is expected to deviate in any way from the normal process outlined here (e.g., if specific evidence of scholarly or artistic productivity is to be presented outside of the normal review process) the Dean, the candidate, and the Chair must agree on this departure and state such agreement in writing. A ranked list of potential external evaluators is agreed upon at this time, but the Dean has authority to make the final choice of evaluators. 
+
+e. The Chair secures agreement from three external evaluators and sends materials to them, together with a cover letter outlining their responsibilities. The cover letter is to follow the format provided by the Dean’s Office. The names of the external evaluators are not shared with the candidate. The Chair also secures agreement from two persons to serve as observers. 
+
+f. The Chair arranges for former students to be surveyed (perhaps by electronic means) for their assessment of the teaching and mentoring abilities of the candidate. (Note that this surveying is conducted entirely by the faculty, not by students.) The department is expected to provide qualitative and quantitative summaries of the survey results. 
+
+g. The Chair compiles the tenure dossier that, in addition to the items mentioned above, includes all student evaluation of teaching forms collected while the candidate has been on the Oberlin 
+
+Faculty and all progress toward tenure reports previously generated by the department or by the divisional Faculty Council. The department is expected to provide qualitative and quantitative summaries of these forms. 
+
+h. After letters have been received from the external evaluators and other materials are in place and have been reviewed by members of the department, the department meets to discuss the case, in the presence of the observers. A vote is taken openly2 on the question of whether or not the candidate should be recommended for tenure. Only persons who have reviewed the materials and have participated in the deliberations are permitted to vote, although this participation may be via telephone or video conferencing. The Chair then writes the Department Report, presenting the committee’s assessment of the performance of the candidate in each of several areas. All other committee members review the Department Report for accuracy and completeness. The Chair also prepares the Chair’s Report, which reports the committee vote, presents any minority views within the committee, and certifies the process that was followed in committee deliberations. The Chair’s report will be made available to the candidate and should not include the names of any committee members when reporting the votes. 
+
+i. The final versions of the Department Report and the Chair’s Report are given to the candidate and department at least one week before being sent, with the dossier, to the divisional Faculty Council. This is to insure for the candidate the opportunity to provide the Council with additional information if he or she feels such information is advisable. A copy of this information is to be given to the Department for its response. 
+
+j. The divisional Faculty Council reviews the tenure dossier. It may ask for clarification or for additional input from the department and/or the candidate. 
+
+k. If after consideration of a recommendation regarding tenure it becomes apparent that the divisional Faculty Council may take an action to decide against the recommendation submitted by the department, or against the awarding of tenure, the Council shall delay action on the case until the Dean has informed the candidate and the department Chair about the concerns of the Council and subsequently informed the Council about whatever views may have been expressed in response by the persons who were consulted. 
+
+l. The divisional Faculty Council votes in favor of or against recommending tenure for the candidate. A majority of at least two votes is required for the adoption by the Faculty Council of a decision to recommend the award of tenure. Abstentions do not affect the outcome of voting. If a total of three or more Faculty Council members withdraw or abstain from voting on a tenure recommendation, then only a simple majority is required for a positive recommendation. 
+
+m. If the vote of the divisional Faculty Council is positive, the decision is forwarded to the General Faculty Council, which makes its own recommendation. 
+
+n. The President presents to the Trustees the cases of those candidates being recommended for tenure. The Trustees have the power to ratify a positive recommendation and award an appointment with continuous tenure or to deny the awarding of tenure. 
+
+For Faculty members appointed as Associate Professors or Professors, a tenure decision may be made at the time of appointment or a short probationary period may be specified in the initial appointment letter. If a tenure decision is made in conjunction with an offer of appointment, parts (a) - (l) of the process outlined above will be modified through discussions between the department and the Council. Typically, the department will evaluate the record of scholarship, augmenting its judgment with that of external sources where possible. The department will also assess teaching ability through the review of student evaluations of teaching collected at the candidate’s current institution. After reviewing the evidence, the department will send a recommendation to the Council. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Earlham
+
+Below is text addressing the external review of scholarship from Earlham’s Evaluation Process for Teaching Faculty Contract Renewal and for Tenure Recommendations policy.
+
+f) External Review of Scholarship
+
+As part of the four-year review and the tenure review file, each faculty member is asked to suggest up to five outside individuals who might be asked to review the file, along with a brief explanation for each choice. People with whom the faculty member has had direct experience, for example, a dissertation advisor, or a co-author should not be members of the list. The Academic Dean will select two for the fourth year review and three for the tenure review and has the option to ask for additional names from which to choose. The reviewers will be invited to read a package of the candidate’s work, which will include the self-evaluation, a cv, and anything the faculty member would like to submit for consideration. Individuals hired before 2013 who are on tenure track have the option of taking advantage of this opportunity.
+
+Faculty will have the opportunity to respond to the evaluation of outside reviewers and that response will also become part of the file.
+
+The external review of scholarship contributes to the evaluation of Quality of Mind, but other indicators also remain important to demonstrating Quality of Mind (see section B – Appointment and Renewal Criteria, subsection 2.b. Quality of Mind). “Scholarship” for this external review could include not only books, monographs, and published articles, but also conference papers, external grants, performances, exhibitions, and products of student-faculty collaborations as appropriate to the faculty member’s position at Earlham. There is no specific numerical quota for the amount of scholarship that must be in the file; the emphasis instead is on the quality of that scholarship, as a demonstration of scholarly engagement within a faculty member’s field and of overall Quality of Mind.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Wabash
+
+Below is the clause from Wabash’s Tenure policy addressing external reviews.
+
+3. The faculty member will identify four outside evaluators of his or her research or creative work and will provide their names and contact information to the Dean of the College’s office by June 15 preceding the semester of the tenure review. The faculty member will also provide a brief rationale for the appropriateness of the persons submitted as potential reviewers. The Dean of the College, after consultation with the Department Chair and the appropriate Division Chair, will select two evaluators. At the date established on the review timetable (which is generally aligned near the first day of fall classes), the Dean will send the evaluators the faculty member’s up-to-date CV, copies of the candidate’s research or creative work, the Faculty Handbook statement on the expectation of faculty excellence (section 2.1), and a letter indicating that the College seeks an assessment of the quality, originality, and significance of the faculty member’s research or creative work. (A copy of the Dean’s letter will be included in the review dossier.) While the evaluators’ reports are shared only with the department review committee and the Academic Personnel Committee, their contents will be summarized in the discussion with the faculty member after the review is completed. 
+
+
+
+
+Ursinus
+
+In preparation for tenure review, candidates shall submit the following to the Dean: (1) list of external reviewers of the professional product(s); (2) professional product(s) for review; and (3) the candidate’s professional dossier. 
+
+1. External Reviewers: 
+
+By May 1 of the academic year preceding the tenure review, and without making contact with any of the individuals, the candidate submits to the Dean the names of four outside evaluators (other than professional collaborators or co-authors) who are qualified to judge the quality of the candidate's professional work. The candidate should also submit to the Dean a prospective list of materials to be reviewed. 
+
+• The candidate should identify each name by position, title, address, email address, telephone numbers, professional or other relationship, if any, with the candidate, and a brief description of the qualifications for reviewing the candidate's work. 
+
+• The Dean will consult with the Faculty Review Committee (FRC) chair to construct a list of four additional persons with a strong record of accomplishment in the candidate's field of expertise. 
+
+• The candidate may veto two names from this list. From this combined list of at least six names, the Dean in consultation with the Promotion and Tenure Committee, will choose three names, normally two of whom must be selected from the candidate's list.
+
+• It is the responsibility of the Dean to establish contact with the selected individuals, send them the materials to be reviewed, and solicit confidential reviews from them.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Alternative Model Listing.txt [/INST] Alternative Model Listing
+
+
+
+3.2: Faculty Classifications
+
+
+
+
+
+3.9: Faculty Evaluation
+
+3.9.1: Evaluation Criteria for Personnel Decisions 
+
+Retain Weighted Percentages vs. Non-Weighted Approach</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Alternative Models Not Used in First Draft.txt [/INST] Alternative Models Not Used in First Draft
+
+
+
+Model #2
+
+In keeping with its mission and ELCA values, California Lutheran University is committed to maintaining a diverse and inclusive community that strives for equity and equal opportunity.  Accordingly, diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts (DEI) related to teaching, advising and/or mentoring, scholarly or creative productivity, and service activities are recognized as having value within the California Lutheran University community.  Examples of such efforts include, but are not limited to, activities such as curricular development that furthers DEI; pedagogical practices that promote inclusivity; mentoring and advising students, faculty, and staff on DEI-related issues; mentoring and advising students, faculty, and staff from underrepresented or underserved groups; and scholarly or creative productivity that examines and furthers knowledge and understanding related to DEI.  The University acknowledges that additional time and effort are required for involvement in such activities and is committed to recognizing these efforts.  In particular, faculty performance evaluations shall recognize DEI activities as an indication of a commitment to effective teaching, effectiveness as an advisor and/or mentor, scholarly or creative productivity, and service to the University and profession.  Contributions to promote DEI should therefore be documented in the Annual Faculty Report, as well as in promotion and tenure dossiers.
+
+
+
+Annual Faculty Report
+
+Each Spring semester, faculty members, utilizing the Annual Faculty Report Form, assess their performance in the areas of teaching, academic advising and/or mentoring, scholarship and creative work, and service pursuant to the University-wide evaluation criteria [INSERT LINK TO SECTION], as well as any supplemental evaluation guidelines established by the faculty member’s [Academic Division or College/School].  In addition, faculty members are also expected to address the faculty member’s progress of achieving the goals identified in the faculty member’s prior Annual Faculty Report Form, as well as propose measurable goals for the following academic year.  The report must address the period from June 1 to May 31.  
+
+Faculty members are required to submit a completed Annual Faculty Report Form each year, except in years when the faculty member is undergoing a second or fourth-year review, has initiated candidacy for promotion or tenure, or is on leave.  In lieu of an Annual Faculty Report, faculty members undergoing a second or fourth-year, promotion or tenure review are required to submit a dossier, as described in the Promotion and Tenure section below [INSERT HYPERLINK].  The completed, signed, and dated Annual Faculty Report Form, as well as a copy of the faculty member’s current curriculum vitae, and any documentation submitted by the faculty member in support of the faculty member’s Annual Faculty Report Form, must be submitted by the faculty member to the Department Chair/Program Director on or before May 31st.
+
+Note: In those departments/programs where the Department Chair/Program Director is not tenured, the Dean (or a tenured designee of the Dean) will annually evaluate the tenured faculty members of the department.  In such departments, tenured faculty should submit the Annual Faculty Report Form to the Dean.
+
+Establishing Goals 
+
+	Faculty member goals are a fundamental component of the evaluation process and, therefore, it is important that the faculty member, in consultation with the Department Chair/Program Director, carefully prepare them.  It is the responsibility of the faculty member to clearly articulate in writing specific goals related to the faculty member’s professional development and responsibilities (i.e., Teaching, Advising and/or Mentoring, Scholarly or Creative Productivity, and Service).  The goals selected should meet or exceed the expectations of the faculty member’s current academic rank, as well as assist in the preparation for the next level of promotion (if applicable).  Goals need not be equally distributed across the four categories of evaluation.  The Department Chair/Program Chair, in reviewing the goals, should consider the merit and quality of the faculty member's stated goals within the context of the [Academic Division or College/School] evaluation guidelines and the expectations of the faculty member specified in the faculty member's appointment contract.
+
+	During the annual evaluation process, the Department Chair/Program Chair will assess how the faculty member’s proposed goals relate to the faculty member’s professional development and responsibilities (i.e., Teaching and Academic Advising, Scholarly/Creative/Professional Development, and Service), align with University, College/School, and department goals, the faculty member’s academic rank, and [Academic Division or School/College] evaluation guidelines.  If the Department Chair and faculty member cannot reach agreement on any part of the goal-setting process, the matter will be referred to the Dean for final resolution.
+
+	Note: New faculty members at California Lutheran University attend an individual goals conference with the Department Chair/Program Director in early September to establish goals for current academic year.
+
+	Goal Setting Guidelines
+
+	The faculty member, in formulating proposed goals for the following academic year, are encouraged to consider the following guidelines: 
+
+	Goals should reflect the department, College/School, and University missions; 
+
+	Goals should contribute to the faculty member’s development as an effective faculty member and be designed to meet or exceed current academic rank expectations; 
+
+	Goals should be attainable within the capabilities and resources of the individual and the University; 
+
+	Goals should specify actions to be taken or tasks to be accomplished.  At the time of evaluation, it should be clear whether a particular goal has been achieved or is progressing towards being achieved; and 
+
+	Goals should be described in such a way that their completion may be objectively evaluated.
+
+													Department Chair/Program Director Annual Evaluation
+
+To supply continuous and useful means to assist faculty members to improve their teaching, academic advising and/or mentoring, scholarship or creative productivity, and service, each faculty member is evaluated annually by the Department Chair/Program Director, except in years when the faculty member is undergoing a second or fourth-year review, has initiated candidacy for promotion or tenure, or is on leave.  In those departments where the Department Chair/Program Director is not tenured, the Dean (or the Dean’s designee) will annually evaluate the tenured faculty members of the department.  Similarly, Department Chairs and Program Directors faculty responsibilities are evaluated annually by the Dean (or the Dean’s designee).  In performing the evaluation, the Dean (or the Dean’s designee) will be substituted for the role of the Department Chair/Program Director but otherwise adhere to the procedures set forth below.  
+
+The Department Chair/Program Director’s evaluation focuses upon the faculty member’s performance in teaching, academic advising and/or mentoring, scholarship or creative productivity, and service pursuant to the university-wide evaluation criteria [INSERT LINK TO SECTION] and the supplemental evaluation guidelines established by the faculty member’s [Academic Division or College/School].  In addition, the Department Chair/Program Director will consider the faculty member’s progress towards achieving the goals identified during the prior annual evaluation process.  The Department Chair/Program Director’s evaluation will address the period from June 1 to May 31.
+
+Items Reviewed: The following items are reviewed by the Department Chair/Program Director as part of the annual evaluation: 
+
+												the faculty member’s current Faculty Self-Assessment Form
+
+												the faculty member’s current curriculum vitae
+
+												any documentation submitted by the faculty member in support of the faculty member’s Annual Faculty Report Form
+
+												student course and instruction evaluation summaries since the faculty member’s last annual evaluation.
+
+After completing the review of the submitted materials and utilizing the aforementioned evaluation criteria and guidelines, the Department Chair/Program Director will document a preliminary evaluation of the faculty member’s professional performance during the evaluation period and submit it electronically to the faculty member on or before TBD.  Included in the draft of the evaluation will be a brief written discussion of the faculty member’s strengths and potential areas of improvement in each of the four categories of evaluation and an assessment of the faculty member’s progress towards meeting the goals established in the most recent annual evaluation.  Moreover, the Department Chair/Program Director will assess the faculty member’s proposed goals for the following academic year (see the Goal Setting section above [INSERT LINK]).
+
+The Department Chair/Program Director and faculty member will then meet either in person or via videoconference to discuss the draft evaluation and review and amend as necessary the faculty member’s proposed goals for the following academic year.  As noted in the goals section above [INSERT LINK], if the Department Chair and faculty member cannot reach agreement on any part of the goal-setting process, the matter will be referred to the Dean for final resolution.
+
+Following the meeting, the Department Chair/Program Director will finalize the evaluation and submit it electronically to the faculty member on or before [TBD].  The faculty member will then be requested to sign the final version of the evaluation, signifying that the evaluation has been read.  The faculty member’s signature, however, does not indicate agreement with the Department Chair/Program Director’s final evaluation.  If the faculty member disagrees with any aspect of the evaluation, the faculty member may submit a written response to the evaluation, which will be appended to the Department Chair/Program Director’s evaluation.  The faculty member’s reply must be filed with the Department Chair/Program within five academic days of electronic receipt of final version of the evaluation.  Evidence of the faculty member’s opportunity to review the final version of the evaluation, together with any written comment the faculty member might choose to file, will be attached to the Department Chair/Program Director evaluation, which is then forwarded to the Dean on or before [TBD].
+
+Evaluation of Faculty by the Dean 
+
+Non-tenured faculty in their first six years of service at California Lutheran will be evaluated annually by the Dean or the Dean’s designee (hereinafter “Dean”).  After tenure, faculty may be evaluated by the Dean if requested by the individual.
+
+Items Reviewed: The following items are reviewed by the Dean as part of the annual evaluation: 
+
+												The faculty member’s current Faculty Self-Assessment Form;
+
+												The faculty member’s current curriculum vitae;
+
+												Any documentation submitted by the faculty member in support of the faculty member’s Annual Faculty Report Form;
+
+												Student course evaluation summaries since the faculty member’s last annual evaluation; and
+
+												The Department Chair/Program Director’s written annual evaluation.
+
+After completing the review of the submitted materials and utilizing the aforementioned evaluation criteria and guidelines, the Dean will prepare a written evaluation of the faculty member’s professional performance during the evaluation period.  The draft will be submitted electronically in draft form to the faculty member on or before [TBD].  The College Dean and faculty member will then discuss the draft evaluation either in person or virtually.  Following the discussion, the Dean will finalize the evaluation and submit it electronically to the faculty member.  The faculty member will then be requested to sign the final version of the evaluation, signifying that the document has been received and read.  The faculty member’s signature, however, does not indicate agreement with the Dean’s evaluation.  
+
+If the faculty member disagrees with any aspect of the Dean’s written evaluation, the faculty member shall have five academic days to submit to the Dean a written response to the report.  Evidence of the faculty member’s opportunity to review the evaluation, together with any written comment the faculty member might choose to append, must be attached by the Dean to the evaluation.  The Dean will then submit both the Department Chair/Program Director evaluation and the Dean’s own evaluation to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, which will to be included in the faculty member’s personnel file.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Alternative Program D.txt [/INST] Alternative Program D/C Procedures
+
+
+
+Such an action may be proposed by a standing faculty committee, by the Provost, the President, or the Board of Trustees. 
+
+Upon receipt of a proposed action, the President shall call together a joint committee, comprising the Committee on Academic Programs and the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee (hereinafter referred to as the Joint Committee), which shall evaluate the proposal considering criteria used in the normal, periodic review of academic programs and departments.  As part of the evaluation, the Joint Committee will consult with the faculty of the impacted program or department. 
+
+The recommendations of the Joint Committee concerning discontinuance of an academic program or department, which shall include the faculty of the impacted program or department and other evidence bearing on the issue, will be reported to the Faculty as a whole for review.
+
+The Faculty shall make a final recommendation on the matter to the Provost.  
+
+In the event the Provost disagrees with that recommendation, the Provost shall meet with the Faculty to discuss the reasons for such disagreement, before making a final recommendation on the matter to the President.
+
+The Provost will then communicate a final decision and the reasons therefor in writing to the Faculty.
+
+Having considered the recommendations above and considered the vote of the Faculty, the Provost will make a final written recommendation to the President on the matter.  If the Provost disagreed with the Faculty’s recommendation, the Provost will ensure that the Faculty proposal is forwarded to the President.
+
+The President will then forward the above recommendations, along with the President’s independent recommendation, to the Board of Trustees for final action.
+
+If the Board of Trustees approves the discontinuation of the program or department, the President will charge the Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee, to recommend names of faculty members to be reduced.
+
+The President shall render the final decision on terminations for reduction in force for reasons of formal reduction or discontinuance of a degree or program area and shall notify the faculty member(s).
+
+
+
+
+
+Such an action may be proposed by the Committee on Academic Programs, by the Provost, the President, or Board of Trustees. 
+
+A proposal will be considered first by the Committee on Academic Programs, which will evaluate the proposal in light of criteria used in the normal, periodic review of departments and programs. As part of the evaluation, the Committee on Academic Programs and Provost will consult with the program or department that would be affected to test the reasons for the proposed action and to determine the probable consequences should it occur. 
+
+The recommendations of the Committee on Academic Programs concerning discontinuance of an academic program or department will be reported to the Faculty for action and to the Provost. 
+
+The results of the Faculty vote will be forwarded to the Provost.
+
+Having considered the recommendations of the individuals and committees noted in Steps (2) and (3), the Provost will make the administrative decision, with the concurrence of the President.  In the event either the Provost or President disagrees with the Faculty recommendation, the Provost, President or both will meet with the Faculty to discuss the reasons for such disagreement.
+
+If formal discontinuance of an existing academic program or department area does not require reduction in faculty appointments, the President will submit the proposal to reduce or discontinue, together with any recommendations of the President, to the Board of Trustees for its action. 
+
+If formal discontinuance requires reduction in faculty appointments, then the President will charge the Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee, to recommend names of faculty members to be reduced. 
+
+The President will render the final decision on terminations for reasons of discontinuance of an academic program or department and notify the faculty member(s) in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.10.5.3.3. 
+
+
+
+In the event the Provost disagrees with that recommendation, the Provost shall meet with the Faculty to discuss the reasons for such disagreement, before making a final recommendation on the matter to the President. 
+
+The Provost will then communicate a final decision and the reasons therefor in writing to the Faculty.
+
+Having considered the recommendations above and considered the vote of the Faculty, the Provost will make a final written recommendation to the President on the matter.  If the Provost disagrees with the Faculty’s recommendation, the Provost will communicate the reasons therefore in the written recommendation to the President.
+
+The President will then refer the above recommendations, along with the President’s independent recommendation, to the Board of Trustees for final action.
+
+
+
+All proposals will be referred to the Committee on Academic Programs as to curricular impact, to the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee as to the implications for the academic plan, to the Faculty Personnel Committee as to personnel implications, and to the affected programs or departments. These bodies will hold hearings as part of their deliberations. At the discretion of the President, an advisory student committee may also be created. These groups will severally consider the proposal(s) and in doing so may consult widely with faculty, students, and, where appropriate, with staff. They are to complete their deliberations within 30 calendar days of receipt of the proposal(s) and report their findings and recommendations to the President immediately upon finishing their deliberations. They may recommend acceptance, alteration, or otherwise, of the initial proposal(s). If and when they are unable to achieve concurrence with the President, and the President determines that a an academic program or department should be discontinued, the President will report to the Board of Trustees the proposed course of action. If there is a difference of views between the President and the committees, the President will ensure that the committees' proposals are forwarded to the Trustees with the President’s proposal(s). The Board of Trustees retains ultimate authority for approving proposals as to discontinue an academic program or department and position reductions and terminations.
+
+After the completion and implementation of decisions for program discontinuation, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Alternative Reauthorization Model.txt [/INST] Alternative Model 
+
+When a position on the full-time faculty shall become vacant for any reason, except paid or unpaid leaves, the position must be re-authorized before it can be filled.  For purposes of this policy, a Visiting Faculty position shall be considered vacant at the expiration of its stated period of authorization.  In addition, a tenure-line position of a faculty member participating in the Phased Retirement Program (Section 3.11.2.1) shall be considered vacant when the faculty member enters the program.  
+
+The department may request authorization to fill the vacant position by submitting to the Provost a written request to recruit a replacement. The department should be prepared to explain the need to maintain the position within the department. Should a question arise concerning the department’s continued need for the position, the Provost shall discuss such concern with the members of the department and the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee. The Provost will then make a written recommendation to the President regarding whether the vacant position should be re-authorized and, if so, whether it should be designated as tenure track or visiting. The President shall then make a final decision on whether the position should be reauthorized and, if so, whether it should tenure track or visiting.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Alternative Text - No Weight Percentage.txt [/INST] Alternative Text – No Weight Percentages
+
+Of the three categories of performance, teaching effectiveness is the most important.  Achievements in the other categories of performance, no matter how significant they may be, cannot compensate for a failure to demonstrate effective teaching.  While teaching is given precedence in the evaluation procedure, a record demonstrating scholarly or creative contributions as evidenced through research, publication, and professional participation, as well as effective service are expected of all full-time faculty members.  Exceptional performance in one of the three categories does not compensate for poor performance in the others.  Of the three categories, teaching effectiveness is the most important and scholarship and creative contributions are valued above service by the University.
+
+Such activities will be evaluated according to the University-wide evaluation criteria set forth below, as well as any applicable department-specific descriptions of appropriate forms of scholarly and/or artistic productivity (e.g., professional engagement activities) documented in a Memorandum of Understanding between the department and Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee.
+
+In situations where a faculty member’s position will differ significantly from others on the tenure track due to administrative responsibilities, departments and the Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee, will develop an individualized Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) agreement. The MOU agreements will outline modified evaluation criteria for reappointment, tenure, promotion, and merit for faculty who are serving in joint administrative and faculty positions and provide specific examples of what work will be evaluated during the reappointment, promotion, tenure and merit processes. Specifically, the MOU agreement will make clear:
+
+The reason for the modified evaluation criteria;
+
+How the impact of the faculty member’s work will be measured;
+
+What unique contributions or activities will be included in the evaluation; and
+
+Which duties will be considered “administrative” in nature.
+
+-End of Alternative Text-
+
+
+
+Additional Alternative Approach 
+
+Some schools permit variations in evaluation weightings for individual faculty members.  This is commonly done via written agreement between the faculty member and the Department Chair or Provost within specified ranges or documentation in the Self-Report or as part of an annual goals setting process (typically as part of annual evaluation conducted by Department Chairs).  Two brief examples of such an approach are set forth below:
+
+
+
+Kenyon: “All reviews where merit pay is a possible outcome, including pre-tenure, tenure, post-tenure, and promotion, shall count teaching at 55 percent. Scholarship and artistic engagement shall count 30 percent, and college citizenship 15 percent. However, in view of the varying career patterns of individuals throughout their stays at Kenyon, it shall be permissible to increase the scholarship and artistic engagement count to 35 percent or to decrease it to 25 percent and, correspondingly, to increase the college citizenship count to 20 percent or to decrease it to 10 percent, the sum always being 100 percent. The corresponding increases and decreases in the scholarship and citizenship counts must be arranged in advance by agreement with and permission of the Provost. Only the dossier is to be evaluated and the merit standard is to be strictly adhered to. Merit decisions are to be entirely separate from administrative adjustments and the considerations relevant to them.”
+
+
+
+UNC-Pembroke: For faculty with a regular 12-hour teaching load, these percentages must conform to the following ranges: teaching, 50% - 70%; scholarship, 10% - 40%; and service, 10% - 40%. For any given academic year, the sum of these weights must equal 100%. Faculty members with unusual teaching loads are to adjust the ranges appropriately. [Note: The ranges are documented in an annual self-report and discussed with Department Chair.]</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Analysis Text Removed from HR Memo.txt [/INST] Per the Faculty Constitution, the faculty is delegated “primary responsibility for governance of such fundamental areas as curriculum; subject matter and methods of instruction; research; faculty status; and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process.”  The AAUP/AGB/ACE Joint Statement on the Government of Colleges and Universities defines “faculty status” to include “faculty appointments, reappointments, decisions not to reappoint, promotions, the granting of tenure, and dismissal.”  Consistent with the Faculty Constitution, the University’s ADRI Charts reflects that the faculty recommends appointment, promotion and tenure categories and approves the criteria thereunder, approves recommendations for individual faculty regarding promotion and tenure, develops sabbatical policies, and recommends faculty terminations without cause and non-renewals.  
+
+According to the ADRI chart, Employee Handbook and General Human Resources policies are decided by the cabinet and approved by the President, with input from faculty and staff.  University benefits are decided by either managers or the cabinet and approved by either the cabinet, president or board depending on the benefit.  Thus, many, if not all, of the human resource and campus community policies currently published in the Faculty Policies Handbook do not address matters of faculty status or cover an area that the ADRI Chart requires an approval, decision, or recommendation from the faculty. The Faculty Bylaw amendment process outlined in the Faculty Constitution, however, requires an affirmative faculty vote for all amendments to the Faculty Policies Handbook.  This ostensibly includes those published in the Appendix to the handbook.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Appeals of Negative Faculty Review Decisions.txt [/INST] Appeals of Negative Faculty Review Decisions 
+
+A full-time faculty member may appeal on procedural grounds a negative personnel review decision concerning reappointment, tenure, or promotion.  If an appeal reveals that prejudicial error did occur or that the decision resulted from inadequate consideration, then the President will reconsider that decision in light of the findings of the appeal and will take corrective measures as warranted. 
+
+Note: All references to periods of time in this policy shall be calculated, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, as ""in session"" time. In session days are those from the first day of classes through the last day of the final examination period of the regular academic terms, including weekends. Vacation days (fall and spring breaks, the summer period) are not counted.
+
+Filing An Appeal 
+
+A full-time faculty member seeking to appeal a negative personnel decision (the “complainant”) must file a written appeal with the Provost within fifteen (15) in session days of receiving written notice of the negative decision.  A complainant who does not file a written appeal within the indicated period of time forfeits any further right of appeal. 
+
+Grounds for Appeal 
+
+The complainant’s written appeal must include a detailed statement of the grounds for appealing and an explicit waiver of any right to nondisclosure of the grounds for the decision. It is intended that the disclosure be restricted to the members of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee. 
+
+There are only two grounds on which a review decision may be appealed. The complainant’s written appeal must allege facts sufficient to establish either:
+
+Prejudicial error in the form of procedural error, violation of University policy, or violation of contract, or
+
+Inadequate consideration. 
+
+The term prejudicial (a) does not refer to the state of mind of the members of the Faculty Personnel Committee, the Provost or, in the case of a tenure or promotion to full professor decision, the President; rather, it refers to an assessment of the likely effect of an error in procedure on a review decision. An error is prejudicial if it is reasonably probable that a result more favorable to the complainant would have been reached in the absence of the error. 
+
+Inadequate consideration occurs if the Faculty Personnel Committee, the Provost or, in the case of a tenure or promotion to full professor decision, the President (a) violated the stated procedures for including relevant evidence in the Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file or using that evidence as a basis for judgment in the review and (b) it is reasonably probable that a result more favorable to the appellant would have been reached had adequate consideration been given to the proper evidence. Alternatively, inadequate consideration occurs when a decision is not supported by substantial evidence in the Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file. 
+
+
+
+The Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee Preliminary Review
+
+Within two days of receiving the complainant’s appeal, the Provost will provide the members of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee a copy of the complainant’s written appeal.
+
+Within seven days of receipt of the complainant’s written appeal, the Provost will convene the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee.  Upon being convened, the members of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee will determine whether any member wishes to self-recuse from further participation because of bias or conflict of interest. Any vacancies created by a self-recusal will be filled by lot from the alternate members of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee who are standing by at the time the committee is convened.  A replacement will serve for that case only (unless independently selected later for another specific case). Should the chair of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee self-recuse, an acting chair will be elected from the non-alternate members.
+
+Following the election of the chair, the committee will conduct a preliminary inquiry.  The purpose of this inquiry is to determine whether the facts alleged in the written appeal establish a prima facie case in terms of the grounds for appeal specified above.  If the committee by majority vote finds that the written appeal does not establish a prima facie case that appealable error occurred in the review, then the chair of the committee will report this finding in writing to the complainant, Provost and President and the appeal will be closed. 
+
+If the committee finds that the appeal petition does establish a prima facie case that appealable error occurred in the review, the chair of the committee will notify the complainant, Provost, and President of the decision.  The Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee will then formally investigated the matter in accordance with the procedures set forth below.
+
+Formal Investigation of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee
+
+													The Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee will have investigative powers and will invite testimony, whether written or oral, from the complainant and an official spokesperson from the Faculty Personnel Committee, normally the chair, either of who may be accompanied by a faculty advisor. The Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee may invite others to testify or provide written statements, including the Provost or President in cases where their disposition of the recommendation of the Faculty Personnel Committee is at issue. No faculty member of the Faculty Personnel Committee except the official spokesperson and the advisor shall testify as a member of the Faculty Personnel Committee, and no one shall be required to disclose confidential sources. The Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee shall not reveal to the complainant or others the content or authorship of confidential evaluation materials used by the Faculty Personnel Committee in its deliberations, and the spokesperson for the Faculty Personnel Committee shall not reveal the views of individual members of the Faculty Personnel Committee.  All such testimony, whether written or oral, shall be documented and included in the faculty member’s permanent evaluative file.
+
+													In all cases which it reviews, the Committee’s task is to determine whether the grounds for appeal have been established by the complainant based on the preponderance of the evidence.  In making its decision, the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee may not substitute its own judgment for that of the Faculty Personnel Committee, the Provost, or, if applicable, the President on the merits of whether the complainant should be reappointed, awarded tenure, or promoted to full Professor. Rather, the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee must presume that the persons responsible for the original decision were in the best position to make it and therefore must give that decision the benefit of every reasonable inference. 
+
+Therefore, the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee will uphold the appeal only if it concludes that the preponderance of the evidence establishes: 
+
+The negative decision resulted from prejudicial error in the form of procedural error, or 
+
+The negative decision resulted from inadequate consideration, as defined above. 
+
+Otherwise, the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee will deny the appeal. 
+
+													Following its deliberations, the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee will prepare a written report for the President, with copies to the complainant, the Faculty Personnel Committee, Provost, and President within 30 days of receiving the faculty member’s written appeal.  The report will include findings of fact and conclusions with respect to the grounds alleged on appeal and, where appropriate, will make recommendations for remedial action.  The finding of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee, together with any accompanying evidence or explanation, shall become a part of the faculty member’s permanent evaluative file.  
+
+At the conclusion of the investigation and by majority vote, the Committee will determine its findings of fact and recommendations. If the Committee upholds the appeal, it may recommend (a) the matter be remanded to the lowest level at which the procedural error was made or at which there was inadequate consideration of evidence or (b) a reversal of the original decision. 
+
+The Chair of the Committee will provide to the President a written report of the Committee’s findings and recommendations, as well as the reasons justifying those findings and recommendations. 
+
+President’s Decision
+
+Within ten (10) working days of receiving the Committee’s report, the President will decide upon appropriate action and will provide a written report of the decision to the complainant, the Provost, the Chair of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee, and the Chair of the Faculty Personnel Committee. If the President’s final decision is against Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee’s recommendation, the President’s reasons will be stated in the letter.  The decision of the President may not be appealed. 
+
+													If the President determines that the matter should be remanded, the Chair of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee will be tasked with submitting (1) the complainants’ written appeal, (2) the evaluative file, and (2) the written report outlining the basis for the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee’s decision and recommendations for corrective action, to the lowest level at which the procedural error was made or at which there was inadequate consideration of evidence.  At that level and each subsequent level, the case shall be evaluated by the designated body as they are constituted at the time of the remand, and by the individuals holding the relevant administrative positions at the time of the remand.  At each level, a recommendation will be completed within ten days and forwarded to the next level.  No case may be remanded more than once, and the remand must consider the decision of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee.
+
+The President of the University is delegated by the Board of Trustees to exercise the final administrative responsibility for all decisions affecting faculty status.  Accordingly, on remand back to the President, the President’s decision shall be final and stated in a letter to the faculty member, with copies to the complainant, Provost, Faculty Personnel Committee, Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee, and the faculty member’s permanent file.  
+
+All matters of interpretation of this appeals procedure shall be resolved on behalf of the Faculty by the Executive Committee of the Faculty.
+
+
+
+
+
+Model 2
+
+Appeals of Negative Faculty Review Decisions 
+
+A full-time faculty member may appeal on procedural grounds a negative personnel review decision concerning reappointment, tenure, or promotion.  If an appeal reveals that prejudicial error did occur or that the decision resulted from inadequate consideration, then the President will reconsider that decision in light of the findings of the appeal and will take corrective measures as warranted. 
+
+Note: All references to periods of time in this policy shall be calculated, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, as ""in session"" time. In session days are those from the first day of classes through the last day of the final examination period of the regular academic terms, including weekends. Vacation days (fall and spring breaks, the summer period) are not counted.
+
+Filing An Appeal 
+
+A full-time faculty member seeking to appeal a negative personnel decision (the “complainant”) must file a written appeal with the Provost within fifteen (15) in session days of receiving written notice of the negative decision.  A complainant who does not file a written appeal within the indicated period of time forfeits any further right of appeal. 
+
+Grounds for Appeal 
+
+The complainant’s written appeal must include a detailed statement of the grounds for appealing and an explicit waiver of any right to nondisclosure of the grounds for the decision. It is intended that the disclosure be restricted to the members of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee. 
+
+There are only two grounds on which a review decision may be appealed. The complainant’s written appeal must allege facts sufficient to establish either:
+
+Prejudicial error in the form of procedural error, violation of University policy, or violation of contract, or
+
+Inadequate consideration. 
+
+The term prejudicial (a) does not refer to the state of mind of the members of the Faculty Personnel Committee, the Provost or, in the case of a tenure or promotion to full professor decision, the President; rather, it refers to an assessment of the likely effect of an error in procedure on a review decision. An error is prejudicial if it is reasonably probable that a result more favorable to the complainant would have been reached in the absence of the error. 
+
+Inadequate consideration occurs if the Faculty Personnel Committee, the Provost or, in the case of a tenure or promotion to full professor decision, the President (a) violated the stated procedures for including relevant evidence in the Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file or using that evidence as a basis for judgment in the review and (b) it is reasonably probable that a result more favorable to the appellant would have been reached had adequate consideration been given to the proper evidence. Alternatively, inadequate consideration occurs when a decision is not supported by substantial evidence in the Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file. 
+
+
+
+The Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee Preliminary Review
+
+Within two days of receiving the complainant’s appeal, the Provost will provide the members of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee a copy of the complainant’s written appeal.
+
+Within seven days of receipt of the complainant’s written appeal, the Provost will convene the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee.  Upon being convened, the members of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee will determine whether any member wishes to self-recuse from further participation because of bias or conflict of interest. Any vacancies created by a self-recusal will be filled by lot from the alternate members of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee who are standing by at the time the committee is convened.  A replacement will serve for that case only (unless independently selected later for another specific case). Should the chair of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee self-recuse, an acting chair will be elected from the non-alternate members.
+
+Following the election of the chair, the committee will conduct a preliminary inquiry.  The purpose of this inquiry is to determine whether the facts alleged in the written appeal establish a prima facie case in terms of the grounds for appeal specified above.  If the committee by majority vote finds that the written appeal does not establish a prima facie case that appealable error occurred in the review, then the chair of the committee will report this finding in writing to the complainant, Provost and President and the appeal will be closed. 
+
+If the committee finds that the written appeal does establish a prima facie case that appealable error occurred in the review, the chair of the Committee will notify the complainant, Provost, and President of the decision and formally investigate the matter in accordance with the procedures set forth below.
+
+Formal Investigation of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee
+
+The Chair of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee shall invite the complainant to meet with the Committee within seven days of the preliminary inquiry for the purpose of assuring the Committee's understanding of the nature of the appeal.
+
+If the appeal is directed at the recommendation of the Faculty Personnel Committee, the chair shall within 10 days of the initial session above submit the complainant's written appeal, with any clarifying information obtained in 1 above, to the Faculty Personnel Committee which shall, within seven days, provide the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee with (a) a written response to the statement, (b) a written statement of the procedures followed and the persons consulted in reaching the decision, and (c) access to all documents employed by the Faculty Personnel Committee as a whole in its deliberations leading to the disputed recommendation. If the complaint is directed at the Provost or President's disposition of the recommendation of the Faculty Personnel Committee, the procedures in this paragraph will apply also to the Provost or President.
+
+The Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee will promptly schedule a hearing for the purpose of oral argument and for the presentation of additional information. The hearing shall be held on campus at a time and place designated by the chair after consultation with the complainant and Provost.
+
+The following procedures shall apply in all hearings:
+
+The burden of proof shall, based on the preponderance of the evidence, rest with the complainant, i.e., the responsibility for affirmatively establishing disputed facts bearing on issues described in 8 below.
+
+The hearing will be closed and the proceedings confidential. Invited for separate appearances shall be the complainant, who may be accompanied by an advisor from the Faculty, and an official spokesperson from the Faculty Personnel Committee, normally the chair, who may be accompanied by an advisor from the Faculty Personnel Committee. The Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee may invite others to testify, including the President in cases where the President’s disposition of the recommendation of the Faculty Personnel Committee is at issue. No faculty member of the Faculty Personnel Committee except the official spokesperson and the advisor may testify as a member of the Faculty Personnel Committee, and confidential sources may not be disclosed. The Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee shall not reveal to the complainant or others the content or authorship of confidential evaluation materials used by the Faculty Personnel Committee in its deliberations, and the spokesperson for the Faculty Personnel Committee shall not reveal the views of individual members of the Faculty Personnel Committee.
+
+The Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee shall not be bound by strict rules of legal evidence, but the findings shall be based on the documents it has considered and on the testimony provided at the hearing.
+
+During and after the formal hearing, the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee will restrict its inquiry to the following questions:
+
+Were there deviations from existing evaluation procedures legislation governing relevant personnel procedures which could well have affected the decision being appealed? (The Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee shall not look for minute deviations here, but significant deviations which reasonable observers would judge to have influenced the decision.)
+
+Was any material evidence ignored? (The question is not whether all possible relevant evidence was present, but whether materials were lacking which ought to have been considered according to established procedures of the University and which could well have worked in the interests of the complainant.)
+
+Was any improper evidence considered? (The question here is whether evidence was considered which was not a kind understood to be relevant under established procedures and policies of the University and which could well have worked against the interests of the complainant.)
+
+Given the evidence, was the decision an unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious one? (The Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee shall not substitute its judgment on the merits of the case for that of the Faculty Personnel Committee. The question is whether the decision was based on a reasonable evaluation of the evidence before the Faculty Personnel Committee, not whether the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee agrees or disagrees with the decision.)
+
+The hearing shall be completed within 31 days of the Provost's convening of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee. Within three days thereafter the Committee shall report its findings to the complainant, the Faculty Personnel Committee, the Provost, and the President. If the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee finds the answers to any of the questions in 8 to be ""yes,"" it shall so report together with the reasons for its finding, and the case shall be considered again by the Faculty Personnel Committee (when its recommendation is at issue) or by the President (when the President’s decision is at issue). In the former kind of case, the recommendation by the Faculty Personnel Committee to the President shall represent the final faculty position on the matter. The Faculty Personnel Committee or the President will complete the reconsideration of the case within 14 days. The complainant and all members of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee shall be notified of the disposition of the case by the Faculty Personnel Committee and the President.
+
+The Complainant can make a final appeal to the President. The appeal must be made within 14 days of notification described at the end of #9, and is to be limited to procedural grounds only.
+
+All matters of interpretation of this appeals procedure shall be resolved on behalf of the Faculty by the Executive Committee of the Faculty.
+
+
+
+
+
+Within five days of receipt of the written appeal, the chair of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee will convene the committee for a preliminary inquiry.  The purpose of this inquiry is to determine whether the facts alleged in the written appeal establish a prima facie case in terms of the grounds for appeal specified above.  If the committee by majority vote at a meeting where a quorum exists finds that the written appeal does not establish a prima facie case that appealable error occurred in the review, then the chair of the committee will report this finding in writing to the President and the appeal is closed. The President then notifies the appellant and the Provost.
+
+If the committee finds that the appeal petition does establish a prima facie case that appealable error occurred in the review, the Chair of the Appeals Board will so notify the President, the Chair of the Assembly, the appellant, and the Provost. Within five (5) working days of receiving notice of the Appeals Board’s decision, the Provost will provide to the Appeals Board a written response to the appellant’s petition, a list of three (3) members of the tenured faculty or senior regular term faculty who meet the criteria specified below (§3.10.10.5) and are acceptable to the Provost as members of the Appeal Committee and a list of proposed witnesses. The Chair of the Appeals Board forwards a copy of the Provost’s written response to the appellant. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+													The Evaluation Review and Appeals Committee will have investigative powers and may interview persons in the evaluation process who it believes may have information potentially relevant to the appeal.  Moreover, the affected faculty member and the Vice President for Academic Affairs have the right to make a statement (either oral or written, or both) to the Committee.  Similarly, the Chair of the Committee on Faculty Status and the President may choose to explain their respective findings in person before the Evaluation Review and Appeals Committee.  All such testimony, whether written or oral, shall be documented and included in the faculty member’s permanent evaluative file.
+
+													In all cases which it reviews, the Committee’s task is to determine whether the grounds for appeal have been established by the faculty member based on the greater weight of the evidence.
+
+													When the faculty member’s appeal is based on an allegation of material procedural irregularity or inadequate consideration on the part of the Committee on Faculty Status, the Evaluation Review and Appeals Committee’s initial presumption shall be that the decision of the Committee on Faculty Status is reasonable, and is therefore to be left standing.  Thus, the Evaluation Review and Appeals Committee shall find in favor of the decision of the Committee on Faculty Status unless it is persuaded that the decision cannot be reasonably defended on procedural and/or substantive grounds.
+
+													Following its deliberations, the Evaluation Review and Appeals Committee will prepare a written report for the President, with copies to the faculty member, Committee on Faculty Status, and the Dean within 30 days of receiving the faculty member’s written appeal.  The report will include findings of fact and conclusions with respect to the grounds alleged on appeal and, where appropriate, will make recommendations for corrective action.  The finding of the Evaluation Review and Appeals Committee, together with any accompanying evidence or explanation, shall become a part of the faculty member’s permanent evaluative file.  
+
+													The faculty member will have the opportunity to respond to the Committee’s review within fifteen calendar days.  Evidence of the faculty member’s opportunity to review the Committee’s finding, together with any written comment the faculty member might choose to append, shall be attached to the finding and be included in the faculty member’s permanent evaluative file.
+
+													If the Committee determines that the faculty member has established by the greater weight of the evidence that the appeal has merit and should be remanded, the Chair of the Committee will submit (1) the faculty member’s written appeal, (2) the evaluative file, and (2) the written report outlining the basis for the Committee’s decision and recommendations for corrective action, to the lowest level at which the procedural error was made or at which there was inadequate consideration of evidence.  At that level and each subsequent level, the case shall be evaluated by the designated body as they are constituted at the time of the remand, and by the individuals holding the relevant administrative positions at the time of the remand.  At each level, a recommendation will be completed within fourteen calendar days and forwarded to the next level.  No case may be remanded more than once, and the remand must consider the decision of the Evaluation Review and Appeals Committee.
+
+The President of the College is delegated by the Board of Trustees, which bears the ultimate responsibility for the actions of the College, to exercise the final administrative responsibility for all decisions affecting faculty status.  Accordingly, on remand back to the President, the President’s decision shall be final and stated in a letter to the faculty member, with copies to the Committee on Faculty Status, the Evaluation Review and Appeals Committee and the faculty member’s permanent file.  If the President’s final decision is against the Committee on Faculty Status’ recommendation, the President’s reasons will be stated in the letter.
+
+All matters of interpretation of this appeals procedure shall be resolved on behalf of the Faculty by the Executive Committee of the Faculty
+
+
+
+If one or more members of the committee believe that a grievable issue may exist, the chair of the committee shall arrange steps for a formal hearing before the committee.
+
+The burden of proof shall, based on the preponderance of the evidence, rest with the complainant, i.e., the responsibility for affirmatively establishing disputed facts bearing on issue
+
+
+
+
+
+							The focus of the Appeal Panel is to determine whether the grounds for appeal have been established by the faculty member based on the preponderance of the evidence.
+
+							The Appeal Panel will have investigative powers and may interview persons in the evaluation process who it believes may have information potentially relevant to the appeal.  Moreover, the affected faculty member and a representative from the administration have the right to make a statement (either oral or written, or both) to the panel.  Similarly, the Chair of the University Promotion and Tenure Committee and the VPAA may choose to explain their respective findings in person before the panel.  All such testimony, whether written or oral, shall be documented and included in the faculty member’s personnel file.
+
+							Within 30 calendar days of receiving the appeal, the panel will issue a report addressed to the candidate, the Provost and the President.  The committee’s report will include findings of fact and conclusions with respect to the grounds alleged on appeal and, where appropriate, will make recommendations for corrective action.
+
+							If no infractions of process are discerned, the original decision stands.  
+
+							If infractions are discovered, the committee’s report will include recommendations for resolution to the President.
+
+							The President’s decision as to whether to sustain or deny the appeal based on the panel’s recommendations will be final.  The President may not grant promotion or tenure as an outcome of the appeal process.  If the appeal is sustained, the VPAA will remand the case to where the error occurred for further evaluation under the established promotion and tenure evaluation process.  This review will take place during the first semester of the following academic year.  The VPAA’s decision and rationale will be transmitted in writing to the candidate, the Appeals Panel, and the President within 7 calendar days of receiving the committee’s findings and recommendations.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Within two (2) working days of receiving the appeal petition, the Chair of the Appeals Board provides a copy of the petition to the Provost and notifies the other members of the Appeals Board. The Chair also notifies the President and Chair of the Assembly that an appeal has been filed and by whom. At that time, the Office of Academic Affairs will provide the Appeals Board copies of the following documents: the Faculty Review Committee’s recommendation to the Dean, the Dean’s recommendation to the Provost, the Provost’s letter to the candidate (appellant). The Appeals Board also will have access to the review dossier to clarify issues of fact, if necessary. 
+
+Any member of the Appeals Board who has a conflict of interest or bias with regard to an appeal or has substantial prior involvement in the current review (e.g., has contributed a letter of evaluation) must self-recuse from the consideration of that appeal. 
+
+Within seven (7) working days of receiving an appeal, a quorum of the Appeals Board meets to determine by a majority of those present and voting whether the facts alleged in the petition establish a prima facie case in terms of the grounds for appeal specified above. 
+
+If the Appeals Board finds that the appeal petition does not establish a prima facie case that appealable error occurred in the review, then the Chair of the Appeals Board will report this finding in writing to the President and the Chair of the Assembly, and the appeal is closed. The President then notifies the appellant and the Provost, reviews the Provost’s original recommendation, along with the reports of the Faculty Review Committee and the Dean, and refers the Administration’s decision to the Board as indicated in §3.10.9. 
+
+If the Appeals Board finds that the appeal petition does establish a prima facie case that appealable error occurred in the review, the Chair of the Appeals Board will so notify the President, the Chair of the Assembly, the appellant, and the Provost. Within five (5) working days of receiving notice of the Appeals Board’s decision, the Provost will provide to the Appeals Board a written response to the appellant’s petition, a list of three (3) members of the tenured faculty or senior regular term faculty who meet the criteria specified below (§3.10.10.5) and are acceptable to the Provost as members of the Appeal Committee and a list of proposed witnesses. The Chair of the Appeals Board forwards a copy of the Provost’s written response to the appellant. 
+
+3.10.10.5 The Appeal Committee 
+
+Formation of the Appeal Committee 
+
+After receiving the above-indicated materials from the Provost, the Appeals Board will meet to name a three-person Appeal Committee—a Chair selected from among the members of the Appeals Board and two at-large members. One of the at-large members will be selected from the list of three eligible faculty members provided by the appellant; the other will be selected from the list of three eligible faculty members provided by the Provost. 
+
+Eligibility for service on an Appeal Committee - prohibition of conflict of interest or bias 
+
+The Appeals Board will disqualify from the Appeal Committee any faculty member who has a conflict of interest or bias (§3.10.6) with regard to an appeal or has substantial prior involvement in the current review (e.g., has contributed a letter of evaluation). Any person selected to serve on an Appeal Committee must disclose to the Chair of the Appeals Board any prior involvement in the review or other potential conflict of interest or bias. If suitable at-large faculty members cannot be selected from the lists provided by the appellant and Provost, then the Appeals Board will select at-large members from among the tenured faculty as they deem appropriate. 
+
+The Charge to the Appeal Committee 
+
+The members of the Appeal Committee will not act as advocates for either party to the appeal but rather, to the best of their abilities, will conduct an impartial investigation into the allegations contained in the appeal petition in light of the review procedures specified in this Handbook. The Appeal Committee will not be bound by strict rules of legal evidence and may consider any information that is of probative value in evaluating the merits of the appeal. 
+
+In making its decision, the Appeal Committee may not substitute its own judgment for that of the Faculty Review Committee, the Dean, or the Provost on the merits of whether the appellant should be reappointed, given tenure, promoted, or receive a positive senior review. Rather, the Appeal Committee must presume that the persons responsible for the original decision were in the best position to make it and therefore must give that decision the benefit of every reasonable inference. 
+
+Therefore, the Appeal Committee will uphold the appeal only if it concludes that 
+
+a) the negative decision resulted from prejudicial error in the form of procedural error, violation of University policy, or violation of contract, or 
+
+b) the negative decision resulted from inadequate consideration, as specified in §3.10.10.3. Otherwise, the Appeal Committee will deny the appeal. 
+
+3.10.10.7 The Appeal Hearing 
+
+The Appeal Committee will meet and set a date so that the hearing will begin within five (5) working days from the formation of the Appeal Committee unless a principal to the case is unavailable for sound reasons, in which case the hearing may be postponed for a period not to exceed twenty (20) working days. 
+
+The Appeal Committee will review the appeal petition, the response from the Provost, the Faculty Review Committee’s recommendation to the Dean, the Dean’s recommendation to the Provost, the Provost’s letter to the candidate (appellant), the report (if any) of the EEO Manager, and the lists of proposed witnesses provided by the appellant and the Provost. The Appeal Committee will have access to the review dossier and to other documents as it deems necessary. 
+
+The appellant and the Provost are entitled to appear in person before the Appeal Committee. The Appeal Committee may call other witnesses at its discretion. Both principals and witnesses must appear at the hearing if called by the Appeal Committee. 
+
+The appellant may be accompanied to the hearing by an advisor who is an employee of the University. The advisor may be present only when the appellant is present, may speak only with the appellant, and may not address the Appeal Committee on the appellant’s behalf. The advisor may not be called as a witness in the appeal but may answer direct questions from the Appeal Committee. Should an advisor violate or attempt to violate any of these conditions, the Appeal Committee may excuse the advisor from the hearing at its discretion. 
+
+The members of the Appeal Committee are bound by the same rules of confidentiality that apply throughout the faculty review process (§3.10.6, above). The hearing will be conducted in strictest confidence, and no party to the appeal may disclose any information regarding the hearing unless such disclosure is specified in these procedures or in the final decision. No party to the appeal may be present when any other party or witness is appearing before the Appeal Committee. No member of the Appeal Committee may unilaterally seek or accept information regarding the appeal; only the Chair of the Appeal Committee may confer individually with a party or witness to the appeal. 
+
+3 . 1 0 . 1 0 . 8 The Appeal Committee’s Recommendation; the President’s Decision 
+
+At the conclusion of the hearing and by majority vote, the Committee will determine its findings of fact and recommendations in accordance with its charge. If the Committee upholds the appeal, it may recommend a rehearing of the review or a reversal of the original decision. 
+
+The Chair of the Appeal Committee will provide to the President a written report of the Committee’s findings and recommendations, as well as the reasons justifying those findings and recommendations. All members of the Appeal Committee will sign the report. 
+
+Within ten (10) working days of receiving the Appeal Committee’s report, the President will decide upon appropriate action and will provide a written report of his or her decision to the appellant, the Provost, the Dean of record, the Chair of the Appeals Board, and the Chair of the Faculty Review Committee. The decision of the President may not be appealed.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Appendix 3.6.txt [/INST] Evaluation of Provost
+
+
+
+As part of the annual evaluation process of the University Provost, the following university leaders will complete an evaluation of the Provost:
+
+College of Arts and Sciences, Elliott School of Nursing, Patton College of Education, and Coleman College of Business.
+
+
+
+Please submit the evaluation to the President no later than December 1.
+
+
+
+Evaluator Name:					Date:
+
+
+
+Evaluator Title:					Office/Division:
+
+______________________________________________________________________
+
+
+
+Employee Name:                  	                  	Date:            	        	        	
+
+ 
+
+Position Title: Provost                                       	Office/Division: Office of the Provost     	        	        
+
+
+
+
+
+Describe areas of accomplishment you have experienced and observed by the Provost.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+How can the Provost better meet the needs at the University of Pikeville? Describe areas of growth and opportunity.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+What specific areas of the university can the Provost spend additional time and effort during the next academic year? Describe the needs and how this would benefit the mission of University of Pikeville.
+
+
+
+
+
+Please evaluate the Provost on the following characteristics.
+
+
+
+ 
+
+(4) Outstanding
+
+(3)
+
+Very Competent or High Level
+
+(2)
+
+Satisfactory
+
+(1)
+
+Inexperienced or Improvement Needed
+
+Moral Character (truthful, honest, sincere, integrity)
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+Stewardship
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+Humility as a Leader
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+Listening
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Collaboration and Teamwork
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+
+
+Professionalism (punctuality, attendance, conduct, responsiveness, and follow through)
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+Communication (verbal and written)
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+Innovation or Creativity
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+Time Management and Organization Skills
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+Interpersonal Skills (positive attitude, ability to collaborate with co-workers)
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+Budget Management
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+Quality of Work (comprehensive, accurate, timely, etc.)
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+Support of co-curricular activities at UPIKE (athletics, theatre productions, WuW, etc.)
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+Collaboration and Professional Relationship with Supervisor
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+Collaboration and Professional Relationship with Colleagues and Peers
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+For any items noted a 2 (Satisfactory) or 1 (Inexperienced or Improvement Needed), please provide additional comments and feedback.
+
+
+
+
+
+How has the Provost promoted student success and student engagement within their capacity as a leader?
+
+
+
+
+
+How has the Provost promoted faculty success and faculty engagement within their capacity as a leader?
+
+
+
+
+
+Any additional comments would be appreciated.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Appt Types Draft.txt [/INST] Faculty Classifications
+
+
+
+Full-Time Teaching Faculty
+
+The Full-time Teaching Faculty at Ohio Wesleyan University is comprised of those individuals appointed to either a Tenure-Line or Term (Non-Tenure Track) position in one of the University’s academic departments or programmatic areas.  Members of the full-time teaching faculty have teaching, scholarship or creative work, and service responsibilities equal to a full-time teaching load as defined in Section - .  Positions are classified as Tenure Line or Term by the President in consultation with established faculty governance processes (See Handbook, Section IV).
+
+	Tenure-Line Faculty
+
+Tenure-Line faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who either hold a tenure-track or tenured appointment and are appointed to the rank of Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor or Professor.
+
+Tenure Track Faculty
+
+Tenure-track faculty members hold regular appointments, which include a University commitment for a probationary period of service leading to permanent tenure on the teaching faculty unless the appointment is terminated by the appointee or by action of the University as hereinafter provided. At the time of initial appointment to Ohio Wesleyan University, tenure track faculty members are issued an initial contract that is subject to renewal after two years of service.  Subsequent contracts are issued annually.  Reappointments are preceded by an evaluation by the Faculty Personnel Committee and Provost.  
+
+Tenured Faculty
+
+Tenured faculty hold tenured appointments at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.  A tenure appointment, once conferred by the Board of Trustees, is subject only to modifications pertaining to rank, salary, and academic assignments in accordance with the provisions of this Faculty Handbook.  A Full-time faculty member with a tenure appointment has the right to continuous appointments until death, resignation, retirement, failure to accept a written assignment of appropriate duties for the ensuing academic year within sixty days following receipt of such assignment, or discontinuance of the individual's teaching position.
+
+Non-Tenure Track Term Faculty
+
+Non-tenure track term faculty hold full-time temporary appointments approved for a specifically limited time, normally one to three years, and are appointed to the academic title of Visiting Faculty or Faculty-in-Residence.  Individuals appointed to a non-tenure track term position are not eligible for tenure, promotion, or sabbatical; however, they otherwise enjoy the same rights and responsibilities as their Tenure-Line colleagues.
+
+Non-tenure track term appointments are renewable only to the expiration date of the position approval and in no case are renewable as a temporary appointment beyond the individual's seventh year of full-time faculty service at the University.  Renewal of appointment is preceded by an evaluation by the Faculty Personnel Committee and Provost.  If the appointment is not renewed prior to expiration date of the position approval, the University will provide notice as specified in Section --.
+
+Visiting Faculty
+
+The title of Visiting Faculty is accorded to a term faculty member appointed on a temporary basis to fill a need for a short-term full-time teaching position, serve as a leave replacement, or teach courses when time has not permitted a full search to conducted or the search has not yielded a suitably regular tenure-trach appointee. 
+
+The University reserves the right to make temporary appointments as Visiting Instructor, Visiting Assistant Professor, Visiting Associate Professor, or Visiting Professor in accordance with qualifications and ranks earned through review at a comparable regionally accredited four- year college or university.
+
+Faculty-in-Residence
+
+The title of Faculty-in-Residence is accorded to a term faculty member appointed on a temporary basis to teach courses within an area of special expertise or training.  This designation is reserved for individuals whose research, publication, or other accomplishments are recognized as authoritative in such areas as the arts, industry, politics, or other domains outside the academic profession. Examples of Faculty-in-Residence include, but are not limited to, Scholar-in-Residence, Writer-in-Residence, Artist-in-Residence, and Pastor-in-Residence.
+
+
+
+Continuation of Faculty in Term Positions
+
+Seen in the light of the University's general responsibility to hire and keep the best Faculty available, the following policy shall apply:
+
+If a person appointed to a full-time non-tenure track term position wishes to be appointed to a vacant regular tenure track position, the individual must apply as a candidate and compete in a search for the best qualified person to fill the position. This policy will apply when the vacant position is the result of ""converting"" the term position presently occupied by the individual into a regular tenure track position, as well as when it is a new tenure track position or one created by retirement, resignation, or dismissal for adequate cause.
+
+The Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee and the department concerned, may in special cases approve exceptions to the above policy such that a non-tenure track term faculty member may be simply appointed to the tenure track position without competing in a search. Such exceptions will be considered only after the tenure track vacancy has been approved, and will require convincing evidence that the individual in all likelihood is the best available person for the position. The thoroughness of the search which resulted in hiring the individual, including its adequacy in reaching a diverse and inclusive pool of candidates minorities and women, will be a consideration.  If awarded a tenure-track appointment, the individual's maximum probationary period will be stated in the initial contract of employment. 
+
+This policy will not necessarily apply when a term position is reestablished as a ""new"" term position. In such cases the occupant of the position may, by simple renewal of appointment, be appointed.
+
+Rationale: Some faculty members are appointed to positions which are scheduled to terminate at a definite time. It is reasonable to assume that such an appointment, being by definition temporary, is less desirable from the faculty member's point of view than is a regular appointment. It follows that on the average the pool of applicants will be smaller for such positions and that some potential candidates who are of such quality as to be able to secure regular positions elsewhere will not be in the pool.
+
+
+
+Part-Time Faculty
+
+Part-time faculty members are appointed on a part-time term contractual basis, teaching less than a normal full-time faculty teaching load over the course of an academic year as determined by the Provost, and having total responsibilities that are partial rather than full.  They are appointed to the rank of Part-time Instructor, Lecturer, or Senior Lecturer.
+
+Part-time appointments are subject to the approval of the department and the Provost. Before any part-time faculty may be appointed to teach, the department(s) or program(s) seeking faculty for part-time teaching must have submitted to the Provost and received approval of a statement of need for part-time support for the semester or term the appointment would cover. 
+
+Part-time faculty members are not tenurable and they are not eligible for sabbatical.  When eligibility requirements are met, they may be promoted to the ranks of Lecturer and Senior Lecturer as specified in Chapter IV.  All initial part-time appointments are made to Part-Time Instructorships.  See Chapter IV for additional information regarding the terms, rights, and responsibilities applicable to part-time faculty.
+
+Appointment to a part-time position does not confer membership in the Faculty as defined in the Faculty Bylaws.  Accordingly, part-time faculty are not voting members of the Faculty.  They are, however, invited to attend the Faculty and department meetings, with voice, but not vote. In addition, part-time faculty do not participate in the Faculty or University standing committee structure.
+
+Part-time Instructor
+
+The title of Part-time Instructor is accorded to a person who teaches courses limited to a specific area of expertise.  To be appointed as an instructor, an individual must hold a minimum of the master's degree in the discipline that they will be teaching, or a master’s in another related discipline, with at least 18 semester hours of graduate work in the discipline that they will be teaching; in special cases the Provost may grant an exception to this degree requirement based on “tested experience” (see Faculty Qualifications).
+
+Lecturer 
+
+The title of Lecturer is accorded to a person who has served effectively as a Part-Time Instructor at the University for a period of six years and completed a minimum of twelve regular units of teaching.
+
+Senior Lecturer
+
+The title of Senior Lecturer is accorded to a person who has served effectively as a Lecturer at the University for a period of six years and completed a minimum of twelve regular units of teaching since their last promotion.
+
+
+
+Administrators with Faculty Status
+
+Pursuant to Article I, Section 1 of the Faculty Bylaws, the following administrators are members of the Faculty: 
+
+President 
+
+Provost 
+
+Vice Presidents
+
+Chaplain
+
+The above individuals are considered administrators for employment purposes, under terms and conditions of employment as stated in the University’s staff personnel policies.  However, they have the privilege of vote at meetings of the Faculty in accordance with Article I, Section 1 of the Faculty Bylaws.  
+
+Librarians
+
+The policies and provisions described in the paragraphs with respect to a member of the teaching faculty shall apply to a faculty member engaged in fulltime professional service on the staff of the University Library, professional library service being substituted for teaching services wherever mentioned. 
+
+University librarians are members of the University’s professional staff and are guided by those policies applicable to staff as set forth in the Staff Employee Handbook.  However, given the close involvement of librarians in support of the faculty's teaching and the student's learning, professional librarians at the University are afforded voting privileges at Faculty meetings and are eligible for election to Faculty standing committees. In addition, librarians may use the appropriate appeal process in the Faculty Handbook for cases involving alleged violations of their academic freedom.  See the Policy Statement on Appointment of Librarians in the Appendix.
+
+
+
+Adjunct Faculty
+
+The main duties of an Adjunct Professor are to give advice to students who have professional goals in or related to the expertise of the Adjunct Professor and to serve as a resource person with whom both staff and students can consult. Adjunct Professors are permitted to supervise departmental honors programs and independent study projects and to serve in the apprenticeship program.
+
+Selection, Appointment, and Review
+
+Departments may make application on behalf of the person they wish to recruit. The application is to include the regular Ohio Wesleyan University application form, a vita, and a supporting document from the department. The application is to be presented for approval to the Provost and to the Faculty Personnel Committee. All Adjunct Professorships shall be reviewed by the Faculty Personnel Committee every three years.
+
+Compensation
+
+Normally, Adjunct Professors will serve without remuneration. However, if lectures or courses are given by the Adjunct Professor, separate honoraria or part-time contracts can be arranged as they exist for visiting and part-time personnel from outside the University. Fringe benefits are not included in such arrangements.
+
+Privileges
+
+Adjunct Professors are listed in the University catalog and directory, are placed on faculty mailing lists, and are admitted to general university activities during their period of appointment. Adjunct Professors can be admitted to may attend faculty and committee meetings and to appropriate committees by invitation.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Honorific Faculty
+
+Professor Emeritus/a
+
+The special status of Professor Emeritus/a is awarded by the Board of Trustees to those persons who meet the following qualifications: 
+
+		Have completed at least ten (10) academic years of ranked faculty service to Ohio Wesleyan and held the rank of Associate Professor or Professor at retirement (in exceptional circumstances, documented by the appropriate Department Chair Provost, candidates may be advanced who do not meet these qualifications); 
+
+		Have fulfilled the responsibilities of a faculty member with consistency and effectiveness; 
+
+		Have received a positive recommendation for such appointment from the appropriate department, the Faculty Personnel Committee, the Provost, and the University President. 
+
+Professor Emeritus/a are not considered employees of the University and therefore are not entitled to fringe benefits.  As members of the broader University community, Professor Emeritus/a are welcome to advise the community in all University assemblies, colloquia, and other academic events.  However, they are not afforded voting privileges in faculty governance.
+
+Professor Emeritus/a faculty are entitled to the following recognitions and privileges:
+
+Listing in the Catalog and other University publications and directories that collectively list the Faculty,
+
+The right to participate in formal and informal academic events and other University events and social functions with other faculty colleagues,
+
+Use of the University Library with faculty privileges.
+
+Use of office space and/or laboratories if recommended by the Department Chair and approved by the Provost.
+
+Use of University identification card and parking permit, and
+
+Attendance at University events and use of services under the same conditions and at the same cost as other regular appointment faculty.
+
+Revocation of Status
+
+Once awarded, Professor Emeritus/a status continues in perpetuity unless the recipient either requests to have status rescinded or violates the intent and spirit of emeritus/a status by engaging in serious dishonorable conduct in violation of law, rule, or policy and/or causes harm to the University’s reputation. 
+
+To revoke Professor Emeritus/a status without the consent of the individual, a petition must be made by a member of the University community to the President, and subsequently to the Board of Trustees, which has the final authority to revoke the individual’s Professor Emeritus/a status.  Actions or conduct protected by academic freedom and unlawful discrimination shall not be used to revoke such status.
+
+
+
+Endowed or Named Chairs
+
+The University reserves the right to make faculty appointments that carry the additional title of endowed or named chair. The holder of an endowed or named chair must satisfy the conditions associated with the chair. 
+
+Appointments to endowed chairs are made by the President with the advice of the Provost and Faculty Personnel Committee and expire at the conclusion of the specified term. 
+
+The terms of the appointment to an endowed or named chair will be specified in the chair holder’s letter of initial appointment to the chair.  A tenure track or tenured faculty member currently employed by the University retains rank and tenure upon appointment to the chaired position.
+
+
+
+Types of Faculty Contracts
+
+The following types of contracts are issued to individuals granted faculty status at Ohio Wesleyan University:
+
+Tenure-Track Contracts, Regular Appointments
+
+Tenure-Line faculty members eligible for tenure receive tenure-track contracts and hold a regular appointment until they either receive tenure or separate from the University.  A probationary appointment is made with the understanding that both the University and the faculty member will engage in a period of mutual evaluation—the probationary period—leading to the tenure decision.
+
+A tenure-track appointment is normally renewable up to a total of seven (7) years—i.e., a maximum of six (6) years prior to and including the year of the tenure decision, plus one (1) additional terminal year in the case of a negative tenure decision.  A tenure-track faculty member’s time to the tenure decision will be stated in the initial letter of appointment.  
+
+Faculty members holding tenure-track contracts undergo reappointment review as specified in Section --.  A faculty member undergoing an unsuccessful tenure review will receive notice and will be allowed to complete the final year of the probationary appointment pursuant to a Terminal contract.
+
+
+
+Tenured Contracts
+
+Tenure contracts are awarded to full-time tenure track faculty who have attained tenured status (see Section -).  The granting of tenure can only be effected by the procedures specified in the University’s Tenure Policy (see Section ) and upon the affirmative vote of the Board of Trustees.  
+
+A tenure contract is subject only to annual modifications pertaining to academic rank, salary, and academic and/or administrative assignments in accordance with the provisions of this Faculty Handbook.  
+
+Full-Time Term Contracts
+
+Full-time term contracts are offered to faculty members holding temporary appointments in a Non-Tenure Track Term position and are limited to the term of employment outlined in the contract.  Term appointments do not confer upon the faculty member an expectation of tenure or a right of continuing employment beyond the expiration date of the position approval.  
+
+A term contract may also be issued to a faculty member holding a tenure track position where the appointee serves as a leave replacement, or when time has not permitted a full search to be conducted or the search has not yielded a suitable regular appointee. In latter kinds of cases, a new search will be conducted the next year, in which search the temporary appointee may compete.
+
+Part-Time Term Contracts
+
+Part-time term contracts are issued to part-time faculty for a designated period or course and automatically expires at the end of that period. Reemployment of the faculty member after expiration of the contract is solely within the discretion of the University. 
+
+Terminal Contracts
+
+A terminal contract is a final annual term contract issued to a full-time faculty member following notice of non-renewal of appointment or denial of tenure.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] ART Feedback.txt [/INST] Hi Veronica,
+
+ 
+
+I wanted to pass these on to you as head of the ART task force. There are other things that came up over my time with/as Jr. Faculty but here are the big concerns I wanted to make sure were passed on. Please feel free to reach out if you have any questions about anything.
+
+ 
+
+Thanks,
+
+XXX
+
+ 
+
+ART thoughts/ concerns that were shared with me 
+
+ 
+
+The ART guidelines are very open, the same documents can be submitted in different years and could have different outcomes. This is not a committee where the outcomes should base on feelings or emotions, and definitely not on who is a member of the committee. (I’m not sure how true this is but it feels like this is true). 
+
+ 
+
+The department and the chair have a major impact on how someone moves through the process. If the chair is good as shepherding someone through and they are supportive it’s great, if not, (chairs do not seeing teaching, chairs or departments not “liking” the person, learning things from other Jr. Fac in the class who hear things from their chairs so people feel left out or abandon) it can be a very different process. The junior faculty need a system of support that is separate from the department, as the process of tenure should also be separate from the department. This is not to say that the department should not have input, but it should not be the deciding or a heavily weighing factor. – (In reality I don't know how much it is, but people feel this)
+
+ 
+
+The deans have impact on the process in a major (?) way. Different deans have different levels of knowledge and understanding about what the candidates know/do. Some deans are very supportive, some are just regurgitating what the chair/dossier said, some don’t really know their Jr. faculty. There can also be a problem when the dean wants someone to focus on something that is not really valued by ART. An example, someone was told to teach first year experience, this person was active in the school, but the dean told them that teaching FYE was helpful and they should do it. When the person didn’t do it, the dean chose to write about this in their letter to ART, even though teaching FYE is not something that ART told the individual to do. The disconcert with a dean was also shared by another person who was told their research was not appropriate, by the Dean but not by ART. When the dean is the person you see more often than “ART” this could lead individuals off the path that ART told them to follow in year 2 or 4. At Cal Lutheran it takes a village to get through tenure and when people are actively working against you that takes so much additional bandwidth and labor that there need to be paths to tell ART about this without Deans and departments knowing, which can lead to blowback, sanctions, and additional problems.
+
+ 
+
+CLU claims to be a teaching institution and yet we have no official weights or percentages for what aspects of the dossier are worth what (example teaching 50%, service 20%, scholarship 30%). It was expressed to me that these numbers vary as people move through the process at other institutions depending on the year and their negotiated contract.  We also do not have a solid program of continuing review and feedback around teaching. An example of this would be two people come in and observe the same classroom day of a first year teacher in first semester. That feedback and a conversation around what could be done better is then shared with the candidate and a plan for improvement implemented. Second semester people come in and observe class also, a conversation is also had documentation of all of these things creates a substantial record of teaching expectations and plan. The candidate would also have the option, if one of the class days was truly horrible, a student went off the rails, the teacher had a migraine, anyone of a number of extenuating circumstances occurred - to request a different observation day. By having two separate observers in the same classroom, on the same day, it helps eliminate bias and give a more holistic view of the events. This would also set up teachers to learn grow and change instead of feeling that the ART process was to eliminate them and judge them.</s>"
+<s>[INST] ART Task Force Memo (Final).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] ART Task Force Memo Draft 1.txt [/INST] ART Task Force
+
+
+
+Memorandum
+
+To: FSEC & FAC Members
+
+From: ART Task Force
+
+Introduction
+
+During the recent faculty forums, several colleagues raised concerns regarding the campus citizenship clause and introduction of a formal professional development plan process to the Post-Tenure/Post Six-Year Review Policy.  Below, we outline why both clauses were initially recommended, how they align with best practices and AAUP guidance, and the reasoning why we believe both should be adopted by our colleagues.
+
+
+
+Campus Citizenship 
+
+Why the Clause was Initially Developed
+
+During the interview stage of the Task Force’s process, faculty members were asked to provide commentary on what is and what is not working well with the University’s present faculty evaluation system.  In response to the question, a few attendees in the chairs, deans, and former ART committee sessions expressed interest in whether the University should formally evaluate collegiality.  Based in part upon this request, the Task Force reviewed the Faculty Handbooks of our peer institutions to gain a deeper understanding of their faculty evaluation practices.  This analysis revealed that several peer institutions affirmatively consider campus citizenship or collegiality as part of their promotion and tenure evaluation process.  
+
+
+
+Table: Peer Campus Collegiality/Campus Citizenship Clauses
+
+
+
+Campus Citizenship or Collegiality Clause
+
+Separate Criterion or Considered as Part of Teaching, Scholarship & Service Categories 
+
+University of Redlands
+
+Section 3.5 states in part, “no set of rules or code of conduct can either guarantee or take the place of the personal and professional integrity of faculty members and administrators as members of the professoriate, participants in extended disciplinary communities, citizens of the University, and individual moral agents. Therefore, in addition to being familiar with and abiding by the University’s policies and procedures, faculty members are expected to be cognizant of and regulate their behavior according to the prevailing professional and ethical standards of their disciplines and the teaching profession as a whole.” 
+
+For promotion & tenure, candidates are expected to “exhibit conduct in accordance with professional standards as defined in Section 3.5.”
+
+
+
+University of the Pacific
+
+Yes – “Consideration of citizenship in the University is part of the established evaluation areas of teaching, scholarship or artistic performance, and service and is not to be evaluated as a separate area. Responsible citizenship consists of attitudes and actions which show respect for one's faculty and staff colleagues as well as students and which help other faculty and staff members so that as a learning community we further Pacific goals of excellent teaching and advising for students, rigorous scholarship, and productive service. Faculty should acknowledge that a deficiency in or complete lack of citizenship can directly and negatively impact their performance in teaching, scholarship or artistic performance, and service.”
+
+Part of the established evaluation areas
+
+St. Edwards University
+
+Yes; collegial relations are considered as an element of service.
+
+“At St. Edward's University the faculty is expected to render service. This may include service within and/or outside of the university community. Both of these categories are evaluated according to two criteria. The first criterion considers what service is rendered, i.e., responsibility, while the second considers the spirit in which it is rendered, i.e., collegial relations. Both are considered important aspects of service and must be included as part of the evaluation” 
+
+Considered as part of the service category.  
+
+
+
+Pacific Lutheran University
+
+No
+
+N/A
+
+Valparaiso University
+
+Yes
+
+“VU values and expects a “collegial relationship among its faculty.” This includes civility in discourse and a willingness to “carry one’s share of the load” in teaching, advising, research, committee work, and other forms of university service. The focus is on quality of contributions…”
+
+Separate Criterion
+
+Chapman University
+
+No
+
+N/A
+
+Santa Clara University
+
+Yes
+
+Collegiality is not a distinct capacity to be assessed independently of the traditional triumvirate of scholarship, teaching, and service. It is rather a quality whose value is expressed in the successful execution of these three functions. Collegiality means that faculty members cooperate with one another in sharing the common burdens related to discharging their responsibilities of teaching, scholarship or creative work, and service, and do so in a conscientious and professional manner. Collegiality is not the same as conformity or intellectual agreement and may not be interpreted in a way that violates the principles of academic freedom. In those rare instances in which lack of collegiality becomes an issue in the evaluation of faculty for promotion and tenure, it may be considered only insofar as it has a negative effect on the functioning of the department, college or school, or University.”
+
+Part of the established evaluation areas
+
+Loyola Marymount
+
+Yes.  
+
+“Collegiality is an individual responsibility of every faculty member at Loyola Marymount University. All faculty are expected to adhere to the tenets given in the AAUP Statement on Professional Ethics, specifically in regard to collegiality.”
+
+Listed as a Faculty Responsibility.  
+
+
+
+As part of P&T process, the chairs and deans respectively assess the candidate’s “contribution to the effective operation of the [Department/College/School/University] responsibilities, including overall performance in contributing to a quality working environment”… 
+
+
+
+
+
+Based on the interview results and analysis of the promotion and tenure evaluation standards in place at several of our peer institutions, the Task Force issued the following draft recommendation to the faculty:
+
+Recommendation #8: Develop a new “collegiality” or “campus citizenship” evaluation category, which is consistent with the University’s values.
+
+Supporting details: The text should emphasize that the evaluator’s focus with respect to this evaluation category solely relates to collaboration and constructive cooperation associated with a faculty member’s overall performance. The text should also note that an assessment of collegiality must not be confused with conformity, sociability, or likability and may not be interpreted in a way that violates the principles of academic freedom.
+
+The above recommendation was discussed during the faculty forums held in late October.  As there was not significant opposition to the recommendation expressed during the forums, the Task Force kept the recommendation in place and proceeded with developing a corresponding policy for the faculty’s consideration.  
+
+Overview of Campus Citizenship Clause
+
+The final version of the Campus Citizenship clause, which has undergone several iterations based on feedback received from the Deans, Chairs, FSEC, FAC, and faculty who attended the April faculty forums, is reprinted below:
+
+Teaching, scholarship, and service constitute the three major criteria for promotion and tenure, but those categories are affected by a faculty member’s interaction with colleagues, staff, administrators, and students.  Campus citizenship, therefore, is not a distinct capacity to be assessed independently, but rather it should be understood as a part of the established evaluation areas of teaching, scholarly/creative productivity, and service.  As a hallmark of professional ethics (see Code of Professional Ethics Policy above [LINK TO POLICY), faculty members are expected to work cooperatively and constructively with their colleagues and to treat staff members, administrators, and students with respect.  Tolerance for differing points of view and the capacity to give civil expression to one′s own position are highly prized.
+
+The University affirms that campus citizenship does not preclude vigorous debate, dissent, or protest in academic and/or intellectual matters and in issues concerning the governance of the institution—these are all vital components of a healthy intellectual environment.  No parties to the tenure and promotion process (colleagues, immediate administrative supervisors, the ART Committee, the Provost, President, or the Board of Trustees) shall appeal to campus citizenship as a reason not to support a candidate because the candidate has academic views or has spoken critically about instructional matters in line with their rights and responsibilities as a faculty member.
+
+In developing the clause, the Task Force sought to align with the AAUP “Statement on Collegiality as a Criterion for Faculty Evaluation,” which reads in part:
+
+Few, if any, responsible faculty members would deny that collegiality, in the sense of collaboration and constructive cooperation, identifies important aspects of a faculty member’s overall performance. A faculty member may legitimately be called upon to participate in the development of curricula and standards for the evaluation of teaching, as well as in peer review of the teaching of colleagues. Much research, depending on the nature of the particular discipline, is by its nature collaborative and requires teamwork as well as the ability to engage in independent investigation. And committee service of a more general description, relating to the life of the institution as a whole, is a logical outgrowth of the Association’s view that a faculty member is an “officer” of the college or university in which he or she fulfills professional duties.
+
+Understood in this way, collegiality is not a distinct capacity to be assessed independently of the traditional triumvirate of teaching, scholarship, and service. Evaluation in these three areas will encompass the contributions that the virtue of collegiality may pertinently add to a faculty member’s career….
+
+Based on this guidance, the clause does not include campus citizenship as a separate, fourth category of evaluation; rather, it embeds considerations of campus citizenship within the three evaluation categories of teaching, scholarly and creative productivity, and service.  Thus, for example, a candidate’s lack of campus citizenship may be addressed in the teaching effectiveness category when it impinges on the faculty member’s ability to work with colleagues in mentoring students or in preparing them for prerequisites for more advanced courses, or in preparing them for group activities required of the academic discipline; or in scholarly or creative productivity when it impinges on the candidate’s ability to work collaboratively or respectively with colleagues in developing research grant proposals or organizing conferences; or in service when it prevents committees or programs from functioning as they should
+
+In addition, the clause aligns with University’s current Code of Professional Ethics Policy in defining campus citizenship, which includes taking on one’s fair and collaborative role in the work of the University, taking part in shared governance, supporting the academic freedom of one’s peers, and showing due respect for the opinion of others.  We have also placed an emphasis on tolerance for differing points of view and the capacity to give civil expression to one′s own position.
+
+Finally, the Task Force has included text affirming that campus citizenship does not preclude vigorous debate, dissent, or protest in academic and/or intellectual matters and in issues concerning the governance of the institution, all of which we believe are vital components of a healthy intellectual environment.  The policy specifically prohibits parties to the tenure and promotion process (colleagues, immediate administrative supervisors, the ART Committee, the Provost, President, or the Board of Trustees) to appeal to campus citizenship as a reason not to support a candidate because the candidate has academic views or has spoken critically about instructional matters in line with their rights and responsibilities as a faculty member.  
+
+Conclusion
+
+The Task Force advocates for the adoption of the campus citizenship clause, which in our view aligns with the standard of professionalism presently set forth in the Faculty Policies Handbook’s Code of Professional Ethics Policy, AAUP guidance, and the practice of many of our peer institutions.  The adoption of such a clause will serve to formally codify conditions that already exist undefined in our current promotion and tenure process, allowing for a more transparent process.  At present, the ART Committee and other evaluators participating in the promotion and tenure evaluation process implicitly consider campus citizenship/collegiality matters given the inclusion of the Department/School Contribution Evaluation Form in the candidate’s confidential file.  Pursuant to the form, departmental colleagues of a candidate are asked the following questions, four of which touch directly upon campus citizenship/collegiality matters:
+
+Acceptance of department assignments. (Does the faculty member accept department assignments willingly? Does he/she volunteer occasionally?)
+
+Performance on department assignments. (Does the faculty member complete assignments thoroughly and on time? What is the quality of his/her performance?) 
+
+Professionalism. (Does he/she take a professional attitude toward human relations and personnel or student problems?)
+
+Cooperation (Does the faculty member act in the best interest of the department and the college with regard to non-teaching activities/tasks? Is he/she a good team member?)
+
+Overall Contribution. (Does he/she contribute positively to the overall energy, morale and accomplishments of the department? Any specific noteworthy contributions?) 
+
+Given the above questions are posed and ostensibly considered by promotion and tenure evaluators, we believe the better practice is to fully define campus citizenship and formally articulate the way in which it will and will not be considered during the promotion and tenure evaluation process.  If the clause is adopted, campus citizenship will not be assessed independently, but rather it will be understood as a part of the established evaluation areas of teaching, scholarly/creative productivity, and service.  Moreover, evaluators will be precluded from citing campus citizenship as a reason not to support a candidate because of academic views or criticism about instructional matters that have been expressed in line with the faculty member’s rights and responsibilities.
+
+The Task Force fully acknowledges the very valid concerns that considerations of campus citizenship are too subjective, may stifle dissent, vigorous debate, or protest, and can possibly be “weaponized” by evaluators.  The Task Force carefully weighed these considerations and counter that a more explicit policy developed and approved by the faculty with appropriate constraints to address such concerns is more effective than an undefined, implicit practice with no official guidance and limitations.  In short, the adoption of a campus citizenship clause, in the Task Force’s judgement, will provide formal guidance to candidate and evaluators, as well as help restrict the reach of non-campus citizenship claims.
+
+
+
+Post-Tenure/Post-Six Year Review – Professional Development Plan & Other Suggested Additions
+
+Why the Professional Development Plan Clause was Developed
+
+As noted earlier, during the interview stage of the Task Force’s process, faculty members were asked to provide commentary on what is and what is not working well with the University’s present faculty evaluation system.  With respect to the Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year Review Policy, some observed that the University’s current policy did not sufficiently encourage a faculty member to improve performance if the ART Committee determined improvement was necessary.  Others noted that the current policy does not delineate the consequences of a positive review.
+
+Current policy requires members of the faculty to be peer-reviewed by the ART Committee every six years from the granting of tenure, or six years from the most recent promotion or sixth-year review.  Central to the process is the ART Committee’s review of the faculty member’s dossier and confidential file based on the Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year review criteria.  Following its review, the committee communicates to the faculty member in writing its evaluation and “suggestions for improvement where improvement is deemed necessary.”  Per current policy, faculty are “expected to take the recommendations of the ART Committee seriously and implement suggestions as necessary.”
+
+As part of its deliberative process, the Task Force also analyzed the post-tenure evaluation practices of its peer institutions, which are summarized in the Table below:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Table – Summary of Peer Institutions’ Post-Tenure Evaluation Policies
+
+
+
+Post-Tenure Review
+
+Professional Development Plan
+
+Commendation for Positive Reviews
+
+University of Redlands
+
+Yes -Every 6 Years
+
+2 Year Prof. Development Plan
+
+Yes
+
+University of the Pacific
+
+Yes -Every 5 Years
+
+Unit Dependent
+
+Silent
+
+St. Edwards University
+
+Yes – Every 6 Years
+
+2 Year Improvement Plan
+
+No
+
+Pacific Lutheran University
+
+Yes - Every 4 to 5 Years (depending on rank) by chair or dean
+
+Referral to Rank & Tenure Committee before dismissal proceedings if negative review
+
+Silent
+
+Valparaiso University
+
+Triggered Comprehensive Evaluations Based on two or more successive unsatisfactory annual evaluations by dean
+
+Performance Improvement Plan. Faculty member will have a minimum of one and a maximum of years in which to accomplish the plan’s goals.
+
+No
+
+Chapman University
+
+Tenured Faculty evaluated annually for promotion to full-professor and / or merit pay 
+
+N/A
+
+N/A
+
+Santa Clara University
+
+Evaluated periodically by the department chair on different cycles as determined by each college or school
+
+Unit Dependent? Not addressed in Faculty HB
+
+Silent
+
+Loyola Marymount
+
+Tenured Faculty evaluated annually for merit pay
+
+N/A
+
+N/A
+
+As reflected above, there are two types of post-tenure reviews systems in place at the University’s peer institutions: those, like CLU’s current system, that evaluate every tenured faculty member periodically and those that are “triggered” by multiple years of substandard performance on annual evaluations.  The Task Force considered both approaches and, in the end, decided against a “triggered” approach, primarily because introducing formal annual evaluations for tenured faculty would create additional workload for administrative supervisors.  Moreover, there was concern that peer review is initially lacking in a “triggered” post-tenure review system tied to annual evaluations.  
+
+Based on the results of the interviews and a review of the above peer institutions’ policies, the Task Force recommended that the University’s current policy be supplemented to (a) provide a mechanisms for recognizing distinguished faculty performance and (b) a means of assisting faculty members who are experiencing difficulties in achieving their expectations.  (See Task Force Recommendation #18).  
+
+The recommendations were presented at the Faculty Forum meetings held in October.  While a faculty member during one of the forums expressed reservations about the introduction of a development plan process, the Task Force elected to keep the recommendation in place given the results of the interviews and peer analysis and proceeded with supplementing the University’s current policy accordingly.  
+
+Overview of Recommended Additions
+
+The final version of proposed Post-Tenure/Post Six-Year Evaluation Policy, which has undergone several iterations, is reprinted in the Appendix for ease of reference. 
+
+With respect to adding a mechanism for recognizing distinguished faculty performance, the Task Force recommended that the following suggested text be adopted:
+
+If the committee determines that the faculty member’s performance exceeds the applicable standard in all evaluation categories, the report will include a commendation for distinguished performance. 
+
+The addition of the above text is in keeping with Standard 4 of the Minimum Standards for Good Practice recommended in the AAUP’s Post-Tenure Review: An AAUP Response report (see Table below).
+
+In determining the best approach to assist faculty members who have been determined by the ART to need improvement in a particular area(s), the Task Force elected to develop a professional development plan process.  The Task Force’s decisions in this regard was based on guidance set forth in Standards 7 through 10 of the Minimum Standards for Good Practice recommended in the AAUP’s Post-Tenure Review: An AAUP Response report (https://www.aaup.org/report/post-tenure-review-aaup-response), as well as the University of Redlands Post-Tenure Review policy (https://sites.redlands.edu/globalassets/depts/office-of-the-provost/docs/2021/faculty-handbook-updated-december-2020.pdf).  
+
+In the Table below, we outline how the proposed revisions to the Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year Policy align with the minimum standards advocated by the AAUP.
+
+AAUP Minimum Standards
+
+Text Responsive to AAUP Recommended Minimum Standards
+
+1. Post-tenure review must ensure the protection of academic freedom as defined in the 1940 Statement of Principles. The application of its procedures, therefore, should not intrude on an individual faculty member’s proper sphere of professional self-direction, nor should it be used as a subterfuge for effecting programmatic change. Such a review must not become the occasion for a wide-ranging “fishing expedition” in an attempt to dredge up negative evidence
+
+
+
+2. Post-tenure review must not be a reevaluation or revalidation of tenured status as defined in the 1940 Statement. In no case should post-tenure review be used to shift the burden of proof from the institution’s administration (to show cause why a tenured faculty member should be dismissed) to the individual faculty member (to show cause why he or she should be retained).
+
+Per the University’s policy, the purposes of the post-tenure/6th Year review are to “nurture faculty growth and development, to maintain quality teaching and advising, and to sustain meaningful contributions on the part of each faculty member to the life of the University community.  The post-tenure/post-sixth year review provides an opportunity for faculty to engage in regular self-reflection on their academic career and to receive feedback from peers in order that these purposes may be achieved.”  
+
+In addition, the Task Force has added the following text:  
+
+“The post-tenure/post-sixth year review is not a re-evaluation of tenure or rolling contract status and is not undertaken for the purposes of discipline or dismissal.”
+
+3. The written standards and criteria by which faculty members are evaluated in post-tenure review should be developed and periodically reviewed by the faculty. The faculty should also conduct the actual review process. The basic standard for appraisal should be whether the faculty member under review discharges conscientiously and with professional competence the duties appropriately associated with his or her position, not whether the faculty member meets the current standards for the award of tenure as those might have changed since the initial granting of tenure
+
+Per the University’s policy, the ART conducts the evaluation.  
+
+Standard for Appraisal: Candidates for Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year review are expected to demonstrate that in the past six years they have: 
+
+fulfilled the faculty responsibilities outlined in the “Faculty Responsibilities” portion of this handbook; 
+
+maintained their teaching effectiveness, scholarly or creative productivity, and University/professional/community service at a level appropriate to the faculty member’s academic rank. 
+
+In areas other than teaching, the committee will recognize that post-tenure/post-6th year faculty may reapportion their productivity, based on their talents and interests, to include greater contribution in either scholarly or creative work or University service and leadership within faculty governance.
+
+4. Post-tenure review should be developmental and supported by institutional resources for professional development or a change of professional direction. In the event that an institution decides to invest the time and resources required for comprehensive or “blanket” review, it should also offer tangible recognition to those faculty members who have demonstrated high or improved performance.
+
+Please refer to the “purposes” text referenced earlier regarding the development aspect of the review.  
+
+In addition, the Task Force has added the following text in Section B of the policy in response to standard 4:
+
+If the committee determines that the faculty member’s performance exceeds the applicable standard in all evaluation categories, the report will include a commendation for distinguished performance.
+
+Professional Development Plan
+
+If the ART subcommittee determines that a faculty member’s performance does not meet the applicable standard in an evaluation category, the faculty member will design, in consultation with the Dean, a two-year professional development plan to address the area(s) in need of improvement.  It is the responsibility of the Dean to assist the faculty member not only in designing the plan but also in identifying University resources that can be used to support it.  If an agreement on the plan’s goals cannot be reached, the Provost will be consulted.
+
+5. Post-tenure review should be flexible enough to acknowledge different expectations in different disciplines and changing expectations at different stages of faculty careers
+
+Please see the following text, reprinted from the Standards for Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year Review section the University’s policy:
+
+In areas other than teaching, the committee will recognize that post-tenure/post-6th year faculty may reapportion their productivity, based on their talents and interests, to include greater contribution in either scholarly or creative work or University service and leadership within faculty governance.
+
+6. Except when faculty appeals procedures direct that files be available to aggrieved faculty members, the outcome of evaluations should be confidential, that is, confined to the appropriate college or university persons or bodies and the faculty member being evaluated, released otherwise only at the discretion, or with the consent of, the faculty member
+
+All faculty evaluations are confidential. Please refer to the following text developed by the Task Force in the Introduction section of the evaluation document:
+
+To preserve the integrity of the evaluation process, those who are involved in it are expected to conduct themselves in accordance with Code of Professional Ethics [INSERT LINK], inclusiveness, and confidentiality, as well as meet all established deadlines. (Emphasis added)
+
+7. If the system of post-tenure review is supplemented, or supplanted, by the option of a formal development plan, that plan cannot be imposed on the faculty member unilaterally, but must be a product of mutual negotiation. It should respect academic freedom and professional self-direction, and it should be flexible enough to allow for subsequent alteration or even its own abandonment. The standard here should be that of good faith on both sides—a commitment to improvement by the faculty member and to the adequate support of that improvement by the institution—rather than the literal fulfillment of a set of nonnegotiable demands or rigid expectations, quantitative or otherwise.
+
+The Development Plan section developed by the Task Force requires that the plan be designed by the faculty in consultation with the Dean.
+
+If the ART subcommittee determines that a faculty member’s performance does not meet the applicable standard in an evaluation category, the faculty member will design, in consultation with the Dean, a two-year professional development plan to address the area(s) in need of improvement.  It is the responsibility of the Dean to assist the faculty member not only in designing the plan but also in identifying University resources that can be used to support it.  If an agreement on the plan’s goals cannot be reached, the Provost will be consulted. 
+
+8. A faculty member should have the right to comment in response to evaluations, and to challenge the findings and correct the record by appeal to an elected faculty grievance committee.. he or she should have the same rights of comment and appeal concerning the manner in which any individualized development plan is formulated, the plan’s content, and any resulting evaluation
+
+The University’s current appeals policy stated that the faculty member appeal “if they feel the process has been unfair.”  The Task Force is recommending that the text be replaced with a more comprehensive policy permits a faculty member to appeal at any point during the post-tenure/post-six year evaluation process:
+
+Faculty members may appeal the ART Committee’s initial Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth-Year Review decision, the requirements of the Professional Development Plan, and/or final action resulting from the follow-up review process.  
+
+Definitions have also been added that align with the promotion and tenure appeals process.
+
+9. In the event that recurring evaluations reveal continuing and persistent problems with a faculty member’s performance that do not lend themselves to improvement after several efforts, and that call into question his or her ability to function in that position, then other possibilities, such as a mutually agreeable reassignment to other duties or separation, should be explored. If these are not practicable, or if no other solution acceptable to the parties can be found, then the administration should invoke peer consideration regarding any contemplated sanctions
+
+The Task Force has developed text that align with standard 9.  Specifically, if the ART determines in a follow-up review that the faculty member has not met the goals of the development plan, then the faculty member and Provost may negotiate other possibilities, such as a mutually agreeable reassignment to other duties or separation.
+
+If the committee finds by majority vote that the faculty member has not met the goals of the plan, the committee will conclude its work by explaining that finding in a written report to the faculty member.  The faculty member will be afforded an opportunity to submit a written response to the Chair of the committee within ten academic days of submission of the report.  Thereafter, the ART Committee’s report, along with the faculty member’s responses (if any), and evaluative file will be submitted to the Provost.
+
+The faculty member and the Provost will then meet to negotiate a mutually acceptable course of action responsive to the issues identified in the committee’s follow-up review report.  Options may include a nonstandard faculty workload profile, reassignment of the faculty member to other duties within the University, some other mutually acceptable plan or course of action, or voluntary separation.  
+
+Note: The text regarding President resolving a disagreement between the faculty member and provost has been stricken.
+
+10. The standard for dismissal or other severe sanction remains that of adequate cause, and the mere fact of successive negative reviews does not in any way diminish the obligation of the institution to show such cause in a separate forum before an appropriately constituted hearing body of peers convened for that purpose. Evaluation records may be admissible but rebuttable as to accuracy. Even if they are accurate, the administration is still required to bear the burden of proof and demonstrate through an adversarial proceeding not only that the negative evaluations rest on fact, but also that the facts rise to the level of adequate cause for dismissal or other severe sanction. The faculty member must be afforded the full procedural safeguards set forth in the 1958 Statement on Procedural Standards in Faculty Dismissal Proceedings and the Recommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure, which include, among other safeguards, the opportunity to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses.
+
+The Task Force has added text in the policy that affirms that the post-tenure/post-six year evaluation process is separate and distinct from dismissal or severe sanction.  
+
+Introduction Section: “The post-tenure/post-sixth year review is not a re-evaluation of tenure or rolling contract status and is not undertaken for the purposes of discipline or dismissal.”
+
+
+
+B. Evaluation and Action (at the end of Follow-Up Review subsection)
+
+Note: The procedures for dismissing or severely sanctioning faculty for cause are separate from these policies and may only be invoked pursuant to the Suspension or Dismissal for Cause Policy [INSERT LINK].
+
+Conclusion
+
+The Task Force has introduced several proposed revisions that better align the University’s Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year Policy with higher education best practice.  As outlined above, care has been taken to address the standards for good practice set forth in the AAUP’s Post-Tenure Review: An AAUP Response report.  Moreover, the revisions address two specific concerns raised by some faculty during the interview process.  Most importantly, the Task Force views the introduction of a professional development plan component in the best interest of the faculty.  As presently written, our policy is silent with respect to what occurs should a faculty member choose not to take the recommendations of the ART Committee seriously and implement suggestions as necessary.  The introduction of a development plan, which must be a product of mutual negotiation between the faculty member and Dean and is subject to appeal, affords a faculty member the opportunity to address an area of concern identified by the ART Committee, making it less likely that the Suspension or Dismissal for Cause Policy will be invoked prematurely by the administration.  
+
+
+
+
+Appendix
+
+
+
+Post-tenure/Post-6th Year Review Policy and Procedures 
+
+Following the 2/4/6-year review process, faculty are reviewed by the ART Committee every six years. The purposes of this review are to nurture faculty growth and development, to maintain quality teaching and advising, and to sustain meaningful contributions on the part of each faculty member to the life of the University community.  The post-tenure/post-sixth year review provides an opportunity for faculty to engage in regular self-reflection on their academic career and to receive feedback from peers in order that these purposes may be achieved.  The post-tenure/post-sixth year review is not a re-evaluation of tenure or rolling contract status and is not undertaken for the purposes of discipline or dismissal.  
+
+Eligibility for Post-tenure/Post-6th Year Review 
+
+Members of the faculty will be reviewed every six years from the granting of tenure, or six years from the most recent promotion or most recent sixth-year review, whichever is later.  If a faculty member is a member of the ART Committee at the time they are eligible for Post Tenure/Post-6th Year review, the review will be postponed until the year after the faculty member leaves the ART Committee. 
+
+Deans are exempt from the review while they are serving in their administrative posts.  Additionally, faculty members who are on leave during the prescribed year of review will ordinarily be reviewed the year after returning.  Exceptions to participating in the Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth-Year review may also be granted at the discretion of the Provost if the faculty member has submitted a letter of intent to retire, resign, or apply for early retirement to be effective within two years from the academic year of the review.  Finally, a faculty member may postpone a scheduled Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth-Year review for extenuating circumstances, such as health problems, upon the approval of the Provost.
+
+Standards for Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year Review 
+
+Candidates for Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year review are expected to demonstrate that in the past six years they have: 
+
+fulfilled the faculty responsibilities outlined in the “Faculty Responsibilities” portion of this handbook; and
+
+maintained their teaching effectiveness, scholarly or creative productivity, and University/professional/community service at a level appropriate to the faculty member’s academic rank. 
+
+In areas other than teaching, the committee will recognize that post-tenure/post-6th year faculty may reapportion their productivity, based on their talents and interests, to include greater contribution in either scholarly or creative work or University service and leadership within faculty governance. 
+
+Procedures 
+
+A. Initiation of Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth-Year Review 
+
+Academic Affairs will notify faculty by September 15 of the review year of their responsibility for compiling a dossier based on guidelines provided to them. 
+
+Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth-Year Review Files: An evaluation by the ART Committee will be based on a Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth Year review dossier. The file will consist of two parts: 
+
+a dossier, prepared by the faculty member in accordance with forms and guidelines provided by the ART Committee and kept on file with the Office of Academic Affairs. The dossier should include: 
+
+a personal statement
+
+a current curriculum vitae
+
+sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the faculty member meets or exceeds the standards  for post-tenure/post-sixth- year review
+
+Materials added to the dossier by the Office of Academic Affairs:
+
+copies of all of the faculty member's California Lutheran University course evaluations
+
+course loads, enrollment and grade distributions
+
+evaluations from student advisees and/or mentees
+
+a current copy of the faculty member’s academic unit evaluation guidelines
+
+a confidential file that contains evaluations solicited by Academic Affairs on behalf of the ART Committee. These evaluations include: 
+
+evaluations by faculty inside of the department
+
+evaluations by the immediate administrative supervisor and Dean 
+
+
+
+
+
+No unsolicited material will be accepted for this file and this part of the file is closed to the faculty member under review.  To maintain the collegial working relationships of small departments and academic units that might be placed at risk should the contents of individual evaluations be disclosed, the University expects the authors of all evaluation recommendations listed above to treat those evaluations as confidential, to be read only by the applicable administrative evaluators and ART Committee.  Candidates undergoing review will not have access to these written evaluations and individual evaluators may not share them with the candidate.
+
+B. Evaluation and Action 
+
+The ART subcommittee reviews all the information in the dossier and the confidential file.  Thereafter, the committee evaluates whether the faculty member has met the applicable standard for Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year review, utilizing the general faculty evaluation criteria and academic unit guidelines. 
+
+The elected faculty members of the ART Committee submit their evaluation in each case to the Provost, indicating whether the faculty member has met the applicable standards for Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year review.  The committee’s conclusions shall be based on a simple majority vote.  A committee member in the minority has the discretion to submit an anonymous written dissenting opinion, which will be included in the report.
+
+The ART Committee will communicate to the faculty member in writing its evaluation.  If the committee determines that the faculty member’s performance exceeds the applicable standard in all evaluation categories, the report will include a commendation for distinguished performance.  If the ART subcommittee determines that the faculty member’s performance does not meet the applicable standard in an evaluation category, the report will include suggestions for improvement where improvement is deemed necessary.  Faculty are expected to take the recommendations of the ART Committee seriously and implement suggestions as necessary by developing a professional development plan in consultation with the faculty member’s Dean. 
+
+Professional Development Plan
+
+If the ART subcommittee determines that a faculty member’s performance does not meet the applicable standard in an evaluation category, the faculty member will design, in consultation with the Dean, a two-year professional development plan to address the area(s) in need of improvement.  It is the responsibility of the Dean to assist the faculty member not only in designing the plan but also in identifying University resources that can be used to support it.  If an agreement on the plan’s goals cannot be reached, the Provost will be consulted.
+
+The Follow-up Review 
+
+In the spring of the second year subsequent to the Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year review, the faculty member will undergo a follow-up review by the ART Committee to determine whether the goals outlined in the professional development plan have been met.  The Dean and the faculty member will agree, in advance, upon the scope of the follow-up review and the composition of the dossier that will be assembled.  Although the dossier may include evidence that the faculty member has been meeting the applicable standards in all evaluation categories, the follow-up review will focus more narrowly on the issues raised in the previous Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year review.  The dossier will typically include a self-evaluation and a letter from the Dean that evaluates the quality of the faculty member’s responses to the issues raised in the previous review, and any other evidence documenting progress the faculty member has made while implementing the professional development plan. 
+
+The completed dossier will be evaluated by the ART Committee, which will determine whether the faculty member has achieved the goals identified in the professional development plan.
+
+If the committee finds by majority vote that the faculty member has met the goals of the plan, the process is complete, and a new Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year cycle will begin in the next appointment year.  Copies of the professional development plan and the assessment of the progress achieved by the end of the development period will be submitted to the Office of Academic Affairs to be added to the faculty member’s personnel file.
+
+If the committee finds by majority vote that the faculty member has not met the goals of the plan, the committee will conclude its work by explaining that finding in a written report to the faculty member.  The faculty member will be afforded an opportunity to submit a written response to the Chair of the committee within ten academic days of submission of the report.  Thereafter, the ART Committee’s report, along with the faculty member’s responses (if any), and evaluative file will be submitted to the Provost.
+
+The faculty member and the Provost will then meet to negotiate a mutually acceptable course of action responsive to the issues identified in the committee’s follow-up review report.  Options may include a nonstandard faculty workload profile, reassignment of the faculty member to other duties within the University, some other mutually acceptable plan or course of action, or voluntary separation.  
+
+Note: The procedures for dismissing or severely sanctioning faculty for cause are separate from these policies and may only be invoked pursuant to the Suspension or Dismissal for Cause Policy [INSERT LINK].
+
+
+
+C. Appeals
+
+
+
+Faculty members may appeal the ART Committee’s initial Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth-Year Review decision, the requirements of the Professional Development Plan, and/or final action resulting from the follow-up review process.  
+
+The faculty member’s appeal letter and all documentation and evidence in support of it must be submitted in writing to the Provost within [ten academic days] of the submission of initial Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth-Year Review decision, the Provost's final approval of the Professional Development Plan, or the Provost's final follow-up review decision.
+
+By filing a grievance, the faculty is asking the Grievance Committee to review the process and advise the Provost regarding whether or not the process has been fair.  Comparable to appeals emanating from promotion and tenure evaluations, formal appeals may be made only on procedural, not substantive grounds (i.e., prejudicial error or inadequate consideration).  The Grievance Committee will not substitute its judgment on the merits of the case for promotion/tenure but rather determine whether the decision was the result of adequate consideration. (See Step III of Grievance Procedures.)
+
+The term prejudicial does not refer to the state of mind of the members of the ART Committee or administrative evaluator; rather, it refers to an assessment of the likely effect of an error in procedure on a review decision.  An error is prejudicial if it is reasonably probable that a result more favorable to the appellant would have been reached in the absence of the error. 
+
+The term “inadequate consideration” refers to procedural rather than substantive issues related to the Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth-Year Review evaluation process.  Inadequate consideration occurs if the ART Committee or administrative evaluators (i) violated the stated procedures for including relevant evidence in the promotion and tenure file or using that evidence as a basis for judgment in the review and (ii) it is reasonably probable that a result more favorable to the appellant would have been reached had adequate consideration been given to the proper evidence.  Alternatively, inadequate consideration occurs when a decision is not supported by substantial evidence in the evaluation file. 
+
+Note: An allegation that a decision emanating from Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth-Year Review represents an instance of unlawful discrimination will be referred to the Assistant Vice President for Human Resources.  Allegations of unlawful discrimination will be considered and resolved before an appeal on procedural grounds is considered. 
+
+
+
+2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] ART Task Force Memo Draft 2.txt [/INST] ART Task Force
+
+
+
+Memorandum
+
+To: FSEC & FAC Members
+
+From: ART Task Force
+
+Introduction
+
+During the recent faculty forums, several colleagues raised concerns regarding the campus citizenship clause and introduction of a formal professional development plan process to the Post-Tenure/Post Six-Year Review Policy.  Below, we outline why both clauses were initially recommended, how they align with peer institution practices and AAUP guidance, and the reasoning why we believe both should be adopted by our colleagues.
+
+
+
+Campus Citizenship 
+
+Why the Clause was Initially Developed
+
+During the interview stage of the Task Force’s process, faculty members were asked to provide commentary on what is and what is not working well with the University’s present faculty evaluation system.  In response to the question, a few attendees in the chairs, deans, and former ART committee sessions expressed interest in whether the University should formally evaluate collegiality.  Based in part upon this request, the Task Force reviewed the Faculty Handbooks of our peer institutions to gain a deeper understanding of their faculty evaluation practices.  This analysis revealed that several peer institutions affirmatively consider campus citizenship or collegiality as part of their promotion and tenure evaluation process.  
+
+
+
+Table: Peer Campus Collegiality/Campus Citizenship Clauses
+
+
+
+Campus Citizenship or Collegiality Clause
+
+Separate Criterion or Considered as Part of Teaching, Scholarship & Service Categories 
+
+University of Redlands
+
+Section 3.5 states in part, “no set of rules or code of conduct can either guarantee or take the place of the personal and professional integrity of faculty members and administrators as members of the professoriate, participants in extended disciplinary communities, citizens of the University, and individual moral agents. Therefore, in addition to being familiar with and abiding by the University’s policies and procedures, faculty members are expected to be cognizant of and regulate their behavior according to the prevailing professional and ethical standards of their disciplines and the teaching profession as a whole.” 
+
+For promotion & tenure, candidates are expected to “exhibit conduct in accordance with professional standards as defined in Section 3.5.”
+
+
+
+University of the Pacific
+
+Yes – “Consideration of citizenship in the University is part of the established evaluation areas of teaching, scholarship or artistic performance, and service and is not to be evaluated as a separate area. Responsible citizenship consists of attitudes and actions which show respect for one's faculty and staff colleagues as well as students and which help other faculty and staff members so that as a learning community we further Pacific goals of excellent teaching and advising for students, rigorous scholarship, and productive service. Faculty should acknowledge that a deficiency in or complete lack of citizenship can directly and negatively impact their performance in teaching, scholarship or artistic performance, and service.”
+
+Part of the established evaluation areas
+
+St. Edwards University
+
+Yes; collegial relations are considered as an element of service.
+
+“At St. Edward's University the faculty is expected to render service. This may include service within and/or outside of the university community. Both of these categories are evaluated according to two criteria. The first criterion considers what service is rendered, i.e., responsibility, while the second considers the spirit in which it is rendered, i.e., collegial relations. Both are considered important aspects of service and must be included as part of the evaluation” 
+
+Considered as part of the service category.  
+
+
+
+Pacific Lutheran University
+
+No
+
+N/A
+
+Valparaiso University
+
+Yes
+
+“VU values and expects a “collegial relationship among its faculty.” This includes civility in discourse and a willingness to “carry one’s share of the load” in teaching, advising, research, committee work, and other forms of university service. The focus is on quality of contributions…”
+
+Separate Criterion
+
+Chapman University
+
+No
+
+N/A
+
+Santa Clara University
+
+Yes
+
+Collegiality is not a distinct capacity to be assessed independently of the traditional triumvirate of scholarship, teaching, and service. It is rather a quality whose value is expressed in the successful execution of these three functions. Collegiality means that faculty members cooperate with one another in sharing the common burdens related to discharging their responsibilities of teaching, scholarship or creative work, and service, and do so in a conscientious and professional manner. Collegiality is not the same as conformity or intellectual agreement and may not be interpreted in a way that violates the principles of academic freedom. In those rare instances in which lack of collegiality becomes an issue in the evaluation of faculty for promotion and tenure, it may be considered only insofar as it has a negative effect on the functioning of the department, college or school, or University.”
+
+Part of the established evaluation areas
+
+Loyola Marymount
+
+Yes.  
+
+“Collegiality is an individual responsibility of every faculty member at Loyola Marymount University. All faculty are expected to adhere to the tenets given in the AAUP Statement on Professional Ethics, specifically in regard to collegiality.”
+
+Listed as a Faculty Responsibility.  
+
+
+
+As part of P&T process, the chairs and deans respectively assess the candidate’s “contribution to the effective operation of the [Department/College/School/University] responsibilities, including overall performance in contributing to a quality working environment”… 
+
+
+
+
+
+Based on the interview results and analysis of the promotion and tenure evaluation standards in place at several peer institutions, the Task Force issued the following draft recommendation to the faculty:
+
+Recommendation #8: Develop a new “collegiality” or “campus citizenship” evaluation category, which is consistent with the University’s values.
+
+Supporting details: The text should emphasize that the evaluator’s focus with respect to this evaluation category solely relates to collaboration and constructive cooperation associated with a faculty member’s overall performance. The text should also note that an assessment of collegiality must not be confused with conformity, sociability, or likability and may not be interpreted in a way that violates the principles of academic freedom.
+
+The above recommendation was discussed during the faculty forums held in late October.  As there was not significant opposition to the recommendation expressed during the forums, the Task Force kept the recommendation in place and proceeded with developing a corresponding policy for the faculty’s consideration.  
+
+Overview of Campus Citizenship Clause
+
+The final version of the Campus Citizenship clause, which has undergone several iterations based on feedback received from the Deans, Chairs, FSEC, FAC, and faculty who attended the April faculty forums, is reprinted below:
+
+Teaching, scholarship, and service constitute the three major criteria for promotion and tenure, but those categories are affected by a faculty member’s interaction with colleagues, staff, administrators, and students.  Campus citizenship, therefore, is not a distinct capacity to be assessed independently, but rather it should be understood as a part of the established evaluation areas of teaching, scholarly/creative productivity, and service.  As a hallmark of professional ethics (see Code of Professional Ethics Policy above [LINK TO POLICY), faculty members are expected to work constructively with their colleagues and to treat faculty, staff, administrators, and students with respect.  Tolerance for differing points of view and the capacity to give civil expression to one′s own position are highly prized.
+
+The University affirms that campus citizenship does not preclude vigorous debate, dissent, or protest in academic and/or intellectual matters and in issues concerning the governance of the institution—these are all vital components of a healthy intellectual environment.  Campus citizenship may not be interpreted in a way that violates the principles of academic freedom. No parties to the tenure and promotion process (colleagues, immediate administrative supervisors, the ART Committee, the Provost, President, or the Board of Trustees) shall appeal to campus citizenship as a reason not to support a candidate because the candidate has expressed views or spoken critically about matters within their rights and responsibilities as a faculty member.
+
+In developing the clause, the Task Force sought to align with the AAUP “Statement on Collegiality as a Criterion for Faculty Evaluation,” which reads in part:
+
+Few, if any, responsible faculty members would deny that collegiality, in the sense of collaboration and constructive cooperation, identifies important aspects of a faculty member’s overall performance. A faculty member may legitimately be called upon to participate in the development of curricula and standards for the evaluation of teaching, as well as in peer review of the teaching of colleagues. Much research, depending on the nature of the particular discipline, is by its nature collaborative and requires teamwork as well as the ability to engage in independent investigation. And committee service of a more general description, relating to the life of the institution as a whole, is a logical outgrowth of the Association’s view that a faculty member is an “officer” of the college or university in which he or she fulfills professional duties.
+
+Understood in this way, collegiality is not a distinct capacity to be assessed independently of the traditional triumvirate of teaching, scholarship, and service. Evaluation in these three areas will encompass the contributions that the virtue of collegiality may pertinently add to a faculty member’s career….
+
+Based on this guidance, the clause does not include campus citizenship as a separate, fourth category of evaluation; rather, it embeds considerations of campus citizenship within the three evaluation categories of teaching, scholarly and creative productivity, and service.  Thus, for example, a candidate’s lack of campus citizenship may be addressed in the teaching effectiveness category when it impinges on the faculty member’s ability to work with colleagues in mentoring students or in preparing them for prerequisites for more advanced courses, or in preparing them for group activities required of the academic discipline; or in scholarly or creative productivity when it impinges on the candidate’s ability to work collaboratively or respectively with colleagues in developing research grant proposals or organizing conferences; or in service when it prevents committees or programs from functioning as they should
+
+In addition, the clause aligns with University’s current Code of Professional Ethics Policy in defining campus citizenship, which includes taking on one’s fair and collaborative role in the work of the University, taking part in shared governance, supporting the academic freedom of one’s peers, and showing due respect for the opinion of others.  We have also placed an emphasis on tolerance for differing points of view and the capacity to give civil expression to one′s own position.
+
+Finally, the Task Force has included text affirming that campus citizenship does not preclude vigorous debate, dissent, or protest in academic and/or intellectual matters and in issues concerning the governance of the institution, all of which we believe are vital components of a healthy intellectual environment.  The policy specifically prohibits parties to the tenure and promotion process (colleagues, immediate administrative supervisors, the ART Committee, the Provost, President, or the Board of Trustees) to appeal to campus citizenship as a reason not to support a candidate because the candidate has expressed views or has spoken critically about matters within their rights and responsibilities as a faculty member.  
+
+Conclusion
+
+The Task Force advocates for the adoption of the campus citizenship clause, which in our view aligns with the standard of professionalism presently set forth in the Faculty Policies Handbook’s Code of Professional Ethics Policy, AAUP guidance, and the practice of some of our peer institutions.  The adoption of such a clause will serve to formally codify conditions that already exist undefined in our current promotion and tenure process, allowing for a more transparent process.  At present, the ART Committee and other evaluators participating in the promotion and tenure evaluation process implicitly consider campus citizenship/collegiality matters given the inclusion of the Department/School Contribution Evaluation Form in the candidate’s confidential file.  Pursuant to the form, departmental colleagues of a candidate are asked the following questions, four of which touch directly upon campus citizenship/collegiality matters:
+
+Acceptance of department assignments. (Does the faculty member accept department assignments willingly? Does he/she volunteer occasionally?)
+
+Performance on department assignments. (Does the faculty member complete assignments thoroughly and on time? What is the quality of his/her performance?) 
+
+Professionalism. (Does he/she take a professional attitude toward human relations and personnel or student problems?)
+
+Cooperation (Does the faculty member act in the best interest of the department and the college with regard to non-teaching activities/tasks? Is he/she a good team member?)
+
+Overall Contribution. (Does he/she contribute positively to the overall energy, morale and accomplishments of the department? Any specific noteworthy contributions?) 
+
+Given the above questions are posed and ostensibly considered by promotion and tenure evaluators, we believe the better practice is to fully define campus citizenship and formally articulate the way in which it will and will not be considered during the promotion and tenure evaluation process.  If the clause is adopted, campus citizenship will not be assessed independently, but rather it will be understood as a part of the established evaluation areas of teaching, scholarly/creative productivity, and service.  Moreover, evaluators will be precluded from citing campus citizenship as a reason not to support a candidate because of academic views or criticism about instructional matters that have been expressed in line with the faculty member’s rights and responsibilities.
+
+The Task Force fully acknowledges the very valid concerns that considerations of campus citizenship are too subjective, may stifle dissent, vigorous debate, or protest, and can possibly be “weaponized” by evaluators.  The Task Force carefully weighed these considerations and counter that a more explicit policy developed and approved by the faculty with appropriate constraints to address such concerns is more effective than an undefined, implicit practice with no official guidance and limitations.  In short, the adoption of a campus citizenship clause, in the Task Force’s judgement, will provide formal guidance to candidate and evaluators, as well as help restrict the reach of non-campus citizenship claims.
+
+
+
+Post-Tenure/Post-Six Year Review – Professional Development Plan & Other Suggested Additions
+
+Why the Professional Development Plan Clause was Developed
+
+As noted earlier, during the interview stage of the Task Force’s process, faculty members were asked to provide commentary on what is and what is not working well with the University’s present faculty evaluation system.  With respect to the Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year Review Policy, some observed that the University’s current policy did not sufficiently encourage a faculty member to improve performance if the ART Committee determined improvement was necessary.  Others noted that the current policy does not delineate the consequences of a positive review.
+
+Current policy requires members of the faculty to be peer-reviewed by the ART Committee every six years from the granting of tenure, or six years from the most recent promotion or sixth-year review.  Central to the process is the ART Committee’s review of the faculty member’s dossier and confidential file based on the Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year review criteria.  Following its review, the committee communicates to the faculty member in writing its evaluation and “suggestions for improvement where improvement is deemed necessary.”  Per current policy, faculty are “expected to take the recommendations of the ART Committee seriously and implement suggestions as necessary.”
+
+As part of its deliberative process, the Task Force also analyzed the post-tenure evaluation practices of its peer institutions, which are summarized in the Table below:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Table – Summary of Peer Institutions’ Post-Tenure Evaluation Policies
+
+
+
+Post-Tenure Review
+
+Professional Development Plan
+
+Commendation for Positive Reviews
+
+University of Redlands
+
+Yes -Every 6 Years
+
+2 Year Prof. Development Plan
+
+Yes
+
+University of the Pacific
+
+Yes -Every 5 Years
+
+Unit Dependent
+
+Silent
+
+St. Edwards University
+
+Yes – Every 6 Years
+
+2 Year Improvement Plan
+
+No
+
+Pacific Lutheran University
+
+Yes - Every 4 to 5 Years (depending on rank) by chair or dean
+
+Referral to Rank & Tenure Committee before dismissal proceedings if negative review
+
+Silent
+
+Valparaiso University
+
+Triggered Comprehensive Evaluations Based on two or more successive unsatisfactory annual evaluations by dean
+
+Performance Improvement Plan. Faculty member will have a minimum of one and a maximum of years in which to accomplish the plan’s goals.
+
+No
+
+Chapman University
+
+Tenured Faculty evaluated annually for promotion to full-professor and / or merit pay 
+
+N/A
+
+N/A
+
+Santa Clara University
+
+Evaluated periodically by the department chair on different cycles as determined by each college or school
+
+Unit Dependent? Not addressed in Faculty HB
+
+Silent
+
+Loyola Marymount
+
+Tenured Faculty evaluated annually for merit pay
+
+N/A
+
+N/A
+
+As reflected above, there are two types of post-tenure reviews systems in place at the University’s peer institutions: those, like CLU’s current system, that evaluate every tenured faculty member periodically and those that are “triggered” by multiple years of substandard performance on annual evaluations.  The Task Force considered both approaches and, in the end, decided against a “triggered” approach, primarily because introducing formal annual evaluations for tenured faculty would create additional workload for administrative supervisors.  Moreover, there was concern that peer review is initially lacking in a “triggered” post-tenure review system tied to annual evaluations.  
+
+Based on the results of the interviews and a review of the above peer institutions’ policies, the Task Force recommended that the University’s current policy be supplemented to (a) provide a mechanisms for recognizing distinguished faculty performance and (b) a means of assisting faculty members who are experiencing difficulties in achieving their expectations.  (See Task Force Recommendation #18).  
+
+The recommendations were presented at the Faculty Forum meetings held in October.  While a faculty member during one of the forums expressed reservations about the introduction of a development plan process, the Task Force elected to keep the recommendation in place given the results of the interviews and peer analysis and proceeded with supplementing the University’s current policy accordingly.  
+
+Overview of Recommended Additions
+
+The final version of proposed Post-Tenure/Post Six-Year Evaluation Policy, which has undergone several iterations, is reprinted in the Appendix for ease of reference. 
+
+With respect to adding a mechanism for recognizing distinguished faculty performance, the Task Force recommended that the following suggested text be adopted:
+
+If the committee determines that the faculty member’s performance exceeds the applicable standard in all evaluation categories, the report will include a commendation for distinguished performance. 
+
+The addition of the above text is in keeping with Standard 4 of the Minimum Standards for Good Practice recommended in the AAUP’s Post-Tenure Review: An AAUP Response report (see Table below).
+
+In determining the best approach to assist faculty members who have been determined by the ART to need improvement in a particular area(s), the Task Force elected to develop a professional development plan process.  The Task Force’s decisions in this regard was based on guidance set forth in Standards 7 through 10 of the Minimum Standards for Good Practice recommended in the AAUP’s Post-Tenure Review: An AAUP Response report (https://www.aaup.org/report/post-tenure-review-aaup-response), as well as the University of Redlands Post-Tenure Review policy (https://sites.redlands.edu/globalassets/depts/office-of-the-provost/docs/2021/faculty-handbook-updated-december-2020.pdf).  
+
+In the Table below, we outline how the proposed revisions to the Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year Policy align with the minimum standards advocated by the AAUP.
+
+AAUP Minimum Standards
+
+Text Responsive to AAUP Recommended Minimum Standards
+
+1. Post-tenure review must ensure the protection of academic freedom as defined in the 1940 Statement of Principles. The application of its procedures, therefore, should not intrude on an individual faculty member’s proper sphere of professional self-direction, nor should it be used as a subterfuge for effecting programmatic change. Such a review must not become the occasion for a wide-ranging “fishing expedition” in an attempt to dredge up negative evidence
+
+
+
+2. Post-tenure review must not be a reevaluation or revalidation of tenured status as defined in the 1940 Statement. In no case should post-tenure review be used to shift the burden of proof from the institution’s administration (to show cause why a tenured faculty member should be dismissed) to the individual faculty member (to show cause why he or she should be retained).
+
+Per the University’s policy, the purposes of the post-tenure/6th Year review are to “nurture faculty growth and development, to maintain quality teaching and advising, and to sustain meaningful contributions on the part of each faculty member to the life of the University community.  The post-tenure/post-sixth year review provides an opportunity for faculty to engage in regular self-reflection on their academic career and to receive feedback from peers in order that these purposes may be achieved.”  
+
+In addition, the Task Force has added the following text:  
+
+“The post-tenure/post-sixth year review is not a re-evaluation of tenure or rolling contract status and is not undertaken for the purposes of discipline or dismissal.”
+
+3. The written standards and criteria by which faculty members are evaluated in post-tenure review should be developed and periodically reviewed by the faculty. The faculty should also conduct the actual review process. The basic standard for appraisal should be whether the faculty member under review discharges conscientiously and with professional competence the duties appropriately associated with his or her position, not whether the faculty member meets the current standards for the award of tenure as those might have changed since the initial granting of tenure
+
+Per the University’s policy, the ART conducts the evaluation.  
+
+Standard for Appraisal: Candidates for Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year review are expected to demonstrate that in the past six years they have: 
+
+fulfilled the faculty responsibilities outlined in the “Faculty Responsibilities” portion of this handbook; 
+
+maintained their teaching effectiveness, scholarly or creative productivity, and University/professional/community service at a level appropriate to the faculty member’s academic rank. 
+
+In areas other than teaching, the committee will recognize that post-tenure/post-6th year faculty may reapportion their productivity, based on their talents and interests, to include greater contribution in either scholarly or creative work or University service and leadership within faculty governance.
+
+4. Post-tenure review should be developmental and supported by institutional resources for professional development or a change of professional direction. In the event that an institution decides to invest the time and resources required for comprehensive or “blanket” review, it should also offer tangible recognition to those faculty members who have demonstrated high or improved performance.
+
+Please refer to the “purposes” text referenced earlier regarding the development aspect of the review.  
+
+In addition, the Task Force has added the following text in Section B of the policy in response to standard 4:
+
+If the committee determines that the faculty member’s performance exceeds the applicable standard in all evaluation categories, the report will include a commendation for distinguished performance.
+
+Professional Development Plan
+
+If the ART subcommittee determines that a faculty member’s performance does not meet the applicable standard in an evaluation category, the faculty member will design, in consultation with the Dean, a two-year professional development plan to address the area(s) in need of improvement.  It is the responsibility of the Dean to assist the faculty member not only in designing the plan but also in identifying University resources that can be used to support it.  If an agreement on the plan’s goals cannot be reached, the Provost will be consulted.
+
+5. Post-tenure review should be flexible enough to acknowledge different expectations in different disciplines and changing expectations at different stages of faculty careers
+
+Please see the following text, reprinted from the Standards for Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year Review section the University’s policy:
+
+In areas other than teaching, the committee will recognize that post-tenure/post-6th year faculty may reapportion their productivity, based on their talents and interests, to include greater contribution in either scholarly or creative work or University service and leadership within faculty governance.
+
+6. Except when faculty appeals procedures direct that files be available to aggrieved faculty members, the outcome of evaluations should be confidential, that is, confined to the appropriate college or university persons or bodies and the faculty member being evaluated, released otherwise only at the discretion, or with the consent of, the faculty member
+
+All faculty evaluations are confidential. Please refer to the following text developed by the Task Force in the Introduction section of the evaluation document:
+
+To preserve the integrity of the evaluation process, those who are involved in it are expected to conduct themselves in accordance with Code of Professional Ethics [INSERT LINK], inclusiveness, and confidentiality, as well as meet all established deadlines. (Emphasis added)
+
+7. If the system of post-tenure review is supplemented, or supplanted, by the option of a formal development plan, that plan cannot be imposed on the faculty member unilaterally, but must be a product of mutual negotiation. It should respect academic freedom and professional self-direction, and it should be flexible enough to allow for subsequent alteration or even its own abandonment. The standard here should be that of good faith on both sides—a commitment to improvement by the faculty member and to the adequate support of that improvement by the institution—rather than the literal fulfillment of a set of nonnegotiable demands or rigid expectations, quantitative or otherwise.
+
+The Development Plan section developed by the Task Force requires that the plan be designed by the faculty in consultation with the Dean.
+
+If the ART subcommittee determines that a faculty member’s performance does not meet the applicable standard in an evaluation category, the faculty member will design, in consultation with the Dean, a two-year professional development plan to address the area(s) in need of improvement.  It is the responsibility of the Dean to assist the faculty member not only in designing the plan but also in identifying University resources that can be used to support it.  If an agreement on the plan’s goals cannot be reached, the Provost will be consulted. 
+
+8. A faculty member should have the right to comment in response to evaluations, and to challenge the findings and correct the record by appeal to an elected faculty grievance committee.. he or she should have the same rights of comment and appeal concerning the manner in which any individualized development plan is formulated, the plan’s content, and any resulting evaluation
+
+The University’s current appeals policy stated that the faculty member appeal “if they feel the process has been unfair.”  The Task Force is recommending that the text be replaced with a more comprehensive policy permits a faculty member to appeal at any point during the post-tenure/post-six year evaluation process:
+
+Faculty members may appeal the ART Committee’s initial Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth-Year Review decision, the requirements of the Professional Development Plan, and/or final action resulting from the follow-up review process.  
+
+Definitions have also been added that align with the promotion and tenure appeals process.
+
+9. In the event that recurring evaluations reveal continuing and persistent problems with a faculty member’s performance that do not lend themselves to improvement after several efforts, and that call into question his or her ability to function in that position, then other possibilities, such as a mutually agreeable reassignment to other duties or separation, should be explored. If these are not practicable, or if no other solution acceptable to the parties can be found, then the administration should invoke peer consideration regarding any contemplated sanctions
+
+The Task Force has developed text that align with standard 9.  Specifically, if the ART determines in a follow-up review that the faculty member has not met the goals of the development plan, then the faculty member and Provost may negotiate other possibilities, such as a mutually agreeable reassignment to other duties or separation.
+
+If the committee finds by majority vote that the faculty member has not met the goals of the plan, the committee will conclude its work by explaining that finding in a written report to the faculty member.  The faculty member will be afforded an opportunity to submit a written response to the Chair of the committee within ten academic days of submission of the report.  Thereafter, the ART Committee’s report, along with the faculty member’s responses (if any), and evaluative file will be submitted to the Provost.
+
+The faculty member and the Provost will then meet to negotiate a mutually acceptable course of action responsive to the issues identified in the committee’s follow-up review report.  Options may include a nonstandard faculty workload profile, reassignment of the faculty member to other duties within the University, some other mutually acceptable plan or course of action, or voluntary separation.  
+
+Note: The text regarding President resolving a disagreement between the faculty member and provost has been stricken.
+
+10. The standard for dismissal or other severe sanction remains that of adequate cause, and the mere fact of successive negative reviews does not in any way diminish the obligation of the institution to show such cause in a separate forum before an appropriately constituted hearing body of peers convened for that purpose. Evaluation records may be admissible but rebuttable as to accuracy. Even if they are accurate, the administration is still required to bear the burden of proof and demonstrate through an adversarial proceeding not only that the negative evaluations rest on fact, but also that the facts rise to the level of adequate cause for dismissal or other severe sanction. The faculty member must be afforded the full procedural safeguards set forth in the 1958 Statement on Procedural Standards in Faculty Dismissal Proceedings and the Recommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure, which include, among other safeguards, the opportunity to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses.
+
+The Task Force has added text in the policy that affirms that the post-tenure/post-six year evaluation process is separate and distinct from dismissal or severe sanction.  
+
+Introduction Section: “The post-tenure/post-sixth year review is not a re-evaluation of tenure or rolling contract status and is not undertaken for the purposes of discipline or dismissal.”
+
+
+
+B. Evaluation and Action (at the end of Follow-Up Review subsection)
+
+Note: The procedures for dismissing or severely sanctioning faculty for cause are separate from these policies and may only be invoked pursuant to the Suspension or Dismissal for Cause Policy [INSERT LINK].
+
+Conclusion
+
+The Task Force has introduced several proposed revisions that better align the University’s Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year Policy with common higher education practice.  As outlined above, care has been taken to address the standards for good practice set forth in the AAUP’s Post-Tenure Review: An AAUP Response report.  Moreover, the revisions address two specific concerns raised by some faculty during the interview process.  Most importantly, the Task Force views the introduction of a professional development plan component in the best interest of the faculty.  As presently written, our policy is silent with respect to what occurs should a faculty member choose not to take the recommendations of the ART Committee seriously and implement suggestions as necessary.  The introduction of a development plan, which must be a product of mutual negotiation between the faculty member and Dean and is subject to appeal, affords a faculty member the opportunity to address an area of concern identified by the ART Committee, making it less likely that the Suspension or Dismissal for Cause Policy will be invoked prematurely by the administration.  
+
+
+
+
+Appendix
+
+
+
+Post-tenure/Post-6th Year Review Policy and Procedures 
+
+Following the 2/4/6-year review process, faculty are reviewed by the ART Committee every six years. The purposes of this review are to nurture faculty growth and development, to maintain quality teaching and advising, and to sustain meaningful contributions on the part of each faculty member to the life of the University community.  The post-tenure/post-sixth year review provides an opportunity for faculty to engage in regular self-reflection on their academic career and to receive feedback from peers in order that these purposes may be achieved.  The post-tenure/post-sixth year review is not a re-evaluation of tenure or rolling contract status and is not undertaken for the purposes of discipline or dismissal.  
+
+Eligibility for Post-tenure/Post-6th Year Review 
+
+Members of the faculty will be reviewed every six years from the granting of tenure, or six years from the most recent promotion or most recent sixth-year review, whichever is later.  If a faculty member is a member of the ART Committee at the time they are eligible for Post Tenure/Post-6th Year review, the review will be postponed until the year after the faculty member leaves the ART Committee. 
+
+Deans are exempt from the review while they are serving in their administrative posts.  Additionally, faculty members who are on leave during the prescribed year of review will ordinarily be reviewed the year after returning.  Exceptions to participating in the Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth-Year review may also be granted at the discretion of the Provost if the faculty member has submitted a letter of intent to retire, resign, or apply for early retirement to be effective within two years from the academic year of the review.  Finally, a faculty member may postpone a scheduled Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth-Year review for extenuating circumstances, such as health problems, upon the approval of the Provost.
+
+Standards for Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year Review 
+
+Candidates for Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year review are expected to demonstrate that in the past six years they have: 
+
+fulfilled the faculty responsibilities outlined in the “Faculty Responsibilities” portion of this handbook; and
+
+maintained their teaching effectiveness, scholarly or creative productivity, and University/professional/community service at a level appropriate to the faculty member’s academic rank. 
+
+In areas other than teaching, the committee will recognize that post-tenure/post-6th year faculty may reapportion their productivity, based on their talents and interests, to include greater contribution in either scholarly or creative work or University service and leadership within faculty governance. 
+
+Procedures 
+
+A. Initiation of Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth-Year Review 
+
+Academic Affairs will notify faculty by September 15 of the review year of their responsibility for compiling a dossier based on guidelines provided to them. 
+
+Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth-Year Review Files: An evaluation by the ART Committee will be based on a Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth Year review dossier. The file will consist of two parts: 
+
+a dossier, prepared by the faculty member in accordance with forms and guidelines provided by the ART Committee and kept on file with the Office of Academic Affairs. The dossier should include: 
+
+a personal statement
+
+a current curriculum vitae
+
+sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the faculty member meets or exceeds the standards  for post-tenure/post-sixth- year review
+
+Materials added to the dossier by the Office of Academic Affairs:
+
+copies of all of the faculty member's California Lutheran University course evaluations
+
+course loads, enrollment and grade distributions
+
+evaluations from student advisees and/or mentees
+
+a current copy of the faculty member’s academic unit evaluation guidelines
+
+a confidential file that contains evaluations solicited by Academic Affairs on behalf of the ART Committee. These evaluations include: 
+
+evaluations by faculty inside of the department
+
+evaluations by the immediate administrative supervisor and Dean 
+
+
+
+
+
+No unsolicited material will be accepted for this file and this part of the file is closed to the faculty member under review.  To maintain the collegial working relationships of small departments and academic units that might be placed at risk should the contents of individual evaluations be disclosed, the University expects the authors of all evaluation recommendations listed above to treat those evaluations as confidential, to be read only by the applicable administrative evaluators and ART Committee.  Candidates undergoing review will not have access to these written evaluations and individual evaluators may not share them with the candidate.
+
+B. Evaluation and Action 
+
+The ART subcommittee reviews all the information in the dossier and the confidential file.  Thereafter, the committee evaluates whether the faculty member has met the applicable standard for Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year review, utilizing the general faculty evaluation criteria and academic unit guidelines. 
+
+The elected faculty members of the ART Committee submit their evaluation in each case to the Provost, indicating whether the faculty member has met the applicable standards for Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year review.  The committee’s conclusions shall be based on a simple majority vote.  A committee member in the minority has the discretion to submit an anonymous written dissenting opinion, which will be included in the report.
+
+The ART Committee will communicate to the faculty member in writing its evaluation.  If the committee determines that the faculty member’s performance exceeds the applicable standard in all evaluation categories, the report will include a commendation for distinguished performance.  If the ART subcommittee determines that the faculty member’s performance does not meet the applicable standard in an evaluation category, the report will include suggestions for improvement where improvement is deemed necessary.  Faculty are expected to take the recommendations of the ART Committee seriously and implement suggestions as necessary by developing a professional development plan in consultation with the faculty member’s Dean. 
+
+Professional Development Plan
+
+If the ART subcommittee determines that a faculty member’s performance does not meet the applicable standard in an evaluation category, the faculty member will design, in consultation with the Dean, a two-year professional development plan to address the area(s) in need of improvement.  It is the responsibility of the Dean to assist the faculty member not only in designing the plan but also in identifying University resources that can be used to support it.  If an agreement on the plan’s goals cannot be reached, the Provost will be consulted.
+
+The Follow-up Review 
+
+In the spring of the second year subsequent to the Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year review, the faculty member will undergo a follow-up review by the ART Committee to determine whether the goals outlined in the professional development plan have been met.  The Dean and the faculty member will agree, in advance, upon the scope of the follow-up review and the composition of the dossier that will be assembled.  Although the dossier may include evidence that the faculty member has been meeting the applicable standards in all evaluation categories, the follow-up review will focus more narrowly on the issues raised in the previous Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year review.  The dossier will typically include a self-evaluation and a letter from the Dean that evaluates the quality of the faculty member’s responses to the issues raised in the previous review, and any other evidence documenting progress the faculty member has made while implementing the professional development plan. 
+
+The completed dossier will be evaluated by the ART Committee, which will determine whether the faculty member has achieved the goals identified in the professional development plan.
+
+If the committee finds by majority vote that the faculty member has met the goals of the plan, the process is complete, and a new Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year cycle will begin in the next appointment year.  Copies of the professional development plan and the assessment of the progress achieved by the end of the development period will be submitted to the Office of Academic Affairs to be added to the faculty member’s personnel file.
+
+If the committee finds by majority vote that the faculty member has not met the goals of the plan, the committee will conclude its work by explaining that finding in a written report to the faculty member.  The faculty member will be afforded an opportunity to submit a written response to the Chair of the committee within ten academic days of submission of the report.  Thereafter, the ART Committee’s report, along with the faculty member’s responses (if any), and evaluative file will be submitted to the Provost.
+
+The faculty member and the Provost will then meet to negotiate a mutually acceptable course of action responsive to the issues identified in the committee’s follow-up review report.  Options may include a nonstandard faculty workload profile, reassignment of the faculty member to other duties within the University, some other mutually acceptable plan or course of action, or voluntary separation.  
+
+Note: The procedures for dismissing or severely sanctioning faculty for cause are separate from these policies and may only be invoked pursuant to the Suspension or Dismissal for Cause Policy [INSERT LINK].
+
+
+
+C. Appeals
+
+
+
+Faculty members may appeal the ART Committee’s initial Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth-Year Review decision, the requirements of the Professional Development Plan, and/or final action resulting from the follow-up review process.  
+
+The faculty member’s appeal letter and all documentation and evidence in support of it must be submitted in writing to the Provost within [ten academic days] of the submission of initial Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth-Year Review decision, the Provost's final approval of the Professional Development Plan, or the Provost's final follow-up review decision.
+
+By filing a grievance, the faculty is asking the Grievance Committee to review the process and advise the Provost regarding whether or not the process has been fair.  Comparable to appeals emanating from promotion and tenure evaluations, formal appeals may be made only on procedural, not substantive grounds (i.e., prejudicial error or inadequate consideration).  The Grievance Committee will not substitute its judgment on the merits of the case for promotion/tenure but rather determine whether the decision was the result of adequate consideration. (See Step III of Grievance Procedures.)
+
+The term prejudicial does not refer to the state of mind of the members of the ART Committee or administrative evaluator; rather, it refers to an assessment of the likely effect of an error in procedure on a review decision.  An error is prejudicial if it is reasonably probable that a result more favorable to the appellant would have been reached in the absence of the error. 
+
+The term “inadequate consideration” refers to procedural rather than substantive issues related to the Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth-Year Review evaluation process.  Inadequate consideration occurs if the ART Committee or administrative evaluators (i) violated the stated procedures for including relevant evidence in the promotion and tenure file or using that evidence as a basis for judgment in the review and (ii) it is reasonably probable that a result more favorable to the appellant would have been reached had adequate consideration been given to the proper evidence.  Alternatively, inadequate consideration occurs when a decision is not supported by substantial evidence in the evaluation file. 
+
+Note: An allegation that a decision emanating from Post-Tenure/Post-Sixth-Year Review represents an instance of unlawful discrimination will be referred to the Assistant Vice President for Human Resources.  Allegations of unlawful discrimination will be considered and resolved before an appeal on procedural grounds is considered. 
+
+
+
+2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] ART Task Force Recommendations .txt [/INST] ART Task Force
+
+Preliminary Recommendations
+
+
+
+The ART Task Force is pleased to share a draft of our preliminary recommendations for revising Cal Lutheran’s faculty evaluation policies. We wanted to share these in advance of the faculty forums, scheduled on Oct. 27th & Nov. 2nd. These recommendations have been drafted after receiving the insightful results from our faculty survey and the consultant-led interviews, as well as following our consultant-led meetings on our institution’s ART policies and procedures. In addition, the task force has studied the scholarly literature and reviewed the tenure and review procedures used at our peer and other institutions. 
+
+We look forward to discussing these items in more detail during the forums and there will be additional opportunities to provide feedback on how these potential recommendations, as well as others, may be implemented. The goal of the task force is to present a final proposal to FAC for Handbook changes by the end of February 2022.
+
+Draft Recommendation #1: Develop a policy requiring each academic division or school to develop supplemental guidelines for tenure and promotion to account for differences in the nature of teaching effectiveness, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service across academic divisions or schools.
+
+Supporting details: The policy text should require that the division or school guidelines (a) conform to the general University evaluation categories published in the Faculty Policies Handbook; (b) make clear what each discipline values in pedagogy, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service; and (c) be used by all evaluators in the annual, promotion, and tenure evaluation processes. Moreover, procedural guidance regarding the development and approval of the academic division guidelines should be also developed.
+
+Draft recommendation #2: Refine the “Teaching Effectiveness” category to more clearly define and provide examples of “teaching effectiveness” and develop a corresponding teaching evaluation rubric for publication in the ART Guidelines document.
+
+Supporting details:  For example, this would be comparable to the standards and rubric developed by the University of Kansas: https://cte.ku.edu/benchmarks-teaching-effectiveness-project
+
+Draft Recommendation #3: Modify the current ""Effectiveness as an Advisor"" category to include mentoring and also include a list of corresponding examples of activities. 
+
+Draft Recommendation #4: Refine the University ""Scholarly Activity and Professional Service"" category to clearly define “scholarship” and “professional service” and augment with a list of additional examples of acceptable forms of corresponding activities.
+
+Draft Recommendation #5: Refine the ""Service"" category by developing formal definitions of ""university service"" and “community service,” and providing examples of corresponding activities. (note to consider department service).
+
+Draft Recommendation #6: Develop guidelines      to account for each candidate’s administrative workload assignments during promotion and tenure evaluations as may be applicable. 
+
+Supporting details: For example, if a candidate’s workload assignment requires more administrative service (such as serving as department chair/program director, director of a center, etc.) and less teaching and scholarly activities, the expectation for teaching effectiveness and scholarship or creative work shall not be compromised, but the expected volume of teaching and research may be reduced and taken into consideration by promotion and tenure evaluators.
+
+Draft Recommendation #7: Develop a new “Contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI)” evaluation category. 
+
+ Supporting Details: Faculty should be required to submit personal statements in the Annual Activity Report and promotion and tenure dossiers detailing their specific individual and/or collaborative activities aimed at supporting diversity, equity, an inclusion, discussing the context, importance, and impact of their contributions in teaching, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service activities during the evaluation period. 
+
+Note: We recommend that the University adopt a staged roll-out of the DEI criteria and provide DEI training to both faculty and evaluators.
+
+Draft recommendation #8: Develop a new “Collegiality” or “Campus Citizenship” evaluation category, which is consistent with the University’s values. 
+
+Supporting details: The text should emphasize that the evaluator’s focus with respect to this evaluation category solely relates to collaboration and constructive cooperation associated with a faculty member’s overall performance. The text should also note that an assessment of collegiality must not be confused with conformity, sociability, or likability and may not be interpreted in a way that violates the principles of academic freedom.
+
+Draft Recommendation #9: Retain our current 2/4/6-year faculty evaluation system (as opposed to using an annual/mid-probationary system), but with a strengthened annual reflection component emphasizing formative feedback and goal setting.
+
+Draft Recommendation #10: Develop a comprehensive peer and administrator teaching evaluation policy that clearly delineates the frequency of teaching observations and outlines in procedural detail how peer evaluators and courses to be observed are selected, and how the data will be shared during the faculty review process.
+
+Draft Recommendation #11: Supplement the second- and fourth-year review evaluation procedures to provide more narrative detail explaining the current step-wise process and develop new text that highlights the formative aspect of these evaluations.
+
+Supporting details: For example, the text should address in greater detail the department chair/program director evaluation and ART Committee deliberations and reporting requirements, etc. The ART Committee evaluation should discuss the faculty member’s strengths and weaknesses and identify areas that require development for continued progress toward tenure (if any).The Dean (or Provost) should discuss the written evaluation with the faculty member.
+
+Draft Recommendation #12: Refine the “Criteria for Promotion to Rank” category by clearly articulating and defining the standards that must be met for each academic rank.
+
+Draft Recommendation #13: Supplement the “Institutional Need Requirement and Tenure Quota” policy with detailed procedures addressing how such determinations are made and implemented.
+
+Draft Recommendation #14: Refine the  “Eligibility for Inclusion” category by developing more inclusive policies to address early tenure application as well as the pausing of the “tenure clock.”
+
+Draft Recommendation #15: For formative purposes, modify the University's current policy regarding an applicant's access to the content of the Confidential file.
+
+Draft Recommendation #16: Supplement the “Procedures for Promotion and Tenure Review” category to provide more narrative detail regarding the current stepwise evaluation process.
+
+Supporting details: For example, develop procedural text that clearly explains how tenured faculty inside and outside the department conduct their evaluations, the role of external evaluators, how the department chair/program director and dean conduct their respective evaluations and document the results,as well as outline the way the ART Committee arrives at and documents its Draft Recommendation, etc.
+
+Draft Recommendation #17: Include a clause in the “Evaluation and Action” subsection indicating that all evaluators are expected to evaluate candidates based solely on the content of the evaluation file (dossier and confidential file) and the results of candidate interviews (as applicable).
+
+Supporting details: If the ART Committee seeks additional content, the faculty member will be notified and be afforded an opportunity to respond.
+
+Draft Recommendation #18: Supplement the “Post-tenure/Post-6th Year Review Policy and Procedures” to provide a mechanism for recognizing distinguished faculty performance, as well as a means of assisting faculty members who are experiencing difficulties in achieving their expectations.
+
+Draft Recommendation #19: Develop a policy that addresses evaluator conflict of interest.
+
+
+
+1</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Article I Feedback.txt [/INST] I. Governance and Economic Security of the Faculty
+
+AAUP
+
+In Article 1, the document generally does well in observing AAUP guidelines or recommendations for governance. However, in Article 5, there are objectionable limitations to the faculty role with regard to shared decision-making around compensation and benefits, which is in clear opposition to AAUP guidelines or recommendations with regard to salary and compensation. 
+
+Global Comments (Not Sure Who From):
+
+Ok on Visiting profs—both rank and not voting BUT a Professor of the Practice has a term limited contract, potentially similar to that of a visiting prof. ¿no? Sure, different intention but still. 
+
+What would be the clause addressing faculty meeting attendance?
+
+Why Faculty Bylaws instead of legislation?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Article 1
+
+Section 1
+
+Niederstadt - Section 1
+
+This may fall under copy editing but I think “Tenure Line” should be hyphenated as “Tenure-line”.
+
+Does “Associate Librarian” exist as a staff role? My understanding is that the library leadership consists of the Dean of the Library and several directors. While I don’t know their exact titles, they include: Ellen Kane, Kelly Faulkner, Thomas San Filippo, and, previously, Kate Boylan. In recent years, who held the “faculty-status” role became an issue of contention.
+
+UFO – Section 1
+
+Why are Professors of Practice and Senior Professors of Practices separated Instructors?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Section 2
+
+UFO - Section 2: 
+
+What is the definition of “half-time?”
+
+UFO: 
+
+CoCA already has a very full charge. Why not have the Provost office keep a roster of committee membership, in collaboration with CoCA, since there are many ad hoc and working groups that don’t fall under the purview of the committee? Service in the UFO and the Faculty Collective are supposed to count equally towards service but CoCA doesn’t keep track of coordinators.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Section 3
+
+AAUP - 3.1, 3.2 If we are still following Robert’s Rules for faculty meetings, I recommend using language from Robert’s Rules when discussing the person chairing meetings or handling business meetings in the absence of the President— the President’s designee, I think. Perhaps something such as, in the President’s absence, the Provost or the President’s designee. This leaves options for situations in which neither the president or provost can preside.
+
+
+
+Niederstadt - 3.1
+
+If a faculty member, e.g., member of CoCA, co-facilitates the faculty meeting with the President, would they – or CoCA? – also have the right to restrict attending to voting members?
+
+Similarly, throughout when reference is made to the President or the Provost taking a certain action, could the faculty co-facilitator do the same?
+
+UFO -  3.1
+
+The second sentence is inconsistent with Section 2, in which administrative officers are also listed as Voting Members. I would like to retain the term ‘chair’ but clarify it as ‘chair of CoCA’.
+
+
+
+Niederstadt - Section 3.3. Procedure at Meetings
+
+Is it worth spelling out how voting will occur – i.e., using the green “yes” button on Zoom instead of thumbs-up emoji? Asking b/c the lack of clarity has caused confusion in recent years.
+
+UFO – 3.3
+
+I disagree with the statement that the president or the provost will decide the format of the meeting. Although I would like these meetings to be in-person, I would like the current system to continue where majority preferences of the faculty decides the format of the meeting.
+
+AAUP - 3.5 b.3 My understanding of an abstaining vote is that the person abstaining is stating profound disagreement with the voting procedural process itself, or reluctance to engage in the process for some reason. In either case, abstaining is not simply a vote of “no.” While it’s true that abstentions mean that the person did not cast a vote, nonetheless abstaining votes signal that persons are, in fact, using their voice and, as such, are abstaining votes are generally symbolic for the record. 
+
+
+
+UFO – 3.5 (SS)
+
+What is the difference between legislation vs. bylaws? Why are we making the switch?
+
+
+
+UFO – 3.5 (WJ) 
+
+Because the necessary number of votes (e.g., “more than one-fourth of the entire voting faculty”) is noted and significant, shouldn’t there be a clearer sense of how to quantify the votes in digital meetings? That is, are “ayes” and emoji hands the official metric? Should there be better records of the vote? Perhaps addressed in the minutes (3.8)?
+
+I’m not sure abstentions should register as a non-vote for “matters other than a change to Faculty Bylaws.” It creates a zero-sum scenario for voters who simply have concerns that haven’t been addressed yet, and can potentially lead to more contentious votes.
+
+Niederstadt - Section 3.5. Necessary Number of Votes
+
+Out of curiosity, why two weeks instead of one, especially in the age of digital communications?
+
+Similarly, why would fewer than two weeks’ notice require unanimous consent as opposed to two-thirds or three-quarters?
+
+
+
+Niederstadt - Section 3.9
+
+I think Educational Council needs to be modified to indicate that it is a body of the Student Government Association (SGA)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Section 4
+
+President – 4.1:
+
+Remove certifications. 
+
+“Leading to one or more major/degrees…”
+
+Add a sentence there that says the Provost is responsible for the organization of all academic units.
+
+For student services in many places, add “if available and willing” 
+
+
+
+UFO - Section 4.1 (WJ)
+
+The explanation of departments, programs, and academic units might benefit from incorporating some language related to faculty definitions established in section 1 (and again in Article II). That is, how are faculty related to departments and programs? More plainly, I just recommend some clarifications about the relationships between faculty and departments/programs, especially for non-tenured faculty and PoPs who can be associated with both in tenuous ways, e.g., a program or dept may subsequently be reconfigured without the faculty member’s intradepartmental say but as of now they nonetheless rely largely on departments/program coordinators for assessment, review, promotions, tenure, reappointments, searches, etc. (This is also a point relevant to Article II and the types of appointments and contracts described as well as the details of “joint appointments” in Article II 2.5 and termination in Article IV 8.2.)
+
+
+
+UFO Section 4.2.1 General (SS) 
+
+There is no mention of annual evaluations of untenured faculty and Professors of Practice
+
+
+
+UFO Section 4.2.1 #2: (SS) 
+
+The added section gives a broad authority to the president without any criteria on what can be credible basis for removal, such as, what does “failure to carry out duties and responsibilities” look like. Will a faculty with 20-25 advisees refusing to take on MAP cohort be considered dereliction of duties?
+
+UFO Section 4.2.1 #4 (SS) 
+
+It is unclear what indicators will be used to identify sufficient labor. Recently, the administration has used the number of hours as a way to determine remuneration or course release for additional labor. This approach doesn’t take into account that most of the work we do requires considerable coordination and deliberation with colleagues across campus. We are being transformed from salaried employees to hourly wage earners.
+
+Curriculum Committee - 4.2. Department Chairs/4.2.1. Selection and Term of Office/4.
+
+Do we have a sense on how many folks take a course release versus a stipend? I’ve only known the former and would be curious if this is a standard practice in other departments/programs. If it is not, where is the interest to have this included?
+
+Curriculum Committee - 4.2.2. Responsibilities and Authority/1.
+
+Do we want to spell out in more detail what it means to be the “official channel” b/t dept and administration?
+
+Curriculum Committee 4.2.2. Responsibilities and Authority/6.
+
+Is there any more one could say about what this annual assessment should be comprised of?
+
+
+
+
+
+Section 5
+
+AAUP - Section 5: 5. Standing and Ad Hoc Committees of the Faculty
+
+It’s odd to have the ad hoc committees mentioned in the proposed Bylaws alongside the standing committees without general operating rules for why those ad hoc committees might be convened, by whom, and for how long? In past years (and according to Robert’s Rules, I think), there has been an interest to curtail the proliferation of committees at Wheaton with the understanding that too many committees obstruct good governance. 
+
+ 
+
+#2 With regard to the composition of committees by racial and gender categories, I think the umbrella term “diverse and inclusive representation” makes sense. However, there seems to be a contradiction by the working group in that “gender diversity” is explicitly allowed and written into the charge of the Appeals and Hearing Committee. If explicitly acknowledging gender diversity remains a value at the College, then perhaps explicitly acknowledging racial and ethnic diversity on standing committees whenever possible should also be valued based on the statements the College has made about adopting and valuing racial and ethnic diversity in the faculty. 
+
+UFO (SS)
+
+There are no guidelines for Professors of Practice and Senior Professors of Practice to serve on Standing and Ad Hoc Committees. I recommend adding Professor of Practice being eligible for positions allocated for untenured faculty and Senior Professors of Practice are eligible for positions allocated to tenured faculty from respective divisions.
+
+UFO (SS) - Section 5 #1: 
+
+The new addition is too vague. There might be personal medical issues or caregiving issues that might preclude someone from serving on committees. The added section is too broad.
+
+
+
+UFO Section 5.1 #2 (SS)
+
+I’m assuming this refers to changes in College policies, not policies for the ad-hoc committee? Currently, I like that ad-hoc committees can make changes to policies about their committee. For instance, UFO recently changed our policy to always have non-tenure-track and tenure-track Co-Coordinators.
+
+With many of the committees having representation of “untenured faculty,” we need a clear definition of this earlier in our ByLaws to show that it includes both tenure-track and non-tenure-track. (ie: Untenured faculty are all faculty members who have not been awarded tenure.)
+
+
+
+AAUP: 5.1, 3 a–d
+
+I don’t understand the verbosity of this section. Why not simply state that committee members have an obligation to abide by [or observe] standards of professional conduct as specified in the Bylaws governing professional ethics and conflicts of interest [Article 3, Section 2]?
+
+
+
+
+
+UFO - Section 5.1 #3 (SS): 
+
+The inclusion of vague terms that are open to interpretation, BIAS, is problematic. As a faculty of color, some of my departmental colleagues have directly accused me of bias when advocating for equitable practices in the department. The use of the term ‘bias’ as a criteria to remove faculty from committees, while no such provision exists for the provost or the president, is VERY problematic. I am confused as to what problem this entire section (a through d) is trying to address. For example, are committee members not supposed to bring their preexisting views (bias) to their roles as committee members?
+
+
+
+President: 5.1.3.c
+
+Remove it, d is enough
+
+Niederstadt - Section 5.1 
+
+Given the recent challenges of filling committees and that the term is 2-3 years for most committees, is four years to long a period of ineligibility?
+
+What are the responsibilities involved in being in a Reserve Members Group?
+
+
+
+Niederstadt -Section 5.1 3. d.
+
+Should this read “A potential conflict of interest must be disclosed…”
+
+
+
+Niederstadt - Section 5.1 4
+
+Is a parental or FMLA leave considered a “leave of absence”. If not, should they be included/spelled out?
+
+
+
+President: 5.1.9 
+
+Add “digital recording with consent and in accordance with Massachusetts law”
+
+
+
+Niederstadt - Section 5.1 10
+
+Who is defined as a member of the college community? Does it include alumni? Parents? Students? Norton residents who take courses at Wheaton?
+
+
+
+UFO Section 5.1 #10 (SS): 
+
+What about minutes of the Appeals and Hearing committee when they discuss specific faculty member’s concerns?
+
+Niederstadt - Section 5.12
+
+Could we add that the list must clearly identify who is serving as chair?
+
+
+
+AAUP: 5.2 
+
+I support the departmental representative continuing to vote on the tenure case, as a vote on behalf of the department. 
+
+Niederstadt - Section 5.2.  
+
+How/when is “academic division” defined?
+
+5.2.1 (p. 9) uses “Tenure Committee” instead of “Committee on Tenure”
+
+
+
+President: 5.2.1: 
+
+Remove President as a member of the Committee on Tenure
+
+
+
+Niederstadt - Section 5.2.1
+
+I know that in the past, History has counted as both humanities and social science. I think this needs to be addressed. For example, should History of Art then count as both? What about faculty who are trained in one academic division but appointed in another? How should they “count” for elections?
+
+The suggestion re: newly tenured faculty is confusing b/c it doesn’t distinguish between colleagues who may be on a committee pre-tenure, then tenured and continuing service on the committee vs. what I think is being suggested, which is that anyone not currently on a committee is now allowed to serve on a committee as a tenured representative unless they have been tenured for at least one year. 
+
+What if the Provost is a member of the candidate’s department/program? I saw that this is addressed on page 10, but is it worth addressing here (halfway down page 9), too? Should it read “one full-time teaching member…”?
+
+On page 9: What qualifies as “actively teaching”? For example, if I have a course release and am not teaching a course but am running the collection, hosting class visits, teaching during those visits, and advising, training, and/or mentoring students and work-study students, am I “actively teaching”? Should “not on leave” be substituted for “actively teaching”?
+
+This may not be addressed in this article or section, but my understanding is that a candidate for tenure can choose to be represented by someone other than a member of their department. Is that addressed elsewhere?
+
+With regard to the question as to whether or not the candidate’s representative should vote, I find it difficult to imagine a situation in which they would vote against the candidate (as long as the candidate can choose to be represented by someone other than the department chair or program coordinator should they wish to do so). It is not entirely analogous and consequences are certainly different, but in the museum field, anyone proposing an acquisition of an object is not allowed to vote on the proposal. What do our peer institutions do?
+
+
+
+UFO -  Section 5.2.1 (SS): 
+
+There is no mention of whether the preference of the untenured faculty will have any weight on the decision who will represent their tenure case. Again, the language of bias is problematic. See above.
+
+
+
+UFO - Section 5.2.2: 
+
+the term “untenured faculty” is used. Later in most other committees, the term “non-tenured members of the teaching faculty” is used. Why aren’t these consistent, and are they defined differently? If so, we need clear definitions, as mentioned above.
+
+SS - We have three divisions; one representative from each division plus two untenured faculty will make five members in the provost advisory committee
+
+
+
+Niederstadt – Section 5.2.3. b. vii. 
+
+Yes, I think the frequency of the reviews should be defined
+
+
+
+Niederstadt –Section 5.2.3. b. xii
+
+And a list of committee members with indication of chairs?
+
+As mentioned above, we may need to add text here re: role of CoCA in co-facilitating the faculty meeting with the President.
+
+UFP - Section 5.2.3, # xii (SS): 
+
+The provost office should be responsible for keeping an official list of all voting members of the faculty in each academic year since they are in-charge of renewing contracts.
+
+Niederstadt –Section 5.2.4. c. 
+
+Yes, I think similar text should be added to the description of the Educational Policy Committee (EdPol).
+
+
+
+Niederstadt –Section 5.2.5
+
+Yes, I think standing subcommittees and addressing curriculum should be added to charge for EdPol
+
+
+
+Curriculum Committee - 5.2.5 - Committee on Education Policy/b/i.
+
+The wording “new courses (including but not limited to 1⁄2 credit courses)” sounds weird to me. I get why it was added, since it was in the documentation previously, but what about wording it: “all new courses”
+
+
+
+UFO - Section 5.2.5.b.i & 5.2.11.c: 
+
+Why the need to specify about 1⁄2 credit courses? What about 1⁄4 credit ones? By only saying “new courses of all credit sizes” (or something similar) wouldn’t that cover courses of any credit amount?
+
+
+
+Niederstadt – Section 5.2.5 iv
+
+It is sometimes unclear which changes require review and/or approval from EdPol. Faculty Bylaws is unlikely the place to provide clarity on this but it’s a concern. 
+
+For example, if a department wants to count courses from another department for its major, does that require EdPol approval? 
+
+What changes to a major or minor require review and approval vs. those that do not?
+
+
+
+Section 5.2.5 viii
+
+To what does size or structure refer (particularly the former)? Is it number of faculty or majors or enrolled students?
+
+
+
+President: 5.2.6
+
+Remove “gender” before diversity (so that all kinds of diversity are considered)
+
+Niederstadt –Section 5.2.6
+
+How will the members of the Committee on Tenure, the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions and the Advisory Committee be chosen for the Appeals and Hearing Committee.
+
+Curriculum Committee - 5.2.6 Appeals and Hearing Committee
+
+What does it mean when you say gender diversity? And what does it mean to be considered?
+
+
+
+UFO - Section 5.2.6 (SS): 
+
+Only gender diversity is listed as a factor to consider on the Appeals and Hearing Committee. Diversity is quite broad and other demographic factors should also be considered.
+
+
+
+
+
+Niederstadt –Section 5.2.8 a.
+
+As mentioned above, what if the candidate for promotion wants to be represented by someone from outside their department?
+
+
+
+UFO - Section 5.2.8.a (first paragraph): 
+
+Why is the term “teaching members of the faculty” rather than simply “faculty” to avoid confusion?
+
+
+
+UFO - Section 5.2.8.a (last paragraph): 
+
+Why must the advocate be tenured? I could envision someone wanting a Senior Professor of Practice as their advocate. Why limit who someone can choose?
+
+
+
+
+
+Niederstadt –Section 5.2.9 b.
+
+It is worth mentioning who determines the comparison group of colleges? 
+
+
+
+UFO -  Section 5.2.9 (SS): 
+
+Unclear who the 4th committee member will be in the Committee on Faculty Workload and Economic Status.
+
+
+
+President: 5.2.9.v
+
+Remove “ensure” and replace with “advocate”
+
+
+
+Niederstadt –Section 5.2.10 - Committee on Library, Technology, and Learning
+
+This relates to my second comment above (on page 1) re: Associate Librarian.
+
+
+
+Niederstadt –Section 5.2.11 - The Curriculum Committee
+
+I don’t that that Executive Dean of Student Success still exists as a title. (It’s not Dolores title.)
+
+
+
+UFO - SS – 
+
+The committee that is no longer active, Faculty Planning and Priorities Committee, has a charge to meet with the executive committees of the BoTs at least once a year. Something like this will be very valuable. Is there another faculty committee that can take on this charge?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AAUP General Comment on Committee Composition: After the full discussion at this year’s September AAUP meeting, it is strange to see that the standing committees did not voluntarily reduce their committee numbers. Five and six faculty members sitting on nearly all 12 standing committees is unsustainable. I think many of the committees, excluding the tenure committee and perhaps the Educational Policy Committee, should be composed of 3 teaching faculty representing each of the three divisions with at least one of the faculty a tenured professor. If the working group has the authority to recommend an adjustment to the number of faculty serving on standing committees, it should do so.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] ARTICLE II - Wheaton College Bylaws (Recommendations to SG)(1.13.23).txt [/INST] Article II.	Faculty Status, Contracts, and Initial Appointments
+
+Faculty Status – Types of Faculty Appointments
+
+The College appoints faculty members to one of the following types of faculty appointments:
+
+Full-time Teaching Faculty 
+
+Tenure-Line Faculty
+
+	Tenure Track Faculty
+
+	Tenured Faculty
+
+	Professors of the Practice
+
+Visiting Faculty 
+
+The College also reserves the right to assign faculty status to certain administrators (see Article II, Section 1.3) and to acknowledge faculty members who have separated from service with the College following distinguished careers with the honorary designation of Associate Professor or Professor Emeritus (Emerita) (see Article II, Section 1.4).
+
+1.1. Full-Time Teaching Faculty
+
+Full-time faculty teaching appointments are made to either a Tenure-Line or Professor of the Practice position in one of the College’s academic departments or program areas.  Regardless of the type of appointment line, members of the full-time teaching faculty have duties equivalent to a full-time workload (see the Employee Handbook for Faculty) in accordance with the duties and responsibilities delineated in the faculty member’s appointment contract.
+
+Members of the full-time teaching faculty enjoy the rights and protections set forth in these Faculty Bylaws.  Moreover, they are afforded full voting privileges at faculty and academic department or program meetings.  They also may serve on standing and ad hoc committees and task forces for which they are eligible.  Full-time teaching faculty are expected to adhere to the responsibilities and policies outlined in the Employee Handbook for Faculty and these Faculty Bylaws, as well as observe other College policies applicable to them to the extent they do not violate academic freedom.
+
+To be appointed to the full-time teaching faculty, candidates must possess the appropriate academic credentials and/or equivalent professional experience to teach courses in their academic discipline(s).
+
+Tenure-Line Faculty
+
+Tenure-Line faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who either hold a Tenure-Track probationary appointment or Tenured (continuous) appointment.
+
+Tenure-Track Faculty
+
+Tenure-track faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who normally hold probationary appointments to one of two academic ranks: Instructor or Assistant Professor.  In rare circumstances, an initial appointment may be made at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.
+
+Tenure-track faculty are eligible to stand for tenure (see Article IV, Section 4) at the conclusion of the candidate’s probationary period.
+
+Tenured Faculty
+
+Tenured faculty are full-time teaching faculty who hold tenured (continued) appointments (see Article IV, Section 4) at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.  
+
+Professors of the Practice
+
+Professors of the Practice are members of the full-time teaching faculty who possess expertise and achievements in a relevant field of instruction.  Duties entail the equivalent of a standard full-time teaching load (see Article IV, Section 1.1.1) and service activities (see Article IV, Section 1.3).  Specific responsibilities entailing course equivalencies will be detailed in individual appointment letters.
+
+Individuals appointed to the Professor of the Practice line are assigned the academic title of Professor of the Practice or Senior Professor of the Practice.  
+
+Professors of the Practice share equal standing in departments and programs with their Tenure-Line colleagues and have the following rights:
+
+Voting rights in faculty and department/program meetings
+
+Protection under the standards of notification for non-reappointment
+
+Eligibility for service on committees
+
+Access to and protection under the grievance procedures
+
+Academic freedom
+
+Faculty benefits and raises 
+
+Access to faculty development funds
+
+Appointment to the Professor of the Practice line, however, does not include eligibility for tenure, promotion to any tenure-seeking academic rank, or sabbatical leave, regardless of length of employment. 
+
+Professors of the Practice are offered initial annual term contracts, followed by eligibility for multi-year contracts of two- and three-year durations as specified in the Duration of Appointment section of these Faculty Bylaws (see Article II, Section 2.2.1).
+
+Professor of the Practice appointments must be externally posted and searched nationally through faculty search committees with approval by the Provost in accordance with Article II, Section 3.1.  In all instances, Professors of the Practice are subject to the evaluation policies and procedures described in Article IV, Section 2.3.
+
+Professors of the Practice may apply for open Tenure-Track positions.  If selected and appointed to a Tenure-Track position, credit for time spent as a Professor of the Practice at Wheaton College for promotion in rank and tenure review purposes will be negotiated and determined by the Provost in consultation with the chair of the Tenure Committee.
+
+Visiting Faculty
+
+Visiting Faculty are appointed for a fixed term on a full or part-time basis to carry out instructional and any other responsibilities as delineated in the individual faculty member’s appointment letter.  Full-time Visiting Faculty may be appointed annually, for a semester, or a year, for a period not to exceed two years.  
+
+The visiting designation is used with one of the four academic ranks reserved for Tenure-Line Faculty (Visiting Instructor, Visiting Assistant Professor, Visiting Associate Professor, or Visiting Professor). 
+
+Visiting Faculty are not eligible for tenure, promotion, or sabbatical leave; however, they have the same academic freedom and access to and protection under the grievance procedures as their Tenure-Line colleagues.  See Article V of the Faculty Bylaws for additional information regarding the terms, rights, and responsibilities applicable to Visiting Faculty.
+
+Visiting Faculty may apply for open Tenure-Track positions.  If selected and appointed to a Tenure-Track position, credit for time spent as a Visiting Faculty member at Wheaton College for promotion in rank and tenure review purposes will be negotiated and determined by the Provost in consultation with the chair of the Tenure Committee.
+
+
+
+Faculty Legislation Visiting Faculty Definition (Part One, Section III.a(2))
+
+A faculty member is considered visiting when the individual’s appointment (full-time) is for a period normally not to exceed one year.  [November 5, 2004, p. 4486; May 4, 2007, p. 4640]  
+
+For such appointments, the Department Chair may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73]  
+
+In all cases where a faculty member is retained for more than one year on a full-time basis – whether the individual has a multiple year contract or a one-year contract that is being renewed – the Department Chair shall annually review the individual’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to do. A copy of this evaluation shall be shared with the faculty member and placed in the individual’s faculty personnel file.  [November 5, 2004, p. 4486] 
+
+Administrative Faculty
+
+Pursuant to Article I, Section 1 of these Faculty Bylaws, administrative faculty include administrators who serve in one of the following positions: 
+
+College President 
+
+Provost 
+
+Dean of Students 
+
+Dean of Advising
+
+Dean of Library Services
+
+Associate Librarian
+
+Dean of Admission
+
+Registrar
+
+Administrative Faculty are considered administrators for employment purposes, under terms and conditions of employment as stated in the College’s staff personnel policies.  Administrative Faculty have the privilege of vote and voice in accordance with the provisions stated in Article I, Section 2.  
+
+Faculty Rank and Retreat Rights for Administrative Faculty
+
+The President has the authority to assign Administrative Faculty a faculty rank that was earned through a faculty review at a comparable accredited or internationally recognized institution.  At its discretion, the Board of Trustees may assign an appropriate faculty rank, either at the time of appointment or subsequently.  Administrative Faculty holding academic rank are ineligible for promotion in rank during their terms of administrative service. 
+
+Administrative Faculty who are not already tenured faculty members at Wheaton College do not ordinarily receive tenure during their administrative term.  However, the President or Board of Trustees has the authority to assign retreat rights at the time of initial appointment.  
+
+Administrative Faculty hired with retreat rights are eligible to assume a faculty position and, in some cases, subsequently stand for tenure after the probationary period.  Prior to such an action, the President or Provost will consult with the relevant department or program to enable the department or program to review the candidate’s academic credentials, to meet with the candidate (if possible), and to make a recommendation.  When an Administrative Faculty member is granted retreat rights, the President will state in the initial appointment letter the conditions under which the individual may join the faculty at the conclusion of the administrative faculty appointment.
+
+Faculty Members Who Accept Administrative Appointments
+
+Full-time teaching faculty accepting full-time administrative appointments move automatically to the administrative appointment at the same rank classification.  Tenured faculty retain also tenure while holding the administrative appointment. 
+
+At the time of the initial administrative appointment, the President (or President’s designee) will state in the administrative appointment contract the conditions under which the person will return to the full-time teaching faculty and whether the time spent as an administrator will count toward promotion, tenure, or the next sabbatical leave.  Faculty members holding full-time administrative appointments who continue teaching and research or creative activities are eligible for certain academic promotions during their terms of administrative service and as assessed by the relevant faculty committees governing the process.
+
+
+
+Faculty Emeriti
+
+Emerita or emeritus status honors a faculty member's distinguished service and contributions during a career at the College, as well as the faculty member’s interest in an ongoing and meaningful connection with Wheaton.  
+
+A retiring Tenured or Senior Professor of the Practice faculty member’s department or program may request emerita or emeritus status for that colleague via a letter from the Department Chair or Program Coordinator to the Provost.  That letter should indicate that the department or program supports the request and outline the reasons why the department or program believes the faculty member’s contributions merit emeriti status.
+
+Following the recommendation of the department/program, the Provost will review the received nomination and make a written recommendation to the Board of Trustees to either confer/not confer emerita/emeritus status.  This recommendation shall not be subject to appeal.  The Board of Trustees officially confers emeritus status.  
+
+Faculty who retire at the Associate Professor level may, at the Provost’s discretion, be recommended for emeritus status.  The Chair or Program Coordinator’s letter to the Provost may make such a request, along with any recommendations for title.
+
+Emeriti Faculty are not considered employees of the College and therefore are not entitled to benefits.  They are considered members of the broader Wheaton community. 
+
+Emeriti Status Recognitions
+
+Emeriti Faculty are entitled to the following recognitions:
+
+Award of an inscribed seal of the College.
+
+Listing in the College Catalog and other College publications that collectively list the Faculty.
+
+Emeriti Status Privileges
+
+Emeriti faculty are entitled to the following privileges:
+
+Regular and on-line library and learning management software privileges it in accordance with applicable licensing agreements. 
+
+Email address and support including listing in Wheaton College directories. 
+
+Membership to athletic, fitness, and recreational facilities on campus. 
+
+Participation in College public ceremonies. 
+
+Revocation of Status
+
+Once awarded, emeritus status continues in perpetuity unless the recipient either requests to have status rescinded or violates the intent and spirit of emeritus status by engaging in serious dishonorable conduct in violation of law, rule, or policy and/or causes harm to the College’s reputation. 
+
+To revoke emeriti status without the consent of the individual, a written petition must be made by a member of the College to the President, and subsequently to the Board of Trustees, which has the final authority to revoke the individual’s emeritus status.  Actions or conduct protected by academic freedom and unlawful discrimination shall not be used to revoke emeriti status.
+
+Academic Rank and Faculty Titles
+
+The College recognizes the following academic ranks and titles: Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor, Professor of the Practice, Senior Professor of the Practice, and Visiting Faculty.  [May 13, 1963, p. 2715; Minutes of the Board of Trustees meeting, October 26, 1963, pp. 1055-57; November 18, 1963, pp. 2728-29] 
+
+Eight specific full-time teaching positions are titled Associate Faculty, as explained in Section O. [November 3, 2006, p. 4608] 
+
+	At the time of initial appointment, the President or Provost shall approve the faculty rank after receiving and considering the recommendation from the search committee.  Appointment to the rank of Associate Professor or Professor is subject to a formal vote of approval by the Board of Trustees.   
+
+	Initial faculty rank is assigned on the basis of the information below, which indicates the minimum qualifications for appointment to the rank.
+
+Instructor
+
+Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or equivalent terminal degree from an accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Instructors.  Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Assistant Professor effective the following academic year.
+
+Assistant Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility. In addition to academic or exceptional alternative equivalent experience qualifications, applicants seeking an initial appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor must demonstrate qualities that indicate potential and promise as an effective educator.
+
+Associate Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Associate Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility and, generally, six (6) years of full–time ranked teaching or a minimum of five (5) years of full–time teaching at the rank of Assistant Professor.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.1.1).
+
+Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.1.1).
+
+Professor of the Practice
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the academic title of Professor of the Practice is the appropriate degree from a regionally accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or the equivalent professional expertise and achievement in a relevant field of professional practice.  
+
+Senior Professor of the Practice
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the academic title of Senior Professor of the Practice is the appropriate degree from a regionally accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or the equivalent professional expertise and achievement in a relevant field of professional practice.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.2.1).
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Contracts
+
+A faculty contract is a written mutual agreement between an individual granted faculty status and the College.  The contractual terms (appointment type, academic department/program, rank, salary, length of appointment, etc.) of every faculty appointment will be stated in writing only by the President or the Provost to the faculty member.  Academic departments and/or programs authorized to fill an open faculty position shall recommend candidates for appointment by the President or the Provost.  Under no circumstance is a faculty member or College employee authorized to offer an appointment or to enter a faculty appointment contract.  Any subsequent extensions or modifications of an appointment, and any special understandings, or any notices incumbent upon either party to provide, will be stated or confirmed in writing, and a copy will be given to the faculty member.
+
+Types of Faculty Contracts
+
+The following types of contracts are issued to individuals granted faculty status at Wheaton College:
+
+Tenure Track Contracts, Probationary Appointments
+
+Tenure-Line faculty members eligible for tenure receive tenure-track contracts and hold probationary appointments until they either receive tenure or separate from the College.  A probationary appointment is made with the understanding that both the College and the probationary faculty member will engage in a period of mutual evaluation—the probationary period—leading to the tenure decision.
+
+Faculty members eligible for tenure may be appointed to the rank of Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor, upon consideration of their qualifications and experience relative to the standards for appointment in rank. 
+
+A tenure-track appointment is normally renewable up to a total of seven (7) years of full-time service—i.e., a maximum of six (6) years prior to and including the year of the tenure decision, plus one (1) additional terminal year in the case of a negative tenure decision—unless the probationary period is either accelerated or extended in accordance with Article IV, Sections 4.1.2 and 4.1.3, respectively.  
+
+Faculty members holding tenure-track contracts undergo annual and reappointment reviews as specified in Article IV, Section 2.2.  A faculty member undergoing an unsuccessful tenure review will receive notice and will be allowed to complete a final year of the probationary appointment pursuant to a terminal contract (see Section 2.1.4 below).
+
+Tenured Contracts
+
+Tenured contracts are awarded to Tenure Line Faculty who have attained tenured status (see Article IV, Section 4).  The granting of tenure can only be effected by the procedures specified in the College’s Tenure Policy (see Article IV, Section 4) and upon the affirmative vote of the Board of Trustees.  De facto tenure is not awarded at Wheaton College.
+
+A tenured faculty member has the contractual right to continuous appointments until the faculty member resigns, is dismissed for adequate cause (see Article IV, Section 8.2.1), or is terminated as a result of a reduction in force due to a bona fide financial exigency or program discontinuation (see Article IV, Section 8.2.2 and 8.2.3, respectively).
+
+Term Contracts
+
+Term contracts are offered to Professors of the Practice and Visiting Faculty and are limited to the term of employment outlined in the appointment contract.  Subject to College need, another term contract may be offered subject to the limitations set forth in these Faculty Bylaws.  Issuance of another term contract is solely within the discretion of the College and no other procedures apply.  
+
+Terminal Contracts
+
+A Terminal contract is the final annual contract issued to Tenure Track faculty whose contract will not be renewed or who have been denied tenure.
+
+Duration of Appointments and Notice of Termination
+
+The College will observe the following guidelines for rank and duration of appointments and notice of terminations:
+
+Duration of Appointments
+
+Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Instructors.  Those who have completed their professional training will ordinarily be appointed Assistant Professors.  Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Assistant Professor effective the following academic year. 
+
+The initial term of appointment for Tenure-Track Faculty will be either for one or two years as set forth in the individual faculty member’s appointment contract.
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	Professors of the Practice will receive one-year appointments in the first two years of appointment.  At the end of the second annual contract year, a Professor of the Practice will be considered for a two-year contract.  When the fiscal and programmatic needs of the College permit, a summative review by the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions at the end of the two-year contract will assess eligibility for a three-year term contract.  Review at the end of the three-year contract will determine eligibility for a successive three-year contract.  See Article IV, Section 2.3.2 for additional information.  Overall, a Professor of the Practice’s employment is governed by the individual’s appointment contract.  The College may elect not to re-appoint the faculty member at the College’s discretion, regardless of the positive outcome of any review, if curricular needs change and/or enrollment declines.
+
+	Visiting Faculty will receive appointments on a per-course, semester, or annual basis. [February 4, 2005, p. 4492] 
+
+	Replacements for faculty members on leave and other temporary personnel will receive appointments of appropriate rank and duration. 
+
+Regardless of rank or duration of previous appointments, any non-tenure track member of the faculty or Professor of the Practice with two or more years of service at Wheaton may be given a one-year terminal contract.  In such a case, the standards of notification as described in Article II, Section 2.2.2 below will be observed. 
+
+Notice of Termination
+
+In decisions regarding reappointment or non-reappointment of full-time Tenure Track and Professors of the Practice faculty members, care will be taken to observe the following standards of notification (or salary in lieu of notice) endorsed in 1964 as the official policy of the American Association of University Professors: 
+
+Not later than March 1 of the first academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if a one-year appointment ends during the academic year, at least three months in advance of its termination. 
+
+Not later than December 15 of the second academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of the year; or, if an initial two-year appointment ends during an academic year, at least six months in advance of its termination. 
+
+At least twelve months before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years of service. 
+
+The notice provisions set forth above do not apply to Tenure-Track faculty and Professors of the Practice that have been issued a Terminal Appointment contract.
+
+Annual Contract Period
+
+The period of employment under a full-time faculty contract shall be for the 12-month period beginning July 1 and ending June 30, during which the individual shall receive salary and benefits. The contract will cover the duties associated with the position performed during the period which begins the week before classes begin through the week after Commencement and is known as the ""academic year."" 
+
+Primary Area of Appointment
+
+All faculty appointment contracts designate a department or academic program as the faculty member’s primary faculty appointment location.  It is from this department(s) or program(s) that recommendations for reappointment, promotion, tenure, and other actions concerning a Full-Time Teaching Faculty member are initiated.  A faculty member’s primary faculty appointment may be changed by the President (or President’s designee) to meet the curricular and organizational needs of the College.  
+
+Joint Appointments 
+
+When a faculty member’s contractual responsibilities require a significant portion of teaching and professional activity responsibilities be devoted to either multiple departments, interdisciplinary programs, areas of instruction, or other academic entities engaged in or responsible for the delivery of the curriculum, the faculty member may receive a joint appointment to a department and a specified program or to two departments.  A joint appointment may be established at any stage of faculty employment. 
+
+In making a joint appointment, a primary and secondary department or program will be clearly designated by the Provost in the faculty member’s appointment contract. Such designation may be revised at any stage of employment by the President (or the President’s designee) to meet the curricular or organizational needs of the College.  The primary department or program will serve as the faculty member’s administrative home, which will take the lead responsibility on personnel issues, central human resources reporting, appointment, promotions, tenure, coordination of annual performance review, conflict resolution, and changes in employment.  Often, but not always, the administrative home will be the department or program with the higher appointment fraction.
+
+The nature of a joint appointment varies and the assignment of duties in the secondary department or program will differ by department/program and candidate.  The details of the assignment of duties, the allocation of salary, departmental/program governance rights, and provision for office and laboratory space as applicable to both the primary and secondary departments/program will be communicated in a signed written memorandum of understanding signed by the two Department Chairs/Program Coordinators, the faculty member, and the Provost.  Additionally, negotiated changes to those details will be evidenced in a signed memorandum of understanding.
+
+The Department Chair/Program Coordinator of the secondary department/program must provide input for every evaluation for a jointly appointed faculty member.  In the case of promotion or tenure review, the secondary Department Chair/Program Coordinator must provide a written evaluation describing the nature and extent of the candidate’s involvement in, and contribution to, the secondary department/program.  In the faculty member’s tenure application, it is important to document how the candidate’s time is being spent, and contributions to each department/program need to be clearly documented.
+
+It is recognized that new opportunities, changes in faculty interest, faculty performance, changes in the College’s curricular needs or enrollments or other issues with the joint appointment may require review, renegotiation, or discontinuation of the original joint appointment.  If possible, a faculty member with a joint appointment will have the option of retreating to a full appointment at the primary department or program.  If retreat is not a possibility, the Provost is responsible for ensuring that the faculty member is made fully aware of the existing options.  Further, a short-term plan must be put in place to ensure a smooth transition with minimum disruption to the initiatives, projects, and teaching, that were the responsibility of the faculty member with the joint appointment.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Recruitment and Appointment
+
+Recruitment and Appointment of Full-Time Teaching Faculty 
+
+Vacancies shall be advertised in as many ways as are necessary in order to obtain a suitable pool of applicants in keeping with Wheaton's policy as an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer; for example: in professional journals, job rosters, etc.  Advertisements shall include a statement that the College is an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer. The Department or Program/Search Committee may also want to write to graduate schools. 
+
+For legal purposes, records pertaining to the hiring process shall be retained in accordance with the College’s Record Retention schedule.  
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Normally departments/programs will establish their own search committee.  In the exceptional case of no continuing tenured member, the Provost will consult with the Advisory Committee.  The Provost will then ask the Committee on Committees and Agenda to set up the search committee. 
+
+The Search Committee shall review applications to determine who should be interviewed. Candidates may be interviewed at professional meetings to narrow the field. All members of the Search Committee will receive anti-bias training.  Moreover, the committee chair is expected to consult with the Office of Human Resources for interview guidance.
+
+After consulting with the Provost, the Chair of the Search Committee shall invite several candidates to visit the College.  The candidates shall be interviewed by members of the department, the Provost and/or the President, and students when possible.  During these interviews, candidates will be notified that any job offer is contingent upon successful completion of employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks, as well documentation of U.S. citizenship or upon maintaining the appropriate visa status and work authorization.  Moreover, notice of the availability of the College’s Annual Security Report will be provided to the interviewee, if the position was externally advertised.
+
+The Search Committee Chair shall send to the Provost a written recommendation from the Search Committee which shall state its majority opinion and indicate any disagreements within the Search Committee.  The written recommendation shall verify that the candidate’s preparation and qualifications are appropriate to the nature of the teaching assignment.  Candidate qualifications shall normally be measured, as applicable to the position, by advanced degrees held, evidence of scholarship, advanced study, creative activities, and teaching abilities, as well as relevant professional experience, training, and credentials. Exceptions may be made for individuals who do not hold advanced degrees but who are considered by the College to possess other demonstrated competencies and professional achievements that provide evidence to support excellent teaching and student achievement in the discipline.
+
+If the Provost or the President has reservations about following the recommendation for appointment, one or both shall consult with the Chair and may request that the Search Committee continue the search process. 
+
+If the recommendation for appointment is approved by the President or the Provost, after consultation with the Chair, the Provost shall make a written offer of appointment to the appointee, stating the precise terms and conditions of the appointment.  Such offer shall refer to, and be accompanied by, either a copy or a link to these Faculty Bylaws as then in effect.  In the written offer, the Provost may, after receiving and considering recommendations from the search committee, award credit toward the fulfillment of promotion and/or tenure eligibility based upon the candidate’s past professional experience at another higher education institution.  The decision to grant prior service credit takes into account the relevancy of the prior service to the College’s needs, the type of institution(s) at which service was provided, and the nature of the position being filled by the appointee.  Evidence as to the quality of the prior service will be entered into the candidate’s file. 
+
+The offer is contingent upon verification of the candidate’s academic credentials or alternative experience qualifications credentials and the successful completion of requisite employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks.  Moreover, an initial written offer of appointment to the rank of Associate Professor with tenure or Professor with tenure shall also indicate that the offer is subject to a formal vote of approval by the Board of Trustees, action on which is pending.  Notice of such Trustee action shall be sent to the candidate. 
+
+Each such offer shall also specify that it may be accepted only in writing.  If it is so accepted, the President or the Provost shall furnish copies of the offer and acceptance to the Chair for the department or program’s records.  All data submitted by appointee in connection with the application for appointment shall be retained in the Provost's records indefinitely. 
+
+As soon as a vacancy has been filled, the Chair shall so advise the unsuccessful candidate(s) selected to be interviewed in writing. Human Resources will advise all other applicants.
+
+Note: Since years in academic rank are calculated based on full academic years, in the rare instance that a Tenure-Line Faculty and Professors of the Practice joins the College after November 1, the faculty member’s first year in rank or title will be calculated starting with the succeeding full academic year.
+
+Recruitment and Appointment of Visiting Faculty
+
+A faculty member is considered visiting when his or her appointment (full-time) is for a period normally not to exceed one year. [November 5, 2004, p. 4486; May 4, 2007, p. 4640] 
+
+For such Visiting Faculty appointments, the Department Chair or Program Coordinator may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures set forth above in Article II, Section 3.1, provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons or less under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73].  In all instances, however, the Department Chair or Program Coordinator shall verify that the final candidate’s preparation and qualifications are appropriate to the nature of the teaching assignment.
+
+Candidates for a Visiting Faculty position that are selected for interviews will be notified that any job offer is contingent upon successful completion of employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks, as well documentation of U.S. citizenship or upon maintaining the appropriate visa status and work authorization.  Moreover, notice of the availability of the College’s Annual Security Report will be provided to the interviewee, if the position was externally advertised.  Any offer of appointment is contingent upon verification of the candidate’s academic credentials or alternative experience qualifications credentials and the successful completion of requisite employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks.
+
+In all cases where a Visiting Faculty member is retained for more than one year on a full-time basis – whether the faculty member has a multiple year contract, a one-year contract that is being renewed for another term or a new semester or per course term contract – the Department Chair/Program Coordinator shall annually review the faculty member’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to do.  A copy of this evaluation shall be shared with the faculty member and placed in the faculty member’s faculty personnel file. 
+
+[November 5, 2004, p. 4486] 
+
+Appointment of Foreign Nationals
+
+The College welcomes international faculty of high qualifications and assists faculty members whenever possible in securing visas and permanent residency.  
+
+Non-U.S. nationals who have secured a faculty position must maintain current legal status in the appropriate visa category and notify the College of any anticipated change of status. Moreover, Tenure-Line Faculty are expected to seek permanent residency as soon as possible after beginning their service to the College.  The loss of appropriate authorization to work in the United States may result in automatic termination of the faculty appointment, regardless of contractual status or type.
+
+All international faculty are requested to consult with Human Resources before accepting salaries, stipends, or honoraria from any other institution to ensure compliance with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and Department of State (J-visa program) regulations.
+
+		Wheaton College Faculty Bylaws – Page 33</s>"
+"<s>[INST] ARTICLE II - Wheaton College Bylaws (Recommendations to SG)(1.23).txt [/INST] Article II.	Faculty Status, Contracts, and Initial Appointments
+
+Faculty Status – Types of Faculty Appointments
+
+The College appoints faculty members to one of the following types of faculty appointments:
+
+Full-time Teaching Faculty 
+
+Tenure-Line Faculty
+
+	Tenure Track Faculty
+
+	Tenured Faculty
+
+	Professors of the Practice
+
+Visiting Faculty 
+
+The College also reserves the right to assign faculty status to certain administrators (see Article II, Section 1.3) and to acknowledge faculty members who have separated from service with the College following distinguished careers with the honorary designation of Associate Professor or Professor Emeritus (Emerita) (see Article II, Section 1.4).
+
+1.1. Full-Time Teaching Faculty
+
+Full-time faculty teaching appointments are made to either a Tenure-Line or Professor of the Practice position in one of the College’s academic departments or program areas.  Regardless of the type of appointment line, members of the full-time teaching faculty have duties equivalent to a full-time workload (see the Employee Handbook for Faculty) in accordance with the duties and responsibilities delineated in the faculty member’s appointment contract.
+
+Members of the full-time teaching faculty enjoy the rights and protections set forth in these Faculty Bylaws.  Moreover, they are afforded full voting privileges at faculty and academic department or program meetings.  They also may serve on standing and ad hoc committees and task forces for which they are eligible.  Full-time teaching faculty are expected to adhere to the responsibilities and policies outlined in the Employee Handbook for Faculty and these Faculty Bylaws, as well as observe other College policies applicable to them to the extent they do not violate academic freedom.
+
+To be appointed to the full-time teaching faculty, candidates must possess the appropriate academic credentials and/or equivalent professional experience to teach courses in their academic discipline(s).
+
+Tenure-Line Faculty
+
+Tenure-Line faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who either hold a Tenure-Track probationary appointment or Tenured (continuous) appointment.
+
+Tenure-Track Faculty
+
+Tenure-track faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who normally hold probationary appointments to one of two academic ranks: Instructor or Assistant Professor.  In rare circumstances, an initial appointment may be made at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.
+
+Tenure-track faculty are eligible to stand for tenure (see Article IV, Section 4) at the conclusion of the candidate’s probationary period.
+
+Tenured Faculty
+
+Tenured faculty are full-time teaching faculty who hold tenured (continued) appointments (see Article IV, Section 4) at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.  
+
+Professors of the Practice
+
+Professors of the Practice are members of the full-time teaching faculty who possess expertise and achievements in a relevant field of instruction.  Duties entail the equivalent of a standard full-time teaching load (see Article IV, Section 1.1.1) and service activities (see Article IV, Section 1.3).  Specific responsibilities entailing course equivalencies will be detailed in individual appointment letters.
+
+Individuals appointed to the Professor of the Practice line are assigned the academic title of Professor of the Practice or Senior Professor of the Practice.  
+
+Professors of the Practice share equal standing in departments and programs with their Tenure-Line colleagues and have the following rights:
+
+Voting rights in faculty and department/program meetings
+
+Protection under the standards of notification for non-reappointment
+
+Eligibility for service on committees
+
+Access to and protection under the grievance procedures
+
+Academic freedom
+
+Faculty benefits and raises 
+
+Access to faculty development funds
+
+Appointment to the Professor of the Practice line, however, does not include eligibility for tenure, promotion to any tenure-seeking academic rank, or sabbatical leave, regardless of length of employment. 
+
+Professors of the Practice are offered initial annual term contracts, followed by eligibility for multi-year contracts of two- and three-year durations as specified in the Duration of Appointment section of these Faculty Bylaws (see Article II, Section 2.2.1).
+
+Professor of the Practice appointments must be externally posted and searched nationally through faculty search committees with approval by the Provost in accordance with Article II, Section 3.1.  In all instances, Professors of the Practice are subject to the evaluation policies and procedures described in Article IV, Section 2.3.
+
+Professors of the Practice may apply for open Tenure-Track positions.  If selected and appointed to a Tenure-Track position, credit for time spent as a Professor of the Practice at Wheaton College for promotion in rank and tenure review purposes will be negotiated and determined by the Provost in consultation with the chair of the Tenure Committee.
+
+Visiting Faculty
+
+Visiting Faculty are appointed for a fixed term on a full, part-time, or per-course basis to carry out instructional and any other responsibilities as delineated in the individual faculty member’s appointment letter.  Full-time Visiting Faculty may be appointed annually, for a semester, or a year, for a period not to exceed two years.  
+
+The visiting designation is used with one of the four academic ranks reserved for Tenure-Line Faculty (Visiting Instructor, Visiting Assistant Professor, Visiting Associate Professor, or Visiting Professor). 
+
+Visiting Faculty are not eligible for tenure, promotion, or sabbatical leave; however, they have the same academic freedom and access to and protection under the grievance procedures as their Tenure-Line colleagues.  See Article V of the Faculty Bylaws for additional information regarding the terms, rights, and responsibilities applicable to Visiting Faculty.
+
+Visiting Faculty may apply for open Tenure-Track positions.  If selected and appointed to a Tenure-Track position, credit for time spent as a Visiting Faculty member at Wheaton College for promotion in rank and tenure review purposes will be negotiated and determined by the Provost in consultation with the chair of the Tenure Committee.
+
+
+
+Faculty Legislation Visiting Faculty Definition (Part One, Section III.a(2))
+
+A faculty member is considered visiting when the individual’s appointment (full-time) is for a period normally not to exceed one year.  [November 5, 2004, p. 4486; May 4, 2007, p. 4640]  
+
+For such appointments, the Department Chair may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73]  
+
+In all cases where a faculty member is retained for more than one year on a full-time basis – whether the individual has a multiple year contract or a one-year contract that is being renewed – the Department Chair shall annually review the individual’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to do. A copy of this evaluation shall be shared with the faculty member and placed in the individual’s faculty personnel file.  [November 5, 2004, p. 4486] 
+
+Administrative Faculty
+
+Pursuant to Article I, Section 1 of these Faculty Bylaws, administrative faculty include administrators who serve in one of the following positions: 
+
+College President 
+
+Provost 
+
+Dean of Students 
+
+Dean of Advising
+
+Dean of Library Services
+
+Associate Librarian
+
+Dean of Admission
+
+Registrar
+
+Administrative Faculty are considered administrators for employment purposes, under terms and conditions of employment as stated in the College’s staff personnel policies.  Administrative Faculty have the privilege of vote and voice in accordance with the provisions stated in Article I, Section 2.  
+
+Faculty Rank and Retreat Rights for Administrative Faculty
+
+The President has the authority to assign Administrative Faculty a faculty rank that was earned through a faculty review at a comparable accredited or internationally recognized institution.  At its discretion, the Board of Trustees may assign an appropriate faculty rank, either at the time of appointment or subsequently.  Administrative Faculty holding academic rank are ineligible for promotion in rank during their terms of administrative service. 
+
+Administrative Faculty who are not already tenured faculty members at Wheaton College do not ordinarily receive tenure during their administrative term.  However, the President or Board of Trustees has the authority to assign retreat rights at the time of initial appointment.  
+
+Administrative Faculty hired with retreat rights are eligible to assume a faculty position and, in some cases, subsequently stand for tenure after the probationary period.  Prior to such an action, the President or Provost will consult with the relevant department or program to enable the department or program to review the candidate’s academic credentials, to meet with the candidate (if possible), and to make a recommendation.  When an Administrative Faculty member is granted retreat rights, the President will state in the initial appointment letter the conditions under which the individual may join the faculty at the conclusion of the administrative faculty appointment.
+
+Faculty Members Who Accept Administrative Appointments
+
+Full-time teaching faculty accepting full-time administrative appointments move automatically to the administrative appointment at the same rank classification.  Tenured faculty retain also tenure while holding the administrative appointment. 
+
+At the time of the initial administrative appointment, the President (or President’s designee) will state in the administrative appointment contract the conditions under which the person will return to the full-time teaching faculty and whether the time spent as an administrator will count toward promotion, tenure, or the next sabbatical leave.  Faculty members holding full-time administrative appointments who continue teaching and research or creative activities are eligible for certain academic promotions during their terms of administrative service and as assessed by the relevant faculty committees governing the process.
+
+
+
+Faculty Emeriti
+
+Emerita or emeritus status honors a faculty member's distinguished service and contributions during a career at the College, as well as the faculty member’s interest in an ongoing and meaningful connection with Wheaton.  
+
+A retiring Tenured or Senior Professor of the Practice faculty member’s department or program may request emerita or emeritus status for that colleague via a letter from the Department Chair or Program Coordinator to the Provost.  That letter should indicate that the department or program supports the request and outline the reasons why the department or program believes the faculty member’s contributions merit emeriti status.
+
+Following the recommendation of the department/program, the Provost will review the received nomination and make a written recommendation to the Board of Trustees to either confer/not confer emerita/emeritus status.  This recommendation shall not be subject to appeal.  The Board of Trustees officially confers emeritus status.  
+
+Faculty who retire at the Associate Professor level may, at the Provost’s discretion, be recommended for emeritus status.  The Chair or Program Coordinator’s letter to the Provost may make such a request, along with any recommendations for title.
+
+Emeriti Faculty are not considered employees of the College and therefore are not entitled to benefits.  They are considered members of the broader Wheaton community. 
+
+Emeriti Status Recognitions
+
+Emeriti Faculty are entitled to the following recognitions:
+
+Award of an inscribed seal of the College.
+
+Listing in the College Catalog and other College publications that collectively list the Faculty.
+
+Emeriti Status Privileges
+
+Emeriti faculty are entitled to the following privileges:
+
+Regular and on-line library and learning management software privileges it in accordance with applicable licensing agreements. 
+
+Email address and support including listing in Wheaton College directories. 
+
+Membership to athletic, fitness, and recreational facilities on campus. 
+
+Participation in College public ceremonies. 
+
+Revocation of Status
+
+Once awarded, emeritus status continues in perpetuity unless the recipient either requests to have status rescinded or violates the intent and spirit of emeritus status by engaging in serious dishonorable conduct in violation of law, rule, or policy and/or causes harm to the College’s reputation. 
+
+To revoke emeriti status without the consent of the individual, a written petition must be made by a member of the College to the President, and subsequently to the Board of Trustees, which has the final authority to revoke the individual’s emeritus status.  Actions or conduct protected by academic freedom and unlawful discrimination shall not be used to revoke emeriti status.
+
+Academic Rank and Faculty Titles
+
+The College recognizes the following academic ranks and titles: Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor, Professor of the Practice, Senior Professor of the Practice, and Visiting Faculty.  [May 13, 1963, p. 2715; Minutes of the Board of Trustees meeting, October 26, 1963, pp. 1055-57; November 18, 1963, pp. 2728-29] 
+
+Eight specific full-time teaching positions are titled Associate Faculty, as explained in Section O. [November 3, 2006, p. 4608] 
+
+	At the time of initial appointment, the President or Provost shall approve the faculty rank after receiving and considering the recommendation from the search committee.  Appointment to the rank of Associate Professor or Professor is subject to a formal vote of approval by the Board of Trustees.   
+
+	Initial faculty rank is assigned on the basis of the information below, which indicates the minimum qualifications for appointment to the rank.
+
+Instructor
+
+Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or equivalent terminal degree from an accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Instructors.  Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Assistant Professor effective the following academic year.
+
+Assistant Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility. In addition to academic or exceptional alternative equivalent experience qualifications, applicants seeking an initial appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor must demonstrate qualities that indicate potential and promise as an effective educator.
+
+Associate Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Associate Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility and, generally, six (6) years of full–time ranked teaching or a minimum of five (5) years of full–time teaching at the rank of Assistant Professor.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.1.1).
+
+Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.1.1).
+
+Professor of the Practice
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the academic title of Professor of the Practice is the appropriate degree from a regionally accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or the equivalent professional expertise and achievement in a relevant field of professional practice.  
+
+Senior Professor of the Practice
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the academic title of Senior Professor of the Practice is the appropriate degree from a regionally accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or the equivalent professional expertise and achievement in a relevant field of professional practice.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.2.1).
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Contracts
+
+A faculty contract is a written mutual agreement between an individual granted faculty status and the College.  The contractual terms (appointment type, academic department/program, rank, salary, length of appointment, etc.) of every faculty appointment will be stated in writing only by the President or the Provost to the faculty member.  Academic departments and/or programs authorized to fill an open faculty position shall recommend candidates for appointment by the President or the Provost.  Under no circumstance is a faculty member or College employee authorized to offer an appointment or to enter a faculty appointment contract.  Any subsequent extensions or modifications of an appointment, and any special understandings, or any notices incumbent upon either party to provide, will be stated or confirmed in writing, and a copy will be given to the faculty member.
+
+Types of Faculty Contracts
+
+The following types of contracts are issued to individuals granted faculty status at Wheaton College:
+
+Tenure Track Contracts, Probationary Appointments
+
+Tenure-Line faculty members eligible for tenure receive tenure-track contracts and hold probationary appointments until they either receive tenure or separate from the College.  A probationary appointment is made with the understanding that both the College and the probationary faculty member will engage in a period of mutual evaluation—the probationary period—leading to the tenure decision.
+
+Faculty members eligible for tenure may be appointed to the rank of Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor, upon consideration of their qualifications and experience relative to the standards for appointment in rank. 
+
+A tenure-track appointment is normally renewable up to a total of seven (7) years of full-time service—i.e., a maximum of six (6) years prior to and including the year of the tenure decision, plus one (1) additional terminal year in the case of a negative tenure decision—unless the probationary period is either accelerated or extended in accordance with Article IV, Sections 4.1.2 and 4.1.3, respectively.  
+
+Faculty members holding tenure-track contracts undergo annual and reappointment reviews as specified in Article IV, Section 2.2.  A faculty member undergoing an unsuccessful tenure review will receive notice and will be allowed to complete a final year of the probationary appointment pursuant to a terminal contract (see Section 2.1.4 below).
+
+Tenured Contracts
+
+Tenured contracts are awarded to Tenure Line Faculty who have attained tenured status (see Article IV, Section 4).  The granting of tenure can only be effected by the procedures specified in the College’s Tenure Policy (see Article IV, Section 4) and upon the affirmative vote of the Board of Trustees.  De facto tenure is not awarded at Wheaton College.
+
+A tenured faculty member has the contractual right to continuous appointments until the faculty member resigns, is dismissed for adequate cause (see Article IV, Section 8.2.1), or is terminated as a result of a reduction in force due to a bona fide financial exigency or program discontinuation (see Article IV, Section 8.2.2 and 8.2.3, respectively).
+
+Term Contracts
+
+Term contracts are offered to Professors of the Practice and Visiting Faculty and are limited to the term of employment outlined in the appointment contract.  Subject to College need, another term contract may be offered subject to the limitations set forth in these Faculty Bylaws.  Issuance of another term contract is solely within the discretion of the College and no other procedures apply.  
+
+Terminal Contracts
+
+A Terminal contract is the final annual contract issued to Tenure Track faculty whose contract will not be renewed or who have been denied tenure.
+
+Duration of Appointments and Notice of Termination
+
+The College will observe the following guidelines for rank and duration of appointments and notice of terminations:
+
+Duration of Appointments
+
+Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Instructors.  Those who have completed their professional training will ordinarily be appointed Assistant Professors.  Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Assistant Professor effective the following academic year. 
+
+The initial term of appointment for Tenure-Track Faculty will be either for one or two years as set forth in the individual faculty member’s appointment contract.
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	Professors of the Practice will receive one-year appointments in the first two years of appointment.  At the end of the second annual contract year, a Professor of the Practice will be considered for a two-year contract.  When the fiscal and programmatic needs of the College permit, a summative review by the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions at the end of the two-year contract will assess eligibility for a three-year term contract.  Review at the end of the three-year contract will determine eligibility for a successive three-year contract.  See Article IV, Section 2.3.2 for additional information.  Overall, a Professor of the Practice’s employment is governed by the individual’s appointment contract.  The College may elect not to re-appoint the faculty member at the College’s discretion, regardless of the positive outcome of any review, if curricular needs change and/or enrollment declines.
+
+	Visiting Faculty will receive appointments on a per-course, semester, or annual basis. [February 4, 2005, p. 4492] 
+
+	Replacements for faculty members on leave and other temporary personnel will receive appointments of appropriate rank and duration. 
+
+Regardless of rank or duration of previous appointments, any non-tenure track member of the faculty or Professor of the Practice with two or more years of service at Wheaton may be given a one-year terminal contract.  In such a case, the standards of notification as described in Article II, Section 2.2.2 below will be observed. 
+
+Notice of Termination
+
+In decisions regarding reappointment or non-reappointment of full-time Tenure Track and Professors of the Practice faculty members, care will be taken to observe the following standards of notification (or salary in lieu of notice) endorsed in 1964 as the official policy of the American Association of University Professors: 
+
+Not later than March 1 of the first academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if a one-year appointment ends during the academic year, at least three months in advance of its termination. 
+
+Not later than December 15 of the second academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of the year; or, if an initial two-year appointment ends during an academic year, at least six months in advance of its termination. 
+
+At least twelve months before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years of service. 
+
+The notice provisions set forth above do not apply to Tenure-Track faculty and Professors of the Practice that have been issued a Terminal Appointment contract.
+
+Annual Contract Period
+
+The period of employment under a full-time faculty contract shall be for the 12-month period beginning July 1 and ending June 30, during which the individual shall receive salary and benefits. The contract will cover the duties associated with the position performed during the period which begins the week before classes begin through the week after Commencement and is known as the ""academic year."" 
+
+Primary Area of Appointment
+
+All faculty appointment contracts designate a department or academic program as the faculty member’s primary faculty appointment location.  It is from this department(s) or program(s) that recommendations for reappointment, promotion, tenure, and other actions concerning a Full-Time Teaching Faculty member are initiated.  A faculty member’s primary faculty appointment may be changed by the President (or President’s designee) to meet the curricular and organizational needs of the College.  
+
+Joint Appointments 
+
+When a faculty member’s contractual responsibilities require a significant portion of teaching and professional activity responsibilities be devoted to either multiple departments, interdisciplinary programs, areas of instruction, or other academic entities engaged in or responsible for the delivery of the curriculum, the faculty member may receive a joint appointment to a department and a specified program or to two departments.  A joint appointment may be established at any stage of faculty employment. 
+
+In making a joint appointment, a primary and secondary department or program will be clearly designated by the Provost in the faculty member’s appointment contract. Such designation may be revised at any stage of employment by the President (or the President’s designee) to meet the curricular or organizational needs of the College.  The primary department or program will serve as the faculty member’s administrative home, which will take the lead responsibility on personnel issues, central human resources reporting, appointment, promotions, tenure, coordination of annual performance review, conflict resolution, and changes in employment.  Often, but not always, the administrative home will be the department or program with the higher appointment fraction.
+
+The nature of a joint appointment varies and the assignment of duties in the secondary department or program will differ by department/program and candidate.  The details of the assignment of duties, the allocation of salary, departmental/program governance rights, and provision for office and laboratory space as applicable to both the primary and secondary departments/program will be communicated in a signed written memorandum of understanding signed by the two Department Chairs/Program Coordinators, the faculty member, and the Provost.  Additionally, negotiated changes to those details will be evidenced in a signed memorandum of understanding.
+
+The Department Chair/Program Coordinator of the secondary department/program must provide input for every evaluation for a jointly appointed faculty member.  In the case of promotion or tenure review, the secondary Department Chair/Program Coordinator must provide a written evaluation describing the nature and extent of the candidate’s involvement in, and contribution to, the secondary department/program.  In the faculty member’s tenure application, it is important to document how the candidate’s time is being spent, and contributions to each department/program need to be clearly documented.
+
+It is recognized that new opportunities, changes in faculty interest, faculty performance, changes in the College’s curricular needs or enrollments or other issues with the joint appointment may require review, renegotiation, or discontinuation of the original joint appointment.  If possible, a faculty member with a joint appointment will have the option of retreating to a full appointment at the primary department or program.  If retreat is not a possibility, the Provost is responsible for ensuring that the faculty member is made fully aware of the existing options.  Further, a short-term plan must be put in place to ensure a smooth transition with minimum disruption to the initiatives, projects, and teaching, that were the responsibility of the faculty member with the joint appointment.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Recruitment and Appointment
+
+Recruitment and Appointment of Full-Time Teaching Faculty 
+
+Vacancies shall be advertised in as many ways as are necessary in order to obtain a suitable pool of applicants in keeping with Wheaton's policy as an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer; for example: in professional journals, job rosters, etc.  Advertisements shall include a statement that the College is an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer. The Department or Program/Search Committee may also want to write to graduate schools. 
+
+For legal purposes, records pertaining to the hiring process shall be retained in accordance with the College’s Record Retention schedule.  
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Normally departments/programs will establish their own search committee.  In the exceptional case of no continuing tenured member, the Provost will consult with the Advisory Committee.  The Provost will then ask the Committee on Committees and Agenda to set up the search committee. 
+
+The Search Committee shall review applications to determine who should be interviewed. Candidates may be interviewed at professional meetings to narrow the field. All members of the Search Committee will receive anti-bias training.  Moreover, the committee chair is expected to consult with the Office of Human Resources for interview guidance.
+
+After consulting with the Provost, the Chair of the Search Committee shall invite several candidates to visit the College.  The candidates shall be interviewed by members of the department, the Provost and/or the President, and students when possible.  During these interviews, candidates will be notified that any job offer is contingent upon successful completion of employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks, as well documentation of U.S. citizenship or upon maintaining the appropriate visa status and work authorization.  Moreover, notice of the availability of the College’s Annual Security Report will be provided to the interviewee, if the position was externally advertised.
+
+The Search Committee Chair shall send to the Provost a written recommendation from the Search Committee which shall state its majority opinion and indicate any disagreements within the Search Committee.  The written recommendation shall verify that the candidate’s preparation and qualifications are appropriate to the nature of the teaching assignment.  Candidate qualifications shall normally be measured, as applicable to the position, by advanced degrees held, evidence of scholarship, advanced study, creative activities, and teaching abilities, as well as relevant professional experience, training, and credentials. Exceptions may be made for individuals who do not hold advanced degrees but who are considered by the College to possess other demonstrated competencies and professional achievements that provide evidence to support excellent teaching and student achievement in the discipline.
+
+If the Provost or the President has reservations about following the recommendation for appointment, one or both shall consult with the Chair and may request that the Search Committee continue the search process. 
+
+If the recommendation for appointment is approved by the President or the Provost, after consultation with the Chair, the Provost shall make a written offer of appointment to the appointee, stating the precise terms and conditions of the appointment.  Such offer shall refer to, and be accompanied by, either a copy or a link to these Faculty Bylaws as then in effect.  In the written offer, the Provost may, after receiving and considering recommendations from the search committee, award credit toward the fulfillment of promotion and/or tenure eligibility based upon the candidate’s past professional experience at another higher education institution.  The decision to grant prior service credit takes into account the relevancy of the prior service to the College’s needs, the type of institution(s) at which service was provided, and the nature of the position being filled by the appointee.  Evidence as to the quality of the prior service will be entered into the candidate’s file. 
+
+The offer is contingent upon verification of the candidate’s academic credentials or alternative experience qualifications credentials and the successful completion of requisite employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks.  Moreover, an initial written offer of appointment to the rank of Associate Professor with tenure or Professor with tenure shall also indicate that the offer is subject to a formal vote of approval by the Board of Trustees, action on which is pending.  Notice of such Trustee action shall be sent to the candidate. 
+
+Each such offer shall also specify that it may be accepted only in writing.  If it is so accepted, the President or the Provost shall furnish copies of the offer and acceptance to the Chair for the department or program’s records.  All data submitted by appointee in connection with the application for appointment shall be retained in the Provost's records indefinitely. 
+
+As soon as a vacancy has been filled, the Chair shall so advise the unsuccessful candidate(s) selected to be interviewed in writing. Human Resources will advise all other applicants.
+
+Note: Since years in academic rank are calculated based on full academic years, in the rare instance that a Tenure-Line Faculty and Professors of the Practice joins the College after November 1, the faculty member’s first year in rank or title will be calculated starting with the succeeding full academic year.
+
+Recruitment and Appointment of Visiting Faculty
+
+A faculty member is considered visiting when his or her appointment (full-time) is for a period normally not to exceed one year. [November 5, 2004, p. 4486; May 4, 2007, p. 4640] 
+
+For such Visiting Faculty appointments, the Department Chair or Program Coordinator may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures set forth above in Article II, Section 3.1, provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons or less under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73].  In all instances, however, the Department Chair or Program Coordinator shall verify that the final candidate’s preparation and qualifications are appropriate to the nature of the teaching assignment.
+
+Candidates for a Visiting Faculty position that are selected for interviews will be notified that any job offer is contingent upon successful completion of employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks, as well documentation of U.S. citizenship or upon maintaining the appropriate visa status and work authorization.  Moreover, notice of the availability of the College’s Annual Security Report will be provided to the interviewee, if the position was externally advertised.  Any offer of appointment is contingent upon verification of the candidate’s academic credentials or alternative experience qualifications credentials and the successful completion of requisite employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks.
+
+In all cases where a Visiting Faculty member is retained for more than one year on a full-time basis – whether the faculty member has a multiple year contract, a one-year contract that is being renewed for another term or a new semester or per course term contract – the Department Chair/Program Coordinator shall annually review the faculty member’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to do.  A copy of this evaluation shall be shared with the faculty member and placed in the faculty member’s faculty personnel file. 
+
+[November 5, 2004, p. 4486] 
+
+Appointment of Foreign Nationals
+
+The College welcomes international faculty of high qualifications and assists faculty members whenever possible in securing visas and permanent residency.  
+
+Non-U.S. nationals who have secured a faculty position must maintain current legal status in the appropriate visa category and notify the College of any anticipated change of status. Moreover, Tenure-Line Faculty are expected to seek permanent residency as soon as possible after beginning their service to the College.  The loss of appropriate authorization to work in the United States may result in automatic termination of the faculty appointment, regardless of contractual status or type.
+
+All international faculty are requested to consult with Human Resources before accepting salaries, stipends, or honoraria from any other institution to ensure compliance with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and Department of State (J-visa program) regulations.
+
+		Wheaton College Faculty Bylaws – Page 33</s>"
+"<s>[INST] ARTICLE II - Wheaton College Bylaws (Recommendations to SG)(12.22).txt [/INST] Article II.	Faculty Status, Contracts, and Initial Appointments
+
+Faculty Status – Types of Faculty Appointments
+
+The College appoints faculty members to one of the following types of faculty appointments:
+
+Full-time Teaching Faculty 
+
+Tenure-Line Faculty
+
+	Tenure Track Faculty
+
+	Tenured Faculty
+
+	Professor of the Practice
+
+Visiting Faculty
+
+The College also reserves the right to assign faculty status to certain administrators (see Article II, Section 1.3) and to acknowledge faculty members who have separated from service with the College following distinguished careers with the honorary designation of Associate Professor or Professor Emeritus (Emerita) (see Article II, Section 1.4).
+
+1.1. Full-Time Teaching Faculty
+
+Full-time faculty teaching appointments are made to either a Tenure-Line or Professor of the Practice position in one of the College’s academic departments or program areas.  Regardless of the type of appointment line, members of the full-time teaching faculty have duties equivalent to a full-time workload (see the Employee Handbook for Faculty) in accordance with the duties and responsibilities delineated in the faculty member’s appointment contract.
+
+Members of the full-time teaching faculty enjoy the rights and protections set forth in these Faculty Bylaws.  Moreover, they are afforded full voting privileges at faculty and academic department or program meetings.  They also may serve on standing and ad hoc committees and task forces for which they are eligible.  Full-time teaching faculty are expected to adhere to the responsibilities and policies outlined in the Employee Handbook for Faculty and these Faculty Bylaws, as well as observe other College policies applicable to them to the extent they do not violate academic freedom.
+
+To be appointed to the full-time teaching faculty, candidates must possess the appropriate academic credentials and/or equivalent professional experience to teach courses in their academic discipline(s).
+
+Tenure-Line Faculty
+
+Tenure-Line faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who either hold a Tenure-Track probationary appointment or Tenured (continuous) appointment.
+
+Tenure Track Faculty
+
+Tenure-Track faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who normally hold probationary appointments to one of two academic ranks: Instructor or Assistant Professor.  In rare circumstances, an initial appointment may be made at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.
+
+Tenure-Track faculty are eligible to stand for tenure (see Article IV, Section 4) at the conclusion of the candidate’s probationary period.
+
+Tenured Faculty
+
+Tenured faculty are full-time teaching faculty who hold tenured (continued) appointments (see Article IV, Section 4) at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.  
+
+Professors of the Practice
+
+Professors of the Practice are members of the full-time teaching faculty who possess expertise and achievements in a relevant field of instruction.  Duties entail the equivalent of a standard full-time teaching load (see Article IV, Section 1.1.1) and service activities (see Article IV, Section 1.3).  Specific responsibilities entailing course equivalencies will be detailed in individual appointment letters.
+
+Individuals appointed to the Professor of the Practice line are assigned the academic title of Professor of the Practice or Senior Professor of the Practice.  
+
+Professors of the Practice share equal standing in departments and programs with their Tenure-Line colleagues and have the following rights:
+
+Voting rights in faculty and department/program meetings
+
+Protection under the standards of notification for non-reappointment
+
+Eligibility for service on committees
+
+Access to and protection under the grievance procedures
+
+Academic freedom
+
+Faculty benefits and raises 
+
+Access to faculty development funds
+
+Appointment to the Professor of the Practice line, however, does not include eligibility for tenure or promotion to any tenure-seeking academic rank, regardless of length of employment. 
+
+Professors of the Practice are offered initial annual term contracts, followed by eligibility for multi-year contracts of two- and three-year durations as specified in the Duration of Appointment section of these Faculty Bylaws (see Article II, Section 2.2.1).
+
+Professor of the Practice appointments must be externally posted and searched nationally through faculty search committees with approval by the Provost in accordance with Article II, Section 3.1.  In all instances, Professors of the Practice are subject to the evaluation policies and procedures described in Article IV, Section 2.3.
+
+Professors of the Practice may apply for open Tenure-Track positions.  If selected and appointed to a Tenure-Track position, credit for time spent as a Professor of the Practice at Wheaton College may be negotiated for promotion in rank and tenure review purposes.
+
+Visiting Faculty
+
+Visiting Faculty are appointed for a fixed term on a full, part-time, or per-course basis to carry out instructional and any other responsibilities as delineated in the individual faculty member’s appointment letter.  Full-time Visiting Faculty may be appointed annually, for a semester, or a year, for a period not to exceed two years.  
+
+The visiting designation is used with one of the four academic ranks reserved for Tenure-Line Faculty (Visiting Instructor, Visiting Assistant Professor, Visiting Associate Professor, or Visiting Professor). 
+
+Visiting Faculty are not eligible for tenure, promotion, or sabbatical leave; however, they have the same academic freedom and access to and protection under the grievance procedures as their Tenure-Line colleagues.  See Article V of the Faculty Bylaws for additional information regarding the terms, rights, and responsibilities applicable to Visiting Faculty.
+
+Visiting Faculty may apply for open Tenure-Track positions.  If selected and appointed to a Tenure-Track position, credit for time spent as a Professor of the Practice at Wheaton College may be negotiated for promotion in rank and tenure review purposes.
+
+
+
+Faculty Legislation Visiting Faculty Definition (Part One, Section III.a(2))
+
+A faculty member is considered visiting when the individual’s appointment (full-time) is for a period normally not to exceed one year.  [November 5, 2004, p. 4486; May 4, 2007, p. 4640]  
+
+For such appointments, the Department Chair may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73]  
+
+In all cases where a faculty member is retained for more than one year on a full-time basis – whether the individual has a multiple year contract or a one-year contract that is being renewed – the Department Chair shall annually review the individual’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to do. A copy of this evaluation shall be shared with the faculty member and placed in the individual’s faculty personnel file.  [November 5, 2004, p. 4486] 
+
+Administrative Faculty
+
+Pursuant to Article I, Section 1 of these Faculty Bylaws, administrative faculty include administrators who serve in one of the following positions: 
+
+College President 
+
+Provost 
+
+Dean of Students 
+
+Dean of Advising
+
+Dean of Library Services
+
+Associate Librarian
+
+Dean of Admission
+
+Registrar
+
+Administrative Faculty are considered administrators for employment purposes, under terms and conditions of employment as stated in the College’s staff personnel policies.  Administrative Faculty have the privilege of vote and voice in accordance with the provisions stated in Article I, Section 2.  
+
+Faculty Rank and Retreat Rights for Administrative Faculty
+
+The President has the authority to assign Administrative Faculty a faculty rank that was earned through a faculty review at a comparable accredited or internationally recognized four-year institution.  At its discretion, the Board of Trustees may assign an appropriate faculty rank, either at the time of appointment or subsequently.  Administrative Faculty holding academic rank are ineligible for promotion in rank during their terms of administrative service. 
+
+Administrative Faculty who are not already tenured faculty members at Wheaton College do not ordinarily receive tenure during their administrative term.  However, the President or Board of Trustees has the authority to assign retreat rights at the time of initial appointment.  
+
+Administrative Faculty hired with retreat rights are eligible to assume a faculty position and, in some cases, subsequently stand for tenure after the probationary period.  Prior to such an action, the President or Provost will consult with the relevant department or program to enable the department or program to review the candidate’s academic credentials, to meet with the candidate (if possible), and to make a recommendation.  When an Administrative Faculty member is granted retreat rights, the President will state in the initial appointment letter the conditions under which the individual may join the faculty at the conclusion of the administrative faculty appointment.
+
+Faculty Members Who Accept Administrative Appointments
+
+Full-time teaching faculty accepting full-time administrative appointments move automatically to the administrative appointment at the same rank classification.  Tenured faculty retain also tenure while holding the administrative appointment. 
+
+At the time of the initial administrative appointment, the President (or President’s designee) will state in the administrative appointment contract the conditions under which the person will return to the full-time teaching faculty and whether the time spent as an administrator will count toward promotion, tenure, or the next sabbatical leave.  Faculty members holding full-time administrative appointments who continue teaching and research or creative activities are eligible for certain academic promotions during their terms of administrative service and as assessed by the relevant faculty committees governing the process.
+
+
+
+Faculty Emeriti
+
+Emerita or emeritus status honors a full-time teaching faculty member's distinguished service and contributions during a career at the College, as well as the faculty member’s interest in an ongoing and meaningful connection with Wheaton.  
+
+A retiring full-time teaching faculty member’s department/program may request emerita or emeritus status for that colleague via a letter from the Department Chair or Program Coordinator to the Provost.  That letter should indicate that the department or program supports the request and outline the reasons why the department believes the faculty member’s contributions merit emeriti status.
+
+Following the recommendation of the department/program, the Provost will review the received nomination and make a written recommendation to the Board of Trustees to either confer/not confer emerita/emeritus status.  This recommendation shall not be subject to appeal.  The Board of Trustees officially confers emeritus status.  
+
+Faculty who retire at the Associate Professor level may, at the Provost’s discretion, be recommended for the status of Professor Emerita/Emeritus.  The Chair or Program Coordinator’s letter to the Provost may make such a request, along with any recommendations for title.
+
+Emeriti Faculty are not considered employees of the College and therefore are not entitled to benefits.  They are considered members of the broader Wheaton community and are expected to conduct themselves in accordance with College policy.  As members of the broader Wheaton community, Emeriti Faculty are welcome to participate in all College assemblies, colloquia, and other academic events.
+
+Emeriti Status Recognitions
+
+Emeriti Faculty are entitled to the following recognitions:
+
+Award of an inscribed seal of the College.
+
+Listing in the College Catalog and other College publications that collectively list the Faculty.
+
+The right to participate in College events and social functions with other faculty colleagues.
+
+Emeriti Status Privileges
+
+Emeriti faculty are entitled to the following privileges:
+
+Regular and on-line library and learning management software privileges it in accordance with applicable licensing agreements. 
+
+Email address and support including listing in Wheaton College directories. 
+
+Membership to athletic, fitness, and recreational facilities on campus. 
+
+Participation in College public ceremonies. 
+
+Revocation of Status
+
+Once awarded, emeriti status continues in perpetuity unless the recipient either requests to have status rescinded or violates the intent and spirit of emeritus status by engaging in serious dishonorable conduct in violation of law, rule, or policy and/or causes harm to the College’s reputation. 
+
+To revoke emeriti status without the consent of the individual, a written petition must be made by a member of the College to the President, and subsequently to the Board of Trustees, which has the final authority to revoke the individual’s emeriti status.  Actions or conduct protected by academic freedom and unlawful discrimination shall not be used to revoke emeriti status.
+
+Academic Rank and Faculty Titles
+
+The College recognizes the following academic ranks and titles: Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor, Professor of the Practice, Senior Professor of the Practice, and Visiting Faculty.  [May 13, 1963, p. 2715; Minutes of the Board of Trustees meeting, October 26, 1963, pp. 1055-57; November 18, 1963, pp. 2728-29] 
+
+Eight specific full-time teaching positions are titled Associate Faculty, as explained in Section O. [November 3, 2006, p. 4608] 
+
+	At the time of initial appointment, the President or Provost shall approve the faculty rank for all Full-Time Teaching faculty after receiving and considering the recommendation from the search committee.  Appointment to the rank of Associate Professor or Professor is subject to a formal vote of approval by the Board of Trustees.   
+
+	Initial faculty rank is assigned on the basis of the information below, which indicates the minimum qualifications for appointment to the rank.
+
+Instructor
+
+Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or equivalent terminal degree from an accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Instructors.  Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Assistant Professor effective the following academic year.
+
+Assistant Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility. In addition to academic or exceptional alternative equivalent experience qualifications, applicants seeking an initial appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor must demonstrate qualities that indicate potential and promise as an effective educator.
+
+Associate Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Associate Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility and, generally, six (6) years of full–time ranked teaching or a minimum of five (5) years of full–time teaching at the rank of Assistant Professor.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.1.1).
+
+Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.2).
+
+Professor of the Practice
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the academic title of Professor of the Practice is the appropriate degree from a regionally accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or the equivalent professional expertise and achievement in a relevant field of professional practice.  
+
+Faculty Contracts
+
+A faculty contract is a written mutual agreement between an individual granted faculty status and the College.  The contractual terms (appointment type, academic department/program, rank, salary, length of appointment, etc.) of every faculty appointment will be stated in writing only by the President or the Provost to the faculty member.  Academic departments and/or programs authorized to fill an open faculty position shall recommend candidates for appointment by the President or the Provost.  Under no circumstance is a faculty member or College employee authorized to offer an appointment or to enter a faculty appointment contract.  Any subsequent extensions or modifications of an appointment, and any special understandings, or any notices incumbent upon either party to provide, will be stated or confirmed in writing, and a copy will be given to the faculty member.
+
+Types of Faculty Contracts
+
+The following types of contracts are issued to individuals granted faculty status at Wheaton College:
+
+Tenure Track Contracts, Probationary Appointments
+
+Tenure-Line faculty members eligible for tenure receive tenure-track contracts and hold probationary appointments until they either receive tenure or separate from the College.  A probationary appointment is made with the understanding that both the College and the probationary faculty member will engage in a period of mutual evaluation—the probationary period—leading to the tenure decision.
+
+Faculty members eligible for tenure may be appointed to the rank of Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor, upon consideration of their qualifications and experience relative to the standards for appointment in rank. 
+
+A tenure-track appointment is normally renewable up to a total of seven (7) years of full-time service—i.e., a maximum of six (6) years prior to and including the year of the tenure decision, plus one (1) additional terminal year in the case of a negative tenure decision—unless the probationary period is either accelerated or extended in accordance with Article IV, Sections 4.1.2 and 4.1.3, respectively.  
+
+Faculty members holding tenure-track contracts undergo annual and reappointment reviews as specified in Article IV, Section 2.2.  A faculty member undergoing an unsuccessful tenure review will receive notice and will be allowed to complete the final year of the probationary appointment pursuant to a Terminal contract (see Section 2.1.4 below).
+
+Tenured Contracts
+
+Tenured contracts are awarded to Full-time Tenure Line Teaching Faculty who have attained tenured status (see Article IV, Section 4).  The granting of tenure can only be effected by the procedures specified in the College’s Tenure Policy (see Article IV, Section 4) and upon the affirmative vote of the Board of Trustees.  De facto tenure is not awarded at Wheaton College.
+
+A tenured faculty member has the contractual right to continuous appointments until the faculty member resigns, is dismissed for adequate cause (see Article IV, Section 8.2.1), or is terminated as a result of a reduction in force due to a bona fide financial exigency or program discontinuation (see Article IV, Section 8.2.2 and 8.2.3, respectively).
+
+Term Contracts
+
+Term contracts are offered to Professors of the Practice and Visiting Faculty and are limited to the term of employment outlined in the appointment contract.  Subject to College need, another term contract may be offered subject to the limitations set forth in these Faculty Bylaws.  Issuance of another term contract is solely within the discretion of the College and no other procedures apply.  
+
+Terminal Contracts
+
+A Terminal contract is the final annual contract issued to Tenure Track faculty whose contracts will not be renewed or who have been denied tenure.
+
+Duration of Appointments and Notice of Termination
+
+The College will observe the following guidelines for rank and duration of appointments and notice of terminations:
+
+Duration of Appointments
+
+Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Instructors.  Those who have completed their professional training will ordinarily be appointed Assistant Professors.  Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Assistant Professor effective the following academic year. 
+
+The initial term of appointment for Tenure Track Faculty will be either for one or two years as set forth in the individual faculty member’s appointment contract.
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	Professors of the Practice will receive one-year appointments in the first two years of appointment.  At the end of the second annual contract year, a Professor of the Practice will be considered for a two-year contract.  When the fiscal and programmatic needs of the College permit, a summative review by the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions at the end of the two-year contract will assess eligibility for a three-year term contract.  Review at the end of the three-year contract will determine eligibility for a successive three-year contract.  See Article IV, Section 2.3.2 for additional information.  Overall, a Professor of the Practice’s employment is governed by the individual’s appointment contract.  The College may elect not to re-appoint the faculty member at the College’s discretion, regardless of the positive outcome of any review, if curricular needs change and/or enrollment declines.
+
+	Visiting Faculty will receive appointments on a per-course, semester, or annual basis. [February 4, 2005, p. 4492] 
+
+	Replacements for faculty members on leave and other temporary personnel will receive appointments of appropriate rank and duration. 
+
+Regardless of rank or duration of previous appointments, any non-tenure track member of the faculty or Professor of the Practice with two or more years of service at Wheaton may be given a one-year terminal contract.  In such a case, the standards of notification as described in Article II, Section 2.2.2 below will be observed. 
+
+Notice of Termination
+
+In decisions regarding reappointment or non-reappointment of full-time Tenure Track and Professors of the Practice faculty members, care will be taken to observe the following standards of notification (or salary in lieu of notice) endorsed in 1964 as the official policy of the American Association of University Professors: 
+
+Not later than March 1 of the first academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if a one-year appointment ends during the academic year, at least three months in advance of its termination. 
+
+Not later than December 15 of the second academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of the year; or, if an initial two-year appointment ends during an academic year, at least six months in advance of its termination. 
+
+At least twelve months before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years of service. 
+
+The notice provisions set forth above do not apply to Tenure Track faculty and Professors of the Practice that have been issued a Terminal Appointment contract.
+
+Annual Contract Period
+
+The period of employment under a full-time faculty contract shall be for the 12-month period beginning July 1st and ending June 30th, during which the individual shall receive salary and benefits. The contract will cover the duties associated with the position performed during the period which begins the week before classes begin through the week after Commencement and is known as the ""academic year.""
+
+Primary Area of Appointment
+
+All faculty appointment contracts designate a department or academic program as the faculty member’s primary faculty appointment location.  It is from this department(s) or program(s) that recommendations for reappointment, promotion, tenure, and other actions concerning a Full-Time Teaching Faculty member are initiated.  A Full-Time Teaching Faculty member’s primary faculty appointment may be changed by the President (or President’s designee) to meet the curricular and organizational needs of the College.  
+
+Joint Appointments 
+
+When a faculty member’s contractual responsibilities require a significant portion of teaching and professional activity responsibilities be devoted to either multiple departments, interdisciplinary programs, areas of instruction, or other academic entities engaged in or responsible for the delivery of the curriculum, the faculty member may receive a joint appointment to a department and a specified program or to two departments.  A joint appointment may be established at any stage of faculty employment. 
+
+In making a joint appointment, a primary and secondary department or program will be clearly designated by the Provost in the faculty member’s appointment contract. Such designation may be revised at any stage of employment by the President (or the President’s designee) to meet the curricular or organizational needs of the College.  The primary department or program will serve as the faculty member’s administrative home, which will take the lead responsibility on personnel issues, central human resources reporting, appointment, promotions, tenure, coordination of annual performance review, conflict resolution, and changes in employment.  Often, but not always, the administrative home will be the department or program with the higher appointment fraction.
+
+The nature of a joint appointment varies and the assignment of duties in the secondary department or program will differ by department/program and candidate.  The details of the assignment of duties, the allocation of salary, departmental/program governance rights, and provision for office and laboratory space as applicable to both the primary and secondary departments/program will be communicated in a signed written memorandum of understanding signed by the two Department Chairs/Program Coordinators, the faculty member, and the Provost.  Additionally, negotiated changes to those details will be evidenced in a signed memorandum of understanding.
+
+The Department Chair/Program Coordinator of the secondary department/program must provide input for every evaluation for a jointly appointed faculty member.  In the case of promotion or tenure review, the secondary Department Chair/Program Coordinator must provide a written evaluation describing the nature and extent of the candidate’s involvement in, and contribution to, the secondary department/program.  In the faculty member’s tenure application, it is important to document how the candidate’s time is being spent, and contributions to each department/program need to be clearly documented.
+
+It is recognized that new opportunities, changes in faculty interest, faculty performance, changes in the College’s curricular needs or enrollments or other issues with the joint appointment may require review, renegotiation, or discontinuation of the original joint appointment.  If possible, a faculty member with a joint appointment will have the option of retreating to a full appointment at the primary department or program.  If retreat is not a possibility, the Provost is responsible for ensuring that the faculty member is made fully aware of the existing options.  Further, a short-term plan must be put in place to ensure a smooth transition with minimum disruption to the initiatives, projects, and teaching, that were the responsibility of the faculty member with the joint appointment.
+
+
+
+Recruitment and Appointment
+
+Full-Time Teaching Faculty 
+
+Vacancies shall be advertised in as many ways as are necessary in order to obtain a suitable pool of applicants in keeping with Wheaton's policy as an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer; for example: in professional journals, job rosters, etc.  Advertisements shall include a statement that the College is an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer. The Department or Program/Search Committee may also want to write to graduate schools. 
+
+For legal purposes, records pertaining to the hiring process shall be retained in accordance with the College’s Record Retention schedule.  
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Normally departments/programs will establish their own search committee.  In the exceptional case of no continuing tenured member, the Provost will consult with the Advisory Committee.  The Provost will then ask the Committee on Committees and Agenda to set up the search committee. 
+
+The Search Committee shall review applications to determine who should be interviewed. Candidates may be interviewed at professional meetings to narrow the field. All members of the Search Committee will receive anti-bias training.  Moreover, the committee chair is expected to consult with the Office of Human Resources for interview guidance.
+
+After consulting with the Provost, the Chair of the Search Committee shall invite several candidates to visit the College.  The candidates shall be interviewed by members of the department, the Provost and/or the President, and students when possible.  During these interviews, candidates will be notified that any job offer is contingent upon successful completion of employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks, as well documentation of U.S. citizenship or upon maintaining the appropriate visa status and work authorization.  Moreover, notice of the availability of the College’s Annual Security Report will be provided to the interviewee, if the position was externally advertised.
+
+The Search Committee Chair shall send to the Provost a written recommendation from the Search Committee which shall state its majority opinion and indicate any disagreements within the Search Committee.  The written recommendation shall verify that the candidate’s preparation and qualifications are appropriate to the nature of the teaching assignment.  Candidate qualifications shall normally be measured, as applicable to the position, by advanced degrees held, evidence of scholarship, advanced study, creative activities, and teaching abilities, as well as relevant professional experience, training, and credentials. Exceptions may be made for individuals who do not hold advanced degrees but who are considered by the College to possess other demonstrated competencies and professional achievements that provide evidence to support excellent teaching and student achievement in the discipline.
+
+If the Provost or the President has reservations about following the recommendation for appointment, one or both shall consult with the Chair and may request that the Search Committee continue the search process. 
+
+If the recommendation for appointment is approved by the President or the Provost, after consultation with the Chair, the Provost shall make a written offer of appointment to the appointee, stating the precise terms and conditions of the appointment.  Such offer shall refer to, and be accompanied by, either a copy or a link to these Faculty Bylaws as then in effect.  In the written offer, the Provost may, after receiving and considering recommendations from the search committee, award credit toward the fulfillment of promotion and/or tenure eligibility based upon the candidate’s past professional experience at another higher education institution.  The decision to grant prior service credit takes into account the relevancy of the prior service to the College’s needs, the type of institution(s) at which service was provided, and the nature of the position being filled by the appointee.  Evidence as to the quality of the prior service will be entered into the candidate’s file. 
+
+The offer is contingent upon verification of the candidate’s academic credentials or alternative experience qualifications credentials and the successful completion of requisite employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks.  Moreover, an initial written offer of appointment to the rank of Associate Professor or Professor shall also indicate that the offer is subject to a formal vote of approval by the Board of Trustees, action on which is pending.  Notice of such Trustee action shall be sent to the candidate. 
+
+Each such offer shall also specify that it may be accepted only in writing.  If it is so accepted, the President or the Provost shall furnish copies of the offer and acceptance to the Chair for the department or program's records.  All data submitted by appointee in connection with the application for appointment shall be retained in the Provost's records indefinitely. 
+
+As soon as a vacancy has been filled, the Chair shall so advise the unsuccessful candidate(s) selected to be interviewed in writing. Human Resources will advise all other applicants.
+
+Note: Since years in academic rank are calculated based on full academic years, in the rare instance that a Tenure-Line Faculty and Professors of the Practice joins the College after November 1, the faculty member’s first year in rank or title will be calculated starting with the succeeding full academic year.
+
+Visiting Faculty
+
+A faculty member is considered visiting when his or her appointment (full-time) is for a period normally not to exceed one year. [November 5, 2004, p. 4486; May 4, 2007, p. 4640] 
+
+For such Visiting Faculty appointments, the Department Chair or Program Coordinator may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures set forth above in Article II, Section 3.1, provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons or less under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73].  In all instances, however, the Department Chair or Program Coordinator shall verify that the final candidate’s preparation and qualifications are appropriate to the nature of the teaching assignment.
+
+Candidates for a Visiting Faculty position that are selected for interviews will be notified that any job offer is contingent upon successful completion of employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks, as well documentation of U.S. citizenship or upon maintaining the appropriate visa status and work authorization.  Moreover, notice of the availability of the College’s Annual Security Report will be provided to the interviewee, if the position was externally advertised.  Any offer of appointment is contingent upon verification of the candidate’s academic credentials or alternative experience qualifications credentials and the successful completion of requisite employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks.
+
+In all cases where a Visiting Faculty member is retained for more than one year on a full-time basis – whether the faculty member has a multiple year contract, a one-year contract that is being renewed for another term or a new per course term contract – the Department Chair/Program Coordinator shall annually review the faculty member’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to do.  A copy of this evaluation shall be shared with the faculty member and placed in the faculty member’s faculty personnel file. 
+
+[November 5, 2004, p. 4486] 
+
+Appointment of Foreign Nationals
+
+The College welcomes international faculty of high qualifications and assists faculty members whenever possible in securing visas and permanent residency.  
+
+Non-U.S. nationals who have secured a faculty position must maintain current legal status in the appropriate visa category and notify the College of any anticipated change of status. Moreover, Tenure-Line Faculty are expected to seek permanent residency as soon as possible after beginning their service to the College.  The loss of appropriate authorization to work in the United States may result in automatic termination of the faculty appointment, regardless of contractual status or type.
+
+All international faculty are requested to consult with Human Resources before accepting salaries, stipends, or honoraria from any other institution to ensure compliance with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and Department of State (J-visa program) regulations.
+
+		Wheaton College Faculty Bylaws – Page 2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] ARTICLE II - Wheaton College Bylaws - Faculty Draft (No Highlights)(March 23).txt [/INST] Article II.	Faculty Status, Contracts, and Initial Appointments
+
+Faculty Status – Types of Faculty Appointments
+
+The College appoints faculty members to one of the following types of faculty appointments:
+
+Full-time Teaching Faculty 
+
+Tenure-line Faculty
+
+	Tenure Track Faculty
+
+	Tenured Faculty
+
+	Professors of the Practice-line Faculty
+
+	Professors of the Practice
+
+	Senior Professors of the Practice
+
+Visiting Faculty 
+
+The College also reserves the right to assign faculty status to certain administrators (see Article II, Section 1.3) and to acknowledge faculty members who have separated from service with the College following distinguished careers with the honorary designation of Associate Professor or Professor Emerita (see Article II, Section 1.4).
+
+1.1. Full-Time Teaching Faculty
+
+Full-time faculty teaching appointments are made to either Tenure-line (see Article II, Section 1.1.1) or Professor of the Practice-line (see Article II, Section 1.1.2) positions in one of the College’s academic departments or program areas.  Members of the full-time teaching faculty have a full-time teaching load as defined in the Wheaton College Employee Handbook for Faculty, as well as other applicable duties and responsibilities delineated in the faculty member’s appointment contract and these Faculty Bylaws.
+
+To be appointed to the full-time teaching faculty, candidates must possess the appropriate academic credentials and/or equivalent professional experience to teach courses in their academic discipline(s).
+
+Tenure-line Faculty
+
+Tenure-line faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who either hold a Tenure-Track (see Section 1.1.1.1) or Tenured (see Section 1.1.1.1) appointment.
+
+Members of the Tenure-line faculty enjoy the rights and protections set forth in these Faculty Bylaws.  Moreover, they are afforded full voting privileges at faculty and academic department or program meetings.  
+
+Tenure-Track Faculty
+
+Tenure-track faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who normally hold probationary appointments to one of two academic ranks: Instructor or Assistant Professor.  An initial appointment may also be made at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.
+
+Tenure-track faculty are eligible to stand for tenure (see Article IV, Section 4) at the conclusion of the candidate’s probationary period.
+
+Tenured Faculty
+
+Tenured faculty are full-time teaching faculty who hold tenured (continued) appointments (see Article IV, Section 4) at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.  
+
+Professors of the Practice Line
+
+Faculty appointed to the Professors of the Practice-line are members of the full-time teaching faculty who possess expertise and achievements in a relevant field of instruction.  Duties entail the equivalent of a standard full-time teaching load as defined in the Wheaton College Employee Handbook for Faculty and service activities following the first year of appointment (see Article IV, Section 1.3). 
+
+Individuals appointed to the Professor of the Practice line are assigned the academic title of Professor of the Practice or Senior Professor of the Practice.  
+
+Professors of the Practice share equal standing in departments and programs with their Tenure-line colleagues and have the following rights:
+
+Voting rights in faculty and department/program meetings
+
+Protection under the standards of notification for non-reappointment
+
+Eligibility for election or appointment to those standing committees for which they are eligible to serve
+
+Access to and protection under the grievance procedures
+
+Academic freedom
+
+Faculty benefits and raises 
+
+Access to faculty development funds
+
+Appointment to the Professor of the Practice line, however, does not include eligibility for tenure, promotion to any tenure-seeking academic rank, or sabbatical leave, regardless of length of employment. 
+
+Professors of the Practice are initially offered annual term contracts, followed by eligibility for multi-year contracts of two- and three-years as specified in the Duration of Appointment section of these Faculty Bylaws (see Article II, Section 2.2.1).
+
+Professor of the Practice appointments must be externally posted and searched nationally through faculty search committees with approval by the Provost in accordance with Article II, Section 3.1.  In all instances, Professors of the Practice are subject to the evaluation policies and procedures described in Article IV, Section 2.3.
+
+Professors of the Practice may apply for open Tenure-Track positions.  If selected and appointed to a Tenure-Track position, credit for time spent as a Professor of the Practice at Wheaton College for promotion in rank and tenure review purposes will be negotiated and determined by the Provost in consultation with the candidate's Department Chair/Program Coordinator, utilizing the same criteria for determining whether prior service credit is awarded to Tenure-line faculty (see Article II, Section 3.1).  In all cases, a maximum of up to two years of full-time teaching in a Professor of the Practice-line position at the College may be excluded from the probationary period (see Article IV, Section 4.1.1).
+
+Visiting Faculty
+
+Visiting Faculty are appointed for a fixed contractual term (see Article II, Section 2.1.3) on a full or part-time basis to carry out instructional and any other responsibilities as delineated in the individual faculty member’s appointment letter.  Full-time Visiting Faculty may be appointed annually, for a semester, or a year, for a period not to exceed two years.  
+
+The visiting designation is used with one of the four academic ranks reserved for Tenure-line Faculty (Visiting Instructor, Visiting Assistant Professor, Visiting Associate Professor, or Visiting Professor). 
+
+Visiting Faculty are not eligible for tenure, promotion, or sabbatical leave; however, they have the same academic freedom, as well as access to and protection under the grievance procedures.  See Article V of the Faculty Bylaws for additional information regarding the terms, rights, and responsibilities applicable to Visiting Faculty.
+
+Visiting Faculty may apply for open Tenure-Track positions.  If selected and appointed to a Tenure-Track position, credit for time spent as a Visiting Faculty member at Wheaton College for promotion in rank and tenure review purposes will be negotiated and determined by the Provost in consultation with the Department Chair/Program Coordinator, utilizing the same criteria for determining whether prior service credit is awarded to Tenure-line faculty (see Article II, Section 3.1).  In all cases, a maximum of up to two years of full-time teaching in a Visiting faculty position at the College may be excluded from the probationary period (see Article IV, Section 4.1.1).
+
+Faculty Legislation Visiting Faculty Definition (Part One, Section III.a(2))
+
+A faculty member is considered visiting when the individual’s appointment (full-time) is for a period normally not to exceed one year.  [November 5, 2004, p. 4486; May 4, 2007, p. 4640]  
+
+For such appointments, the Department Chair may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73]  
+
+In all cases where a faculty member is retained for more than one year on a full-time basis – whether the individual has a multiple year contract or a one-year contract that is being renewed – the Department Chair shall annually review the individual’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to do. A copy of this evaluation shall be shared with the faculty member and placed in the individual’s faculty personnel file.  [November 5, 2004, p. 4486] 
+
+Administrative Faculty
+
+Pursuant to Article I, Section 1 of these Faculty Bylaws, administrative faculty include administrators who serve in one of the following positions: 
+
+College President 
+
+Provost 
+
+Dean of Students 
+
+Dean of Advising
+
+Dean of Library Services
+
+Dean of Global Education
+
+Dean of Admission
+
+Registrar
+
+Administrative Faculty are considered administrators for employment purposes, under terms and conditions of employment as stated in the College’s staff personnel policies.  Administrative Faculty have the privilege of vote and voice in accordance with the provisions stated in Article I, Section 2.  
+
+Faculty Rank and Retreat Rights for Administrative Faculty
+
+At the time of initial appointment to the administrative position, the President, subject to Board of Trustee approval, has the authority to assign the administrator a faculty rank that was earned through a faculty review at a comparable accredited or internationally recognized institution.  In addition, the appointment may be made with tenure (see Article II, Section 3.1.1). Administrative Faculty holding academic rank, however, are ineligible to apply for tenure or promotion in rank during their terms of administrative service at Wheaton College. 
+
+The President or Board of Trustees has the authority to assign Administrative Faculty retreat rights to a position on the faculty following the conclusion of administrative service (“retreat rights”).  Administrative Faculty hired with retreat rights are eligible to assume a faculty position and, in some cases, subsequently stand for tenure after serving a probationary period.  Prior to the assigning of retreat rights, the President or Provost will consult with the faculty of the cognizant department or program to enable the department or program to review the candidate’s academic credentials, to meet with the candidate (if possible), and to make a recommendation to the President as to whether the candidate possesses the appropriate academic credentials and/or equivalent professional experience to teach courses in their academic discipline(s).  
+
+When an Administrative Faculty member is granted retreat rights, the President will state in the initial appointment letter the conditions under which the individual may join the faculty at the conclusion of the administrative faculty appointment.
+
+Faculty Members Who Accept Administrative Appointments
+
+Full-time teaching faculty accepting full-time administrative appointments move automatically to the administrative appointment at the same rank classification.  Tenured faculty retain also tenure while holding the administrative appointment. 
+
+At the time of the initial administrative appointment, the President (or President’s designee) will state in the administrative appointment contract the conditions under which the person will return to the full-time teaching faculty and whether the time spent as an administrator will count toward promotion, tenure, or the next sabbatical leave.  Faculty members holding full-time administrative appointments who continue teaching and research or creative activities are eligible for certain academic promotions during their terms of administrative service and as assessed by the relevant faculty committees governing the process.
+
+
+
+Faculty Emeriti
+
+Emerita or emeritus status honors a faculty member's distinguished service and contributions during a career at the College, as well as the faculty member’s interest in an ongoing and meaningful connection with Wheaton.  This status is open to all full-time teaching faculty members who have contributed meaningfully to the college for more than 20 years.
+
+A retiring Tenured or Senior Professor of the Practice-line faculty member’s department or program may request emerita or emeritus status for that colleague via a letter from the Department Chair or Program Coordinator to the Provost.  That letter should indicate that the department or program supports the request and outline the reasons why the department or program believes the faculty member’s contributions merit emeriti status.
+
+Following the recommendation of the department/program, the Provost will review the received nomination and make a written recommendation to the Board of Trustees to either confer/not confer emerita/emeritus status.  This recommendation shall not be subject to appeal.  The Board of Trustees officially confers emeritus status.  
+
+Emeriti Faculty are not considered employees of the College and therefore are not entitled to benefits.  They are considered members of the broader Wheaton community. 
+
+Emeriti Status Privileges
+
+Privileges of Emeriti Faculty are outlined in the Emeriti Faculty Guidelines in the Wheaton College Employee Handbook for Faculty.
+
+Revocation of Status
+
+Once awarded, emeritus status continues in perpetuity unless the recipient either requests to have status rescinded or violates the intent and spirit of emeritus status by engaging in serious dishonorable conduct in violation of law, rule, or policy and/or causes harm to the College’s reputation. 
+
+To revoke emeriti status without the consent of the individual, a written petition must be made by the President to the Board of Trustees, which has the final authority to revoke the individual’s emeritus status.  Actions or conduct protected by academic freedom shall not be used to revoke emeriti status.
+
+Academic Rank and Faculty Titles
+
+The College recognizes the following academic ranks and titles: Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor, Professor of the Practice, Senior Professor of the Practice, and Visiting Faculty.  [May 13, 1963, p. 2715; Minutes of the Board of Trustees meeting, October 26, 1963, pp. 1055-57; November 18, 1963, pp. 2728-29] 
+
+Eight specific full-time teaching positions are titled Associate Faculty, as explained in Section O. [November 3, 2006, p. 4608] 
+
+	At the time of initial appointment, the President or Provost shall approve the faculty rank after receiving and considering the recommendation from the search committee.  In the case of an initial appointment to the rank of Associate Professor, the Committee on Tenure shall also offer a recommendation to the President.  For an initial appointment to the rank of Professor or Senior Professor of the Practice, the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions will provide a recommendation to the President.  Appointment to the rank of Associate Professor or Professor is further subject to a formal vote of approval by the Board of Trustees. 
+
+	Initial faculty rank is assigned on the basis of the information below, which indicates the minimum qualifications for appointment to the applicable rank.
+
+Instructor
+
+Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or equivalent terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Instructors.  Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Assistant Professor effective the following academic year.
+
+Assistant Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility. In addition to academic or exceptional alternative equivalent experience qualifications, applicants seeking an initial appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor must demonstrate qualities that indicate potential and promise as an effective educator.
+
+Associate Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Associate Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility and, generally, six (6) years of full–time ranked teaching or a minimum of five (5) years of full–time teaching at the rank of Assistant Professor.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.1.1).
+
+Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.1.1).
+
+Professor of the Practice
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the academic title of Professor of the Practice is the appropriate degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or the equivalent professional expertise and achievement in a relevant field of professional practice.  
+
+Senior Professor of the Practice
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the academic title of Senior Professor of the Practice is the appropriate degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or the equivalent professional expertise and achievement in a relevant field of professional practice.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.2.1).
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Contracts
+
+A faculty contract is a written mutual agreement between an individual granted faculty status and the College.  The contractual terms (appointment type, academic department/program, rank, salary, length of appointment, etc.) of every faculty appointment will be stated in writing only by the President or the Provost to the faculty member.  Academic departments and/or programs authorized to fill an open faculty position shall recommend candidates for appointment by the President or the Provost.  Under no circumstance is a faculty member or College employee authorized to offer an appointment or to enter a faculty appointment contract.  Any subsequent extensions or modifications of an appointment, and any special understandings, or any notices incumbent upon either party to provide, will be stated or confirmed in writing, and a copy will be given to the faculty member.
+
+Types of Faculty Contracts
+
+The following types of contracts are issued to individuals granted faculty status at Wheaton College:
+
+Tenure Track Contracts, Probationary Appointments
+
+Tenure-line faculty members eligible for tenure receive tenure-track contracts and hold probationary appointments until they either receive tenure or separate from the College.  A probationary appointment is made with the understanding that both the College and the probationary faculty member will engage in a period of mutual evaluation—the probationary period—leading to the tenure decision.
+
+Faculty members eligible for tenure may be appointed to the rank of Instructor and Assistant Professor upon consideration of their qualifications and experience relative to the standards for appointment in rank. 
+
+A tenure-track appointment is normally renewable up to a total of seven (7) years of full-time service—i.e., a maximum of six (6) years prior to and including the year of the tenure decision, plus one (1) additional terminal year in the case of a negative tenure decision—unless the probationary period is either accelerated or extended in accordance with Article IV, Sections 4.1.2 and 4.1.3, respectively.  
+
+Faculty members holding tenure-track contracts undergo annual and reappointment reviews as specified in Article IV, Section 2.2.  A faculty member undergoing an unsuccessful tenure review will receive notice and will be allowed to complete a final year of the probationary appointment pursuant to a terminal contract (see Section 2.1.4 below).
+
+Tenured Contracts
+
+Tenured contracts are awarded to Tenure-line Faculty who have attained tenured status (see Article IV, Section 4).  The granting of tenure can only be effected by the procedures specified in the College’s Tenure Policy (see Article IV, Section 4) and upon the affirmative vote of the Board of Trustees.  De facto tenure is not awarded at Wheaton College.
+
+A tenured faculty member has the contractual right to continuous appointments until the faculty member resigns, is dismissed for adequate cause (see Article IV, Section 8.2.1), or is terminated as a result of a reduction in force due to fide financial exigency or program discontinuation (see Article IV, Section 8.2.2 and 8.2.3, respectively).
+
+Term Contracts
+
+Term contracts are offered to Professors of the Practice-line and Visiting faculty and are limited to the term of employment outlined in the appointment contract.  Subject to College need, another term contract may be offered subject to the limitations set forth in these Faculty Bylaws.  Issuance of another term contract is solely within the discretion of the College and no other procedures apply.  
+
+Terminal Contracts
+
+A Terminal contract is the final annual contract issued to Tenure Track faculty whose contract will not be renewed or who have been denied tenure.
+
+Duration of Appointments and Notice of Termination
+
+The College will observe the following guidelines for rank and duration of appointments and notice of terminations:
+
+Duration of Appointments
+
+Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Instructors.  Those who have completed their professional training will ordinarily be appointed Assistant Professors.  Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Assistant Professor effective the following academic year. 
+
+The initial term of appointment for Tenure-Track Faculty will be either for one or two years as set forth in the individual faculty member’s appointment contract.
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	Professors of the Practice will receive one-year appointments in the first two years of service at the College.  After two years of full-time teaching at the College, Professors of the Practice are eligible to receive a two-year appointment.  Review in May of the first year of a two-year contract will determine eligibility for a subsequent two-year contract if the Professor of the Practice does not choose to be considered for a promotion to Senior Professor of the Practice.  After four years of full-time teaching at the College, Professors of the Practice are eligible for promotion to Senior Professor of the Practice and a three-year appointment.  Review in May of the second year of a three-year contract will determine eligibility for a subsequent three-year contract.  See Article IV, Section 2.3.2 for additional information.  Overall, a Professor of the Practice’s employment is governed by the individual’s appointment contract.  The College may elect not to re-appoint the faculty member at the College’s discretion, regardless of the positive outcome of any review, if curricular needs change and/or enrollment declines.
+
+	Visiting Faculty will receive appointments on a per-course, semester, or annual basis. [February 4, 2005, p. 4492] 
+
+	Replacements for faculty members on leave and other temporary personnel will receive appointments of appropriate rank and duration. 
+
+Regardless of rank or duration of previous appointments, any non-tenure track member of the faculty or Professor of the Practice with two or more years of service at Wheaton may be given a one-year terminal contract.  In such a case, the standards of notification as described in Article II, Section 2.2.2 below will be observed. 
+
+Notice of Termination
+
+In decisions regarding reappointment or non-reappointment of full-time Tenure Track and Professors of the Practice-line faculty members, care will be taken to observe the following standards of notification (or salary in lieu of notice) endorsed in 1964 as the official policy of the American Association of University Professors: 
+
+Not later than May 1 of the first academic or second academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if a one-year appointment ends during the academic year, at least three months in advance of its termination. 
+
+Not later than December 15 of the second academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of the year; or, if an initial two-year appointment ends during an academic year, at least six months in advance of its termination. 
+
+At least twelve months before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years of service. 
+
+The notice provisions set forth above do not apply to Tenure-Track faculty that have been issued a Terminal Appointment contract.
+
+Annual Contract Period
+
+The period of employment under a full-time faculty contract shall be for the 12-month period beginning July 1 and ending June 30, during which the individual shall receive salary and benefits. The contract will cover the duties associated with the position performed during the period which begins the week before classes begin through the week after Commencement and is known as the ""academic year."" 
+
+Primary Area of Appointment
+
+All faculty appointment contracts designate a department or academic program as the faculty member’s primary faculty appointment location.  It is from this department(s) or program(s) that recommendations for reappointment, promotion, tenure, and other actions concerning a Full-Time Teaching Faculty member are initiated.  A faculty member’s primary faculty appointment may be changed by the President (or President’s designee) to meet the curricular and organizational needs of the College.  
+
+Joint Appointments 
+
+When a faculty member’s contractual responsibilities require a significant portion of teaching and professional activity responsibilities be devoted to either multiple departments, interdisciplinary programs, areas of instruction, or other academic entities engaged in or responsible for the delivery of the curriculum, the faculty member may receive a joint appointment to a department and a specified program or to two departments.  A joint appointment may be established at any stage of faculty employment. 
+
+In making a joint appointment, a primary and secondary department or program will be clearly designated by the Provost in the faculty member’s appointment contract. Such designation may be revised at any stage of employment by the President (or the President’s designee) to meet the curricular or organizational needs of the College.  The primary department or program will serve as the faculty member’s administrative home, which will take the lead responsibility on personnel issues, central human resources reporting, appointment, promotions, tenure, coordination of annual performance review, conflict resolution, and changes in employment.  Often, but not always, the administrative home will be the department or program with the higher appointment fraction.
+
+The nature of a joint appointment varies and the assignment of duties in the secondary department or program will differ by department/program and candidate.  The details of the assignment of duties, the allocation of salary, departmental/program governance rights, and provision for office and laboratory space as applicable to both the primary and secondary departments/program will be communicated in a signed written memorandum of understanding signed by the two Department Chairs/Program Coordinators, the faculty member, and the Provost.  Additionally, negotiated changes to those details will be evidenced in a signed memorandum of understanding.
+
+The Department Chair/Program Coordinator of the secondary department/program must provide input for every evaluation for a jointly appointed faculty member.  In the case of promotion or tenure review, the secondary Department Chair/Program Coordinator must provide a written evaluation describing the nature and extent of the candidate’s involvement in, and contribution to, the secondary department/program.  In the faculty member’s tenure application, it is important to document how the candidate’s time is being spent, and contributions to each department/program need to be clearly documented.
+
+It is recognized that new opportunities, changes in faculty interest, faculty performance, changes in the College’s curricular needs or enrollments or other issues with the joint appointment may require review, renegotiation, or discontinuation of the original joint appointment.  If possible, a faculty member with a joint appointment will have the option of retreating to a full appointment at the primary department or program.  If retreat is not a possibility, the Provost is responsible for ensuring that the faculty member is made fully aware of the existing options.  Further, a short-term plan must be put in place to ensure a smooth transition with minimum disruption to the initiatives, projects, and teaching, that were the responsibility of the faculty member with the joint appointment.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Recruitment and Appointment
+
+Recruitment and Appointment of Full-Time Teaching Faculty 
+
+Vacancies shall be advertised in as many ways as are necessary in order to obtain a suitable pool of applicants in keeping with Wheaton's commitment to Equity and Belonging values and its policy as an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer; for example: in professional journals, job rosters, etc.  Advertisements shall include a statement that the College is an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer. The Department or Program/Search Committee may also want to write to graduate schools. 
+
+For legal purposes, records pertaining to the hiring process shall be retained in accordance with the College’s Record Retention schedule (see Inside Wheaton).  
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Normally departments/programs will establish their own search committee.  In the exceptional case of no continuing tenured member, the Provost will consult with the Advisory Committee.  The Provost will then ask the Committee on Committees and Agenda to set up the search committee. 
+
+The Search Committee shall review applications to determine who should be interviewed. Candidates may be interviewed at professional meetings to narrow the field. All members of the Search Committee will receive anti-bias training.  Moreover, the committee chair is expected to consult with the Office of Human Resources for interview guidance.
+
+After consulting with the Provost, the Chair of the Search Committee shall invite several candidates to visit the College.  The candidates shall be interviewed by members of the department, the Provost and/or the President, and students when possible.  During these interviews, candidates will be notified that any job offer is contingent upon successful completion of employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks, as well documentation of U.S. citizenship or upon maintaining the appropriate visa status and work authorization.  Moreover, notice of the availability of the College’s Annual Security Report will be provided to the interviewee, if the position was externally advertised.
+
+The Search Committee Chair shall send to the Provost a written recommendation from the Search Committee which shall state its majority opinion and indicate any disagreements within the Search Committee.  The written recommendation shall verify that the candidate’s preparation and qualifications are appropriate to the nature of the teaching assignment.  Candidate qualifications shall normally be measured, as applicable to the position, by advanced degrees held, evidence of scholarship, advanced study, creative activities, and teaching abilities, as well as relevant professional experience, training, and credentials. Exceptions may be made for individuals who do not hold advanced degrees but who are considered by the College to possess other demonstrated competencies and professional achievements that provide evidence to support excellent teaching and student achievement in the discipline.
+
+If the Provost or the President has reservations about following the recommendation for appointment, one or both shall consult with the Chair and may request that the Search Committee continue the search process. 
+
+If the recommendation for appointment is approved by the President or the Provost, after consultation with the Chair, the Provost shall make a written offer of appointment to the appointee, stating the precise terms and conditions of the appointment.  Such offer shall refer to, and be accompanied by, either a copy or a link to these Faculty Bylaws as then in effect.  In the written offer, the Provost may, after receiving and considering recommendations from the search committee and the candidate’s Department Chair/Program Coordinator, award credit toward the fulfillment of promotion and/or tenure eligibility based upon the candidate’s past teaching and scholarly or creative work achievements at another accredited higher education institution.   In all cases, a maximum of up to two years of full-time teaching at an accredited higher education institution may be excluded from the probationary period (see Article IV, Section 4.1.1).
+
+The offer is contingent upon verification of the candidate’s academic credentials or alternative experience qualifications credentials and the successful completion of requisite employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks.  Moreover, an initial written offer of appointment to the rank of Associate Professor with tenure or Professor with tenure shall also indicate that the offer is subject to a formal vote of approval by the Board of Trustees, action on which is pending.  Notice of such Trustee action shall be sent to the candidate. 
+
+Each such offer shall also specify that it may be accepted only in writing.  If it is so accepted, the President or the Provost shall furnish copies of the offer and acceptance to the Chair for the department or program’s records.  All data submitted by appointee in connection with the application for appointment shall be retained in the Provost's records indefinitely. 
+
+As soon as a vacancy has been filled, the Chair shall so advise the unsuccessful candidate(s) selected to be interviewed in writing. Human Resources will advise all other applicants.
+
+Note: Since years in academic rank are calculated based on full academic years, in the rare instance that a Tenure-line Faculty and Professors of the Practice joins the College after November 1, the faculty member’s first year in rank or title will be calculated starting with the succeeding full academic year.
+
+Initial Appointments with Tenure
+
+On occasion, the College may wish to hire a faculty member or academic administrator who already holds tenure at another accredited institution of higher education and who would not accept appointment at the College without tenure transfer.  In such cases, after review of scholarly or creative materials and teaching philosophy, and in consultation with the Provost, applicable Department Chair or Program Coordinator, and Committee on Tenure, the President forwards the recommendation for tenure to the Board of Trustees.  The Board renders a decision that is final.  The College will only appoint candidates with tenure transfer at the same rank conferred by the candidate's previous institution.
+
+Recruitment and Appointment of Visiting Faculty
+
+A faculty member is considered visiting when his or her appointment (full-time) is for a period normally not to exceed one year. [November 5, 2004, p. 4486; May 4, 2007, p. 4640] 
+
+For such Visiting Faculty appointments, the Department Chair or Program Coordinator may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures set forth above in Article II, Section 3.1, provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons or less under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73].  In all instances, however, the Department Chair or Program Coordinator shall verify that the final candidate’s preparation and qualifications are appropriate to the nature of the teaching assignment.
+
+Candidates for a Visiting Faculty position that are selected for interviews will be notified that any job offer is contingent upon successful completion of employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks, as well documentation of U.S. citizenship or upon maintaining the appropriate visa status and work authorization.  Moreover, notice of the availability of the College’s Annual Security Report will be provided to the interviewee, if the position was externally advertised.  Any offer of appointment is contingent upon verification of the candidate’s academic credentials or alternative experience qualifications credentials and the successful completion of requisite employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks.
+
+In all cases where a Visiting Faculty member is retained for more than one year on a full-time basis – whether the faculty member has a multiple year contract, a one-year contract that is being renewed for another term or a new semester or per course term contract – the Department Chair/Program Coordinator shall annually review the faculty member’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to do.  A copy of this evaluation shall be shared with the faculty member and placed in the faculty member’s faculty personnel file. 
+
+[November 5, 2004, p. 4486] 
+
+
+
+		Wheaton College Faculty Bylaws – Page 34</s>"
+"<s>[INST] ARTICLE II - Wheaton College Bylaws - Faculty Draft (No Highlights).txt [/INST] Article II.	Faculty Status, Contracts, and Initial Appointments
+
+Faculty Status – Types of Faculty Appointments
+
+The College appoints faculty members to one of the following types of faculty appointments:
+
+Full-time Teaching Faculty 
+
+Tenure-line Faculty
+
+	Tenure Track Faculty
+
+	Tenured Faculty
+
+	Professors of the Practice-line Faculty
+
+	Professors of the Practice
+
+	Senior Professors of the Practice
+
+Visiting Faculty 
+
+The College also reserves the right to assign faculty status to certain administrators (see Article II, Section 1.3) and to acknowledge faculty members who have separated from service with the College following distinguished careers with the honorary designation of Associate Professor or Professor Emerita (see Article II, Section 1.4).
+
+1.1. Full-Time Teaching Faculty
+
+Full-time faculty teaching appointments are made to either Tenure-line (see Article II, Section 1.1.1) or Professor of the Practice-line (see Article II, Section 1.1.2) positions in one of the College’s academic departments or program areas.  Members of the full-time teaching faculty have a full-time teaching load as defined in the Wheaton College Employee Handbook for Faculty, as well as other applicable duties and responsibilities delineated in the faculty member’s appointment contract and these Faculty Bylaws.
+
+To be appointed to the full-time teaching faculty, candidates must possess the appropriate academic credentials and/or equivalent professional experience to teach courses in their academic discipline(s).
+
+Tenure-line Faculty
+
+Tenure-line faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who either hold a Tenure-Track (see Section 1.1.1.1) or Tenured (see Section 1.1.1.1) appointment.
+
+Members of the Tenure-line faculty enjoy the rights and protections set forth in these Faculty Bylaws.  Moreover, they are afforded full voting privileges at faculty and academic department or program meetings.  
+
+Tenure-Track Faculty
+
+Tenure-track faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who normally hold probationary appointments to one of two academic ranks: Instructor or Assistant Professor.  An initial appointment may also be made at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.
+
+Tenure-track faculty are eligible to stand for tenure (see Article IV, Section 4) at the conclusion of the candidate’s probationary period.
+
+Tenured Faculty
+
+Tenured faculty are full-time teaching faculty who hold tenured (continued) appointments (see Article IV, Section 4) at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.  
+
+Professors of the Practice Line
+
+Faculty appointed to the Professors of the Practice line are members of the full-time teaching faculty who possess expertise and achievements in a relevant field of instruction.  Duties entail the equivalent of a standard full-time teaching load as defined in the Wheaton College Employee Handbook for Faculty and service activities following the first year of appointment (see Article IV, Section 1.3). 
+
+Individuals appointed to the Professor of the Practice line are assigned the academic title of Professor of the Practice or Senior Professor of the Practice.  
+
+Professors of the Practice share equal standing in departments and programs with their Tenure-line colleagues and have the following rights:
+
+Voting rights in faculty and department/program meetings
+
+Protection under the standards of notification for non-reappointment
+
+Eligibility for election or appointment to those standing committees for which they are eligible to serve
+
+Access to and protection under the grievance procedures
+
+Academic freedom
+
+Faculty benefits and raises 
+
+Access to faculty development funds
+
+Appointment to the Professor of the Practice line, however, does not include eligibility for tenure, promotion to any tenure-seeking academic rank, or sabbatical leave, regardless of length of employment. 
+
+Professors of the Practice are initially offered annual term contracts, followed by eligibility for multi-year contracts of two- and three-year durations as specified in the Duration of Appointment section of these Faculty Bylaws (see Article II, Section 2.2.1).
+
+Professor of the Practice appointments must be externally posted and searched nationally through faculty search committees with approval by the Provost in accordance with Article II, Section 3.1.  In all instances, Professors of the Practice are subject to the evaluation policies and procedures described in Article IV, Section 2.3.
+
+Professors of the Practice may apply for open Tenure-Track positions.  If selected and appointed to a Tenure-Track position, credit for time spent as a Professor of the Practice at Wheaton College for promotion in rank and tenure review purposes will be negotiated and determined by the Provost in consultation with the candidate's Department Chair/Program Coordinator, utilizing the same criteria for determining whether prior service credit is awarded to Tenure-line faculty (see Article II, Section 3.1).  In all cases, a maximum of up to two years of full-time teaching in a Professor of the Practice-line position at the College may be excluded from the probationary period (see Article IV, Section 4.1.1).
+
+Visiting Faculty
+
+Visiting Faculty are appointed for a fixed contractual term (see Article II, Section 2.1.3) on a full or part-time basis to carry out instructional and any other responsibilities as delineated in the individual faculty member’s appointment letter.  Full-time Visiting Faculty may be appointed annually, for a semester, or a year, for a period not to exceed two years.  
+
+The visiting designation is used with one of the four academic ranks reserved for Tenure-line Faculty (Visiting Instructor, Visiting Assistant Professor, Visiting Associate Professor, or Visiting Professor). 
+
+Visiting Faculty are not eligible for tenure, promotion, or sabbatical leave; however, they have the same academic freedom, as well as access to and protection under the grievance procedures.  See Article V of the Faculty Bylaws for additional information regarding the terms, rights, and responsibilities applicable to Visiting Faculty.
+
+Visiting Faculty may apply for open Tenure-Track positions.  If selected and appointed to a Tenure-Track position, credit for time spent as a Visiting Faculty member at Wheaton College for promotion in rank and tenure review purposes will be negotiated and determined by the Provost in consultation with the Department Chair/Program Coordinator, utilizing the same criteria for determining whether prior service credit is awarded to Tenure-line faculty (see Article II, Section 3.1).  In all cases, a maximum of up to two years of full-time teaching in a Visiting faculty position at the College may be excluded from the probationary period (see Article IV, Section 4.1.1).
+
+Faculty Legislation Visiting Faculty Definition (Part One, Section III.a(2))
+
+A faculty member is considered visiting when the individual’s appointment (full-time) is for a period normally not to exceed one year.  [November 5, 2004, p. 4486; May 4, 2007, p. 4640]  
+
+For such appointments, the Department Chair may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73]  
+
+In all cases where a faculty member is retained for more than one year on a full-time basis – whether the individual has a multiple year contract or a one-year contract that is being renewed – the Department Chair shall annually review the individual’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to do. A copy of this evaluation shall be shared with the faculty member and placed in the individual’s faculty personnel file.  [November 5, 2004, p. 4486] 
+
+Administrative Faculty
+
+Pursuant to Article I, Section 1 of these Faculty Bylaws, administrative faculty include administrators who serve in one of the following positions: 
+
+College President 
+
+Provost 
+
+Dean of Students 
+
+Dean of Advising
+
+Dean of Library Services
+
+Dean of Global Education
+
+Dean of Admission
+
+Registrar
+
+Administrative Faculty are considered administrators for employment purposes, under terms and conditions of employment as stated in the College’s staff personnel policies.  Administrative Faculty have the privilege of vote and voice in accordance with the provisions stated in Article I, Section 2.  
+
+Faculty Rank and Retreat Rights for Administrative Faculty
+
+At the time of initial appointment to the administrative position, the President, subject to Board of Trustee approval, has the authority to assign the administrator a faculty rank that was earned through a faculty review at a comparable accredited or internationally recognized institution.  In addition, the appointment may be made with tenure (see Article II, Section 3.1.1). Administrative Faculty holding academic rank, however, are ineligible to apply for tenure or promotion in rank during their terms of administrative service at Wheaton College. 
+
+The President or Board of Trustees has the authority to assign Administrative Faculty retreat rights to a position on the faculty following the conclusion of administrative service (“retreat rights”).  Administrative Faculty hired with retreat rights are eligible to assume a faculty position and, in some cases, subsequently stand for tenure after serving a probationary period.  Prior to the assigning of retreat rights, the President or Provost will consult with the faculty of the cognizant department or program to enable the department or program to review the candidate’s academic credentials, to meet with the candidate (if possible), and to make a recommendation to the President as to whether the candidate possesses the appropriate academic credentials and/or equivalent professional experience to teach courses in their academic discipline(s).  
+
+When an Administrative Faculty member is granted retreat rights, the President will state in the initial appointment letter the conditions under which the individual may join the faculty at the conclusion of the administrative faculty appointment.
+
+Faculty Members Who Accept Administrative Appointments
+
+Full-time teaching faculty accepting full-time administrative appointments move automatically to the administrative appointment at the same rank classification.  Tenured faculty retain also tenure while holding the administrative appointment. 
+
+At the time of the initial administrative appointment, the President (or President’s designee) will state in the administrative appointment contract the conditions under which the person will return to the full-time teaching faculty and whether the time spent as an administrator will count toward promotion, tenure, or the next sabbatical leave.  Faculty members holding full-time administrative appointments who continue teaching and research or creative activities are eligible for certain academic promotions during their terms of administrative service and as assessed by the relevant faculty committees governing the process.
+
+
+
+Faculty Emeriti
+
+Emerita or emeritus status honors a faculty member's distinguished service and contributions during a career at the College, as well as the faculty member’s interest in an ongoing and meaningful connection with Wheaton.  This status is open to all full-time teaching faculty members who have contributed meaningfully to the college for more than 20 years.
+
+A retiring Tenured or Senior Professor of the Practice-line faculty member’s department or program may request emerita or emeritus status for that colleague via a letter from the Department Chair or Program Coordinator to the Provost.  That letter should indicate that the department or program supports the request and outline the reasons why the department or program believes the faculty member’s contributions merit emeriti status.
+
+Following the recommendation of the department/program, the Provost will review the received nomination and make a written recommendation to the Board of Trustees to either confer/not confer emerita/emeritus status.  This recommendation shall not be subject to appeal.  The Board of Trustees officially confers emeritus status.  
+
+Emeriti Faculty are not considered employees of the College and therefore are not entitled to benefits.  They are considered members of the broader Wheaton community. 
+
+Emeriti Status Privileges
+
+Privileges of Emeriti Faculty are outlined in the Emeriti Faculty Guidelines in the Wheaton College Employee Handbook for Faculty.
+
+Revocation of Status
+
+Once awarded, emeritus status continues in perpetuity unless the recipient either requests to have status rescinded or violates the intent and spirit of emeritus status by engaging in serious dishonorable conduct in violation of law, rule, or policy and/or causes harm to the College’s reputation. 
+
+To revoke emeriti status without the consent of the individual, a written petition must be made by the President to the Board of Trustees, which has the final authority to revoke the individual’s emeritus status.  Actions or conduct protected by academic freedom shall not be used to revoke emeriti status.
+
+Academic Rank and Faculty Titles
+
+The College recognizes the following academic ranks and titles: Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor, Professor of the Practice, Senior Professor of the Practice, and Visiting Faculty.  [May 13, 1963, p. 2715; Minutes of the Board of Trustees meeting, October 26, 1963, pp. 1055-57; November 18, 1963, pp. 2728-29] 
+
+Eight specific full-time teaching positions are titled Associate Faculty, as explained in Section O. [November 3, 2006, p. 4608] 
+
+	At the time of initial appointment, the President or Provost shall approve the faculty rank after receiving and considering the recommendation from the search committee.  In the case of an initial appointment to the rank of Associate Professor, the Committee on Tenure shall also offer a recommendation to the President.  For an initial appointment to the rank of Professor or Senior Professor of the Practice, the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions will provide a recommendation to the President.  Appointment to the rank of Associate Professor or Professor is further subject to a formal vote of approval by the Board of Trustees. 
+
+	Initial faculty rank is assigned on the basis of the information below, which indicates the minimum qualifications for appointment to the applicable rank.
+
+Instructor
+
+Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or equivalent terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Instructors.  Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Assistant Professor effective the following academic year.
+
+Assistant Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility. In addition to academic or exceptional alternative equivalent experience qualifications, applicants seeking an initial appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor must demonstrate qualities that indicate potential and promise as an effective educator.
+
+Associate Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Associate Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility and, generally, six (6) years of full–time ranked teaching or a minimum of five (5) years of full–time teaching at the rank of Assistant Professor.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.1.1).
+
+Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.1.1).
+
+Professor of the Practice
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the academic title of Professor of the Practice is the appropriate degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or the equivalent professional expertise and achievement in a relevant field of professional practice.  
+
+Senior Professor of the Practice
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the academic title of Senior Professor of the Practice is the appropriate degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or the equivalent professional expertise and achievement in a relevant field of professional practice.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.2.1).
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Contracts
+
+A faculty contract is a written mutual agreement between an individual granted faculty status and the College.  The contractual terms (appointment type, academic department/program, rank, salary, length of appointment, etc.) of every faculty appointment will be stated in writing only by the President or the Provost to the faculty member.  Academic departments and/or programs authorized to fill an open faculty position shall recommend candidates for appointment by the President or the Provost.  Under no circumstance is a faculty member or College employee authorized to offer an appointment or to enter a faculty appointment contract.  Any subsequent extensions or modifications of an appointment, and any special understandings, or any notices incumbent upon either party to provide, will be stated or confirmed in writing, and a copy will be given to the faculty member.
+
+Types of Faculty Contracts
+
+The following types of contracts are issued to individuals granted faculty status at Wheaton College:
+
+Tenure Track Contracts, Probationary Appointments
+
+Tenure-line faculty members eligible for tenure receive tenure-track contracts and hold probationary appointments until they either receive tenure or separate from the College.  A probationary appointment is made with the understanding that both the College and the probationary faculty member will engage in a period of mutual evaluation—the probationary period—leading to the tenure decision.
+
+Faculty members eligible for tenure may be appointed to the rank of Instructor and Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor, upon consideration of their qualifications and experience relative to the standards for appointment in rank. 
+
+A tenure-track appointment is normally renewable up to a total of seven (7) years of full-time service—i.e., a maximum of six (6) years prior to and including the year of the tenure decision, plus one (1) additional terminal year in the case of a negative tenure decision—unless the probationary period is either accelerated or extended in accordance with Article IV, Sections 4.1.2 and 4.1.3, respectively.  
+
+Faculty members holding tenure-track contracts undergo annual and reappointment reviews as specified in Article IV, Section 2.2.  A faculty member undergoing an unsuccessful tenure review will receive notice and will be allowed to complete a final year of the probationary appointment pursuant to a terminal contract (see Section 2.1.4 below).
+
+Tenured Contracts
+
+Tenured contracts are awarded to Tenure-line Faculty who have attained tenured status (see Article IV, Section 4).  The granting of tenure can only be effected by the procedures specified in the College’s Tenure Policy (see Article IV, Section 4) and upon the affirmative vote of the Board of Trustees.  De facto tenure is not awarded at Wheaton College.
+
+A tenured faculty member has the contractual right to continuous appointments until the faculty member resigns, is dismissed for adequate cause (see Article IV, Section 8.2.1), or is terminated as a result of a reduction in force due to fide financial exigency or program discontinuation (see Article IV, Section 8.2.2 and 8.2.3, respectively).
+
+Term Contracts
+
+Term contracts are offered to Professors of the Practice-line and Visiting faculty and are limited to the term of employment outlined in the appointment contract.  Subject to College need, another term contract may be offered subject to the limitations set forth in these Faculty Bylaws.  Issuance of another term contract is solely within the discretion of the College and no other procedures apply.  
+
+Terminal Contracts
+
+A Terminal contract is the final annual contract issued to Tenure Track faculty whose contract will not be renewed or who have been denied tenure.
+
+Duration of Appointments and Notice of Termination
+
+The College will observe the following guidelines for rank and duration of appointments and notice of terminations:
+
+Duration of Appointments
+
+Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Instructors.  Those who have completed their professional training will ordinarily be appointed Assistant Professors.  Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Assistant Professor effective the following academic year. 
+
+The initial term of appointment for Tenure-Track Faculty will be either for one or two years as set forth in the individual faculty member’s appointment contract.
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	Professors of the Practice will receive one-year appointments in the first two years of service at the College.  At the end of the second annual contract year, a Professor of the Practice will be considered for a two-year contract.  When the fiscal and programmatic needs of the College permit, a summative review by the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions in May of the first year of the two-year contract will assess eligibility for a three-year term contract.  Review in May of second year of a three-year contract will determine eligibility for a successive three-year contract.  See Article IV, Section 2.3.2 for additional information.  Overall, a Professor of the Practice’s employment is governed by the individual’s appointment contract.  The College may elect not to re-appoint the faculty member at the College’s discretion, regardless of the positive outcome of any review, if curricular needs change and/or enrollment declines.
+
+	Visiting Faculty will receive appointments on a per-course, semester, or annual basis. [February 4, 2005, p. 4492] 
+
+	Replacements for faculty members on leave and other temporary personnel will receive appointments of appropriate rank and duration. 
+
+Regardless of rank or duration of previous appointments, any non-tenure track member of the faculty or Professor of the Practice with two or more years of service at Wheaton may be given a one-year terminal contract.  In such a case, the standards of notification as described in Article II, Section 2.2.2 below will be observed. 
+
+Notice of Termination
+
+In decisions regarding reappointment or non-reappointment of full-time Tenure Track and Professors of the Practice-faculty members, care will be taken to observe the following standards of notification (or salary in lieu of notice) endorsed in 1964 as the official policy of the American Association of University Professors: 
+
+Not later than May 1 of the first academic or second academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if a one-year appointment ends during the academic year, at least three months in advance of its termination. 
+
+Not later than December 15 of the second academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of the year; or, if an initial two-year appointment ends during an academic year, at least six months in advance of its termination. 
+
+At least twelve months before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years of service. 
+
+The notice provisions set forth above do not apply to Tenure-Track faculty and Professors of the Practice-line faculty that have been issued a Terminal Appointment contract.
+
+Annual Contract Period
+
+The period of employment under a full-time faculty contract shall be for the 12-month period beginning July 1 and ending June 30, during which the individual shall receive salary and benefits. The contract will cover the duties associated with the position performed during the period which begins the week before classes begin through the week after Commencement and is known as the ""academic year."" 
+
+Primary Area of Appointment
+
+All faculty appointment contracts designate a department or academic program as the faculty member’s primary faculty appointment location.  It is from this department(s) or program(s) that recommendations for reappointment, promotion, tenure, and other actions concerning a Full-Time Teaching Faculty member are initiated.  A faculty member’s primary faculty appointment may be changed by the President (or President’s designee) to meet the curricular and organizational needs of the College.  
+
+Joint Appointments 
+
+When a faculty member’s contractual responsibilities require a significant portion of teaching and professional activity responsibilities be devoted to either multiple departments, interdisciplinary programs, areas of instruction, or other academic entities engaged in or responsible for the delivery of the curriculum, the faculty member may receive a joint appointment to a department and a specified program or to two departments.  A joint appointment may be established at any stage of faculty employment. 
+
+In making a joint appointment, a primary and secondary department or program will be clearly designated by the Provost in the faculty member’s appointment contract. Such designation may be revised at any stage of employment by the President (or the President’s designee) to meet the curricular or organizational needs of the College.  The primary department or program will serve as the faculty member’s administrative home, which will take the lead responsibility on personnel issues, central human resources reporting, appointment, promotions, tenure, coordination of annual performance review, conflict resolution, and changes in employment.  Often, but not always, the administrative home will be the department or program with the higher appointment fraction.
+
+The nature of a joint appointment varies and the assignment of duties in the secondary department or program will differ by department/program and candidate.  The details of the assignment of duties, the allocation of salary, departmental/program governance rights, and provision for office and laboratory space as applicable to both the primary and secondary departments/program will be communicated in a signed written memorandum of understanding signed by the two Department Chairs/Program Coordinators, the faculty member, and the Provost.  Additionally, negotiated changes to those details will be evidenced in a signed memorandum of understanding.
+
+The Department Chair/Program Coordinator of the secondary department/program must provide input for every evaluation for a jointly appointed faculty member.  In the case of promotion or tenure review, the secondary Department Chair/Program Coordinator must provide a written evaluation describing the nature and extent of the candidate’s involvement in, and contribution to, the secondary department/program.  In the faculty member’s tenure application, it is important to document how the candidate’s time is being spent, and contributions to each department/program need to be clearly documented.
+
+It is recognized that new opportunities, changes in faculty interest, faculty performance, changes in the College’s curricular needs or enrollments or other issues with the joint appointment may require review, renegotiation, or discontinuation of the original joint appointment.  If possible, a faculty member with a joint appointment will have the option of retreating to a full appointment at the primary department or program.  If retreat is not a possibility, the Provost is responsible for ensuring that the faculty member is made fully aware of the existing options.  Further, a short-term plan must be put in place to ensure a smooth transition with minimum disruption to the initiatives, projects, and teaching, that were the responsibility of the faculty member with the joint appointment.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Recruitment and Appointment
+
+Recruitment and Appointment of Full-Time Teaching Faculty 
+
+Vacancies shall be advertised in as many ways as are necessary in order to obtain a suitable pool of applicants in keeping with Wheaton's commitment to Equity and Belonging values and its policy as an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer; for example: in professional journals, job rosters, etc.  Advertisements shall include a statement that the College is an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer. The Department or Program/Search Committee may also want to write to graduate schools. 
+
+For legal purposes, records pertaining to the hiring process shall be retained in accordance with the College’s Record Retention schedule (see Inside Wheaton).  
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Normally departments/programs will establish their own search committee.  In the exceptional case of no continuing tenured member, the Provost will consult with the Advisory Committee.  The Provost will then ask the Committee on Committees and Agenda to set up the search committee. 
+
+The Search Committee shall review applications to determine who should be interviewed. Candidates may be interviewed at professional meetings to narrow the field. All members of the Search Committee will receive anti-bias training.  Moreover, the committee chair is expected to consult with the Office of Human Resources for interview guidance.
+
+After consulting with the Provost, the Chair of the Search Committee shall invite several candidates to visit the College.  The candidates shall be interviewed by members of the department, the Provost and/or the President, and students when possible.  During these interviews, candidates will be notified that any job offer is contingent upon successful completion of employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks, as well documentation of U.S. citizenship or upon maintaining the appropriate visa status and work authorization.  Moreover, notice of the availability of the College’s Annual Security Report will be provided to the interviewee, if the position was externally advertised.
+
+The Search Committee Chair shall send to the Provost a written recommendation from the Search Committee which shall state its majority opinion and indicate any disagreements within the Search Committee.  The written recommendation shall verify that the candidate’s preparation and qualifications are appropriate to the nature of the teaching assignment.  Candidate qualifications shall normally be measured, as applicable to the position, by advanced degrees held, evidence of scholarship, advanced study, creative activities, and teaching abilities, as well as relevant professional experience, training, and credentials. Exceptions may be made for individuals who do not hold advanced degrees but who are considered by the College to possess other demonstrated competencies and professional achievements that provide evidence to support excellent teaching and student achievement in the discipline.
+
+If the Provost or the President has reservations about following the recommendation for appointment, one or both shall consult with the Chair and may request that the Search Committee continue the search process. 
+
+If the recommendation for appointment is approved by the President or the Provost, after consultation with the Chair, the Provost shall make a written offer of appointment to the appointee, stating the precise terms and conditions of the appointment.  Such offer shall refer to, and be accompanied by, either a copy or a link to these Faculty Bylaws as then in effect.  In the written offer, the Provost may, after receiving and considering recommendations from the search committee and the candidate’s Department Chair/Program Coordinator, award credit toward the fulfillment of promotion and/or tenure eligibility based upon the candidate’s past teaching and scholarly or creative work achievements at another accredited higher education institution.   In all cases, a maximum of up to two years of full-time teaching at an accredited higher education institution may be excluded from the probationary period (see Article IV, Section 4.1.1).
+
+The offer is contingent upon verification of the candidate’s academic credentials or alternative experience qualifications credentials and the successful completion of requisite employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks.  Moreover, an initial written offer of appointment to the rank of Associate Professor with tenure or Professor with tenure shall also indicate that the offer is subject to a formal vote of approval by the Board of Trustees, action on which is pending.  Notice of such Trustee action shall be sent to the candidate. 
+
+Each such offer shall also specify that it may be accepted only in writing.  If it is so accepted, the President or the Provost shall furnish copies of the offer and acceptance to the Chair for the department or program’s records.  All data submitted by appointee in connection with the application for appointment shall be retained in the Provost's records indefinitely. 
+
+As soon as a vacancy has been filled, the Chair shall so advise the unsuccessful candidate(s) selected to be interviewed in writing. Human Resources will advise all other applicants.
+
+Note: Since years in academic rank are calculated based on full academic years, in the rare instance that a Tenure-line Faculty and Professors of the Practice joins the College after November 1, the faculty member’s first year in rank or title will be calculated starting with the succeeding full academic year.
+
+Initial Appointments with Tenure
+
+On occasion, the College may wish to hire a faculty member or academic administrator who already holds tenure at another accredited institution of higher education and who would not accept appointment at the College without tenure transfer.  In such cases, after review of scholarly or creative materials and teaching philosophy, and in consultation with the Provost, applicable Department Chair or Program Coordinator, and Committee on Tenure, the President forwards the recommendation for tenure to the Board of Trustees.  The Board renders a decision that is final.  The College will only appoint candidates with tenure transfer at the same rank conferred by the candidate's previous institution.
+
+Recruitment and Appointment of Visiting Faculty
+
+A faculty member is considered visiting when his or her appointment (full-time) is for a period normally not to exceed one year. [November 5, 2004, p. 4486; May 4, 2007, p. 4640] 
+
+For such Visiting Faculty appointments, the Department Chair or Program Coordinator may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures set forth above in Article II, Section 3.1, provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons or less under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73].  In all instances, however, the Department Chair or Program Coordinator shall verify that the final candidate’s preparation and qualifications are appropriate to the nature of the teaching assignment.
+
+Candidates for a Visiting Faculty position that are selected for interviews will be notified that any job offer is contingent upon successful completion of employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks, as well documentation of U.S. citizenship or upon maintaining the appropriate visa status and work authorization.  Moreover, notice of the availability of the College’s Annual Security Report will be provided to the interviewee, if the position was externally advertised.  Any offer of appointment is contingent upon verification of the candidate’s academic credentials or alternative experience qualifications credentials and the successful completion of requisite employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks.
+
+In all cases where a Visiting Faculty member is retained for more than one year on a full-time basis – whether the faculty member has a multiple year contract, a one-year contract that is being renewed for another term or a new semester or per course term contract – the Department Chair/Program Coordinator shall annually review the faculty member’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to do.  A copy of this evaluation shall be shared with the faculty member and placed in the faculty member’s faculty personnel file. 
+
+[November 5, 2004, p. 4486] 
+
+
+
+		Wheaton College Faculty Bylaws – Page 34</s>"
+"<s>[INST] ARTICLE II - Wheaton College Bylaws - Faculty Draft.txt [/INST] Article II.	Faculty Status, Contracts, and Initial Appointments
+
+Faculty Status – Types of Faculty Appointments
+
+The College appoints faculty members to one of the following types of faculty appointments:
+
+Full-time Teaching Faculty 
+
+Tenure-line Faculty
+
+	Tenure Track Faculty
+
+	Tenured Faculty
+
+	Professors of the Practice-line Faculty
+
+	Professors of the Practice
+
+	Senior Professors of the Practice
+
+Visiting Faculty 
+
+The College also reserves the right to assign faculty status to certain administrators (see Article II, Section 1.3) and to acknowledge faculty members who have separated from service with the College following distinguished careers with the honorary designation of Associate Professor or Professor Emerita (see Article II, Section 1.4).
+
+1.1. Full-Time Teaching Faculty
+
+Full-time faculty teaching appointments are made to either Tenure-line (see Article II, Section 1.1.1) or Professor of the Practice-line (see Article II, Section 1.1.2) positions in one of the College’s academic departments or program areas.  Members of the full-time teaching faculty have a full-time teaching load as defined in the Wheaton College Employee Handbook for Faculty, as well as other applicable duties and responsibilities delineated in the faculty member’s appointment contract and these Faculty Bylaws.
+
+To be appointed to the full-time teaching faculty, candidates must possess the appropriate academic credentials and/or equivalent professional experience to teach courses in their academic discipline(s).
+
+Tenure-line Faculty
+
+Tenure-line faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who either hold a Tenure-Track (see Section 1.1.1.1) or Tenured (see Section 1.1.1.1) appointment.
+
+Members of the Tenure-line faculty enjoy the rights and protections set forth in these Faculty Bylaws.  Moreover, they are afforded full voting privileges at faculty and academic department or program meetings.  
+
+Tenure-Track Faculty
+
+Tenure-track faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who normally hold probationary appointments to one of two academic ranks: Instructor or Assistant Professor.  An initial appointment may also be made at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.
+
+Tenure-track faculty are eligible to stand for tenure (see Article IV, Section 4) at the conclusion of the candidate’s probationary period.
+
+Tenured Faculty
+
+Tenured faculty are full-time teaching faculty who hold tenured (continued) appointments (see Article IV, Section 4) at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.  
+
+Professors of the Practice-line
+
+Faculty appointed to the Professors of the Practice-line are members of the full-time teaching faculty who possess expertise and achievements in a relevant field of instruction.  Duties entail the equivalent of a standard full-time teaching load as defined in the Wheaton College Employee Handbook for Faculty and service activities following the first year of appointment (see Article IV, Section 1.3). 
+
+Individuals appointed to the Professor of the Practice line are assigned the academic title of Professor of the Practice or Senior Professor of the Practice.  
+
+Professors of the Practice share equal standing in departments and programs with their Tenure-line colleagues and have the following rights:
+
+Voting rights in faculty and department/program meetings
+
+Protection under the standards of notification for non-reappointment
+
+Eligibility for election or appointment to those standing committees for which they are eligible to serve
+
+Access to and protection under the grievance procedures
+
+Academic freedom
+
+Faculty benefits and raises 
+
+Access to faculty development funds
+
+Appointment to the Professor of the Practice line, however, does not include eligibility for tenure, promotion to any tenure-seeking academic rank, or sabbatical leave, regardless of length of employment. 
+
+Professors of the Practice are initially offered annual term contracts, followed by eligibility for multi-year contracts of two- and three-years as specified in the Duration of Appointment section of these Faculty Bylaws (see Article II, Section 2.2.1).
+
+Professor of the Practice appointments must be externally posted and searched nationally through faculty search committees with approval by the Provost in accordance with Article II, Section 3.1.  In all instances, Professors of the Practice are subject to the evaluation policies and procedures described in Article IV, Section 2.3.
+
+Professors of the Practice may apply for open Tenure-Track positions.  If selected and appointed to a Tenure-Track position, credit for time spent as a Professor of the Practice at Wheaton College for promotion in rank and tenure review purposes will be negotiated and determined by the Provost in consultation with the candidate's Department Chair/Program Coordinator, utilizing the same criteria for determining whether prior service credit is awarded to Tenure-line faculty (see Article II, Section 3.1).  In all cases, a maximum of up to three years of full-time teaching in a Professor of the Practice-line position at the College may be excluded from the probationary period (see Article IV, Section 4.1.1).
+
+Visiting Faculty
+
+Visiting Faculty are appointed for a fixed contractual term (see Article II, Section 2.1.3) on a full or part-time basis to carry out instructional and any other responsibilities as delineated in the individual faculty member’s appointment letter.  Full-time Visiting Faculty may be appointed annually, for a semester, or a year, for a period not to exceed two years.  
+
+The visiting designation is used with one of the four academic ranks reserved for Tenure-line Faculty (Visiting Instructor, Visiting Assistant Professor, Visiting Associate Professor, or Visiting Professor). 
+
+Visiting Faculty are not eligible for tenure, promotion, or sabbatical leave; however, they have the same academic freedom, as well as access to and protection under the grievance procedures.  See Article V of the Faculty Bylaws for additional information regarding the terms, rights, and responsibilities applicable to Visiting Faculty.
+
+Visiting Faculty may apply for open Tenure-Track positions.  If selected and appointed to a Tenure-Track position, credit for time spent as a Visiting Faculty member at Wheaton College for promotion in rank and tenure review purposes will be negotiated and determined by the Provost in consultation with the Department Chair/Program Coordinator, utilizing the same criteria for determining whether prior service credit is awarded to Tenure-line faculty (see Article II, Section 3.1).  In all cases, a maximum of up to three years of full-time teaching in a Visiting faculty position at the College may be excluded from the probationary period (see Article IV, Section 4.1.1).
+
+Faculty Legislation Visiting Faculty Definition (Part One, Section III.a(2))
+
+A faculty member is considered visiting when the individual’s appointment (full-time) is for a period normally not to exceed one year.  [November 5, 2004, p. 4486; May 4, 2007, p. 4640]  
+
+For such appointments, the Department Chair may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73]  
+
+In all cases where a faculty member is retained for more than one year on a full-time basis – whether the individual has a multiple year contract or a one-year contract that is being renewed – the Department Chair shall annually review the individual’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to do. A copy of this evaluation shall be shared with the faculty member and placed in the individual’s faculty personnel file.  [November 5, 2004, p. 4486] 
+
+Administrative Faculty
+
+Pursuant to Article I, Section 1 of these Faculty Bylaws, administrative faculty include administrators who serve in one of the following positions: 
+
+College President 
+
+Provost 
+
+Dean of Students 
+
+Dean of Advising
+
+Dean of Library Services
+
+Dean of Global Education
+
+Dean of Admission
+
+Registrar
+
+Administrative Faculty are considered administrators for employment purposes, under terms and conditions of employment as stated in the College’s staff personnel policies.  Administrative Faculty have the privilege of vote and voice in accordance with the provisions stated in Article I, Section 2.  
+
+Faculty Rank and Retreat Rights for Administrative Faculty
+
+At the time of initial appointment to the administrative position, the President, subject to Board of Trustee approval, has the authority to assign the administrator a faculty rank that was earned through a faculty review at a comparable accredited or internationally recognized institution.  In addition, the appointment may be made with tenure (see Article II, Section 3.1.1). Administrative Faculty holding academic rank, however, are ineligible to apply for tenure or promotion in rank during their terms of administrative service at Wheaton College. 
+
+The President or Board of Trustees has the authority to assign Administrative Faculty retreat rights to a position on the faculty following the conclusion of administrative service (“retreat rights”).  Administrative Faculty hired with retreat rights are eligible to assume a faculty position and, in some cases, subsequently stand for tenure after serving a probationary period.  Prior to the assigning of retreat rights, the President or Provost will consult with the faculty of the cognizant department or program to enable the department or program to review the candidate’s academic credentials, to meet with the candidate (if possible), and to make a recommendation to the President as to whether the candidate possesses the appropriate academic credentials and/or equivalent professional experience to teach courses in their academic discipline(s).  
+
+When an Administrative Faculty member is granted retreat rights, the President will state in the initial appointment letter the conditions under which the individual may join the faculty at the conclusion of the administrative faculty appointment.
+
+Faculty Members Who Accept Administrative Appointments
+
+Full-time teaching faculty accepting full-time administrative appointments move automatically to the administrative appointment at the same rank classification.  Tenured faculty retain also tenure while holding the administrative appointment. 
+
+At the time of the initial administrative appointment, the President (or President’s designee) will state in the administrative appointment contract the conditions under which the person will return to the full-time teaching faculty and whether the time spent as an administrator will count toward promotion, tenure, or the next sabbatical leave.  Faculty members holding full-time administrative appointments who continue teaching and research or creative activities are eligible for certain academic promotions during their terms of administrative service and as assessed by the relevant faculty committees governing the process.
+
+
+
+Faculty Emeriti
+
+Emerita or emeritus status honors a faculty member's distinguished service and contributions during a career at the College, as well as the faculty member’s interest in an ongoing and meaningful connection with Wheaton.  This status is open to all full-time teaching faculty members who have contributed meaningfully to the college for more than 20 years.
+
+A retiring Tenured or Senior Professor of the Practice-line faculty member’s department or program may request emerita or emeritus status for that colleague via a letter from the Department Chair or Program Coordinator to the Provost.  That letter should indicate that the department or program supports the request and outline the reasons why the department or program believes the faculty member’s contributions merit emeriti status.
+
+Following the recommendation of the department/program, the Provost will review the received nomination and make a written recommendation to the Board of Trustees to either confer/not confer emerita/emeritus status.  This recommendation shall not be subject to appeal.  The Board of Trustees officially confers emeritus status.  
+
+Emeriti Faculty are not considered employees of the College and therefore are not entitled to benefits.  They are considered members of the broader Wheaton community. 
+
+Emeriti Status Privileges
+
+Privileges of Emeriti Faculty are outlined in the Emeriti Faculty Guidelines in the Wheaton College Employee Handbook for Faculty.
+
+Revocation of Status
+
+Once awarded, emeritus status continues in perpetuity unless the recipient either requests to have status rescinded or violates the intent and spirit of emeritus status by engaging in serious dishonorable conduct in violation of law, rule, or policy and/or causes harm to the College’s reputation. 
+
+To revoke emeriti status without the consent of the individual, a written petition must be made by the President to the Board of Trustees, which has the final authority to revoke the individual’s emeritus status.  Actions or conduct protected by academic freedom shall not be used to revoke emeriti status.
+
+Academic Rank and Faculty Titles
+
+The College recognizes the following academic ranks and titles: Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor, Professor of the Practice, Senior Professor of the Practice, and Visiting Faculty.  [May 13, 1963, p. 2715; Minutes of the Board of Trustees meeting, October 26, 1963, pp. 1055-57; November 18, 1963, pp. 2728-29] 
+
+Eight specific full-time teaching positions are titled Associate Faculty, as explained in Section O. [November 3, 2006, p. 4608] 
+
+	At the time of initial appointment, the President or Provost shall approve the faculty rank after receiving and considering the recommendation from the search committee.  In the case of an initial appointment to the rank of Associate Professor, the Committee on Tenure shall also offer a recommendation to the President.  For an initial appointment to the rank of Professor or Senior Professor of the Practice, the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions will provide a recommendation to the President.  Appointment to the rank of Associate Professor or Professor is further subject to a formal vote of approval by the Board of Trustees. 
+
+	Initial faculty rank is assigned on the basis of the information below, which indicates the minimum qualifications for appointment to the applicable rank.
+
+Instructor
+
+Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or equivalent terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Instructors.  Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Assistant Professor effective the following academic year.
+
+Assistant Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility. In addition to academic or exceptional alternative equivalent experience qualifications, applicants seeking an initial appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor must demonstrate qualities that indicate potential and promise as an effective educator.
+
+Associate Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Associate Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility and, generally, six (6) years of full–time ranked teaching or a minimum of five (5) years of full–time teaching at the rank of Assistant Professor.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.1.1).
+
+Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.1.1).
+
+Professor of the Practice
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the academic title of Professor of the Practice is the appropriate degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or the equivalent professional expertise and achievement in a relevant field of professional practice.  
+
+Senior Professor of the Practice
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the academic title of Senior Professor of the Practice is the appropriate degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or the equivalent professional expertise and achievement in a relevant field of professional practice.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.2.1).
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Contracts
+
+A faculty contract is a written mutual agreement between an individual granted faculty status and the College.  The contractual terms (appointment type, academic department/program, rank, salary, length of appointment, etc.) of every faculty appointment will be stated in writing only by the President or the Provost to the faculty member.  Academic departments and/or programs authorized to fill an open faculty position shall recommend candidates for appointment by the President or the Provost.  Under no circumstance is a faculty member or College employee authorized to offer an appointment or to enter a faculty appointment contract.  Any subsequent extensions or modifications of an appointment, and any special understandings, or any notices incumbent upon either party to provide, will be stated or confirmed in writing, and a copy will be given to the faculty member.
+
+Types of Faculty Contracts
+
+The following types of contracts are issued to individuals granted faculty status at Wheaton College:
+
+Tenure Track Contracts, Probationary Appointments
+
+Tenure-line faculty members eligible for tenure receive tenure-track contracts and hold probationary appointments until they either receive tenure or separate from the College.  A probationary appointment is made with the understanding that both the College and the probationary faculty member will engage in a period of mutual evaluation—the probationary period—leading to the tenure decision.
+
+Faculty members eligible for tenure may be appointed to the rank of Instructor and Assistant Professor upon consideration of their qualifications and experience relative to the standards for appointment in rank. 
+
+A tenure-track appointment is normally renewable up to a total of seven (7) years of full-time service—i.e., a maximum of six (6) years prior to and including the year of the tenure decision, plus one (1) additional terminal year in the case of a negative tenure decision—unless the probationary period is either accelerated or extended in accordance with Article IV, Sections 4.1.2 and 4.1.3, respectively.  
+
+Faculty members holding tenure-track contracts undergo annual and reappointment reviews as specified in Article IV, Section 2.2.  A faculty member undergoing an unsuccessful tenure review will receive notice and will be allowed to complete a final year of the probationary appointment pursuant to a terminal contract (see Section 2.1.4 below).
+
+Tenured Contracts
+
+Tenured contracts are awarded to Tenure-line Faculty who have attained tenured status (see Article IV, Section 4).  The granting of tenure can only be effected by the procedures specified in the College’s Tenure Policy (see Article IV, Section 4) and upon the affirmative vote of the Board of Trustees.  De facto tenure is not awarded at Wheaton College.
+
+A tenured faculty member has the contractual right to continuous appointments until the faculty member resigns, is dismissed for adequate cause (see Article IV, Section 8.2.1), or is terminated as a result of a reduction in force due to fide financial exigency or program discontinuation (see Article IV, Section 8.2.2 and 8.2.3, respectively).
+
+Term Contracts
+
+Term contracts are offered to Professors of the Practice-line and Visiting faculty and are limited to the term of employment outlined in the appointment contract.  Subject to College need, another term contract may be offered subject to the limitations set forth in these Faculty Bylaws.  Issuance of another term contract is solely within the discretion of the College and no other procedures apply.  
+
+Terminal Contracts
+
+A Terminal contract is the final annual contract issued to Tenure Track faculty whose contract will not be renewed or who have been denied tenure.
+
+Duration of Appointments and Notice of Termination
+
+The College will observe the following guidelines for rank and duration of appointments and notice of terminations:
+
+Duration of Appointments
+
+Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Instructors.  Those who have completed their professional training will ordinarily be appointed Assistant Professors.  Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Assistant Professor effective the following academic year. 
+
+The initial term of appointment for Tenure-Track Faculty will be either for one or two years as set forth in the individual faculty member’s appointment contract.
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	Professors of the Practice will receive one-year appointments in the first two years of service at the College.  After two years of full-time teaching at the College, Professors of the Practice are eligible to receive a two-year appointment.  Review in May of the first year of a two-year contract will determine eligibility for a subsequent two-year contract if the Professor of the Practice does not choose to be considered for a promotion to Senior Professor of the Practice.  After four years of full-time teaching at the College, Professors of the Practice are eligible for promotion to Senior Professor of the Practice and a three-year appointment.  Review in May of the second year of a three-year contract will determine eligibility for a subsequent three-year contract.  See Article IV, Section 2.3.2 for additional information.  Overall, a Professor of the Practice’s employment is governed by the individual’s appointment contract.  The College may elect not to re-appoint the faculty member at the College’s discretion, regardless of the positive outcome of any review, if curricular needs change and/or enrollment declines.
+
+	Visiting Faculty will receive appointments on a per-course, semester, or annual basis. [February 4, 2005, p. 4492] 
+
+	Replacements for faculty members on leave and other temporary personnel will receive appointments of appropriate rank and duration. 
+
+Regardless of rank or duration of previous appointments, any non-tenure track member of the faculty or Professor of the Practice with two or more years of service at Wheaton may be given a one-year terminal contract.  In such a case, the standards of notification as described in Article II, Section 2.2.2 below will be observed. 
+
+
+
+Notice of Termination
+
+In decisions regarding reappointment or non-reappointment of full-time Tenure Track and Professors of the Practice-line faculty members, care will be taken to observe the following standards of notification (or salary in lieu of notice) endorsed in 1964 as the official policy of the American Association of University Professors: 
+
+Not later than May 1 of the first academic or second academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if a one-year appointment ends during the academic year, at least three months in advance of its termination. 
+
+Not later than December 15 of the second academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of the year; or, if an initial two-year appointment ends during an academic year, at least six months in advance of its termination. 
+
+At least twelve months before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years of service. 
+
+The notice provisions set forth above do not apply to Tenure-Track faculty that have been issued a Terminal Appointment contract.
+
+Annual Contract Period
+
+The period of employment under a full-time faculty contract shall be for the 12-month period beginning July 1 and ending June 30, during which the individual shall receive salary and benefits. The contract will cover the duties associated with the position performed during the period which begins the week before classes begin through the week after Commencement and is known as the ""academic year."" 
+
+Primary Area of Appointment
+
+All faculty appointment contracts designate a department or academic program as the faculty member’s primary faculty appointment location.  It is from this department(s) or program(s) that recommendations for reappointment, promotion, tenure, and other actions concerning a Full-Time Teaching Faculty member are initiated.  A faculty member’s primary faculty appointment may be changed by the President (or President’s designee) to meet the curricular and organizational needs of the College.  
+
+Joint Appointments 
+
+When a faculty member’s contractual responsibilities require a significant portion of teaching and professional activity responsibilities be devoted to either multiple departments, interdisciplinary programs, areas of instruction, or other academic entities engaged in or responsible for the delivery of the curriculum, the faculty member may receive a joint appointment to a department and a specified program or to two departments.  A joint appointment may be established at any stage of faculty employment. 
+
+In making a joint appointment, a primary and secondary department or program will be clearly designated by the Provost in the faculty member’s appointment contract. Such designation may be revised at any stage of employment by the President (or the President’s designee) to meet the curricular or organizational needs of the College.  The primary department or program will serve as the faculty member’s administrative home, which will take the lead responsibility on personnel issues, central human resources reporting, appointment, promotions, tenure, coordination of annual performance review, conflict resolution, and changes in employment.  Often, but not always, the administrative home will be the department or program with the higher appointment fraction.
+
+The nature of a joint appointment varies and the assignment of duties in the secondary department or program will differ by department/program and candidate.  The details of the assignment of duties, the allocation of salary, departmental/program governance rights, and provision for office and laboratory space as applicable to both the primary and secondary departments/program will be communicated in a signed written memorandum of understanding signed by the two Department Chairs/Program Coordinators, the faculty member, and the Provost.  Additionally, negotiated changes to those details will be evidenced in a signed memorandum of understanding.
+
+The Department Chair/Program Coordinator of the secondary department/program must provide input for every evaluation for a jointly appointed faculty member.  In the case of promotion or tenure review, the secondary Department Chair/Program Coordinator must provide a written evaluation describing the nature and extent of the candidate’s involvement in, and contribution to, the secondary department/program.  In the faculty member’s tenure application, it is important to document how the candidate’s time is being spent, and contributions to each department/program need to be clearly documented.
+
+It is recognized that new opportunities, changes in faculty interest, faculty performance, changes in the College’s curricular needs or enrollments or other issues with the joint appointment may require review, renegotiation, or discontinuation of the original joint appointment.  If possible, a faculty member with a joint appointment will have the option of retreating to a full appointment at the primary department or program.  If retreat is not a possibility, the Provost is responsible for ensuring that the faculty member is made fully aware of the existing options.  Further, a short-term plan must be put in place to ensure a smooth transition with minimum disruption to the initiatives, projects, and teaching, that were the responsibility of the faculty member with the joint appointment.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Recruitment and Appointment
+
+Recruitment and Appointment of Full-Time Teaching Faculty 
+
+Vacancies shall be advertised in as many ways as are necessary in order to obtain a suitable pool of applicants in keeping with Wheaton's commitment to Equity and Belonging values and its policy as an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer; for example: in professional journals, job rosters, etc.  Advertisements shall include a statement that the College is an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer. The Department or Program/Search Committee may also want to write to graduate schools. 
+
+For legal purposes, records pertaining to the hiring process shall be retained in accordance with the College’s Record Retention schedule (see Inside Wheaton).  
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Normally departments/programs will establish their own search committee.  In the exceptional case of no continuing tenured member, the Provost will consult with the Advisory Committee.  The Provost will then ask the Committee on Committees and Agenda to set up the search committee. 
+
+The Search Committee shall review applications to determine who should be interviewed. Candidates may be interviewed at professional meetings to narrow the field. All members of the Search Committee will receive anti-bias training.  Moreover, the committee chair is expected to consult with the Office of Human Resources for interview guidance.
+
+After consulting with the Provost, the Chair of the Search Committee shall invite several candidates to visit the College.  The candidates shall be interviewed by members of the department, the Provost and/or the President, and students when possible.  During these interviews, candidates will be notified that any job offer is contingent upon successful completion of employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks, as well documentation of U.S. citizenship or upon maintaining the appropriate visa status and work authorization.  Moreover, notice of the availability of the College’s Annual Security Report will be provided to the interviewee, if the position was externally advertised.
+
+The Search Committee Chair shall send to the Provost a written recommendation from the Search Committee which shall state its majority opinion and indicate any disagreements within the Search Committee.  The written recommendation shall verify that the candidate’s preparation and qualifications are appropriate to the nature of the teaching assignment.  Candidate qualifications shall normally be measured, as applicable to the position, by advanced degrees held, evidence of scholarship, advanced study, creative activities, and teaching abilities, as well as relevant professional experience, training, and credentials. Exceptions may be made for individuals who do not hold advanced degrees but who are considered by the College to possess other demonstrated competencies and professional achievements that provide evidence to support excellent teaching and student achievement in the discipline.
+
+If the Provost or the President has reservations about following the recommendation for appointment, one or both shall consult with the Chair and may request that the Search Committee continue the search process. 
+
+If the recommendation for appointment is approved by the President or the Provost, after consultation with the Chair, the Provost shall make a written offer of appointment to the appointee, stating the precise terms and conditions of the appointment.  Such offer shall refer to, and be accompanied by, either a copy or a link to these Faculty Bylaws as then in effect.  In the written offer, the Provost may, after receiving and considering recommendations from the search committee and the candidate’s Department Chair/Program Coordinator, award credit toward the fulfillment of promotion and/or tenure eligibility based upon the candidate’s past teaching and scholarly or creative work achievements at another accredited higher education institution.   In all cases, a maximum of up to two years of full-time teaching at an accredited higher education institution may be excluded from the probationary period (see Article IV, Section 4.1.1).
+
+The offer is contingent upon verification of the candidate’s academic credentials or alternative experience qualifications credentials and the successful completion of requisite employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks.  Moreover, an initial written offer of appointment to the rank of Associate Professor with tenure or Professor with tenure shall also indicate that the offer is subject to a formal vote of approval by the Board of Trustees, action on which is pending.  Notice of such Trustee action shall be sent to the candidate. 
+
+Each such offer shall also specify that it may be accepted only in writing.  If it is so accepted, the President or the Provost shall furnish copies of the offer and acceptance to the Chair for the department or program’s records.  All data submitted by appointee in connection with the application for appointment shall be retained in the Provost's records indefinitely. 
+
+As soon as a vacancy has been filled, the Chair shall so advise the unsuccessful candidate(s) selected to be interviewed in writing. Human Resources will advise all other applicants.
+
+Note: Since years in academic rank are calculated based on full academic years, in the rare instance that a Tenure-line Faculty and Professors of the Practice joins the College after November 1, the faculty member’s first year in rank or title will be calculated starting with the succeeding full academic year.
+
+Initial Appointments with Tenure
+
+On occasion, the College may wish to hire a faculty member or academic administrator who already holds tenure at another accredited institution of higher education and who would not accept appointment at the College without tenure transfer.  In such cases, after review of scholarly or creative materials and teaching philosophy, and in consultation with the Provost, applicable Department Chair or Program Coordinator, and Committee on Tenure, the President forwards the recommendation for tenure to the Board of Trustees.  The Board renders a decision that is final.  The College will only appoint candidates with tenure transfer at the same rank conferred by the candidate's previous institution.
+
+Recruitment and Appointment of Visiting Faculty
+
+A faculty member is considered visiting when his or her appointment (full-time) is for a period normally not to exceed one year. [November 5, 2004, p. 4486; May 4, 2007, p. 4640] 
+
+For such Visiting Faculty appointments, the Department Chair or Program Coordinator may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures set forth above in Article II, Section 3.1, provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons or less under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73].  In all instances, however, the Department Chair or Program Coordinator shall verify that the final candidate’s preparation and qualifications are appropriate to the nature of the teaching assignment.
+
+Candidates for a Visiting Faculty position that are selected for interviews will be notified that any job offer is contingent upon successful completion of employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks, as well documentation of U.S. citizenship or upon maintaining the appropriate visa status and work authorization.  Moreover, notice of the availability of the College’s Annual Security Report will be provided to the interviewee, if the position was externally advertised.  Any offer of appointment is contingent upon verification of the candidate’s academic credentials or alternative experience qualifications credentials and the successful completion of requisite employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks.
+
+In all cases where a Visiting Faculty member is retained for more than one year on a full-time basis – whether the faculty member has a multiple year contract, a one-year contract that is being renewed for another term or a new semester or per course term contract – the Department Chair/Program Coordinator shall annually review the faculty member’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to do.  A copy of this evaluation shall be shared with the faculty member and placed in the faculty member’s faculty personnel file. 
+
+[November 5, 2004, p. 4486] 
+
+
+
+		Wheaton College Faculty Bylaws – Page 34</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Article III Feedback.txt [/INST] Article III
+
+AAUP – No Comments
+
+Curriculum – No Comments
+
+Global (Alba) -  No Comments
+
+President – No Comments
+
+
+
+Section 1: AAUP Academic Freedom Statement - UFO (SS)
+
+The language around teaching ‘controversial matter’ is very problematic. How will the faculty or the administration decide what is ‘controversial’?  Who will determine this? 
+
+Again, the sentence - “Limitations of academic freedom because of religious or other aims of the institution should be clearly stated in writing at the time of the appointment” is too broad and might actually be used to limit academic freedom.”
+
+
+
+Section 5 – Conflicts of Interest - UFO (WJ)
+
+Conflict of interest is defined here, in Article 1 5.1.3.a., and in the Employee Handbook for Faculty in varied ways. On one hand, I wholly believe each piece contributes to a holistic view of determining misconduct, but ultimately it leads to unnecessary ambiguity. For instance, none of the sources define “immediate family member” but the Handbook makes more explicit reference to other relationships that could cause a conflict (but largely in financial circumstances). It just may be more helpful to consider a cohesive more consistent approach to this language.
+
+Section 5.3 - UFO (WJ)
+
+What about consulting services that have nothing to do with the College? I only ask since Section 5.5 specifies it is allowed when done in a personal capacity, but it doesn’t specify here. Many PoPs, SPops, and others consult to pay the bills and keep their expertise updated and current.
+
+Section 5.4 – Advisory
+
+Should this also apply to work on behalf of themselves personally? And to asking staff to do work on behalf of an outside agency or for the faculty member personally if the work is unrelated to research or their other roles as faculty?
+
+Section 6 – Outside Employment - UFO (WJ)
+
+Looking through the Faculty Handbook, I did not see anything covering this. Is the handbook currently being updated?</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Article IV Feedback.txt [/INST] Article IV
+
+
+
+President General Comments:
+
+I have been reading through the documents and I'll share some specific points of feedback with the provost.  One issue that I think you should address is tenure transfer.  This is particularly important if the college seeks to recruit an external provost, a senior member of the faculty, or even a president who has held tenure.
+
+Here is some sample language to consider:  On occasion, the College may wish to hire a faculty member or academic administrator who already holds tenure at another accredited institution of higher education and who would not accept appointment at the College without tenure transfer.  In such cases, after review of scholarly materials and teaching philosophy, and in consultation with the provost, division head or chair, and committee on tenure, the president forwards the recommendation for tenure to the Board of Trustees.  The Board renders a decision that is final.  The College will only appoint candidates with tenure transfer at the same rank conferred by the candidate's previous institution.  
+
+
+
+AAUP General Comments: 
+
+Written rules for tenure-line faculty and professors of the practice with regard to faculty rights and professional conduct are necessary, and the rules in Article 2 and Article 3 seem reasonable. However, throughout Article 4 and parts of Article 5, the professional standards with regard to faculty interactions with students goes well beyond the faculty role, according to the AAUP and perhaps federal laws with regard to compliance (or “making referrals""). This language also potentially leaves an individual faculty member, regardless of their perceptions of competency, vulnerable to risk in advising students on complicated ""personal problems"" without a full history of the student's personal situation. For example: the highlighted sections in the following rules are objectionable. 
+
+
+
+UFO General Comments
+
+WJ - How are faculty duties and responsibilities outlined as four distinct categories in Section 1 but evaluation categories in Section 2 only include 3? Frankly, this presents DEI contributions as ostensibly performative. Notably, the three categories of evaluation are prevalent throughout this article, whereas the DEI duty and responsibility seems to have no bearing outside of Section 1. This leads to an issue especially in Section 7 when “neglect of obligations and responsibilities” can lead to disciplinary action. Does this include neglect of diversity equity and inclusion responsibilities?
+
+
+
+
+
+Section 1 – Duties and Responsibilities – UFO Comment
+
+Section 1 (Paragraph 2) - Again, reviewing the current Faculty Handbook linked from insideWheaton does not contain this verbiage as stated as I don’t see Professor of Practice anywhere in the handbook, so is a new version coming that the working group has had access to, but is not public yet?
+
+
+
+1.2 -Scholarly or Creative Activity – President
+
+3rd line: “… by maintaining active involvement in scholarly and creative….”
+
+
+
+1.3 – Service – UFO
+
+SS: What is “a fair share of student advisees”?
+
+
+
+
+
+1.4 Contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion – 
+
+
+
+AAUP Comments 
+
+I support social justice and anti-discrimination wholeheartedly. However, mandating DEI work, as written here without the language included in your marginal comment, is a violation of academic freedom. 
+
+I recommend adapting American University's resolution on academic freedom and diversity, which the AAC&U commends in this article, https://www.aacu.org/liberaleducation/articles/academic-freedom-and-the-challenge-of-diversity-upholding-two-core-values-essential-to-the-pursuit-of-the-common-good. American University's resolution reads, The Faculty Senate remains committed to initiatives being developed, to provide more mentors from diverse groups, sensitize colleagues to the needs of our campus’ communities, cultivate empathy and civility across our community, and reinforce the strengths we all gain from the broadest exposure to the human experience. . . . At the same time, increased attention to issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion need not come at the expense of academic freedom. In fact, a central purpose of academic freedom is precisely to support diversity, equity, and inclusion. The right to dissent—in a civil and respectful manner—must remain sacrosanct in the classroom. . . . Inclusion and academic freedom go hand in hand at institutions of higher learning in free societies aspiring to generate knowledge and wisdom (quoted in the article linked above).
+
+
+
+UFO Comments
+
+I love adding this section and keeping it broad enough that we won’t outgrow it.
+
+SS - The addition of this section is a welcome change but there is an assumption we all know what meaning engagement with DEIB work looks like. There is no information in the subsequent evaluation section on how DEIB work will be evaluated. Also, criteria for evaluation is not specified. Finally, this addition only applies for those submitting YESE. What about other faculty who don’t have to go through any evaluation process?
+
+
+
+
+
+Section 2 – Evaluation of Full-time Faculty 
+
+
+
+2.1: Evaluation Categories - President
+
+3rd paragraph, 3rd sentence: “A faculty member’s scholarly activities…”
+
+
+
+2.1.1.1: Teaching Criteria 
+
+
+
+President Comments
+
+It would be important to be explicit about inclusive pedagogy, maybe in the introductory paragraph
+
+
+
+UFO (SS) Comments 
+
+Tenure Committee’s guidelines are subject to change and changes are not required to be voted on by the full faculty. Therefore, how student course feedback is used in teaching evaluation is dependent on the views of tenure committee members. Therefore, I highly recommend that recent changes that have lead to decentering of student evaluations, that may disproportionately and negatively impact faculty of color, female faculty and faculty who teach topics that are hot button issues, be adopted in the current version of the bylaws.
+
+
+
+2.1.1.2: Scholarship and Creative Activity - FdAlba
+
+Evaluation: Page 7 (47 in the whole doc). Does editorial work include: Anonymous reader for journals and publishers. Also, there is no mention of program evaluator, or referee for tenure cases. Nobody asks you to read papers or manuscripts if you are not up to the literature and scholarship. I know that this can be included in service to the profession but still. More detail is never a bad thing because it is setting possibilities and professional expectations.  
+
+Also, impact is hard to measure in the humanities in the terms presented in this description. Often, the impact in the humanities is harder to gauge since citations work in a different way and that the impact happens over much longer period of time. Another note on this could be helpful to remind everyone of discipline specific forms of impact. 
+
+
+
+2.1.1.3 Service Criteria 
+
+
+
+President Comments
+
+Categories of service, 3rd line from the bottom, insert “tenured” before “faculty member’s record of service.”
+
+
+
+AAUP Comments
+
+""Advising includes such activities as assisting students in planning academic programs, helping students make career plans, providing feedback to students regarding academic performance and progress, writing letters of recommendation, making referrals to support services which may be helpful to a student, and, as faculty feel competent and comfortable, helping students work through academic or personal problems."" 
+
+I recommend using AAUP guidelines for faculty professional responsibilities to students throughout these Bylaws, which seemingly have proposed standardizing at Wheaton the in loco parentis legal responsibilities governing elementary and secondary education teachers— and also seemingly shifting clinical-type work to the faculty. 
+
+
+
+UFO Comments (SS)
+
+Why is there an exception for committee service and advising? If I am working on a large research project or am developing multiple new courses in a semester, I might consider not serving on committees. Also, not all faculty are good advisors. I have had multiple conversations with students, whose advisors do not give them enough time for advising or don’t offer time.
+
+Administrative Service - Chairing a large department/program is a high workload. So, we need to revisit compensation for large departments/programs along with a course release.
+
+
+
+
+
+Section 2.1.2: Academic Unit Evaluation Criteria 
+
+Advisory Comments:
+
+I would be in favor of allowing departments/programs to develop evaluation criteria for scholarly/creative work and that these be considered in tenure/promotion but that they are not the only standard for evaluating scholarly/creative work. In other words, the Committee on Tenure and the Committee on Faculty Promotion and Scholarship should also take into account other factors/standards so the department/program’s criteria is not the prescriptive (or “be all, end all”) standard with regard to this category of faculty performance in the tenure or promotion process. This is important for several reasons:
+
+Disciplinary standards can vary quite widely which raises an equity issue. If one department/program requires a manuscript and another requires peer-reviewed articles and a third requires a major grant, such as an NSF or NEH grant.
+
+Over the course of their careers, faculty may shift their scholarship/creative work in directions that differ from those of the “standard/traditional” expectations or criteria for their discipline/program/department.
+
+Faculty may be hired into department or programs that differ from their own primary discipline or may have an interdisciplinary focus to their creative/scholarship work.
+
+Both are applicable to my own situation as an anthropologist (social scientist) appointed in Visual Art/History of Art (humanities). While I recognize that this is rare, it does occasionally happen.
+
+What constitutes “accepted” venues for or forms of scholarship may shift rapidly, as is the case with the rise of online, peer-reviewed platforms. 
+
+Again, I experienced this as a pre-tenure faculty member. A peer-reviewed online publication was questioned and what I considered to be problematic language (regarding the publication’s validity) was left unchanged in the departmental response to my YESE, although a brief footnote was added.
+
+The value/role of public scholarship (for lack of a better term) should also be considered for faculty who choose to direct some of their efforts in this direction.
+
+I personally would strongly argue that the general/overall guidelines for teaching and for advising and other forms service should be consistent across departments/programs/divisions, taking into account, of course, the fact that some departments/programs will focus their advising on majors as opposed to MAP advisees.
+
+Based on our current organizational model, programs/departments make sense as the academic unit, although I could see an argument for programs/departments within similar divisions having broader conversations about these criteria. I would be in favor of such conversations, if only to better understand how expectations for scholarship and creative work vary. 
+
+For example, it may be challenging for some colleagues to understand how an exhibition constitutes scholarly and creative work but conversations may help to clarify this.  
+
+Should we ever restructure into larger units, e.g., Creative Arts, and dissolve departmental or programmatic divisions, then those could determine the criteria while also taking into account more “traditional” departmental or programmatic expectations re: creative and scholarly work.
+
+I support the proposal to review the criteria regularly.
+
+
+
+FdAlba Comments:
+
+¿Academic Unit? This is the first time I have seen this language used in the new bylaws. Is the faculty asking for this? If not, who? I would love to see a rationale explaining the need for this new organization. I do not oppose the idea. Simply, I would like more clarity on the purpose of this change that, to my knowledge, no faculty member is asking for. I understand the issue as presented, the relative lack of flexibility of “divisions.” That said, it seems that while the concept of “academic divisions” has a history (and a reason), “academic unit” is a way to organize departments in a “creative” way. Would the administration create these “academic units”? If this is the case, why is the Working Group willing to offer the work of their colleague to do the work we are not paid to do?  In sum, I can´t offer an opinion on an empty organizational concept without seeing first what and how the academic units would be formed. [After reading the whole section, it seems necessary that, if academic units are deployed (meaning, if Wheaton’s departments and programs are reorganized), new positions of faculty with administrative responsibilities be created to oversee the process of creating evaluation criteria, etc. In the current financial environment, can we afford it?]
+
+What is the rationale to introduce another level of administration and of evaluation criteria? Is it necessary to introduce more work into the process? 
+
+To have academic units formed by one department and academic units formed by several departments of programs does not sound like a fair system. While a 1 academic unit/1 department is easy to align and negotiation evaluations criteria, a 1 academic unit / several departments and programs have to work and negotiate a set of common criteria. 
+
+
+
+UFO Comments:
+
+No strong feeling for or against this. It gives the power to add additional criteria but does not require it.
+
+SS -We have been told that we will be voting on the entire bylaws document as one document and articles or sections are not voted on separately. So, I am against adding new provisions in this document without any meaningful dialogue among faculty. My reaction to this addition is the same as the addition of draft provisions for Professors and Practice and senior Professors of Practice as if they have been finalized. Please remove this section and bring this forward as a separate item for discussion and deliberation.
+
+
+
+2.1.2.1: Establishment and Approval of Academic Unit Criteria- 
+
+
+
+President Comments: 
+
+Remove “in three categories.”
+
+First full paragraph in next page, remove “(perhaps due to external circumstances)” and replace with “highly placed with national recognition”
+
+
+
+FdAlba Comments:
+
+See above. In the bylaws, there seems to be two levels: departments, then academic units with specific standards each that, hopefully, are negotiated so they match. Is this necessary at a small institution like Wheaton? I fail to see the usefulness of introducing new levels of complexity and layers of bureaucracy, especially when faculty is already maxed out and underpaid. I can also see potential conflict as departments within a same academic unit would have to unify their standards. I can also see the positive aspect in the standardization of best practices across departments. 
+
+I am concern that this changes the current tenure process by including a new set of (non-departmental) expectations that, at this point, do not seem aligned with the tenure committee ones. I understand that the goal is that everything seamlessly matches but I wonder who is going to fall through the cracks of the transition period. 
+
+On response to comment sl11: Candid thought regarding this comment. The Working Group proposes something (academic units) that, as far as I know, nobody in the faculty has asked for.  Apparently unable to work through the concept and make it into a full proposal, it defaults to other faculty members who are new to the idea to give it content and shape. If the Working Group thinks that this is the way to move forward, please present a rationale and a working concept for this new organizational structure.
+
+Page 50, lower paragraph, the language “academic area” is used. This is confusing. “Academic area” or “academic unit”? 
+
+
+
+
+
+2.2: Evaluation of Tenure Track Faculty – 
+
+
+
+FdAlba Comments 
+
+I totally agree. Promise is subjective at best. Promise, for instance, is a book contract and/or a number of published articles. Promise is a list of conferences attended and panels organized that assure that the candidate is known in the profession and presenting research findings. Promise is a reasonable and logic research agenda for the future, meaning, research project that will be shared via a second book or articles, etc. A book manuscript is not promise, per se. Several articles send the year before tenure do not represent promise in my opinion as do not show the steady rhythm of academic production and publication. 
+
+Growth as a scholar or an artist is also fluffy if not explained. One could grow and learn a lot with no publication record.
+
+
+
+UFO Comments
+
+SS - Section 2.2: I did not see the term “degree of accessibility to students and colleagues in section 2.1.1”. Some departments do not share their written feedback on untenured faculty’s YESE until months after they are due to the provost’s office. Therefore, the deadline for when the signed annual evaluation is submitted to the provost office needs to be strengthened.  The term “typically by the 3rd Thursday of June” is too lenient. The untenured faculty shouldn’t have to sign a document they don’t agree with. Therefore, a separate signation section needs to be added that clarifies the untenured faculty is just signing for receipt of the department’s statement with the added response from the untenured faculty. 
+
+I am very confused, an untenured faculty can be dismissed just because the needs of the department changes, completely separate from their performance.
+
+SS - Section 2.2, #5: Does the provost oversee the academic programs and staff? So, the reappointment information should come from the provost, in consultation with the president.
+
+
+
+
+
+2.2.1: Evaluation of Tenure Track Faculty 
+
+
+
+President Comments
+
+P.12, 1st full paragraph should not say “self-evaluation” but only “evaluation”
+
+
+
+UFO Comments
+
+Section 2.2.1 (Paragraph 5) - Why is there no input from Senior Professors of Practice?
+
+
+
+2.2 1. c.: Evaluation of Tenure Track Faculty – Advisory
+
+[See paragraph c of standards]: How will success as a student academic advisor be measured/determined? 
+
+Not surprisingly, I am very much in favor of recognizing, measuring, and evaluating our role as advisors, as I believe it is critical to our students’ success and to the success of our institution. 
+
+Given this dual importance, how do we recognize, measure, and evaluate effective and successful advising? 
+
+Equally importantly, how do we also help colleagues work toward both valuing and becoming strong advisors?
+
+[See Paragraph re Materials Reviewed]: Who is responsible for maintaining the current vita?
+
+[See current text re: DC and Faculty Member Meeting]: Given Senior Week and Commencement and Reunion activities, could the ten-day deadline (bottom of p. 51) be extended? And is it ten business days or ten calendar days? (NOTE: Chris, this is an issue throughout as in some places business days is explicitly stated; in others, it is not.)
+
+
+
+2.3.1: Annual Evaluations of Professors of Practice – 
+
+
+
+Advisory Comments
+
+What about evidence of (successful) advising and other forms of service?
+
+
+
+UFO Comments
+
+SS: Please add a firm deadline for when the departmental evaluation needs to be submitted to the provost office. The June 30th deadline for an appointment letter is too late. The evaluation timeline needs to be done earlier to provide more time for our colleagues to get another job. The length of time for Senior Professor of Practice is still under negotiation.
+
+
+
+
+
+2.4: Merit Evaluation - Advisory
+
+Merit “increases” reads as if these will be added to base salary, which is not my understanding of the current plan. Perhaps “bonus”? (I recognize the policy has not yet been developed.)
+
+
+
+3.1.1.: Standards for Promotion in Rank - Advisory
+
+In response to the comments, I agree that this requires some additional clarity and is confusing. Given the financial incentive in holding Associate Professor rank (based on our current salary threshold policy), this requires some additional attention.
+
+
+
+3.1.2: Review Procedures for Promotion to Professor 
+
+
+
+Advisory Comments:
+
+(p. 60) If the candidate for Full Professor may choose their advocate, I can’t imagine them voting against the candidate. 
+
+It is not entirely analogous and consequences are certainly different, but in the museum field, anyone proposing an acquisition of an object is not allowed to vote on the proposal. 
+
+What do our peer institutions do with regard to this question?
+
+
+
+FdAlba Comments:
+
+What is the rationale to take the “advocate” to promotion to full professor out of the candidate’s department/program? There has always been the possibility to do this but this establishes a different process more “free for all.”  I do not oppose the idea but I would like to know why this change, which was always an option, if necessary. 
+
+“Public intellectual” is the first (and only) time that appears in this document. Why now? Why assistant professors or associate professor cannot be “public intellectuals” for their promotions?  
+
+Sl29 Comment: This is a confusing question. The advocate, as proposed here, is not a representative of the department/program. It is an advocate for the candidate. Sure, it channels the department support for the promotion but the fact is that in the proposed process the candidate selects the advocate that then (with the department blessing) decides if promotion is a go. If this is the case, I would not count the advocate for the final vote. It seems that the advocate should be, from the moment that the promotion process starts, a positive vote for the candidate. It would seem strange that someone agrees to be an advocate, embarks in the process after reviewing the materials and then votes “no” on the candidate. 
+
+
+
+UFO Comments
+
+SS - Section 3.1.2: I do not see an inherent conflict of interest with the representative of the department serving as a voting member.  
+
+The end of the section states “if promotion is not recommended, the candidate may request clarification of the decision”. There is no information on how this clarification can be sought and from whom. Please add necessary guidelines or point to where such guidelines exist.
+
+
+
+3.1.3: Board of Trustees Review – 
+
+
+
+FdAbla Comments
+
+I support the idea that Wheaton should be able to attract faculty by offering a position at the associate level directly. That said, the notion that the President can simply go to the BoT and ask for the rank for someone I find very problematic. I don’t think anybody would like to be accused of nepotism and yet, this may open the door to that. Why the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion only makes a recommendation for promotion to full? I think the CFSP should be consulted every single time this process is about the be taken so there is a check on the quality and standards of the candidate.
+
+
+
+UFO Comments
+
+SS - The first sentence is unclear - when might this situation arise? What does ‘separate from regular tenure review’ look like? This addition bypasses shared governance structure completely.
+
+
+
+3.2.1: Standard for Promotion to Senior Professor of the Practice - UFO
+
+SS - Again, the term extension for Senior Professor of Practice is still under consideration.
+
+
+
+4.1.1: Tenure Probationary Period 
+
+
+
+Advisory Comments
+
+If the 4th year of teaching includes the year in which a candidate comes up for tenure, I would argue for keeping the requirement at 4 years, to allow at least 3 years (assuming a pre-tenure, one-semester sabbatical) of teaching, service, and scholarly/creative work to be evaluated. 
+
+It can take time for colleagues to learn and to navigate our campus culture and also for us to gain a sense of them as a community member, colleague, teacher, advisor, etc. 
+
+Given this, parental leaves and any sabbatical longer than one semester would necessitate delaying the tenure clock if a candidate had two years of “credit” toward tenure review, correct? Does this need to be spelled out more clearly? 
+
+As worded, it says “a year” but does that mean a calendar year? An academic year? Isn’t the issue really that someone cannot take more than one semester of leave (parental, research, other) without automatically delaying the tenure clock? 
+
+As written, that’s not clear here, nor in 4.1.3. Extending the Probationary Period. “…a full-time leave for an entire year” does not read the same as “two (or more) one-semester leaves”
+
+
+
+UFO Comments
+
+I am not in agreement with giving more latitude to the provost and the president without any guidelines that allows for equitable negotiations with potential new employees.
+
+Also, tenure guidelines only take into consideration work completed at Wheaton. Unless we revise the tenure guidelines, this change will not be in the best interest of new incoming faculty.
+
+
+
+4.14: Tenure Decision – UFO
+
+What is the recourse if the BofT does not act favorably on the recommendation of the tenure committee? Please add guidelines or direct faculty to existing guidelines.
+
+
+
+4.1.6: Tenure Additional Guidelines - FdAlba
+
+Wait, so one faculty member’s professional conduct is “questioned on any ground” and it goes to dismissal without investigation? Really? What about “proven”? 🡪 what about a reference to 8.2.1.1
+
+
+
+4.3: Structure of the Committee 
+
+
+
+Advisory Comments:
+
+I commented similarly above but my understanding is that candidates can request to be represented to the Committee on Tenure by someone other than their department chair or program coordinator. For comment s153, my response is affirmative that candidates should be allowed to express a preference and for someone outside the department. Which is not to say that the person for whom a preference is expressed must agree to serve in that role. Should that person not agree, the department chair or program coordinator or ranking tenured member of the department (or as otherwise provided elsewhere in the bylaws) should serve in that role. 
+
+This then raises the question of would a candidate be allowed (entitled?) to appeal a negative tenure review based on representation if they were not represented by their “preferred” advocate.
+
+FdAlba Comments:
+
+It was my understanding that there was always a “escape hatch” in cases in which the candidate thought that the department would not represent them fairly. Therefore, I believe this contingency should be contemplated by offering the option. 
+
+See my previous comments on the voting rights of the “advocate.” A department / program representative, I think, plays a similar but also different role and, maybe, it should be allowed to vote. That said, for consistency’s sake, the same should be done in both cases. In any case, a department representative that, voicing the department’s will to grant tenure, votes against the candidate would be strange. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+5.1: Sabbatical Leave – 
+
+Advisory Comments
+
+Comments163 and the related phrase seem at odds with 4.1.1. in which candidates are only granted TWO years of “credit” toward progress toward tenure. Unless the faculty agrees that colleagues can receive more than two years of “credit” toward tenure, the text is a potential inconsistency.
+
+The Post-Tenure Sabbatical Leave section is a bit unclear about the immediate (first) post-tenure sabbatical. My understanding is that this can occur after the faculty member’s first year of full-time post-tenure employment and then the clock “resets” toward the second post-tenure sabbatical. 
+
+
+
+UFO Comments:
+
+Disappointing to see no mention of sabbaticals for Senior Professors of Practice who many would welcome the chance to “...enhancing the value of the recipient’s further contribution to the College through scholarly, creative, or pedagogical work, to solve an administrative problem(s) in consultation with and the support of the appropriate administrative office(s), or broaden the scope of knowledge in the faculty member’s discipline or field of research.”
+
+
+
+5.2.1: Professional Leave - Advisory
+
+Should it read “Leaves of absence may be used…”
+
+
+
+6.1 Compensation  
+
+AAUP Comments
+
+The language of this rule, with its various qualifiers, shows no commitment to compensation consistent with the cost of living in New England and the Northeast. The faculty is essential to the existence of this institution and its mission as a higher education nonprofit working for the common good and, as such, faculty wellbeing should be a priority. I recommend revising and keeping the spirit of the existing language, which has been struck from the proposed Bylaws. Importantly, the option given to administrators to choose when or if the administration should consult with the Committee on Faculty Workload and Economic Status about the review of compensation contradicts the charge to the Committee on Faculty Workload and Economic Status—and goes against AAUP guidelines. It’s strange to find the principles governing pay raises enshrined in the Bylaws as rules when these general principles normally are shaped by individual senior administrators in consultation with the faculty. Overall, the highlighted language is objectionable and this rule alone makes it difficult to support passing these Bylaws. 
+
+“The salaries of full-time faculty members are determined by the College based upon rank, length of service, and merit, as well as the financial condition of the College. It is the objective of the College to provide salary levels reasonably competitive with other private colleges of similar size. Accordingly, faculty salary ranges are evaluated periodically for effectiveness, fairness, and internal and external equity. Such reviews are conducted by the administration, who may consult the Committee on Faculty Workload and Economic Status, and approved by the Board of Trustees. However, the amount available for increases and cost of living adjustments each year is dependent on the total financial resources, considering other competing demands.”
+
+
+
+UFO Comments:
+
+SS - The last sentence of the first paragraph sets up a stage where faculty/staff will not get a raise in the new future. I am against the addition of this sentence.
+
+
+
+6.2: Faculty Benefits – UFO
+
+SS: Do changes in the faculty handbook need a vote of the faculty? If so, removal of the entire faculty benefits section from the legislation/bylaws puts these benefits at the whim of the administration.
+
+
+
+Section 7 – Disciplinary Action Short of Dismissal
+
+UFO Comments SS: I don’t see any accountability built into this section to deter the administration from abusing the authority outlined in this section to silence those who disagree or question the actions of the administration. For example, we can require the provost to consult with the PAC Or Appeals and Hearing committee before initiating a written reprimand. Perhaps a standing committee can mediate the conversations around a reprimand. There needs to be strong stopgap measures added in this section to protect the faculty from retaliation.
+
+I am quite struck by how this revision is being used to strengthen the administration’s hand with no consultation with faculty governance - both the advisory and appeals and hearing committees are already charged with mediating issues with the administration. I wonder if the administration can use either one of these committees to help mediate reprimand of a faculty member.
+
+
+
+Section 8 - Faculty Separation
+
+
+
+8.2: Termination of Appointment by College – UFO
+
+SS: Add Senior Professor of Practice in the first line of the paragraph.
+
+Also, what is the process of discontinuation of a department/program?
+
+
+
+8.2.1: Dismissal for Adequate Cause – 
+
+
+
+Advisory Comments: 
+
+What constitutes “Demonstrated professional incompetence”
+
+8.2.1. 4. What about emotional harassment/abuse or manipulation? 
+
+8.2.1.1 a. 3.
+
+No, I don’t think pre-tenure faculty should serve on the Advisory Committee (for the purposes of review) if the faculty member under review for dismissal is tenured.
+
+If a pre-tenure or PoP/SPoP faculty member is under review for dismissal, I would offer pre-tenure faculty members on Advisory Committee the choice regarding serving during the review.
+
+If the review involves a PoP and no PoP or SPoP serves on the Advisory Committee at that time, I would suggest asking a SPoP to do so.
+
+
+
+FdAlba Comments:
+
+Comment on sl75. What would be the reason to remove non-tenure? And, what does “non tenured” mean here, tenure-track and PoP?  I am very hesitant to agree with PoPs serving on standing committees (or in sensitive ad-hoc committees) when they have term limited contracts. While most will act according to the best interest of the college and their conscience, we cannot ignore the fact that their professional fate depends on others who have tenure or more power than they do. Therefore, are we placing PoPs on the difficult situation of a “political minefield.”
+
+The solution of a subcommittee seems a reasonable one.
+
+
+
+UFO Comments:
+
+SS: Again, add Senior Professor of Practice in the first line of this section.
+
+SS - Section 8.2.1, #3: Are there guidelines to determine “serious neglect of basic duties or responsibilities? Article IV, Section 1 is vague.
+
+SS - Section 8.2.1, #5: How might this statement run afoul of ADA?
+
+SS - Section 8.2.1, #6: “Deliberate and serious violation of the rights and academic freedom of fellow ......” is too vague. Need more guidelines to avoid abuse of this clause.
+
+
+
+8.2.2.1: Procedures - UFO
+
+SS - Section 8.2.1.1, #3: Here again, the language around bias is too broad. At the end of the section, there is a note that the advisory’s recommendation is not binding. Since a lot of labor goes into completing these preliminary inquiries, as I found when a case with a very different issue was brought in front of the advisory last year, it is frustrating that recommendations from the faculty may not have any impact on the final decision.
+
+
+
+8.2.2: Termination of Appointment due to Financial Exigency – 
+
+
+
+Advisory Comments
+
+Step 1: Should the same considerations as listed immediately above apply to the Advisory Committee and Educational Policy Committee if the Joint Committee is formed? In other words, how should the participation of pre-tenure faculty and PoP/SPoP on the Joint Committee be modified, if at all?
+
+Step 4: I agree with the suggestion in comments184.
+
+Additional Guidelines - 2. & 3
+
+What constitutes serious distortion? For example, would a pre-tenure faculty member in a major or program consistently serving large numbers of students be retained over a tenured Full Professor in a department with a small number of majors?
+
+Additional Guidelines - 4: 
+
+Questions will arise regarding how moving a faculty member to another role within the institution save the institution money, unless it’s to cover a role vacated by attrition (as mentioned in 1.) or a critical staff vacancy. 
+
+
+
+UFO Comments
+
+Step 4.2 (SS): How might age and length of service be used to decide appointments to be terminated? Will faculty who have been at the institution longer, hence, potentially paid more, be on the chopping block?
+
+Additional guidelines, #5: The severance salary is not included in the Article II, subsection 2.2.2 but is referenced in this guideline. Please clarify what type of severance packet will be offered to faculty members who receive a notice of termination as a result of institution declaring financial exigency.
+
+
+
+8.2.3: Termination of Appointment due to Program Discontinuation 
+
+
+
+Advisory Comments
+
+Same question as above re: role of pre-tenure and PoP/SPoP colleagues serving on Joint Committee if formed for the purpose of modifying or discontinuing a department or program.
+
+
+
+FdAlba Comments
+
+What about an “academic unit”? Could it be discontinued? Whereas academic divisions cannot because they are larger umbrellas, “academic units,” as proposed in this document could be formed by as little as one department. 
+
+
+
+UFO Comments (SS)
+
+The level of staffing of academic programs and departments ought to be in the purview of the provost since that office oversees all academic personnel. I understand that the president’s office sits above that of the provost, but if we allow the president to oversee discontinuation of programs, the provost office will be considerably weakened.
+
+Section 8.2.3, #2: We don’t have “criteria used in the normal periodic review of academic programs and departments”. Are these posted someplace?
+
+
+
+
+
+Section 9: Appeals
+
+
+
+9.2 and 9.3 3. and 9.4 – Advisory
+
+Calendar or business days? (For references to thirty and ten days)
+
+
+
+General note for Article IV - Advisory
+
+Pp. 47 and 70 use “Tenure Committee” instead of “Committee on Tenure”</s>"
+"<s>[INST] ARTICLES V & VI - Wheaton College Bylaws (Recommendations to SG) (1.13.23).txt [/INST] Article V Visiting Faculty Appointments and Provisions
+
+This Article sets forth policies, responsibilities, duties, rights, and privileges pertaining to Visiting faculty.  
+
+Visiting Faculty Academic Titles
+
+The College should continue to use the following ranks: Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Professor.  ““Assistant”” and ““Lecturer” should have special uses under condition which normally preclude the assignment of regular ranks. [May 13, 1963, p. 2715; Minutes of the Board of Trustees meeting, October 26, 1963, pp. 1055-57; November 18, 1963, pp. 2728-29] 
+
+The Visiting Faculty title is used with one of the four academic ranks (i.e., Visiting Instructor, Visiting Assistant Professor, Visiting Associate Professor, Visiting Professor).  
+
+The initial title for each Visiting faculty member shall be determined by the Provost in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair/Program Coordinator. [May 29, 1980, p. 3469; May 3, 1985, p. 3678] 
+
+The Provost, in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair/Program Coordinator, shall determine whether or not an individual Visiting Faculty member’s appointment constitutes half-time teaching. The parameters that define “part-time” and “half-time” are outlined in the Wheaton College Employee Handbook for Faculty and are used for human resource purposes.
+
+Each letter of appointment or reappointment shall clearly state the results of this determination. 
+
+Voting Rights 
+
+Members of the faculty who teach at Wheaton less than half-time have no vote at department or faculty meetings. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641] 
+
+Visiting Faculty members who have taught at Wheaton half-time or more for three consecutive years are eligible for service on faculty committees and have a full vote in department or academic program and faculty meetings. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641] 
+
+Duration of Appointment and Notice of Termination
+
+1. The College will observe the following guidelines for Visiting Faculty ranks and duration of appointments:
+
+··Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Visiting Instructors. Those who have completed their professional training will ordinarily be appointed Visiting Assistant Professors. Visiting Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Visiting Assistant Professor effective the following academic year.
+
+··The initial appointment of Visiting Faculty will be for one semester, one, two or three years. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641]  Full-time Visiting Faculty will be appointed annually pursuant to a term contract for a semester or a year, for a period not to exceed two years.  Part-time Visiting Faculty will be appointed pursuant to a term contract to teach on a part-time or per-course basis.  Issuance of another term contract is solely within the discretion of the College and no other procedures apply.
+
+··Replacements for faculty members on leave and other temporary personnel will receive appointments of appropriate rank and duration.
+
+··Visiting faculty members who have taught at Wheaton half-time or more for five years are entitled to contracts ranging from two to five years in length. Other part-time faculty may be given a one- year terminal appointment. In such a case, the standards of notification as described in Paragraph 2 below will be observed. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641]
+
+2. The following paragraph applies to reappointment of Visiting Faculty, excluding those who are replacements for faculty on leave or are appointed to teach a single course in one semester or are on terminal contracts. 
+
+By March 1 of the last year of contract, part-time teaching personnel shall receive letters informing them of their reappointment or non-reappointment. If the College cannot provide them with this information by March 1, they will receive a letter that explains why the reappointment decision has not yet been reached and provides a date by which the decision will be made. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641] 
+
+Resignation 
+
+Professional ethics obligate the individual faculty member to notify the College as early as possible of an his or her intention to resign. [April 9, 1976, p. 3237] 
+
+Compensation 
+
+Compensation for Visiting Faculty is determined at the time of hire by the Provost [May 4, 2007, p. 4642] 
+
+Benefits 
+
+Prorated Benefits for eligible faculty members are determined by Human Resources guidelines. [May 4, 2007, p. 4642]
+
+Policies and Procedures Respecting Recruitment and Appointment, Reappointment, and Termination of Visiting Faculty
+
+	Recruitment, Appointment, Reappointment, and Evaluation
+
+For recruitment of full-time Visiting Faculty, the procedures for recruitment and appointment of full-time faculty shall be followed, except that the Chair of the Search Committee may limit advertisement provided that a suitable pool of applicants is obtained in keeping with the College’s policy as an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer. 
+
+	For such appointments, the Chair may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73 In all cases where a Visiting Faculty member is retained for more than one year, the Department Chair/Program Coordinator shall review the faculty member’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to perform. 
+
+
+
+Promotion: Criteria: Procedures and Responsibilities for Carrying them On
+
+Promotion of part-time faculty members shall be by the same procedures as those for full-time faculty members. The Provost, in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair, shall determine when a part-time faculty member shall be eligible for consideration for promotion.
+[May 29, 1980, p. 3469; May 3, 1985, p. 3678] 
+
+	Termination of Visiting Faculty Appointments by the College
+
+If the College seeks a dismissal for adequate cause prior to the expiration of the faculty member’s contract term, the procedures specific in Article IV, Section 8.2.1 shall be followed. 
+
+	Academic Freedom and Responsibility 
+
+All members of the Faculty, whether tenured or not, are entitled to academic freedom as set forth in the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, formulated by the Association of American Colleges and the American Association of University Professors, and as modified by the 1970 Interpretive Comments developed by representatives of the same two bodies.  See Article III, Section 1.
+
+All members of the Faculty are expected to conduct themselves in accordance with the 1966 Statement on Professional Ethics formulated by the American Association of University Professors.  See Article III, Section 2.
+
+	Miscellaneous Visiting Faculty Grievances
+
+1. A Visiting Faculty member who feels that he or she has cause for grievance may have such grievance reviewed in accordance with the College’s then current “Review and Appeals Procedures for Certain Faculty Grievances” (see Article IV, Section 9). [May 4, 2007, p. 4643] 
+
+2. The Policies and Procedures set forth herein shall go into effect in accordance with the Enabling Section, as separately provided. 
+
+3. The Faculty may at any time or from time to time amend or revise the Policies and Procedures herein set forth, subject to each instance to the approval of the President of the College and of the Board of Trustees. 
+
+4. The Board of Trustees has final authority for acts under the Policies and Procedures herein set forth, subject to the delegations of authority to the Faculty under this legislation and to the President under the By-Laws; Article III. [March 17, 1978, pp. 3354-63] 
+
+
+
+
+Article VI. Amendments to Faculty Bylaws
+
+The Faculty Bylaws Policies and Procedures set forth herein shall go into effect in accordance with the Enabling Section, as separately provided. 
+
+The Faculty may at any time or from time to time amend or revise these Faculty Bylaws the Policies and Procedures herein set forth.  Amendments or revisions to Articles II through VI of these Faculty Bylaws are subject in each instance to the approval of the President of the College and of the Board of Trustees. 
+
+Amendments to the Faculty Bylaws may be initiated by any individual with faculty status as defined in Article I or a standing committee of the faculty (see Article I, Section 3.7).  A proposal from a member of the Faculty or standing committee to amend the Faculty Bylaws will be referred to the Committee on Committees and Agenda.
+
+If a proposed amendment to Articles II through VI of the Faculty Bylaws is introduced, the Faculty shall vote on the matter within 90 days of receiving the proposed amendment (excluding the period of time between the end of the traditional nine-month full-time faculty contract period and the beginning of the new nine-month full-time faculty contract period).  
+
+An affirmative vote of the majority in attendance and at least one-fourth of the entire voting faculty at duly constituted meeting of the Faculty is required to approve a proposed amendment.
+
+The Board of Trustees has final authority for acts under Articles II through VI the Faculty Bylaws Policies and Procedures herein set forth, subject to the delegations of authority to the Faculty under this legislation and to the President under the Bylaws; Article III. [March 17, 1978, pp. 3354-63]
+
+Conflict with Federal, State or Local Law: If any provision of the Faculty Bylaws is in conflict with federal, State, or local law, or is otherwise illegal, the remainder of the Faculty Bylaws shall not be affected.  The Faculty shall make it a priority to meet and resolve the conflict in conjunction with the Administration.
+
+
+
+		
+
+		Wheaton College Faculty Bylaws – Page 2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] ARTICLES V & VI - Wheaton College Bylaws (Recommendations to SG) (1.23).txt [/INST] Article V Visiting Faculty Appointments and Provisions
+
+This Article sets forth policies, responsibilities, duties, rights, and privileges pertaining to Visiting faculty.  
+
+Visiting Faculty Academic Titles
+
+The College should continue to use the following ranks: Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Professor.  ““Assistant”” and ““Lecturer” should have special uses under condition which normally preclude the assignment of regular ranks. [May 13, 1963, p. 2715; Minutes of the Board of Trustees meeting, October 26, 1963, pp. 1055-57; November 18, 1963, pp. 2728-29] 
+
+The Visiting Faculty title is used with one of the four academic ranks (i.e., Visiting Instructor, Visiting Assistant Professor, Visiting Associate Professor, Visiting Professor).  
+
+The initial title for each Visiting faculty member shall be determined by the Provost in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair/Program Coordinator. [May 29, 1980, p. 3469; May 3, 1985, p. 3678] 
+
+The Provost, in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair/Program Coordinator, shall determine whether or not an individual Visiting Faculty member’s appointment constitutes half-time teaching. The parameters that define “part-time” and “half-time” are outlined in the Wheaton College Employee Handbook for Faculty and are used for human resource purposes.
+
+Each letter of appointment or reappointment shall clearly state the results of this determination. 
+
+Voting Rights 
+
+Members of the faculty who teach at Wheaton less than half-time have no vote at department or faculty meetings. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641] 
+
+Visiting Faculty members who have taught at Wheaton half-time or more for three consecutive years are eligible for service on faculty committees and have a full vote in department or academic program and faculty meetings. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641] 
+
+Duration of Appointment and Notice of Termination
+
+1. The College will observe the following guidelines for Visiting Faculty ranks and duration of appointments:
+
+··Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Visiting Instructors. Those who have completed their professional training will ordinarily be appointed Visiting Assistant Professors. Visiting Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Visiting Assistant Professor effective the following academic year.
+
+··The initial appointment of Visiting Faculty will be for one semester, one, two or three years. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641]  Full-time Visiting Faculty will be appointed annually pursuant to a term contract for a semester or a year, for a period not to exceed two years.  Part-time Visiting Faculty will be appointed pursuant to a term contract to teach on a part-time or per-course basis.  Issuance of another term contract is solely within the discretion of the College and no other procedures apply.
+
+··Replacements for faculty members on leave and other temporary personnel will receive appointments of appropriate rank and duration.
+
+··Visiting faculty members who have taught at Wheaton half-time or more for five years are entitled to contracts ranging from two to five years in length. Other part-time faculty may be given a one- year terminal appointment. In such a case, the standards of notification as described in Paragraph 2 below will be observed. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641]
+
+2. The following paragraph applies to reappointment of Visiting Faculty, excluding those who are replacements for faculty on leave or are appointed to teach a single course in one semester or are on terminal contracts. 
+
+By March 1 of the last year of contract, part-time teaching personnel shall receive letters informing them of their reappointment or non-reappointment. If the College cannot provide them with this information by March 1, they will receive a letter that explains why the reappointment decision has not yet been reached and provides a date by which the decision will be made. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641] 
+
+Resignation 
+
+Professional ethics obligate the individual faculty member to notify the College as early as possible of an his or her intention to resign. [April 9, 1976, p. 3237] 
+
+Compensation 
+
+Compensation for Visiting Faculty is determined at the time of hire by the Provost [May 4, 2007, p. 4642] 
+
+Benefits 
+
+Prorated Benefits for eligible faculty members are determined by Human Resources guidelines. [May 4, 2007, p. 4642]
+
+Policies and Procedures Respecting Recruitment and Appointment, Reappointment, and Termination of Visiting Faculty
+
+	Recruitment, Appointment, Reappointment, and Evaluation
+
+For recruitment of full-time Visiting Faculty, the procedures for recruitment and appointment of full-time faculty shall be followed, except that the Chair of the Search Committee may limit advertisement provided that a suitable pool of applicants is obtained in keeping with the College’s policy as an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer. 
+
+	For such appointments, the Chair may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73 In all cases where a Visiting Faculty member is retained for more than one year, the Department Chair/Program Coordinator shall review the faculty member’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to perform. 
+
+
+
+Promotion: Criteria: Procedures and Responsibilities for Carrying them On
+
+Promotion of part-time faculty members shall be by the same procedures as those for full-time faculty members. The Provost, in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair, shall determine when a part-time faculty member shall be eligible for consideration for promotion.
+[May 29, 1980, p. 3469; May 3, 1985, p. 3678] 
+
+	Termination of Visiting Faculty Appointments by the College
+
+If the College seeks a dismissal for adequate cause prior to the expiration of the faculty member’s contract term, the procedures specific in Article IV, Section 8.2.1 shall be followed. 
+
+	Academic Freedom and Responsibility 
+
+All members of the Faculty, whether tenured or not, are entitled to academic freedom as set forth in the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, formulated by the Association of American Colleges and the American Association of University Professors, and as modified by the 1970 Interpretive Comments developed by representatives of the same two bodies.  See Article III, Section 1.
+
+All members of the Faculty are expected to conduct themselves in accordance with the 1966 Statement on Professional Ethics formulated by the American Association of University Professors.  See Article III, Section 2.
+
+	Miscellaneous Visiting Faculty Grievances
+
+1. A Visiting Faculty member who feels that he or she has cause for grievance may have such grievance reviewed in accordance with the College’s then current “Review and Appeals Procedures for Certain Faculty Grievances” (see Article IV, Section 9). [May 4, 2007, p. 4643] 
+
+2. The Policies and Procedures set forth herein shall go into effect in accordance with the Enabling Section, as separately provided. 
+
+3. The Faculty may at any time or from time to time amend or revise the Policies and Procedures herein set forth, subject to each instance to the approval of the President of the College and of the Board of Trustees. 
+
+4. The Board of Trustees has final authority for acts under the Policies and Procedures herein set forth, subject to the delegations of authority to the Faculty under this legislation and to the President under the By-Laws; Article III. [March 17, 1978, pp. 3354-63] 
+
+
+
+
+Article VI. Amendments to Faculty Bylaws
+
+The Faculty Bylaws Policies and Procedures set forth herein shall go into effect in accordance with the Enabling Section, as separately provided. 
+
+The Faculty may at any time or from time to time amend or revise these Faculty Bylaws the Policies and Procedures herein set forth.  Amendments or revisions to Articles II through VI of these Faculty Bylaws are subject in each instance to the approval of the President of the College and of the Board of Trustees. 
+
+Amendments to the Faculty Bylaws may be initiated by any individual with faculty status as defined in Article I or a standing committee of the faculty (see Article I, Section 3.7).  A proposal from a member of the Faculty or standing committee to amend the Faculty Bylaws will be referred to the Committee on Committees and Agenda.
+
+If a proposed amendment to Articles II through VI of the Faculty Bylaws is introduced, the Faculty shall vote on the matter within 90 days of receiving the proposed amendment (excluding the period of time between the end of the traditional nine-month full-time faculty contract period and the beginning of the new nine-month full-time faculty contract period).  
+
+An affirmative vote of the majority in attendance and at least one-fourth of the entire voting faculty at duly constituted meeting of the Faculty is required to approve a proposed amendment.
+
+The Board of Trustees has final authority for acts under Articles II through VI the Faculty Bylaws Policies and Procedures herein set forth, subject to the delegations of authority to the Faculty under this legislation and to the President under the Bylaws; Article III. [March 17, 1978, pp. 3354-63]
+
+Conflict with Federal, State or Local Law: If any provision of the Faculty Bylaws is in conflict with federal, State, or local law, or is otherwise illegal, the remainder of the Faculty Bylaws shall not be affected.  The Faculty shall make it a priority to meet and resolve the conflict in conjunction with the Administration.
+
+
+
+		
+
+		Wheaton College Faculty Bylaws – Page 2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] ARTICLES V & VI - Wheaton College Bylaws - Faculty Draft (No Highlights).txt [/INST] Article V Visiting Faculty Appointments and Provisions
+
+This Article sets forth policies, responsibilities, duties, rights, and privileges pertaining to Visiting faculty.  
+
+Visiting Faculty Academic Titles
+
+The College should continue to use the following ranks: Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Professor.  ““Assistant”” and ““Lecturer” should have special uses under condition which normally preclude the assignment of regular ranks. [May 13, 1963, p. 2715; Minutes of the Board of Trustees meeting, October 26, 1963, pp. 1055-57; November 18, 1963, pp. 2728-29] 
+
+The Visiting Faculty title is used with one of the four academic ranks (i.e., Visiting Instructor, Visiting Assistant Professor, Visiting Associate Professor, Visiting Professor).  The initial title for each Visiting faculty member shall be determined by the Provost in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair/Program Coordinator. [May 29, 1980, p. 3469; May 3, 1985, p. 3678] 
+
+The Provost, in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair/Program Coordinator, shall determine whether or not an individual Visiting faculty member’s appointment constitutes full or part-time teaching.  The parameters that define “part-time” and “full-time” teaching are outlined in the Wheaton College Employee Handbook for Faculty and are used for human resource purposes.
+
+Each letter of appointment or reappointment shall clearly state the results of this determination. 
+
+Voting Rights 
+
+Members of the faculty Part-time Visiting faculty who teach at Wheaton less than half-time have no vote at department or faculty meetings. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641].  Part-time Visiting faculty members who have taught at Wheaton half-time or more for three consecutive years are eligible for service on faculty committees and have a full vote in department or academic program and faculty meetings. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641] 
+
+The Provost, in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair/Program Coordinator, shall determine whether or not an individual Visiting faculty member’s appointment constitutes half-time teaching for purposes of determining voting right eligibility. For purposes of this policy, half-time is defined as a teaching load that is fifty percent or more, but less than one hundred percent of a full-time teaching load as defined in the Employee Handbook for Faculty.
+
+Duration of Appointment and Notice of Termination
+
+1. The College will observe the following guidelines for Visiting Faculty ranks and duration of appointments:
+
+··Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or equivalent terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Visiting Instructors. Those who have completed their professional training will ordinarily be appointed Visiting Assistant Professors. Visiting Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Visiting Assistant Professor effective the following academic year.
+
+··The initial appointment of Visiting Faculty will be for one semester, one, two or three years. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641]  Full-time Visiting Faculty will be appointed annually pursuant to a term contract for a semester or a year, for a period not to exceed two years.  Part-time Visiting Faculty will be appointed pursuant to a term contract to teach on a part-time or per-course basis.  Issuance of another term contract is solely within the discretion of the College and no other procedures apply.
+
+··Replacements for faculty members on leave and other temporary personnel will receive appointments of appropriate rank and duration.
+
+··Visiting faculty members who have taught at Wheaton half-time or more for five years are entitled to contracts ranging from two to five years in length. Other part-time faculty may be given a one- year terminal appointment. In such a case, the standards of notification as described in Paragraph 2 below will be observed. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641]
+
+2. The following paragraph applies to reappointment of Visiting Faculty, excluding those who are replacements for faculty on leave or are appointed to teach a single course in one semester or are on terminal contracts. 
+
+By March 1 of the last year of contract, part-time teaching personnel shall receive letters informing them of their reappointment or non-reappointment. If the College cannot provide them with this information by March 1, they will receive a letter that explains why the reappointment decision has not yet been reached and provides a date by which the decision will be made. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641] 
+
+Resignation 
+
+Professional ethics obligate the individual faculty member to notify the College as early as possible of an his or her intention to resign. [April 9, 1976, p. 3237] 
+
+Compensation 
+
+Compensation for Visiting Faculty is determined at the time of hire by the Provost [May 4, 2007, p. 4642] 
+
+Benefits 
+
+Prorated Benefits for eligible faculty members are determined by Human Resources guidelines. [May 4, 2007, p. 4642]
+
+Policies and Procedures Respecting Recruitment and Appointment, Reappointment, and Termination of Visiting Faculty
+
+	Recruitment, Appointment, Reappointment, and Evaluation
+
+For recruitment of full-time Visiting Faculty, the procedures for recruitment and appointment of full-time faculty shall be followed, except that the Chair of the Search Committee may limit advertisement provided that a suitable pool of applicants is obtained in keeping with the College’s policy as an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer. 
+
+	For such appointments, the Chair may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73 In all cases where a Visiting Faculty member is retained for more than one year, the Department Chair/Program Coordinator shall review the faculty member’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to perform. 
+
+
+
+Promotion: Criteria: Procedures and Responsibilities for Carrying them On
+
+Promotion of part-time faculty members shall be by the same procedures as those for full-time faculty members. The Provost, in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair, shall determine when a part-time faculty member shall be eligible for consideration for promotion.
+[May 29, 1980, p. 3469; May 3, 1985, p. 3678] 
+
+	Termination of Visiting Faculty Appointments by the College
+
+If the College seeks a dismissal for adequate cause prior to the expiration of the faculty member’s contract term, the procedures specific in Article IV, Section 8.2.1 shall be followed. 
+
+	Academic Freedom and Responsibility 
+
+All members of the Faculty, whether tenured or not, are entitled to academic freedom as set forth in the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, formulated by the Association of American Colleges and the American Association of University Professors, and as modified by the 1970 Interpretive Comments developed by representatives of the same two bodies.  See Article III, Section 1.
+
+All members of the Faculty are expected to conduct themselves in accordance with the 1966 Statement on Professional Ethics formulated by the American Association of University Professors.  See Article III, Section 2.
+
+	Miscellaneous Visiting Faculty Grievances
+
+1. A Visiting Faculty member who feels that he or she has cause for grievance may have such grievance reviewed in accordance with the College’s then current “Review and Appeals Procedures for Certain Faculty Grievances” (see Article IV, Section 9). [May 4, 2007, p. 4643] 
+
+2. The Policies and Procedures set forth herein shall go into effect in accordance with the Enabling Section, as separately provided. 
+
+3. The Faculty may at any time or from time to time amend or revise the Policies and Procedures herein set forth, subject to each instance to the approval of the President of the College and of the Board of Trustees. 
+
+4. The Board of Trustees has final authority for acts under the Policies and Procedures herein set forth, subject to the delegations of authority to the Faculty under this legislation and to the President under the By-Laws; Article III. [March 17, 1978, pp. 3354-63] 
+
+
+
+
+Article VI. Amendments to Faculty Bylaws
+
+The Faculty Bylaws Policies and Procedures set forth herein shall go into effect in accordance with the Enabling Section, as separately provided. 
+
+The Faculty may at any time or from time to time amend or revise these Faculty Bylaws the Policies and Procedures herein set forth.  Amendments or revisions to Articles II through VI of these Faculty Bylaws are subject in each instance to the approval of the President of the College and of the Board of Trustees. 
+
+Amendments to the Faculty Bylaws may be initiated by any individual with faculty status as defined in Article I or a standing committee of the faculty (see Article I, Section 3.7).  A proposal from a member of the Faculty or standing committee to amend the Faculty Bylaws will be referred to the Committee on Committees and Agenda, in consultation with the President and the Provost, as consensus among this group is necessary to bring the amendment to faculty for a vote.
+
+If a proposed amendment to Articles II through VI of the Faculty Bylaws is introduced, the Faculty shall vote on the matter within 90 days of receiving the proposed amendment (excluding the period of time between the end of the traditional nine-month full-time faculty contract period and the beginning of the new nine-month full-time faculty contract period).  
+
+An affirmative vote of the majority in attendance and at least one-fourth of the entire voting faculty at duly constituted meeting of the Faculty is required to approve a proposed amendment.
+
+The Board of Trustees has final authority for acts under Articles II through VI the Faculty Bylaws Policies and Procedures herein set forth, subject to the delegations of authority to the Faculty under this legislation and to the President under the Bylaws; Article III. [March 17, 1978, pp. 3354-63]
+
+Conflict with Federal, State or Local Law: If any provision of the Faculty Bylaws is in conflict with federal, State, or local law, or is otherwise illegal, the remainder of the Faculty Bylaws shall not be affected.  The Faculty shall make it a priority to meet and resolve the conflict in conjunction with the Administration.
+
+
+
+		Wheaton College Faculty Bylaws – Page 114</s>"
+"<s>[INST] ARTICLES V & VI - Wheaton College Bylaws - Faculty Draft.txt [/INST] Article V Visiting Faculty Appointments and Provisions
+
+This Article sets forth policies, responsibilities, duties, rights, and privileges pertaining to Visiting faculty.  
+
+Visiting Faculty Academic Titles
+
+The College should continue to use the following ranks: Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Professor.  ““Assistant”” and ““Lecturer” should have special uses under condition which normally preclude the assignment of regular ranks. [May 13, 1963, p. 2715; Minutes of the Board of Trustees meeting, October 26, 1963, pp. 1055-57; November 18, 1963, pp. 2728-29] 
+
+The Visiting Faculty title is used with one of the four academic ranks (i.e., Visiting Instructor, Visiting Assistant Professor, Visiting Associate Professor, Visiting Professor).  The initial title for each Visiting faculty member shall be determined by the Provost in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair/Program Coordinator. [May 29, 1980, p. 3469; May 3, 1985, p. 3678] 
+
+The Provost, in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair/Program Coordinator, shall determine whether or not an individual Visiting faculty member’s appointment constitutes full or part-time teaching.  The parameters that define “part-time” and “full-time” teaching are outlined in the Wheaton College Employee Handbook for Faculty and are used for human resource purposes.
+
+Each letter of appointment or reappointment shall clearly state the results of this determination. 
+
+Voting Rights 
+
+Members of the faculty Part-time Visiting faculty who teach at Wheaton less than half-time have no vote at department or faculty meetings. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641].  Part-time Visiting faculty members who have taught at Wheaton half-time or more for three consecutive years are eligible for service on faculty committees and have a full vote in department or academic program and faculty meetings. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641] 
+
+The Provost, in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair/Program Coordinator, shall determine whether or not an individual Visiting faculty member’s appointment constitutes half-time teaching for purposes of determining voting right eligibility. For purposes of this policy, half-time is defined as a teaching load that is fifty percent or more, but less than one hundred percent of a full-time teaching load as defined in the Employee Handbook for Faculty.
+
+Duration of Appointment and Notice of Termination
+
+1. The College will observe the following guidelines for Visiting Faculty ranks and duration of appointments:
+
+··Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or equivalent terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Visiting Instructors. Those who have completed their professional training will ordinarily be appointed Visiting Assistant Professors. Visiting Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Visiting Assistant Professor effective the following academic year.
+
+··The initial appointment of Visiting Faculty will be for one semester, one, two or three years. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641]  Full-time Visiting Faculty will be appointed annually pursuant to a term contract for a semester or a year, for a period not to exceed two years.  Part-time Visiting Faculty will be appointed pursuant to a term contract to teach on a part-time or per-course basis.  Issuance of another term contract is solely within the discretion of the College and no other procedures apply.
+
+··Replacements for faculty members on leave and other temporary personnel will receive appointments of appropriate rank and duration.
+
+··Visiting faculty members who have taught at Wheaton half-time or more for five years are entitled to contracts ranging from two to five years in length. Other part-time faculty may be given a one- year terminal appointment. In such a case, the standards of notification as described in Paragraph 2 below will be observed. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641]
+
+2. The following paragraph applies to reappointment of Visiting Faculty, excluding those who are replacements for faculty on leave or are appointed to teach a single course in one semester or are on terminal contracts. 
+
+By March 1 of the last year of contract, part-time teaching personnel shall receive letters informing them of their reappointment or non-reappointment. If the College cannot provide them with this information by March 1, they will receive a letter that explains why the reappointment decision has not yet been reached and provides a date by which the decision will be made. [May 4, 2007, p. 4641] 
+
+Resignation 
+
+Professional ethics obligate the individual faculty member to notify the College as early as possible of an his or her intention to resign. [April 9, 1976, p. 3237] 
+
+Compensation 
+
+Compensation for Visiting Faculty is determined at the time of hire by the Provost [May 4, 2007, p. 4642] 
+
+Benefits 
+
+Prorated Benefits for eligible faculty members are determined by Human Resources guidelines. [May 4, 2007, p. 4642]
+
+Policies and Procedures Respecting Recruitment and Appointment, Reappointment, and Termination of Visiting Faculty
+
+	Recruitment, Appointment, Reappointment, and Evaluation
+
+For recruitment of full-time Visiting Faculty, the procedures for recruitment and appointment of full-time faculty shall be followed, except that the Chair of the Search Committee may limit advertisement provided that a suitable pool of applicants is obtained in keeping with the College’s policy as an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer. 
+
+	For such appointments, the Chair may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73 In all cases where a Visiting Faculty member is retained for more than one year, the Department Chair/Program Coordinator shall review the faculty member’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to perform. 
+
+
+
+Promotion: Criteria: Procedures and Responsibilities for Carrying them On
+
+Promotion of part-time faculty members shall be by the same procedures as those for full-time faculty members. The Provost, in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair, shall determine when a part-time faculty member shall be eligible for consideration for promotion.
+[May 29, 1980, p. 3469; May 3, 1985, p. 3678] 
+
+	Termination of Visiting Faculty Appointments by the College
+
+If the College seeks a dismissal for adequate cause prior to the expiration of the faculty member’s contract term, the procedures specific in Article IV, Section 8.2.1 shall be followed. 
+
+	Academic Freedom and Responsibility 
+
+All members of the Faculty, whether tenured or not, are entitled to academic freedom as set forth in the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, formulated by the Association of American Colleges and the American Association of University Professors, and as modified by the 1970 Interpretive Comments developed by representatives of the same two bodies.  See Article III, Section 1.
+
+All members of the Faculty are expected to conduct themselves in accordance with the 1966 Statement on Professional Ethics formulated by the American Association of University Professors.  See Article III, Section 2.
+
+	Miscellaneous Visiting Faculty Grievances
+
+1. A Visiting Faculty member who feels that he or she has cause for grievance may have such grievance reviewed in accordance with the College’s then current “Review and Appeals Procedures for Certain Faculty Grievances” (see Article IV, Section 9). [May 4, 2007, p. 4643] 
+
+2. The Policies and Procedures set forth herein shall go into effect in accordance with the Enabling Section, as separately provided. 
+
+3. The Faculty may at any time or from time to time amend or revise the Policies and Procedures herein set forth, subject to each instance to the approval of the President of the College and of the Board of Trustees. 
+
+4. The Board of Trustees has final authority for acts under the Policies and Procedures herein set forth, subject to the delegations of authority to the Faculty under this legislation and to the President under the By-Laws; Article III. [March 17, 1978, pp. 3354-63] 
+
+
+
+
+Article VI. Amendments to Faculty Bylaws
+
+The Faculty Bylaws Policies and Procedures set forth herein shall go into effect in accordance with the Enabling Section, as separately provided. 
+
+The Faculty may at any time or from time to time amend or revise these Faculty Bylaws the Policies and Procedures herein set forth.  Amendments or revisions to Articles II through VI of these Faculty Bylaws are subject in each instance to the approval of the President of the College and of the Board of Trustees. 
+
+Amendments to the Faculty Bylaws may be initiated by any individual with faculty status as defined in Article I or a standing committee of the faculty (see Article I, Section 3.7).  A proposal from a member of the Faculty or standing committee to amend the Faculty Bylaws will be referred to the Committee on Committees and Agenda, in consultation with the President and the Provost, as consensus among this group is necessary to bring the amendment to faculty for a vote.
+
+If a proposed amendment to Articles II through VI of the Faculty Bylaws is introduced, the Faculty shall vote on the matter within 90 days of receiving the proposed amendment (excluding the period of time between the end of the traditional nine-month full-time faculty contract period and the beginning of the new nine-month full-time faculty contract period).  
+
+An affirmative vote of the majority in attendance and at least one-fourth of the entire voting faculty at duly constituted meeting of the Faculty is required to approve a proposed amendment.
+
+The Board of Trustees has final authority for acts under Articles II through VI the Faculty Bylaws Policies and Procedures herein set forth, subject to the delegations of authority to the Faculty under this legislation and to the President under the Bylaws; Article III. [March 17, 1978, pp. 3354-63]
+
+Conflict with Federal, State or Local Law: If any provision of the Faculty Bylaws is in conflict with federal, State, or local law, or is otherwise illegal, the remainder of the Faculty Bylaws shall not be affected.  The Faculty shall make it a priority to meet and resolve the conflict in conjunction with the Administration.
+
+
+
+		Wheaton College Faculty Bylaws – Page 114</s>"
+"<s>[INST] ATI.txt [/INST] ATI
+
+Each class has a number of hours
+
+We pay 40 dollars per hour –refer to administrative bulletins
+
+Full time
+
+Required 23 contact hours plus 2 hours lab maintenance hours
+
+Fall
+
+Spring
+
+[Legacy] Professors don’t have to work summer
+
+The other guys were meant to work both summers but they fell through a crack and only one summer.
+
+Same deal … 23 hours per week plus 2 hours lab maintenance plus 5 office hours
+
+See admin bulletin</s>"
+"<s>[INST] AUDIT & ACCOUNTABLITY CONTROL POLICY.txt [/INST] AUDIT AND ACCOUNTABILITY CONTROL POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+
+
+Policy Number:
+
+
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Chief Information Officer
+
+Applicability:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+All College Information Systems that collect, process, maintain, use, share, disseminate or dispose of College Data (“applicable information system(s)”), as well as all Authorized Users who access, use, or handle those resources.
+
+History:
+
+ 
+
+______________________________________________________________________________
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to adapt and maintain a formal documented program for the monitoring, management, and review of applicable information systems and associated Authorized User activity.
+
+POLICY 
+
+It is the policy of Canisius College to configure applicable information systems to produce, store, and retain audit records for the specific resource and Authorized User activity. 
+
+Under the leadership of the chief information officer, applicable resources are routinely reviewed to determine if such resources provide the necessary means whereby the Information Technology Services (“ITS”) may audit and establish individual accountability for any auditable event that can potentially cause access to, generation of, modification of, or affect the release of Private College Data.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Authorized User—are all individuals, including, but not limited to, employees, temporary employees, faculty, students, alumni, trustees, campus visitors, contractors, vendors, consultants and their related personnel, and other individuals authorized by the college to access a college computer, the college network(s), or information systems that collect, process, maintain, use, share, disseminate or dispose of College Data.
+
+Audit Event—any observable occurrence within a College Information System that is significant and relevant to the security of the system and the environment in which it operates in order to meet specific and ongoing audit needs.  Audit events include any auditable event required by applicable local, state, and federal laws. Audit events can include, for example, password changes, failed logons, or failed accesses related to information systems, etc. 
+
+Cardholder Data - full magnetic stripe or the Primary Account Number (PAN) plus any of the following: cardholder name; expiration date; service code; CVC2/CVV2/CID (a three- or four-digit number displayed on the signature panel of the card or, in the case of American Express, on the face of the card.
+
+College Data— any information collected, manipulated, stored, reported, or presented in any format, on any medium, at any location by any department, program or office of the college in support of the college’s mission.
+
+College Employees—includes Canisius College executive officers, administrators, faculty, staff, student employees, contractors, and others who act on behalf of the college.
+
+College Information System—a set of information resources organized expressly for the collection, processing, maintenance, use, sharing, dissemination, or disposition of information.  The term system is used throughout this policy to represent all types of computing platforms that can process, store, or transmit College Data.
+
+Covered Data and Information—means all Non-Public Personnel Information of customers required to be protected under the Title V of the Gramm Leach Bliley Act of 1999 (“GLBA”), including Student Financial Information.  In addition to this coverage, which is required under federal law, the college chooses as a matter of policy to also include in this definition any Cardholder Data received in the course of business by the college, whether or not such Cardholder Data is covered by GLBA. Covered Data and Information includes both paper and electronic records.  Covered Data and Information is classified as Private, Highly Restricted College Data pursuant to the College Data Classification Policy.
+
+Data Custodians—the custodian of College Data is generally responsible for the processing and storage of College Data. The custodian is responsible for the administration of controls as specified by the Data Owner. By definition, Data Custodians are also Authorized Users.
+
+Data Owners—the owner of a collection of College Data is usually the manager responsible for the creation of that data or the primary user of that information. This role often corresponds with the management of department. In this context, ownership does not signify proprietary interest, and ownership may be shared. By definition, Data Owners are also Authorized Users.
+
+Members of the College Community—includes any person who is a student, college employee, volunteer, trustee, alumni, as well as college organizations, clubs, groups, and teams. This definition also includes all college departments, offices and programs.
+
+Mobile Device—any handheld or portable computing device including running an operating system optimized or designed for mobile computing. Any device running a full desktop version operating system is not included in this definition.
+
+Non-Public Personal Information—any personally identifiable financial or other personal information, not otherwise publicly available, that the college has obtained from a customer in the process of offering a financial product or service; such information provided to the college by another financial institution; such information otherwise obtained by the college in connection with providing a financial product or service; or any list, description, or other grouping of customers (and publicly available information pertaining to them) that is derived using any information listed above that is not publicly available. Examples of personally identifiable financial information include names, date and place of birth, mother’s maiden name, biometric records, addresses, telephone numbers, bank and credit card account numbers, income and credit histories, tax returns, asset statements, and social security numbers, both in paper and electronic form.
+
+Personally Identifiable Information or PII—any information about an individual that (i) can be used to distinguish or trace an individual’s identity, such as name, date and place of birth, mother’s maiden name or biometric records, (ii) is linked or linkable to an individual, such as medical, educational, financial and employment information, which if lost, compromised or disclosed without authorization, could result in harm to that individual; and (iii) is protected by federal, state or local laws and regulations or industry standards.
+
+Private College Data—any College Data classified as Private-Highly Restricted and Private-Restricted pursuant to this policy. By definition, Private College Data includes, but is not limited to, Covered Data and Information, Student Financial Information, Personally Identifiable Information, Student Education Records, Human Subjects Research Data or Other Sensitive Research Data, Protected Health Information, Cardholder Data, and Sensitive Authentication Data.  See the College Data Classification Policy for additional information.
+
+Public College Data—College Data that by law are available to the public upon request, and that the loss of the data would not cause significant personal, institutional, or other harm.
+
+Security Incident—occurs when there is a serious threat of or unauthorized access or acquisition to a College Information System or an Authorized User’s computerized data that compromises the security, confidentiality, or integrity of the data, including Private College Data. A Security Incident also occurs where there has been unauthorized access or acquisition of encrypted data and the confidential process or key to the encryption is also compromised. Security Incidents can range from the unauthorized use of another Authorized User’s account or system privileges to the execution of malicious code, viruses, worms, Trojan horses, cracking utilities, or attacks by crackers or hackers. Security Incidents may also involve the physical theft of a college information system, a component thereof, or an Authorized User’s technology, such as a computer, mobile device, or other electronic media, or may occur as the result of a weakness in information systems or components (e.g., hardware design or system security procedures).
+
+A non-exhaustive list of symptoms of incidents that qualify as Security Incidents include:
+
+A system alarm or similar indication from an intrusion detection tool;
+
+Suspicious entries in a system or network accounting;
+
+Accounting discrepancies; unexplained new user accounts or file names;
+
+Unexplained modification or deletion of data; system crashes or poor system performance;
+
+Unusual time of usage; and
+
+Unusual usage patterns.
+
+Sensitive Authentication Data—Full track data (magnetic strip data or equivalent on a chip, CAV2/CVC2/CVV2/CID, and PINs/PIN blocks.
+
+Student Education Records—as defined by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), student education records are all records which contain information directly related to a student and maintained by the college, including those files, documents, and other materials (in handwriting, print, computer media, video or audio tape, film, microfilm, and microfiche) that contain information directly related to a student which are maintained by the college or by a person acting for the college pursuant to college or department policy. Information that is captured as a result of a student’s various activities at the college is part of the student record. This information includes, but may not be limited to, logs, databases or other records of: websites the student has visited, purchases made at college facilities, entry day/time into college facilities, library use and biometric records.
+
+Student Financial Information—information the college or its affiliates have obtained from a student in the process of offering a financial product or service, or such information provided to the college by another financial institution. Offering a financial product or service includes offering student loans to students, receiving income tax information from a student’s parent when offering a financial aid package, and other miscellaneous financial services as defined in 12 CRF §225.28. Examples of student financial information include addresses, phone numbers, bank and credit card account numbers, income and credit histories and Social Security numbers, in both paper and electronic format.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+		I.		Auditable Events
+
+Information systems designated by ITS as requiring authentication are configured to generate an audit record for a pre-defined set of events that are adequate to support after-the-fact Security Incident investigations.  
+
+At a minimum, applicable resources will be configured to record: 
+
+Authorized User identification;
+
+Type of event;
+
+Date;
+
+Timestamp;
+
+Logon/logoff;
+
+Identity or name of resource/data/system component;
+
+All system and data interactions concerning Private College Data, including failed access attempts for operating systems, databases, devices, and applications that collect, process, maintain, use, share, disseminate, or dispose of Private College Data;
+
+Administrative access functions, including changes in the status of auditable events;
+
+Creation of new accounts and elevation of privileges; and 
+
+All changes, additions, or deletions to accounts with root or administrative privileges.
+
+When resources or technology allows, ITS will configure applicable resources to audit the following additional events: 
+
+Change of password; 
+
+Switching accounts or running administrator access functions from another account;
+
+Subset of security administrator commands while logged on in an administrator access role; 
+
+Subset of system administrator commands while logged on in the Authorized User role; 
+
+Access to all audit functions; 
+
+Clearing of the audit log file; 
+
+Startup, pausing, and shutdown of audit functions;
+
+Change of file or Authorized User permissions or privileges; 
+
+Remote access outside of college network communications channels (e.g., dedicated virtual private network) and all dial-in access to the system; 
+
+Changes made to an application or database by a batch file; 
+
+Application critical record changes; 
+
+Creation and deletion of system-level objects;
+
+Changes to database or application records, where the application is bypassed to produce the change (via a file or other database utility); and 
+
+Additional platform specific events may also be required, based on the outcome of the risk assessment required by the Risk Assessment and Security Policy.
+
+A.	Auditable Events Review
+
+Auditable events and review frequencies are documented by ITS. The documentation is evaluated on an annual basis by the chief information officer (or his/her designee) and updates to the audit and accountability program are introduced as necessary. 
+
+B.	Changes by Authorized Individuals
+
+Only authorized personnel designated by the chief information officer (or his/her designee) are permitted to make changes to the audit system. Changes to the audit system may include adjustments to capture more or less information to comply with investigation requirements, as well as modifications that would facilitate audit reduction, analysis, and reporting. 
+
+II.	Content of Audit Records
+
+As noted above, applicable information systems designated by ITS as requiring authentication must have the capability to create audit records. ITS is responsible for ensuring that such records contain sufficient information to, at a minimum establish what events occurred, when (date and time) the events occurred, the source of the events, the source of the event, the identity of any user associated with the event, and the event outcome. 
+
+Applicable resources may also include additional defined requirements in the audit records for audit events identified by type, location, or subject. An example of detailed information that the college may require in audit records is full-text recording of privileged commands or the individual identities of group account users. 
+
+ITS centrally manages the content of audit records, including those records generated by all web servers, database servers, messaging servers, file servers, print servers, middleware servers, DNS servers, routers, firewalls, IDS/IPS, and VoIP servers. Such records are maintained in accordance with the Record Retention Policy and Schedule.
+
+The following information is never included in the audit records maintained by ITS:
+
+Unencrypted Private College Data;
+
+Session identification values (consider replacing with a hashed value if needed to track session specific events);
+
+Access tokens (except nonce URLs that grant limited, specific purpose access);
+
+Clear text authentication credentials (e.g., passwords);
+
+Database connection strings;
+
+Encryption keys; and
+
+Information it is illegal to collect in the relevant jurisdiction.
+
+III.	Audit Storage Capacity
+
+ITS is responsible for ensuring that applicable information systems requiring authentication have a sufficient amount of storage capacity allocated for audit records. ITS configures such systems to: 
+
+Reduce the likelihood of audit records exceeding storage capacity; and 
+
+Allow the records to be maintained for a period as designated by ITS.  
+
+When possible, ITS will off-load audit records onto a different information system than the one that is being audited to preserve the confidentiality and integrity of the audit records.
+
+IV.	Response to Audit Processing Failures
+
+When possible, applicable information systems requiring authentication shall provide the capability to generate system alerts and send them to appropriate ITS staff in the event of an audit failure or audit storage capacity being reached. In the event of an audit processing failure, when possible, the system will be configured by ITS to shut down or provide limited functionality. ITS will then attempt to remediate logging discrepancies.
+
+V.	Audit Review, Analysis and Reporting Authority 
+
+Audit records are regularly reviewed and analyzed by ITS staff to identify unauthorized, inappropriate, unusual, suspicious activity, or other Security Incidents (see the Incident Response Policy). Such activities are investigated by ITS staff and reported to the chief information officer, in accordance with the Incident Response Policy.
+
+A.	Frequency of Review and Analysis
+
+Assigned ITS staff review audit records for applicable resources and associated components to identify anomalies or suspicious activity as follows: 
+
+The following audit records are reviewed by ITS at least daily: 
+
+All security events; 
+
+Logs of all system components that store, process, or transmit cardholder data, or that could impact the security of Private College Data, including Cardholder Data; 
+
+Logs of all critical system components; and 
+
+Logs of all servers and system components that perform security functions. As applicable, this includes, but is not limited to: 
+
+Firewalls;
+
+Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS); 
+
+Intrusion Prevention Systems (IPS); 
+
+Authentication servers (e.g., Active Directory domain controllers); and
+
+E-commerce redirection servers;
+
+ITS staff reviews other audit records in accordance with the annual risk assessment (see the Risk Assessment and Security Policy); and 
+
+ITS staff report exceptions and anomalies identified during the review process to the chief information officer (or his/her designee) and follow sup as appropriate. 
+
+B.	Risk Escalation
+
+If there is an increased risk to operating systems, databases or applications, review and analysis will be performed more frequently. See the Risk Assessment and Security Policy.
+
+C.	Integrate Alert Processes
+
+Audit review, analysis, and reporting processes are integrated to support investigations and subsequent responses to suspicious activities. 
+
+D.	Correlate Audit Repositories
+
+Audit records are analyzed and correlated across different repositories by ITS to gain organizational situational awareness. 
+
+VI.	Time Stamps
+
+ITS is responsible for ensuring that applicable information systems are configured to use internal system clocks to generate time stamps for audit records. Time stamps generated by the system include both date and time. The time may be expressed in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), a modern continuation of Greenwich Mean Time (GMT), or local time with an offset from UTC. 
+
+Data Owners must ensure that the time stamps on applicable resources they are responsible for are configured properly and validate the following: 
+
+The applicable resource is configured to synchronize time with college servers; 
+
+The applicable resource has the correct and consistent time; and 
+
+Time data is protected from unauthorized modification.
+
+VII.	Audit Information Protection 
+
+Audit records are protected from unauthorized modification, access, or deletion while online and during offline storage as follows: 
+
+Only authorized Data Owners and Custodians with administrative access credentials, as well as select staff from ITS are permitted access to audit logs and audit tools; 
+
+Audit logs containing Private College Data are encrypted in accordance with the System and Communications Protection Policy;
+
+Audit files are protected from unauthorized modifications via the use of Login ID and authentication; 
+
+ITS is responsible for ensuring that applicable resources are configured to either allow real-time backup or audit the transfer of trail files to a centralized log server or media that is difficult to alter; 
+
+ITS is responsible for ensuring that applicable resources are configured to write logs for external-facing technologies onto a secure, centralized, internal log server or media devices; and 
+
+Where feasible, ITS implements File Integrity Monitoring (FIM) or change-detection software on logs to ensure that existing log data cannot be changed without generating alerts.
+
+VIII.	Audit Record Retention
+
+The college retains audit records for a time sufficient to provide support after-the-fact security investigations as determined by the chief information officer (or his/her designee) and to meet regulatory and applicable college record retention requirements as delineated in the Record Retention Policy and Schedule.
+
+Note: Per the PCI-DDS requirements, the college retains Cardholder Data Environment related audit records for at least one (1) year, with a minimum of three (3) months immediately available for analysis. 
+
+IX.	Exception Requests 
+
+For details on requesting an exception request to this Policy, please contact the chief information officer. 
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Access Control Policy
+
+Acquisition and Disposal Policy
+
+Configuration Management Policy
+
+Data Classification Policy
+
+Incident Response Policy
+
+Information Security Program 
+
+Information Technology Configuration Management Policy
+
+Media Protection Policy
+
+Passwords Policy
+
+Payment Card Security Policy 
+
+Record Retention Policy
+
+Risk and Security Assessment Policy
+
+System and Communication Protection Policy
+
+System and Information Integrity Policy</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Authority of the Faculty-SS Comments.txt [/INST] Currently in the Faculty Constitution:
+
+
+
+
+
+The Authority of the Faculty
+
+
+
+1. The President delegates to the Faculty primary responsibility for governance of such fundamental areas as curriculum; subject matter and methods of instruction; research; faculty status; and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process.
+
+ 
+
+
+
+2. The Faculty, in collaboration with the Provost, recommends standards, criteria, and procedures for hiring, retention, promotion, and tenure of faculty members and for evaluating teaching, scholarly and creative activity, and service.
+
+ 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+3. The Faculty is consulted and offers informed advice with respect to issues that affect the Faculty’s primary areas of responsibility, including but not limited to faculty workload and working conditions, strategic planning, budgeting and academic resource allocation, improvements in physical and technological resources, and the selection of academic administrators.
+
+ 
+
+4. The President has the option to appeal to the Board of Regents in the event that a decision, policy, or process instituted by the Faculty is deemed contrary to the mission or goals of the university.  In such an instance, the Faculty shall be informed of the President’s appeal and given an opportunity to present, before the Board of Regents, Faculty arguments regarding the decision, policy, or process.
+
+ 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Proposed Change (Approved recently by the Senate and Assembly):
+
+
+
+The Authority of the Faculty
+
+ 
+
+1. The President delegates to the Faculty primary responsibility for governance of such fundamental areas as curriculum; subject matter and methods of instruction; research; faculty status; and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process.  Such responsibilities are subject to the power of approval lodged in the Board of Regents or delegated by it to the President.
+
+2-The Faculty, in collaboration with the Provost, recommends standards, criteria, and procedures for hiring, retention, promotion, and tenure of faculty members and for evaluating teaching, scholarly and creative activity, and service. This area includes appointments, reappointments, decisions not to reappoint, promotions, the granting of tenure, and dismissal. The primary responsibility of the faculty for such matters is based upon the fact that its expertise is central to general educational policy and specialized knowledge is needed to understand and evaluate scholarship and creative works.
+
+ 
+
+
+
+3. The Faculty is consulted and offers informed advice with respect to issues that affect the Faculty’s primary areas of responsibility, including but not limited to faculty workload and working conditions, strategic planning, budgeting and academic resource allocation, improvements in physical and technological resources, and the selection of academic administrators.
+
+ 
+
+ 4-The President has the option to appeal to the Board of Regents in the event that a decision, policy, or process instituted by the Faculty is deemed contrary to the mission or goals of the university. This action should be used in rare and exceptional circumstances. In such an instance, the President will inform the Faculty Senate and FSEC of the President’s appeal in detail, in writing and in a timely manner. Following such communication, Faculty should have the opportunity to present arguments regarding Faculty’s views on their decision, policy, or process to the President and the Board of Regents.
+
+
+
+Alternative Text
+
+On these matters the power of review or final decision lodged in the Board of Regents or delegated by it to the President should be exercised adversely only in exceptional circumstances, and for reasons communicated to the faculty. It is desirable that the faculty should, following such communication, have opportunity for further consideration and further transmittal of its views to the President or Board.  Budgets, personnel limitations, the time element, and the policies of other groups, bodies, and agencies having jurisdiction over the institution may set limits to realization of faculty advice
+
+
+
+
+
+ 
+
+Comparison of Cal Lutheran’s faculty handbook language with the language from University of Laverne’s faculty handbook:
+
+
+
+
+
+Currently in the Faculty Constitution:
+
+
+
+Proposed Change:
+
+
+
+Univ of Laverne’s handbook
+
+1. The President delegates to the Faculty primary responsibility for governance of such fundamental areas as curriculum; subject matter and methods of instruction; research; faculty status; and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process.
+
+
+
+1. The President delegates to the Faculty primary responsibility for governance of such fundamental areas as curriculum; subject matter and methods of instruction; research; faculty status; and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process.
+
+
+
+The President delegates to the faculty primary responsibility for governance of such fundamental areas as curriculum; subject matter and methods of instruction; research; faculty status; and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process. The President avoids overturning faculty judgment in those areas in which the faculty has been delegated primary responsibility.
+
+2. The Faculty, in collaboration with the Provost, recommends standards, criteria, and procedures for hiring, retention, promotion, and tenure of faculty members and for evaluating teaching, scholarly and creative activity, and service.
+
+
+
+2-The Faculty, in collaboration with the Provost, recommends standards, criteria, and procedures for hiring, retention, promotion, and tenure of faculty members and for evaluating teaching, scholarly and creative activity, and service. This area includes appointments, reappointments, decisions not to reappoint, promotions, the granting of tenure, and dismissal. The primary responsibility of the faculty for such matters is based upon the fact that its expertise is central to general educational policy and specialized knowledge is needed to understand and evaluate scholarship and creative works.
+
+
+
+The faculty, in collaboration with the Provost, recommends standards, criteria, and procedures for hiring, retention, promotion, and tenure of faculty members and for evaluating teaching, scholarly and creative activity, and service.
+
+
+
+It is the function of the faculty: 
+
+• to form such organization of the entire teaching staff, adopt such rules of procedure, and establish such committees as appropriate; 
+
+• to initiate and recommend to the Trustees, or to approve directly or through its constituted committees, all policies and actions directly affecting the curriculum and other educational matters, including the establishment or discontinuance of new courses or fields of instruction, faculty compensation, admissions and financial aid standards, academic calendars, academic advising procedures, faculty load policies, and criteria for promotion, tenure, and dismissal of faculty, all such action being subject to review and approval by the Board of Trustees;
+
+3. The Faculty is consulted and offers informed advice with respect to issues that affect the Faculty’s primary areas of responsibility, including but not limited to faculty workload and working conditions, strategic planning, budgeting and academic resource allocation, improvements in physical and technological resources, and the selection of academic administrators.
+
+
+
+3. The Faculty is consulted and offers informed advice with respect to issues that affect the Faculty’s primary areas of responsibility, including but not limited to faculty workload and working conditions, strategic planning, budgeting and academic resource allocation, improvements in physical and technological resources, and the selection of academic administrators.
+
+
+
+The faculty is consulted and offers informed advice with respect to issues that affect the Faculty’s primary areas of responsibility, including, but not limited to, faculty workload and working conditions, strategic planning, budgeting and academic resource allocation, improvements in physical and technological resources, and the selection of academic administrators.
+
+4. The President has the option to appeal to the Board of Regents in the event that a decision, policy, or process instituted by the Faculty is deemed contrary to the mission or goals of the university.  In such an instance, the Faculty shall be informed of the President’s appeal and given an opportunity to present, before the Board of Regents, Faculty arguments regarding the decision, policy, or process.
+
+ 
+
+
+
+ 4-The President has the option to appeal to the Board of Regents in the event that a decision, policy, or process instituted by the Faculty is deemed contrary to the mission or goals of the university. This action should be used in rare and exceptional circumstances. In such an instance, the President will inform the Faculty Senate and FSEC of the President’s appeal in detail, in writing and in a timely manner. Following such communication, Faculty should have the opportunity to present arguments regarding Faculty’s views on their decision, policy, or process to the President and the Board of Regents.
+
+ 
+
+
+
+The President has the power to veto the decisions of Faculty Senate, provided, however, that Faculty Senate is notified within one week of said action and the reasons are given in writing to the President of Faculty Senate and the Secretary of the Board. The right of appeal to the Board is granted to Faculty Senate, upon two-thirds vote of Faculty Senate, provided such a vote is taken at the next scheduled Faculty Senate meeting. If requested by the Faculty, the President or the Board shall reconsider the action and shall inform the Faculty of its decision on reconsideration in writing within thirty days of receipt of the Faculty’s request for review.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Authority of the Faculty.txt [/INST] Currently in the Faculty Constitution:
+
+
+
+
+
+The Authority of the Faculty
+
+
+
+1. The President delegates to the Faculty primary responsibility for governance of such fundamental areas as curriculum; subject matter and methods of instruction; research; faculty status; and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process.
+
+ 
+
+
+
+2. The Faculty, in collaboration with the Provost, recommends standards, criteria, and procedures for hiring, retention, promotion, and tenure of faculty members and for evaluating teaching, scholarly and creative activity, and service.
+
+ 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+3. The Faculty is consulted and offers informed advice with respect to issues that affect the Faculty’s primary areas of responsibility, including but not limited to faculty workload and working conditions, strategic planning, budgeting and academic resource allocation, improvements in physical and technological resources, and the selection of academic administrators.
+
+ 
+
+4. The President has the option to appeal to the Board of Regents in the event that a decision, policy, or process instituted by the Faculty is deemed contrary to the mission or goals of the university.  In such an instance, the Faculty shall be informed of the President’s appeal and given an opportunity to present, before the Board of Regents, Faculty arguments regarding the decision, policy, or process.
+
+ 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Proposed Change (Approved recently by the Senate and Assembly):
+
+
+
+The Authority of the Faculty
+
+ 
+
+1. The President delegates to the Faculty primary responsibility for governance of such fundamental areas as curriculum; subject matter and methods of instruction; research; faculty status; and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process.
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+2-The Faculty, in collaboration with the Provost, recommends standards, criteria, and procedures for hiring, retention, promotion, and tenure of faculty members and for evaluating teaching, scholarly and creative activity, and service. This area includes appointments, reappointments, decisions not to reappoint, promotions, the granting of tenure, and dismissal. The primary responsibility of the faculty for such matters is based upon the fact that its expertise is central to general educational policy and specialized knowledge is needed to understand and evaluate scholarship and creative works.
+
+ 
+
+
+
+3. The Faculty is consulted and offers informed advice with respect to issues that affect the Faculty’s primary areas of responsibility, including but not limited to faculty workload and working conditions, strategic planning, budgeting and academic resource allocation, improvements in physical and technological resources, and the selection of academic administrators.
+
+ 
+
+ 4-The President has the option to appeal to the Board of Regents in the event that a decision, policy, or process instituted by the Faculty is deemed contrary to the mission or goals of the university. This action should be used in rare and exceptional circumstances. In such an instance, the President will inform the Faculty Senate and FSEC of the President’s appeal in detail, in writing and in a timely manner. Following such communication, Faculty should have the opportunity to present arguments regarding Faculty’s views on their decision, policy, or process to the President and the Board of Regents.
+
+
+
+Alternative Text
+
+On these matters the power of review or final decision lodged in the Board of Regents or delegated by it to the President should be exercised adversely only in exceptional circumstances, and for reasons communicated to the faculty. It is desirable that the faculty should, following such communication, have opportunity for further consideration and further transmittal of its views to the President or Board.  Budgets, personnel limitations, the time element, and the policies of other groups, bodies, and agencies having jurisdiction over the institution may set limits to realization of faculty advice
+
+
+
+
+
+ Comparison of Cal Lutheran’s faculty handbook language with the language from University of Laverne’s faculty handbook:
+
+
+
+
+
+Currently in the Faculty Constitution:
+
+
+
+Proposed Change:
+
+
+
+Univ of Laverne’s handbook
+
+1. The President delegates to the Faculty primary responsibility for governance of such fundamental areas as curriculum; subject matter and methods of instruction; research; faculty status; and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process.
+
+
+
+1. The President delegates to the Faculty primary responsibility for governance of such fundamental areas as curriculum; subject matter and methods of instruction; research; faculty status; and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process.
+
+
+
+The President delegates to the faculty primary responsibility for governance of such fundamental areas as curriculum; subject matter and methods of instruction; research; faculty status; and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process. The President avoids overturning faculty judgment in those areas in which the faculty has been delegated primary responsibility.
+
+2. The Faculty, in collaboration with the Provost, recommends standards, criteria, and procedures for hiring, retention, promotion, and tenure of faculty members and for evaluating teaching, scholarly and creative activity, and service.
+
+
+
+2-The Faculty, in collaboration with the Provost, recommends standards, criteria, and procedures for hiring, retention, promotion, and tenure of faculty members and for evaluating teaching, scholarly and creative activity, and service. This area includes appointments, reappointments, decisions not to reappoint, promotions, the granting of tenure, and dismissal. The primary responsibility of the faculty for such matters is based upon the fact that its expertise is central to general educational policy and specialized knowledge is needed to understand and evaluate scholarship and creative works.
+
+
+
+The faculty, in collaboration with the Provost, recommends standards, criteria, and procedures for hiring, retention, promotion, and tenure of faculty members and for evaluating teaching, scholarly and creative activity, and service.
+
+
+
+It is the function of the faculty: 
+
+• to form such organization of the entire teaching staff, adopt such rules of procedure, and establish such committees as appropriate; 
+
+• to initiate and recommend to the Trustees, or to approve directly or through its constituted committees, all policies and actions directly affecting the curriculum and other educational matters, including the establishment or discontinuance of new courses or fields of instruction, faculty compensation, admissions and financial aid standards, academic calendars, academic advising procedures, faculty load policies, and criteria for promotion, tenure, and dismissal of faculty, all such action being subject to review and approval by the Board of Trustees;
+
+3. The Faculty is consulted and offers informed advice with respect to issues that affect the Faculty’s primary areas of responsibility, including but not limited to faculty workload and working conditions, strategic planning, budgeting and academic resource allocation, improvements in physical and technological resources, and the selection of academic administrators.
+
+
+
+3. The Faculty is consulted and offers informed advice with respect to issues that affect the Faculty’s primary areas of responsibility, including but not limited to faculty workload and working conditions, strategic planning, budgeting and academic resource allocation, improvements in physical and technological resources, and the selection of academic administrators.
+
+
+
+The faculty is consulted and offers informed advice with respect to issues that affect the Faculty’s primary areas of responsibility, including, but not limited to, faculty workload and working conditions, strategic planning, budgeting and academic resource allocation, improvements in physical and technological resources, and the selection of academic administrators.
+
+4. The President has the option to appeal to the Board of Regents in the event that a decision, policy, or process instituted by the Faculty is deemed contrary to the mission or goals of the university.  In such an instance, the Faculty shall be informed of the President’s appeal and given an opportunity to present, before the Board of Regents, Faculty arguments regarding the decision, policy, or process.
+
+ 
+
+
+
+ 4-The President has the option to appeal to the Board of Regents in the event that a decision, policy, or process instituted by the Faculty is deemed contrary to the mission or goals of the university. This action should be used in rare and exceptional circumstances. In such an instance, the President will inform the Faculty Senate and FSEC of the President’s appeal in detail, in writing and in a timely manner. Following such communication, Faculty should have the opportunity to present arguments regarding Faculty’s views on their decision, policy, or process to the President and the Board of Regents.
+
+ 
+
+
+
+The President has the power to veto the decisions of Faculty Senate, provided, however, that Faculty Senate is notified within one week of said action and the reasons are given in writing to the President of Faculty Senate and the Secretary of the Board. The right of appeal to the Board is granted to Faculty Senate, upon two-thirds vote of Faculty Senate, provided such a vote is taken at the next scheduled Faculty Senate meeting. If requested by the Faculty, the President or the Board shall reconsider the action and shall inform the Faculty of its decision on reconsideration in writing within thirty days of receipt of the Faculty’s request for review.</s>"
+<s>[INST] B&F (2nd Draft)(3.20).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Back Up Policies.txt [/INST] Back Up Policies
+
+
+
+
+
+https://www.du.edu/it/about/it-policies/backup
+
+
+
+
+
+https://ww1.odu.edu/about/policiesandprocedures/computing/standards/06/10
+
+
+
+
+
+https://www.stmarytx.edu/policies/it-services/data-server-backup/
+
+
+
+
+
+https://brocku.ca/policies/wp-content/uploads/sites/94/IT-Backup-Policy.pdf
+
+
+
+
+
+https://confluence.rowan.edu/display/POLICY/Data+Backup</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Benchmarks Evaluation Form (updated 1-24-21).txt [/INST] Benchmarks for Teaching Effectiveness posits that effective teaching involves the alignment of course goals and instructional practices, the creation of motivating and inclusive learning climates, and consistent attention to and reflection on student learning and feedback.
+
+Evaluation form for Benchmarks for Teaching Excellence        
+
+CTE@KU   Updated 27 January 2021           
+
+
+
+
+
+What is this?
+
+This document is a guide for evaluating faculty members using the Benchmarks for Teaching Excellence framework. It provides short forms for evaluators to use in providing feedback to instructors on each of the seven dimensions of teaching in the Benchmarks framework: 
+
+Goals, content and alignment
+
+Teaching practices
+
+Class climate
+
+Achievement of learning outcomes
+
+Reflection and iterative growth
+
+Mentoring and advising
+
+Involvement in teaching service, scholarship or community
+
+
+
+Each section has a list of questions to consider in evaluating an instructor’s materials and a list of information sources where an evaluator can find appropriate evidence. For annual evaluations, the process could be streamlined by focusing on a subset of the dimensions and cycling through them over 2-3 years (some could be essential and others rotating). 
+
+
+
+This document is intended to be used alongside the Benchmarks for Teaching Excellence rubric. That rubric (see p. 6) provides further guidance, including language that an evaluator can use in deciding whether an instructor’s teaching contributions fit into the developing, proficient or expert levels. The proficient level is where most instructors will fit. The expert level requires exceptional work in all the dimensions of teaching. Departments must identify expectations for achievement of the rubric levels for evaluation purposes. 
+
+
+
+Best Practices-Departments should build consensus on: 
+
+Expectations on rubric for instructors at different career phases (e.g., ���for junior faculty to meet expectations, most ratings should be in the proficient category.”) 
+
+Adaptations of rubric language and criteria to fit discipline 
+
+The relative weights of the seven teaching dimensions
+
+What is this?
+
+This document is a guide for evaluating faculty members using the Benchmarks for Teaching Excellence framework. It provides short forms for evaluators to use in providing feedback to instructors on each of the seven dimensions of teaching in the Benchmarks framework: 
+
+Goals, content and alignment
+
+Teaching practices
+
+Class climate
+
+Achievement of learning outcomes
+
+Reflection and iterative growth
+
+Mentoring and advising
+
+Involvement in teaching service, scholarship or community
+
+
+
+Each section has a list of questions to consider in evaluating an instructor’s materials and a list of information sources where an evaluator can find appropriate evidence. For annual evaluations, the process could be streamlined by focusing on a subset of the dimensions and cycling through them over 2-3 years (some could be essential and others rotating). 
+
+
+
+This document is intended to be used alongside the Benchmarks for Teaching Excellence rubric. That rubric (see p. 6) provides further guidance, including language that an evaluator can use in deciding whether an instructor’s teaching contributions fit into the developing, proficient or expert levels. The proficient level is where most instructors will fit. The expert level requires exceptional work in all the dimensions of teaching. Departments must identify expectations for achievement of the rubric levels for evaluation purposes. 
+
+
+
+Best Practices-Departments should build consensus on: 
+
+Expectations on rubric for instructors at different career phases (e.g., “for junior faculty to meet expectations, most ratings should be in the proficient category.”) 
+
+Adaptations of rubric language and criteria to fit discipline 
+
+The relative weights of the seven teaching dimensions
+
+Where do I find evidence?
+
+The Benchmarks framework draws on evidence from the instructor, peers, and students. Here are examples of what each can provide.
+
+
+
+From the instructor
+
+Statements explaining:
+
+Approaches and techniques related to each Benchmarks dimension (pointing to evidence in course materials and student work) 
+
+Successes or challenges in the approaches used, and evidence of those
+
+What changes the instructor will consider in the future 
+
+Syllabi from classes
+
+Sample course materials, including assignments, rubrics and other materials used for evaluating student learning
+
+Samples of student work and representations of student learning
+
+
+
+From peers
+
+Evaluations of course materials
+
+Discussions with the instructor
+
+Class visits, or review of online site (Blackboard, Canvas) and related interaction sites (like Teams)
+
+Results from observation protocols (e.g., the COPUS observation protocol) 
+
+
+
+From students
+
+Results and comments from student surveys
+
+Instructor-gathered feedback (and instructor reflection on it)
+
+Letters from alumni
+
+
+
+
+
+Where do I find evidence?
+
+The Benchmarks framework draws on evidence from the instructor, peers, and students. Here are examples of what each can provide.
+
+
+
+From the instructor
+
+Statements explaining:
+
+Approaches and techniques related to each Benchmarks dimension (pointing to evidence in course materials and student work) 
+
+Successes or challenges in the approaches used, and evidence of those
+
+What changes the instructor will consider in the future 
+
+Syllabi from classes
+
+Sample course materials, including assignments, rubrics and other materials used for evaluating student learning
+
+Samples of student work and representations of student learning
+
+
+
+From peers
+
+Evaluations of course materials
+
+Discussions with the instructor
+
+Class visits, or review of online site (Blackboard, Canvas) and related interaction sites (like Teams)
+
+Results from observation protocols (e.g., the COPUS observation protocol) 
+
+
+
+From students
+
+Results and comments from student surveys
+
+Instructor-gathered feedback (and instructor reflection on it)
+
+Letters from alumni
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+1. Goals, content and alignment
+
+
+
+Focus on what the instructor expects students to learn and why. 
+
+Are course goals well-articulated, relevant to students and clearly connected to program or curricular goals?
+
+Is course content appropriately challenging or innovative and related to current issues in the field?
+
+Are course topics well-integrated and of appropriate range and depth?
+
+Are course materials of high quality and aligned with course goals?
+
+Does course reflect diverse perspectives and promote critical reflection on diverse perspectives? 
+
+
+
+Where to look	
+
+Instructor:  □ Instructor statement □ Course goals from syllabus □ Sample course materials (e.g., rubrics, assignment sheets, readings), □ Modules in LMS
+
+Peer:   □ Peer Review 
+
+Students: □ Student survey  □ Instructor gathered feedback
+
+Other________________________
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+1. Goals, content and alignment
+
+
+
+Focus on what the instructor expects students to learn and why. 
+
+Are course goals well-articulated, relevant to students and clearly connected to program or curricular goals?
+
+Is course content appropriately challenging or innovative and related to current issues in the field?
+
+Are course topics well-integrated and of appropriate range and depth?
+
+Are course materials of high quality and aligned with course goals?
+
+Does course reflect diverse perspectives and promote critical reflection on diverse perspectives? 
+
+
+
+Where to look	
+
+Instructor:  □ Instructor statement □ Course goals from syllabus □ Sample course materials (e.g., rubrics, assignment sheets, readings), □ Modules in LMS
+
+Peer:   □ Peer Review 
+
+Students: □ Student survey  □ Instructor gathered feedback
+
+Other________________________
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Strengths
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Areas for improvement
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rubric level 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Strengths
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Areas for improvement
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rubric level 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Strengths
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Areas for improvement
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rubric level
+
+
+
+Strengths
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Areas for improvement
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rubric level
+
+
+
+2. Teaching practices
+
+
+
+Focus on the instructor’s use of in- and out-of-class time. 
+
+Are courses well-planned and integrated, reflecting commitment to providing meaningful assignments and assessments?
+
+Does the instructor use inclusive and effective or innovative methods to support learning in all students?
+
+Do in- and out-of-class activities provide opportunities for practice and feedback on important skills and concepts?
+
+Do students show high levels of engagement?
+
+Are assessments and assignments varied, allowing students to demonstrate knowledge through multiple approaches?
+
+Where to look
+
+Instructor: □ Instructor statement □ Syllabus or course schedule □ Sample class activities and assignments □ Modules in Blackboard or Canvas □ Lesson plans 
+
+□ Examples of feedback on student work
+
+Peers: □ Peer observations □ COPUS observation □ Peer Review 
+
+Students: □ Student survey  □ Instructor gathered feedback
+
+Other: 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+2. Teaching practices
+
+
+
+Focus on the instructor’s use of in- and out-of-class time. 
+
+Are courses well-planned and integrated, reflecting commitment to providing meaningful assignments and assessments?
+
+Does the instructor use inclusive and effective or innovative methods to support learning in all students?
+
+Do in- and out-of-class activities provide opportunities for practice and feedback on important skills and concepts?
+
+Do students show high levels of engagement?
+
+Are assessments and assignments varied, allowing students to demonstrate knowledge through multiple approaches?
+
+Where to look
+
+Instructor: □ Instructor statement □ Syllabus or course schedule □ Sample class activities and assignments □ Modules in Blackboard or Canvas □ Lesson plans 
+
+□ Examples of feedback on student work
+
+Peers: □ Peer observations □ COPUS observation □ Peer Review 
+
+Students: □ Student survey  □ Instructor gathered feedback
+
+Other: 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Strengths
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Areas for improvement
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rubric level
+
+
+
+Strengths
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Areas for improvement
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rubric level
+
+
+
+4. Achievement of learning outcomes
+
+Focus on the impact of the instructor’s courses on learners. 
+
+Are standards for evaluating learning clear and connected to program, curriculum or professional expectations? 
+
+What is the evidence of student learning? Does the instructor use it to inform teaching? Does the quality of learning support success in other contexts?  
+
+Are there efforts to make achievement equitable?
+
+
+
+Where to look
+
+Instructor: □ Instructor statement   □ Rubrics and samples of student work (assignments, projects, journals, blogs, etc.)    □ Summaries/analysis of performance on rubrics or other indicators of student achievement    □ Item analysis of exam questions that are connected to learning goals  
+
+Peers: □ Peer review
+
+Students: □ Student perceptions of learning
+
+Other____________________________________________________
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+4. Achievement of learning outcomes
+
+Focus on the impact of the instructor’s courses on learners. 
+
+Are standards for evaluating learning clear and connected to program, curriculum or professional expectations? 
+
+What is the evidence of student learning? Does the instructor use it to inform teaching? Does the quality of learning support success in other contexts?  
+
+Are there efforts to make achievement equitable?
+
+
+
+Where to look
+
+Instructor: □ Instructor statement   □ Rubrics and samples of student work (assignments, projects, journals, blogs, etc.)    □ Summaries/analysis of performance on rubrics or other indicators of student achievement    □ Item analysis of exam questions that are connected to learning goals  
+
+Peers: □ Peer review
+
+Students: □ Student perceptions of learning
+
+Other____________________________________________________
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+3. Class climate
+
+
+
+Focus on the sort of climate for learning the instructor creates.
+
+Is the climate respectful, open and inclusive? Does it promote student-student and student-teacher dialogue? Does it foster motivation, self-efficacy and ownership of learning?
+
+Does the instructor model inclusive language and behavior? 
+
+What are students’ views of their learning experience and their instructor’s accessibility? 
+
+How has the instructor sought student feedback and how has feedback informed teaching?
+
+
+
+Where to look
+
+Instructor: □ Syllabus (diversity or climate statement)  □ LMS site □ Lesson plans or sample activities □ Instructor statement □ Results of syllabus review tool, along with changes made to course
+
+Peers: □ Peer observation  □ Peer review     
+
+Students:   □ Student survey of teaching   □ Instructor-gathered feedback from students, along with instructor reflection    Other_____________________________
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+3. Class climate
+
+
+
+Focus on the sort of climate for learning the instructor creates.
+
+Is the climate respectful, open and inclusive? Does it promote student-student and student-teacher dialogue? Does it foster motivation, self-efficacy and ownership of learning?
+
+Does the instructor model inclusive language and behavior? 
+
+What are students’ views of their learning experience and their instructor’s accessibility? 
+
+How has the instructor sought student feedback and how has feedback informed teaching?
+
+
+
+Where to look
+
+Instructor: □ Syllabus (diversity or climate statement)  □ LMS site □ Lesson plans or sample activities □ Instructor statement □ Results of syllabus review tool, along with changes made to course
+
+Peers: □ Peer observation  □ Peer review     
+
+Students:   □ Student survey of teaching   □ Instructor-gathered feedback from students, along with instructor reflection    Other_____________________________
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Strengths
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Areas for improvement
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rubric level
+
+
+
+Strengths
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Areas for improvement
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rubric level
+
+
+
+
+
+Strengths
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Areas for improvement
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rubric level
+
+
+
+Strengths
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Areas for improvement
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rubric level
+
+
+
+5. Reflection and Iterative growth
+
+
+
+Focus on how the instructor’s teaching has changed over time. 
+
+How and why have the instructor’s teaching, and the student learning experience, changed over time?  
+
+How have adjustments been informed by reflection on student learning evidence, within or across semesters? By feedback from students and/or peers? By other factors (e.g., contextual) prompting adaptation? 
+
+Are student achievement or other outcomes improving over time? 
+
+
+
+Where to look
+
+Instructor: □ Instructor statement □ Syllabi highlighting changes over time
+
+□ Annotated screenshots from learning management system
+
+□ Sample assignments or examples of student work that highlight changes in the course  □ Changes in student achievement  (e.g., assignment or exam performance, improvements in a rubric dimension)  
+
+Peers: □ Peer review  
+
+Students: □ Changes in student feedback
+
+Other ________________________
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+5. Reflection and Iterative growth
+
+
+
+Focus on how the instructor’s teaching has changed over time. 
+
+How and why have the instructor’s teaching, and the student learning experience, changed over time?  
+
+How have adjustments been informed by reflection on student learning evidence, within or across semesters? By feedback from students and/or peers? By other factors (e.g., contextual) prompting adaptation? 
+
+Are student achievement or other outcomes improving over time? 
+
+
+
+Where to look
+
+Instructor: □ Instructor statement □ Syllabi highlighting changes over time
+
+□ Annotated screenshots from learning management system
+
+□ Sample assignments or examples of student work that highlight changes in the course  □ Changes in student achievement  (e.g., assignment or exam performance, improvements in a rubric dimension)  
+
+Peers: □ Peer review  
+
+Students: □ Changes in student feedback
+
+Other ________________________
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Strengths
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Areas for improvement
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rubric level
+
+
+
+Strengths
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Areas for improvement
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rubric level
+
+
+
+6. Mentoring and advising
+
+
+
+How effectively has the instructor worked individually with undergraduates or graduate students? (define expectations as appropriate for discipline and department)
+
+
+
+
+
+Where to look
+
+
+
+Instructor: □ Instructor statement    □ CV (e.g., thesis or dissertation committees; directed study; awards)   
+
+Students:  □ Letters from students or alumni  □ Examples of student achievement or awards
+
+Other____________________________________________________
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+6. Mentoring and advising
+
+
+
+How effectively has the instructor worked individually with undergraduates or graduate students? (define expectations as appropriate for discipline and department)
+
+
+
+
+
+Where to look
+
+
+
+Instructor: □ Instructor statement    □ CV (e.g., thesis or dissertation committees; directed study; awards)   
+
+Students:  □ Letters from students or alumni  □ Examples of student achievement or awards
+
+Other____________________________________________________
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Strengths
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Areas for improvement
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rubric level
+
+
+
+Strengths
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Areas for improvement
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rubric level
+
+
+
+6. Involvement in teaching service, scholarship, or community
+
+
+
+How has the instructor contributed to the teaching and learning culture in the department or institution (e.g., curriculum committees, program assessment, co-curricular activities)? 
+
+How has the instructor engaged with peers on teaching, on or off campus (e.g., participation in teaching communities, workshops, peer reviews)?
+
+Has the instructor engaged in educational leadership activities (e.g., leading teaching communities or workshops, internal or external presentations or publications of teaching, internal or external grants related to teaching)?
+
+
+
+Where to look
+
+Instructor: □ Instructor statement    □ CV (workshops, presentations, articles or work done in other media, social media posts, participation in committees) □ Public Artifacts: Publications or other public repositories of teaching practices/results 
+
+Other____________________________________________________
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+6. Involvement in teaching service, scholarship, or community
+
+
+
+How has the instructor contributed to the teaching and learning culture in the department or institution (e.g., curriculum committees, program assessment, co-curricular activities)? 
+
+How has the instructor engaged with peers on teaching, on or off campus (e.g., participation in teaching communities, workshops, peer reviews)?
+
+Has the instructor engaged in educational leadership activities (e.g., leading teaching communities or workshops, internal or external presentations or publications of teaching, internal or external grants related to teaching)?
+
+
+
+Where to look
+
+Instructor: □ Instructor statement    □ CV (workshops, presentations, articles or work done in other media, social media posts, participation in committees) □ Public Artifacts: Publications or other public repositories of teaching practices/results 
+
+Other____________________________________________________
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+(revised Oct 2020)
+
+Developing
+
+Proficient
+
+Expert
+
+Goals, content, and alignment  
+
+What are students expected to learn? Are course goals appropriate? Is content aligned with the curriculum? Does content represent diverse perspectives? 
+
+Course goals are not articulated, or are unclear, inappropriate or marginally related to curriculum
+
+Content and materials are outdated or unsuitable for students in the course
+
+Range of topics is too narrow or too broad 
+
+Content is not clearly aligned with curriculum or institutional expectations
+
+Content does not reflect diverse perspectives 
+
+Course goals are articulated and appropriate for curriculum 
+
+Content is current and appropriate for topic, students, and curriculum
+
+Course topics have appropriate range
+
+Standard, intellectually sound materials
+
+Course materials reflect diverse perspectives
+
+Course goals are well-articulated, high quality, relevant to all students, and clearly connected to program or curricular goals
+
+Content is challenging and innovative or related to current issues and developments in field
+
+Topics are well-integrated and of appropriate range and depth 
+
+High-quality materials, well-aligned with course goals 
+
+Course materials reflect diverse perspectives and promote critical reflection on these diverse perspectives
+
+Teaching practices
+
+How is in-class and out-of-class time used? What assignments, assessments, and learning activities are implemented to help students learn? Are students engaged in the learning process?  
+
+Courses are not sufficiently planned or organized
+
+Practices are not well-executed and show little development over time 
+
+Students lack opportunities to practice critical skills embedded in course goals
+
+Student engagement is generally low
+
+Assessments and assignments are at inappropriate difficulty level or not well-aligned with course goals
+
+Courses are well-planned and organized
+
+Standard course practices; follows conventions of discipline and institution
+
+Students have some opportunities to practice skills embedded in course goals
+
+Students are consistently engaged
+
+Assessments/assignments are appropriately challenging and tied to course goals
+
+Courses are well-planned and integrated, and reflect commitment to providing meaningful assignments and assessments
+
+Uses inclusive and effective or innovative methods to support learning in all students
+
+In- and out-of-class activities provide opportunities for practice and feedback on important skills and concepts
+
+Students show high levels of engagement
+
+Assessments and assignments are varied and allow students to demonstrate knowledge through multiple modalities
+
+Class climate 
+
+What sort of climate for learning does the instructor create? What are students’ views of their learning experience and how has this informed teaching?
+
+Class climate does not promote respect or sense of belonging among all students 
+
+Class climate discourages student motivation or self-efficacy 
+
+Consistently negative student reports of teacher accessibility or interaction skills
+
+Little attempt to address concerns voiced by students
+
+Class climate is inclusive and promotes respect 
+
+Class climate encourages student motivation
+
+No consistently negative student ratings of teacher accessibility or interaction skills
+
+Instructor articulates some lessons learned through student feedback
+
+Class climate is respectful, open, and inclusive; promotes both student-student and student-teacher dialogue.
+
+Climate fosters motivation, self-efficacy, ownership of learning 
+
+Instructor models inclusive language and behavior
+
+Student feedback on teacher accessibility and interaction is generally positive 
+
+Instructor seeks and is responsive to student feedback
+
+Achievement of learning outcomes
+
+What impact do courses have on learners? What is the evidence of student learning? Are there efforts to make achievement equitable?
+
+Insufficient attention to student understanding; quality of learning is not described or analyzed with clear standards
+
+Evidence of inadequate learning or inequities in learning without clear attempts to improve
+
+Quality of learning is insufficient to support success in other contexts
+
+Standards for evaluating the quality of student understanding are clear
+
+Student learning meets dept. expectations
+
+Some use of evidence of student learning to inform teaching
+
+Quality of learning is not a barrier to success in other contexts
+
+Standards for evaluating understanding are clear and connected to program, curriculum, or professional expectations
+
+Consistently attends to student learning, uses it to inform teaching
+
+Quality of learning supports success in other contexts (e.g., subsequent courses or relevant non-classroom venues)
+
+Efforts to support learning in all students by examining possible inequities in performance across groups and making adjustments
+
+Reflection and iterative growth   
+
+How has the instructor’s teaching changed over time? How has this been informed by student learning evidence?
+
+Little or no indication of having reflected upon or learned from prior teaching, evidence of student learning, or peer or student feedback
+
+Little or no indication of efforts to develop as a teacher despite evidence of need 
+
+Continued competent teaching, possibly with minor reflection based on input from peers and/or students
+
+Articulates some lessons learned or changes informed by prior teaching, student learning, or feedback
+
+Regularly adjusts teaching based on reflection on student learning, within or across semesters
+
+Examines student performance following adjustments 
+
+Reports improved student achievement of learning goals and/or improved equity in outcomes based on past course modifications
+
+Mentoring & advising
+
+How effectively has the instructor worked individually with UG or grad students?
+
+No indication of effective advising or mentoring (but expected in department)
+
+Some evidence of effective advising and mentoring (define as appropriate for discipline)
+
+Evidence of exceptional quality and time commitment to advising and mentoring (define as appropriate for discipline)
+
+Involvement in teaching service, scholarship, or community
+
+How has the instructor contributed to the broader teaching community, both on and off campus?
+
+Little or no evidence of positive contributions to teaching and learning culture in department or institution
+
+Little or no interaction with teaching community   
+
+Practices and results of teaching are not shared with others
+
+Some positive contributions to teaching and learning culture in department or institution 
+
+Some engagement with peers on teaching 
+
+Has shared teaching practices or results with others (e.g., presentation, workshop, essay) 
+
+Consistently positive contributions to teaching and learning culture in department or institution (e.g., curriculum committees, program assessment, co-curricular activities)
+
+Regular engagement with peers on teaching (e.g., teaching-related presentations or workshops, peer reviews of teaching)
+
+Presentations or publications to share practices or results of teaching with multiple audiences
+
+Scholarly publications or grant applications related to teaching</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Benchmarks Instructor Guide AnRev 15Feb21.txt [/INST] KU Benchmarks Instructor Guide: Annual/Multi-Term Review of Teaching	 4
+
+
+
+
+
+An Instructor Guide for Documenting Your Teaching 
+
+(for Annual Review or Multi-Term Review)
+
+KU Center for Teaching Excellence
+
+(Last updated 15 February 2021)
+
+
+
+T
+
+his guide is intended to help instructors identify and organize the information they provide for review and evaluation of their teaching. To support effective documentation and evaluation of teaching, CTE developed a framework called Benchmarks for Teaching Effectiveness. This guide is designed to help you use the framework to document and represent your own teaching. Part I gives an overview of what material you as an instructor can submit to document your teaching. Part II provides two possible tools that can help you provide statements, evidence and reflections related to the Benchmarks framework. 
+
+About Benchmarks
+
+Benchmarks for Teaching Effectiveness posits that effective teaching involves the alignment of course goals and instructional practices, the creation of motivating and inclusive learning climates, and consistent attention to and reflection on student learning and feedback. Benchmarks identifies seven dimensions of teaching to capture the full range of faculty teaching activities. A rubric articulates criteria for each dimension: 
+
+Goals, content and alignment
+
+Teaching practices
+
+Class climate
+
+Achievement of learning outcomes
+
+Reflection and iterative growth
+
+Mentoring and advising
+
+Involvement in teaching service, scholarship or community
+
+The framework also specifies evidence that can speak to each dimension, including information from the instructor, peers, and students. Per KU policy, faculty evaluation should draw on these multiple sources. This guide focuses on the information provided by you, the instructor.  
+
+Benchmarks was initially developed in 2016 based on the literature on teaching effectiveness, with input from CTE Department Ambassadors, department chairs and pilot departments. But because Benchmarks is designed to capture the intellectual work of designing and redesigning course components, it is well-suited to documenting and rewarding faculty efforts to adapt their teaching during the pandemic. CTE has a collaborative NSF grant to explore how we can use this framework to improve teaching evaluation at KU, CU Boulder and UMass Amherst.
+
+I. What Material Can You Use to Document Your Teaching?
+
+We recommend two components: instructor statements and supporting documentation.
+
+
+
+Component 1: Instructor Statement(s). This is centerpiece of instructors’ documentation of their teaching. The statement(s) should go beyond philosophy of teaching. Use it to explain what and how you teach, giving specific examples to illustrate why you use the approaches you do and (very importantly) how you know whether those approaches are effective (i.e., the intellectual work involved in teaching). The Benchmarks dimensions and rubric can structure these reflective statements.  Here are two approaches (Part II provides tools to guide both): 
+
+A single integrated statement describing how and why you have designed, implemented and adjusted or improved the courses you teach, how you approach mentoring, and your contributions to teaching community and leadership. The Self-Reflection Narrative Guide in Part II can help you create a statement. 
+
+Short individual statements on each Benchmarks dimension (or bullet points, if acceptable to your department). The Self-Reflection Short Form in Part II can help you generate these statements. This approach may be easier for both instructors and reviewers, especially if a department elects to focus on a subset of dimensions each year, cycling through all over them over time. 
+
+
+
+Component 2: Supporting documentation. Materials from your courses can provide supporting evidence and examples related to your responses to the Benchmarks prompts. The tools in Part II provides a list of possible supporting documentation or evidence relevant to each Benchmarks dimension. In your statement, point the reviewer to the relevant supporting documentation. Here are three recommendations for supporting documentation of increasing depth and informativeness. 
+
+Basic Documentation. Include a syllabus for each course mentioned
+
+Moderate Documentation:  For an example course (or courses if, for instance, you teach a graduate course and a large undergraduate course, include:
+
+Syllabus (or screenshots from course LMS)
+
+Sample course materials, such as a sample assignment with rubrics or criteria, and a sample instructional activity that helps students acquire the skills/knowledge needed for the assignment.
+
+Even better… include:
+
+Representations of student learning, such as summaries of student achievement on different rubric dimensions, or annotated samples of student work (see this consent form for permission to use student work). See this guide on how to represent student learning for teaching evaluation. 
+
+Student feedback (if available) and your reflections on it
+
+Thorough Documentation: A Course Portfolio that provides examples and evidence for one or more example courses. The Course Portfolio organizes the above information into a coherent package framed by a brief narrative): 
+
+A course narrative (1/2 page or less) that provides a guide to the rest of the materials. Key framing questions include: What are your goals for students in this course? What assignments and activities do you use to accomplish these goals? How do you create a motivating and inclusive environment for students to progress toward course goals? How do you know if students are meeting your goals? What future changes will you consider and why? 
+
+Syllabus (or screenshots from course LMS)
+
+Sample course materials, such as a sample assignment with rubrics or grading criteria, and a sample instructional activity that helps students acquire the skills/knowledge needed for the assignment.
+
+Representations of student learning, such as summaries of student achievement on different rubric dimensions, or annotated samples of student work (see this consent form for permission to use student work). See this guide on how to represent student learning for teaching evaluation. 
+
+Student feedback (if available) and your reflections on it
+
+
+
+Part II: How to Produce Statements and Documentation
+
+Here are two guides that can help you produce statements and documentation of your teaching. The Self Reflection Narrative Guide can help you produce a single integrated statement about your teaching, and the Self Reflection Short Form can help you produce short statements and documentation about individual dimensions of teaching. 
+
+Self-Reflection Narrative Guide
+
+The prompts below can help you think through how to write about your teaching related to each of the Benchmarks dimensions. You can use this document alongside the Benchmarks for Teaching Excellence rubric, which provides further details and language for representing teaching contributions. Feel free to use the language from the rubric in your narrative, but it will be important that you also point to specific examples and evidence along with that language. Therefore, for each dimension of teaching, we’ve also included suggestions of the sorts of materials that could speak to that dimension (ideally, these materials could be organized into a brief “course portfolio”). 
+
+How many courses should you write about? This may depend on the expectations set by your department, and the similarity in approaches you use across the courses you teach. One recommendation is to address each prompt with a response that is representative of your approach across all of your teaching, and then provide examples and evidence from one sample course, or two sample courses if you’d like to highlight very different approaches. 
+
+Start with an overview of your teaching responsibilities: 
+
+What courses do you teach? For each one, what is the typical enrollment? Who takes the course and why? What role does it play in the program?
+
+Goals, Content, and Alignment. What are students expected to learn in your course(s) and why? What content and materials do you use and why? 
+
+
+
+Evidence/ Examples could come from     □ Course goals in syllabus □ Sample course materials (e.g., 
+
+
+
+Teaching Practices.  What activities and assignments do you use in and out of class time to help students reach those learning goals? How do these activities and assignments provide opportunities for practice and feedback on important skills and concepts? What strategies do you use to help all students feel engaged and included?
+
+
+
+Evidence/ Examples could come from        □ Syllabus or course schedule □ Sample class activities and assignments  □ Lesson plans □ Examples of feedback on student work  
+
+Class Climate.  How do you encourage motivation, inclusion, and a sense of belonging among your students? Are there things you are doing to enable students to interact with each other? To build a sense of community? To support struggling students? How has student feedback informed the way you teach?
+
+Evidence/ Examples could come from   □ Syllabus (diversity or climate statement)  □ Lesson plans or sample activities  □ Reflections on student feedback
+
+
+
+Achievement of Learning Outcomes. How do you know how well your approaches to teaching are working? Which assignments are most central and best illustrate student learning (particularly in relation to the goals you have already articulated)? Does the student work on these assignments meet your (or other stakeholders’) expectations and course learning goals? How do you know? 
+
+
+
+Evidence/ Examples could come from    □ Rubrics and samples of student work (assignments, blogs, etc.)  □ Summaries/ analysis of performance on rubrics or other indicators of student achievement  □ Item analysis of exam questions that are connected to learning goals  □ Reflections on student learning    
+
+This guide on how to represent student learning for teaching evaluation may help you address this section. 
+
+Reflection and Iterative Growth. Have your approaches to teaching described above changed over time, either within a semester or from one semester to another? If so, what prompted the changes? Did they yield the outcomes you wanted? Are there things you’d like to change in future versions of your course?
+
+Evidence/ Examples could come from □ Syllabi □ Sample assignments or examples of student work that highlight changes in course  □ Changes in student achievement  (e.g., assignment or exam performance, improvement in a rubric dimension) □ Reflections on student feedback
+
+Mentoring and advising. Describe your mentoring or advising of students for academic and career choices and for scholarship. How do you make yourself available and communicate with students? How do you support students’ professional development? Are there other ways in which you have supported students? 
+
+Evidence/ Examples could come from □ # of undergraduate mentees □ # of graduate mentees and status   □ Service on graduate committees   □ Letters of recommendation written for students  □ Nomination of students for awards, grants scholarships  □ presentations or publications with student co-authors    □ letters from or surveys of student advisees
+
+
+
+Service, scholarship and participation in teaching community. In what ways do you participate in or contribute to the broader teaching community, both on and off campus (e.g., participation in CTE, CODL or IT workshops- see evidence/examples for more ideas)?
+
+Evidence/ Examples could come from □Teaching/assessment committees □ Participation or supervision of co-curricular activities or experiential learning  □ Participation in teaching community or development opportunities (e.g., CTE, CODL, IT workshops, teaching-focused conferences or networks)   □ Leadership roles in teaching communities or development opportunities. □ Internal or external presentations or publications on teaching   □ Internal or external grant applications related to teaching
+
+
+
+
+
+ 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Self-Reflection Short Form 
+
+The prompts below can help you produce short statements (or bullet points, if acceptable to your department) about each of the Benchmarks dimensions (or a selected subset of them). In your response, you can point reviewers to examples or additional materials (ideally these could be organized into a short Course Portfolio, as suggested above). For each Benchmarks dimension, we’ve included suggestions of the sorts of materials that could speak to that dimension. You can use this document alongside the Benchmarks for Teaching Excellence rubric, which provides language for representing teaching contributions. Feel free to use the language from the rubric in your responses, but it will be important that you also point to specific examples and evidence along with that language.
+
+Course number(s) and name(s) that are the focus of this report:
+
+For each course, what is the typical enrollment? Who takes the course and why? What role does it play in the program?
+
+
+
+
+
+Draw Evidence/ Examples from                 □ Course goals in syllabus □ Sample course materials (e.g., rubrics, assignment sheets, readings)
+
+
+
+Draw Evidence/ Examples from                 □ Course goals in syllabus □ Sample course materials (e.g., rubrics, assignment sheets, readings)
+
+1. Goals, Content, and Alignment. What are students expected to learn in your course(s) and why? What content and materials do you use and why? 
+
+If you want to go deeper
+
+How are your goals related to department, university, or discipline goals? 
+
+Do they match your students’ needs?  
+
+What perspectives do course material represent?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Draw Evidence/ Examples from                □ Syllabus or course schedule □ Sample class activities and assignments  □ Lesson plans □ Examples of feedback on student work  
+
+
+
+Draw Evidence/ Examples from                □ Syllabus or course schedule □ Sample class activities and assignments  □ Lesson plans □ Examples of feedback on student work  
+
+
+
+2. Teaching Practices.  What activities and assignments do you use in and out of class time to help students reach learning goals? 
+
+If you want to go deeper
+
+How do these activities and assignments provide opportunities for practice and feedback on important skills and concepts?
+
+What strategies do you use to help all students feel engaged and included?
+
+
+
+
+
+Draw Evidence/ Examples from                 □ Syllabus (diversity or climate statement)  □ Lesson plans or sample activities  □ Reflections on student feedback
+
+
+
+Draw Evidence/ Examples from                 □ Syllabus (diversity or climate statement)  □ Lesson plans or sample activities  □ Reflections on student feedback
+
+3. Class Climate.  How do you encourage motivation, inclusion, and a sense of belonging among your students?
+
+If you want to go deeper
+
+What strategies do you use to communicate with students?
+
+How do students interact with each other?
+
+Are there things you are doing to build a sense of community?
+
+Are there things you are doing to support struggling students?
+
+How has student feedback informed the way you teach?
+
+
+
+
+
+Draw Evidence/ Examples from                     □ Rubrics and samples of student work (assignments, blogs, etc.)  □ Summaries/ analysis of performance on rubrics or other indicators of student achievement  □ Item analysis of exam questions that are connected to learning goals  □ Reflections on student learning    
+
+
+
+Draw Evidence/ Examples from                     □ Rubrics and samples of student work (assignments, blogs, etc.)  □ Summaries/ analysis of performance on rubrics or other indicators of student achievement  □ Item analysis of exam questions that are connected to learning goals  □ Reflections on student learning    
+
+4. Achievement of Learning Outcomes. Does the student work on these assignments meet your (or other stakeholders’) expectations and course learning goals? How do you know? 
+
+If you want to go deeper
+
+Which assignments are most central to the course and best illustrate student learning?
+
+Do you know if there are any inequities in student performance? If so, have you taken any steps to address them?
+
+This guide on how to represent student learning for teaching evaluation may help you address this section. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Draw Evidence/ Examples from □ Syllabi □ Sample assignments or examples of student work that highlight changes in course  □ Changes in student achievement  (e.g., assignment or exam performance, improvement in a rubric dimension) □ Reflections on student feedback
+
+
+
+Draw Evidence/ Examples from □ Syllabi □ Sample assignments or examples of student work that highlight changes in course  □ Changes in student achievement  (e.g., assignment or exam performance, improvement in a rubric dimension) □ Reflections on student feedback
+
+5. Reflection and Iterative Growth. Have you changed your teaching over time, either within a semester or from one semester to another? If so, what prompted the changes? How did you adapt your teaching because of the pandemic? How effective were the changes you made? Did you learn or try anything that you will continue to do post-COVID? 
+
+If you want to go deeper
+
+How has student feedback or evidence of student learning informed your teaching?
+
+What changes have you made in this course from previous semesters? Why?
+
+Did the changes yield the outcomes you wanted?
+
+Are there things you’d like to change in a future version of the course?
+
+
+
+Draw Evidence/ Examples from □ # of undergraduate mentees □ # of graduate mentees and status   □ Service on graduate committees   □ Letters of recommendation written for students  □ Nomination of students for awards, grants scholarships  □ presentations or publications with student co-authors    □ letters from or surveys of student advisees
+
+Draw Evidence/ Examples from □ # of undergraduate mentees □ # of graduate mentees and status   □ Service on graduate committees   □ Letters of recommendation written for students  □ Nomination of students for awards, grants scholarships  □ presentations or publications with student co-authors    □ letters from or surveys of student advisees6. Mentoring and advising. Describe your mentoring or advising of students for academic and career choices and for scholarship. How do you make yourself available and communicate with students? How do you support students’ professional development? Are there other ways in which you have supported students (particularly during the pandemic)?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Draw Evidence/ Examples from □Teaching/assessment committees □ Participation or supervision of co-curricular activities or experiential learning  □ Participation in teaching community or development opportunities (e.g., CTE, CODL, IT workshops, teaching-focused conferences or networks)   □ Leadership roles in teaching communities or development opportunities. □ Internal or external presentations or publications on teaching   □ Internal or external grant applications related to teaching
+
+Draw Evidence/ Examples from □Teaching/assessment committees □ Participation or supervision of co-curricular activities or experiential learning  □ Participation in teaching community or development opportunities (e.g., CTE, CODL, IT workshops, teaching-focused conferences or networks)   □ Leadership roles in teaching communities or development opportunities. □ Internal or external presentations or publications on teaching   □ Internal or external grant applications related to teaching7. Service, scholarship and participation in teaching community. In what ways do you participate in or contribute to the broader teaching community, both on and off campus (e.g., participation in CTE, CODL or IT workshops- see evidence/examples for more ideas)?</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Benefits.txt [/INST] Benefits
+
+
+
+Medaille
+
+C. Salary and Benefits 
+
+The faculty, through its Faculty Compensation Committee, shall be a participant in discussions with the President and/or the VPAA on matters regarding faculty salaries and benefits. The Faculty Compensation Committee shall recommend guidelines for the compensation of faculty members for overloads and teaching graduate courses. Benefits that pertain to all Medaille employees can be found in General Institutional Employment Policies/Volume III of the Medaille College Policy Manual. Questions regarding salary or benefits may be made to the Director of Human Resources. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Washington and Jefferson 
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Handbook 2019-2020 - Washington & Jefferson ...
+
+https://wiki.washjeff.edu › download › attachments
+
+
+
+
+
+PDF
+
+Academic advising is a central part of the teaching mission of Washington & Jefferson College and fosters the development of the whole student. Through ongoing 
+
+
+
+While the Bylaws make clear the delegation of authority to the President and administrative officers and the duty of the Faculty, organizational mechanisms and structures must be adopted to facilitate the operations of the College in accordance with these provisions. In the tradition and spirit of collegiality so vital to the effectiveness of a college community, these mechanisms and structures must provide for the substantial participation of the multiple campus constituencies—students, faculty and administration— in the operational processes by which the College works to achieves it overall mission. 
+
+The basic structure by which this shared participation of the multiple constituencies is facilitated is a series of committees. The types of committees comprising the governance structure and the particular features of each are specified in Article II of this policy. The particular membership provisions and charges of the individual committees are enumerated in Articles III, IV, V, and VIII.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Best Practice Citations (Final).txt [/INST] 1
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+2
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Evaluation Citations
+
+
+
+Prepared for: California Lutheran University
+
+
+
+
+
+ 
+
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	By
+
+	
+
+	Stevens Strategy®, LLC
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+September 3, 2021
+
+Introduction
+
+
+
+Below we have listed citations to resources, academic literature and task force reports that may inform the work of the ART Task Force. The initial set of citations focus on key elements associated with successful faculty evaluation systems.  Thereafter, we provide citations to materials addressing the evaluation of teaching effectiveness, scholarship/research/creative activity, advising, and service activities, respectively. Finally, we provide citations to resources addressing the integration of mission and commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the faculty evaluation process.  Where available, we provide hyperlinks to all citations. 
+
+
+
+General Faculty Evaluation Citations
+
+
+
+Buller, J. L. (2012). Best practices in faculty evaluation: A practical guide for academic leaders. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers
+
+Note: Part Four may be of particular interest to the Task Force. Chapters 10 and 11 in Part Four explore a quantitative vs. qualitative approach to faculty evaluation; Chapter 12 outlines two possible integrative approaches.
+
+
+
+American Council on Education, American Association of University Professors, and United Educators. (2000) Good practice in tenure evaluation: Advice for tenured faculty, department chairs, and academic administrators.
+
+https://blogs.umflint.edu/aaup/wp-content/uploads/sites/27/2016/11/App2d-Good-Practice-in-Tenure-Evaluation.pdf
+
+
+
+Miller, J. E. & Seldin, P. (2014). Changing Practices in Faculty Evaluation. Academe, 100(3), 35-38. 
+
+
+
+Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education. (2014). Benchmark Best Practices: Tenure & Promotion. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Education.
+
+https://coache.gse.harvard.edu/files/gse-coache/files/coache-tenure.pdf
+
+
+
+Rethinking Tenure, A Chronicle of Higher Education publication. (2021)
+
+https://store.chronicle.com/a/downloads/-/8d3b703e907a4f69/2155472588c46789
+
+Note: I believe a total of two (2) additional downloads are available via the link above.  Please feel free to use them.
+
+This Chronicle publication is a collection of essays addressing tenure in general, including sections addressing tenure evaluation and criteria. The following essays are especially pertinent:
+
+“Faculty Evaluation After the Pandemic’ (pp 35-39)
+
+“Diversity, Inclusion, and Tenure,” (pp 54-55)
+
+“How to Create More Equitable Tenure Policies,” (pp 56-57)
+
+Junior Faculty Don’t Need More Time, Senior Faculty Need More Imagination: A template for Change (pp 62-63)
+
+Note: This section discusses teaching load issues and suggests redefining what constitutes “publication,” including a model department scholarly work evaluation rubric.
+
+“Tenure by the Book: Revising Tenure Expectations is on the Table. We should take caution” (pp 64- 65)
+
+“Bringing the Humanities to the Public — and the Public to the Humanities (85-86) a case for valuing and rewarding public scholars/ intellectuals
+
+
+
+Channing, J. (2017). Faculty Evaluations: Contentious Bothers or Important Tools for Faculty Growth? Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 41:11, 757-760
+
+DOI: 10.1080/10668926.2016.1241197
+
+
+
+Cadez, S., Dimovski, V., & Groff, M. Z (2017). Research, teaching and performance evaluation in academia: The salience of quality. Studies in Higher Education, 42:8, 1455-1473
+
+DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2015.1104659
+
+
+
+Qualitative vs Quantitative vs Hybrid Evaluation Models
+
+See Part Four, Chapters 10 - 12 of “Best practices in faculty evaluation: A practical guide for academic leaders (cited above)” for a summary of these respective models.  Below are citations to the seminal publications highlighted in Chapters 10 and 11:
+
+
+
+Qualitative:
+
+Arreola, R. A. (2007). Developing a comprehensive faculty evaluation system: A guide to designing, building, and operating large-scale faculty evaluation systems. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Anker.
+
+
+
+Quantitative:
+
+Seldin, P. (2006). Evaluating faculty performance: A practical guide to assessing teaching, research, and service. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Anker.
+
+Seldin, P., Miller, J. E., & Seldin, C. A. (2010). The teaching portfolio: A practical guide to improved performance and promotion/tenure decisions (4th ed.) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
+
+
+Teaching Effectiveness
+
+
+
+AAUP. Statement on teaching evaluation. In Policy Documents and Reports. 11th ed. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 219-22. 
+
+https://www.aaup.org/report/statement-teaching-evaluation
+
+
+
+“Statement on Student Evaluations of Teaching,” American Sociological Association, August 2019 
+
+https://www.asanet.org/sites/default/files/asa_statement_on_student_evaluations_of_teaching_feb132020.pdf
+
+
+
+Benton, S. L., & Young, S. (2018). Best Practices in the Evaluation of Teaching. IDEA Paper, 69. 
+
+https://www.ideaedu.org/Portals/0/Uploads/Documents/IDEA%20Papers/IDEA%20Papers/IDEA_Paper_69.pdf 
+
+
+
+Blumberg, P. (2014). Assessing and Improving Your Teaching: Strategies and Rubrics for Faculty Growth and Student Learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
+
+
+
+Doerer, K. (2019) “Colleges Are Getting Smarter About Student Evaluations. Here’s How. Chronicle of Higher Education, January 13, 2019 
+
+https://www.chronicle.com/article/Colleges-Are-Getting- Smarter/245457 
+
+
+
+Follmer Greenhoot, A., Ward, D., Bernstein, D., Patterson, M. M., & Colyott, K. (2020). Benchmarks for Teaching Effectiveness. (Revised 2020).
+
+https://cte.ku.edu/sites/cte.ku.edu/files/docs/KU%20Benchmarks%20Framework%202020update.pdf
+
+https://cte.ku.edu/benchmarks-teaching-effectiveness-project
+
+
+
+Linse, A.R. (2017), “Interpreting and using student ratings data: Guidance for faculty serving as administrators and on evaluation committees,” Studies in Educational Evaluation, Volume 54, September 2017, Pages 94-106
+
+https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.12.004 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Poproski, R., Greene, R. (2018) Metrics and Measures of Teaching Effectiveness  
+
+https://ctl.gatech.edu/sites/default/files/documents/poproski_greene_2018_metrics_and_measures_of_teaching_effectiveness.pdf
+
+Uttl, B., White, C.A., Gonzalez, D.W. (2017) “Meta-analysis of faculty’s teaching effectiveness: Student evaluation of teaching ratings and student learning are not related,” Studies in Educational Evaluation, Volume 54, September 2017, Pages 22-42, 
+
+https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/0191491X/54/supp/C 
+
+
+
+Wieman, Carl (2015) A Better Way to Evaluate Undergraduate Teaching, Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 47:1, 6-15
+
+DOI: 10.1080/00091383.2015.996077
+
+
+
+Task Force Reports 
+
+
+
+The following task force reports include recent academic literature references germane to the evaluation of teaching, as well as recommendations that the ART Task Force may want to consider in formulating its own recommendations:
+
+
+
+University of California Academic Council Teaching Evaluation Task Force Report (2020)
+
+https://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/_files/reports/kkb-divs-teaching-evaluation-task-force-report.pdf
+
+
+
+Iowa State Joint Task Force on Teaching Assessment and Evaluation (2019)
+
+
+
+http://www.facsen.iastate.edu/sites/default/files/uploads/Senate%20Presentations/Teaching%20Task%20Force%20report%20FINAL.pdf
+
+
+
+Georgia Tech University Task Force on Teaching Effectiveness
+
+https://academiceffectiveness.gatech.edu/sites/default/files/2021-03/Teaching-Effectiveness-Final-Report-Sept-2019.pdf
+
+
+
+
+Research, Scholarship, Creative Activity
+
+
+
+Boyer, E.L. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. Princeton, N.J.: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1990
+
+
+
+Report of the MLA Task Force on Evaluating Scholarship for Tenure and Promotion -MLA Task Force on Evaluating Scholarship for Tenure and Promotion (2007 by The Modern Language Association of America)
+
+https://www.mla.org/content/download/3362/81802/taskforcereport0608.pdf
+
+Note: Although this report was produced over 14 years ago, the findings, insights and recommendations remain relevant and applicable to addressing the evaluation of scholarship in a broad range of disciplines.
+
+
+
+The Modern Language Association, Guidelines for Evaluating Work in Digital Humanities and Digital Media 
+
+https://www.mla.org/About-Us/Governance/Committees/Committee-Listings/Professional- Issues/Committee-on-Information-Technology/Guidelines-for-Evaluating-Work-in-Digital- Humanities-and-Digital-Media 
+
+
+
+Ringuette, D. We Need to Talk: Scholarship, Tenure, and Promotion in the Balance Source: Profession, 2008, (2008), pp. 185-193 Published by: Modern Language Association Stable 
+
+https://www.jstor.org/stable/25595893
+
+
+
+The College Art Association (CAA), Case Studies and Examples for Evaluating Digital Scholarship 
+
+http://www.collegeart.org/news/2016/02/23/case-studies-and-examples-for-evaluating-digital- scholarship/ 
+
+
+
+American Historical Association, Suggested Guidelines for Evaluating Digital Media Activities in Tenure, Review, and Promotion: An AAHC Document 
+
+http://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/october- 2001/suggested-guidelines-for-evaluating-digital-media-activities-in-tenure-review-and- promotion-an-aahc-document 
+
+
+
+Benchmarking Analysis: Faculty Research and Scholarship (2020 by Hanover Research)	
+
+	(Will email PDF) 
+
+Task Force Report
+
+
+
+Baruch College Provost’s Faculty Task Force on Research 
+
+https://provost.baruch.cuny.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2019/11/TaskForceResearchFINAL.pdf
+
+
+
+Other Literature Citations
+
+Bouwma-Gearhart, Jana, Cindy Lenhart, Rich Carter, Karl Mundorff, Holly Cho, and Jessica Knoch. 2021. ""Inclusively Recognizing Faculty Innovation and Entrepreneurship Impact within Promotion and Tenure Considerations"" Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 7, no. 3: 182.
+
+https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7030182
+
+
+
+Diamond, R. (1999). Aligning faculty rewards with institutional mission: Statements, policies, and guidelines. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company, Inc. 
+
+
+
+O’Meara, K. (2002). Uncovering the values in faculty evaluation of service as scholarship. Review of Higher Education, 26(1), 57-80.
+
+
+
+O’Meara, K., Eatman, T. & Peterson, S. (2015). Advancing Engaged Scholarship in Promotion and Tenure: A Roadmap and Call for Reform. Liberal Education, 101(3).
+
+http://www.aacu.org/liberaleducation/2015/summer/o'meara
+
+
+
+O’Meara, K., & Rice, R. E. (Eds.) (2005). Faculty priorities reconsidered: Encouraging multiple forms of scholarship. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
+
+
+
+O’Meara, K. (2010). Rewarding multiple forms of scholarship: Promotion and tenure. In H. Fitzgerald, C. Burack, & S. Seifer (Eds.), Handbook of engaged scholarship, volume 1: Institutional change (pp. 271-294). East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University Press.
+
+https://static1.squarespace.com/static/52aa1677e4b069d1317f42d0/t/5a00dd82ec212da4fc4aa244/1510006146723/OMeara+%282010%29+Rewarding+Multiple+Forms+of+Scholarship_Promotion+and+Tenure-2-24.pdf 
+
+
+
+Schimanski LA and Alperin JP. The evaluation of scholarship in academic promotion and tenure processes: Past, present, and future. F1000Research 2018, 7:1605 
+
+https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6325612/
+
+
+Service
+
+
+
+Baker, Diane F.; Neely, Walter P.; Prenshaw, Penelope J.; Taylor, Patrick A. (2015). Developing a Multi-Dimensional Evaluation Framework for Faculty Teaching and Service Performance. Journal of Academic Administration in Higher Education, v11 n2 p29-41 Fall 2015
+
+https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1139200.pdf
+
+“Based on the literature review, the most commonly used factors to assess faculty service performance are service to the department, service to the college and/or university, professional activities, service to the community, academic advising, and consulting. There are no studies describing or evaluating the way in which participation in these activities are assessed.”
+
+
+
+O’Meara, K. (1997). Rewarding faculty professional service, New England Resource Center for Higher Education publications. Paper 17. 
+
+http://scholarworks.umb.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1016& context=nerche_pubs 
+
+
+
+O’Meara, K. (2002). Uncovering the values in faculty evaluation of service as scholarship. Review of Higher Education, 26(1), 57-80. 
+
+
+
+Hanasono, L. K., Broido, E. M., Yacobucci, M. M., Root, K. V., Peña, S., & O'Neil, D. A. (2019). Secret service: Revealing gender biases in the visibility and value of faculty service. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 12(1), 85–98.
+
+https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000081
+
+
+
+Ward, K. (2003). Faculty service roles and the scholarship of engagement (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No 29-5.) San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Advising
+
+
+
+Ye He, Bryant Hutson; Assessment for Faculty Advising: Beyond the Service Component. NACADA Journal 1 January 2017; 37 (2): 66–75. 
+
+https://doi.org/10.12930/NACADA-16-028
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Diversity, Equity, and Inclusivity
+
+
+
+Laursen, S. L., & Austin, A. E. (2014). Strategic intervention brief #6: Equitable processes of tenure and promotion. In S. L. Laursen and A. E. Austin, strategic Toolkit: Strategies for effecting gender equity and intuitional change. Boulder, CO, and East Lansing, MI. 
+
+www.strategictoolkit.org
+
+https://www.colorado.edu/eer/sites/default/files/attached-files/6_tenurepromotionbrief123015.pdf
+
+
+
+Trainer, S., & Miguel, A., & Jacoby, J. M., & O'Brien, J., Seattle University ADVANCE: Institutional Diversity Requires Recognizing and Rewarding Faculty Hidden Work, NCURA magazine, October/November 2020, page 72 
+
+https://www.seattleu.edu/media/advance/NCURA-Article_SU-ADVANCE.pdf
+
+
+
+Trainer, S., & Miguel, A., & Jacoby, J. M., & O'Brien, J. (2021, January), Exploring the Gendered Impacts of COVID-19 on Faculty Paper presented at 2021 CoNECD
+
+https://peer.asee.org/36087
+
+
+
+Chávez, Kerry, and Kristina M. W. Mitchell. 2020. “Exploring Bias in Student Evaluations: Gender, Race, and Ethnicity.” PS: Political Science & Politics 53(2):270–74. 
+
+Gonzalez, Leslie and Kimberly Ann Griffin. 2020. Supporting Faculty during & after COVID-19: Don't Let Go of Equity. Washington, DC: Aspire Alliance
+
+
+
+Lisnic R, Zajicek A, Morimoto S. Gender and Race Differences in Faculty Assessment of Tenure Clarity: The Influence of Departmental Relationships and Practices. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity. 2019; 5(2):244-260. 
+
+https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2332649218756137
+
+
+
+Malisch, Jessica L., Breanna N. Harris, Shanen M. Sherrer, Kristy A. Lewis, Stephanie L. Shepherd, Pumtiwitt C. McCarthy, Jessica L. Spott, Elizabeth P. Karam, Naima Moustaid- Moussa, and Jessica McCrory Calarco. 2020. “Opinion: In the Wake of COVID-19, “Academia Needs New Solutions to Ensure Gender Equity.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117(27):15378–15381. 
+
+
+
+Matthew, P.A. Written/Unwritten: Diversity and the Hidden Truths of Tenure; University of North Carolina Press: Chapel Hill, NC, USA, 2016; ISBN 978-1-4696-2773-1. 
+
+https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=oKMwDAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&ots=fdDKVJue42&sig=7q7ee7J0MPbPDsNYORO8uRZOsR0#v=onepage&q&f=false
+
+
+
+Tierney, William G., and Estela Mara Bensimon. 1996. Promotion and Tenure: Community and Socialization in Academe. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
+
+ 
+
+Weisshaar, Katherine. 2017. “Publish and Perish? An Assessment of Gender Gaps in Promotion to Tenure in Academia.” Social Forces 96(2):529–60. 
+
+
+
+Examples of How Some Schools are Addressing DEI in Faculty Evaluation Policies
+
+
+
+Seattle University: Seattle University is poised to make significant changes to its promotion and tenure reviews because of the work of its SU ADVANCE Program, an NSF grant-funded research program focused on equity issues among Seattle University faculty.  Of note, the program focused on inequities in faculty workloads and promotion guidelines. Please visit the following link to review the changes being proposed (see green font):
+
+https://www.seattleu.edu/media/advance/documents/Approved-Revised-Promotion-Guidelines_6-3-21.pdf
+
+
+
+Chapman University: A Chapman University working group of faculty and staff recently issued a steering document addressing diversity, equity, and inclusion.  On pages 6-7 of the document, the working group advocates that the University develop a robust system for documentation, recognition, and reward for faculty professional activity in diversity, equity, and inclusion. 
+
+https://www.chapman.edu/diversity/_files/dei--roadmap-to-best-practices_september2020_compressed.pdf
+
+University of Illinois: The University of Illinois recently made several major revisions to its P&T evaluation policy (Communication 9) to (a) indicate that DEI efforts are valued and (b) incorporate such efforts into the evaluation of candidates: 
+
+The introduction to Communication 9 states that the University values DEI and contributions along these lines are evaluated and recognized (p. 4). 
+
+A new section (II.C.7) was drafted addressing the evaluation of DEI contributions (p. 14). In the section, candidates describe their DEI contributions in terms of research, teaching, and service. 
+
+Instructions were developed for internal evaluations of candidates’ DEI efforts in the internal service and research evaluations (e.g., p. 13 and 14) (p. 14).
+
+See https://uofi.app.box.com/s/doyhfhr0534ffeym5u95j02grlwijcjl for text.
+
+
+
+University of Denver: The University of Denver is exploring ways in which to value DEI achievements in promotion decisions. The following citation advocates for DEI achievement to be valued in promotion decisions and outlines examples of DEI achievements in the areas of teaching, research productivity/creative work, and service: 
+
+https://duvpfa.du.edu/blog/2021/05/27/making-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-in-promotion-tenure-and-re-appointment-decisions-visible/
+
+
+
+University of Delaware: A faculty task force at the University of Delaware recently issued a report addressing equity in faculty evaluation.   
+
+https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/sites.udel.edu/dist/9/2591/files/2021/02/Equity-in-Faculty-Evaluations-Task-Force-Report_2-11-21.pdf 
+
+
+
+Recent DEI Articles in the Press
+
+
+
+https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2021/08/24/academe-should-determine-what-specific-systemic-changes-are-needed-dei-opinion
+
+https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/05/14/iupui-creates-path-promotion-and-tenure-based-dei-work
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Mission Integration
+
+
+
+Diamond, R. (1999). Aligning faculty rewards with institutional mission: Statements, policies, and guidelines. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company, Inc. 
+
+
+
+Ellison, J. & Eatman, T. K. (2008). Scholarship in public: Knowledge creation and tenure policy in the engaged university. Syracuse, NY: Imagining America. 
+
+
+
+Zahorski, K.J. (2005) Redefining scholarship: A small liberal arts college’s journey. In K. O’Meara & R. E. Rice (Eds.), Faculty Priorities Reconsidered: Rewarding Multiple Forms of Scholarship, pp. 6-65. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 
+
+
+
+Wagner, Joan, ""The Distinctive Mission of Catholic Colleges & Universities and Faculty Reward Policies for Community Engagement: Aspirational or Operational?"" (2017). Graduate College Dissertations and Theses. 749.
+
+https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/graddis/749
+
+
+
+Note: When we gather data on comparison institutions later in Phase One, we will also provide models examples of how some schools have attempted to align their faculty evaluation policies with the institution’s mission.  In the interim, the Wagner dissertation cited above is worth reviewing as it explores, in part, to what extent the faculty tenure and promotion policies of the Catholic schools studied reflected institutional mission through a commitment to community engaged teaching, scholarship and service.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Best Practice Citations.txt [/INST] 26
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Evaluation Citations
+
+
+
+
+
+ 
+
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	from
+
+	
+
+	Stevens Strategy®, LLC
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+September 2021
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Introduction
+
+
+
+Below we have listed citations to resources and academic literature that address faculty evaluation best practices and emerging trends.  The initial set of citations focus on key elements associated with successful faculty evaluation systems.  Thereafter, we provide citations to literature addressing the evaluation of teaching effectiveness, scholarship/research/creative activity, and service activities, respectively. Finally, we provide citations to resources addressing the integration of mission and commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the faculty evaluation process.  Where available, we provide hyperlinks to citations. 
+
+
+
+Faculty Evaluation Citations
+
+
+
+General Faculty Evaluation Citations
+
+
+
+Buller, J. L. (2012). Best practices in faculty evaluation: A practical guide for academic leaders. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers
+
+Note: Part Four may be of particular interest to the Task Force. Chapters 10 and 11 in Part Four explore a quantitative vs. qualitative approach to faculty evaluation; Chapter 12 outlines two possible integrative approaches.
+
+American Council on Education, American Association of University Professors, and United Educators. (2000) Good practice in tenure evaluation: Advice for tenured faculty, department chairs, and academic administrators.
+
+https://blogs.umflint.edu/aaup/wp-content/uploads/sites/27/2016/11/App2d-Good-Practice-in-Tenure-Evaluation.pdf
+
+Miller, J. E. & Seldin, P. (2014). Changing Practices in Faculty Evaluation. Academe, 100(3), 35-38. 
+
+Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education. (2014). Benchmark Best Practices: Tenure & Promotion. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Education.
+
+https://coache.gse.harvard.edu/files/gse-coache/files/coache-tenure.pdf
+
+Rethinking Tenure, A Chronicle of Higher Education publication. (2021)
+
+https://store.chronicle.com/a/downloads/-/8d3b703e907a4f69/2155472588c46789
+
+Note: I believe a total of two (2) additional downloads are available via the link above.  Please feel free to use them.
+
+This Chronicle publication is a collection of essays addressing tenure in general, including sections addressing tenure evaluation and criteria. The following essays are especially pertinent:
+
+“Faculty Evaluation After the Pandemic’ (pp 35-39);
+
+“Diversity, Inclusion, and Tenure,” (pp 54-55);
+
+“How to Create More Equitable Tenure Policies,” (pp 56-57). 
+
+Junior Faculty Don’t Need More Time, Senior Faculty Need More Imagination: A template for Change (pp 62-63): 
+
+Note: This section discusses teaching load issues and suggests redefining what constitutes “publication,” including a model department scholarly work evaluation rubric.
+
+“Tenure by the Book: Revising Tenure Expectations is on the Table. We should take caution” (pp 64- 65)
+
+“Bringing the Humanities to the Public — and the Public to the Humanities (85-86) a case for valuing and rewarding public scholars/ intellectuals
+
+
+
+Jill Channing (2017) Faculty Evaluations: Contentious Bothers or Important Tools for Faculty Growth?, Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 41:11, 757-760
+
+DOI: 10.1080/10668926.2016.1241197
+
+Simon Cadez, Vlado Dimovski & Maja Zaman Groff (2017) Research, teaching and performance evaluation in academia: the salience of quality, Studies in Higher Education,42:8, 1455-1473
+
+DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2015.1104659
+
+
+
+Qualitative vs Quantitative vs Hybrid Evaluation Models
+
+Qualitative:
+
+Arreola, R. A. (2007). Developing a comprehensive faculty evaluation system: A guide to designing, building, and operating large-scale faculty evaluation systems. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Anker.
+
+Quantitative:
+
+Seldin, P. (2006). Evaluating faculty performance: A practical guide to assessing teaching, research, and service. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Anker.
+
+Seldin, P., Miller, J. E., & Seldin, C. A. (2010). The teaching portfolio: A practical guide to improved performance and promotion/tenure decisions (4th ed.) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
+
+Hybrid
+
+Buller, J. L. (2012). Best practices in faculty evaluation: A practical guide for academic leaders. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Evaluation Criteria
+
+Teaching Effectiveness
+
+AAUP. Statement on teaching evaluation. In Policy Documents and Reports. 11th ed. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 219-22. 
+
+https://www.aaup.org/report/statement-teaching-evaluation
+
+""Statement on Student Evaluations of Teaching,"" American Sociological Association, August 2019 
+
+https://www.asanet.org/sites/default/files/asa_statement_on_student_evaluations_of_teaching_feb132020.pdf
+
+Benton, S. L., & Young, S. (2018). Best Practices in the Evaluation of Teaching. IDEA Paper, 69. 
+
+https://www.ideaedu.org/Portals/0/Uploads/Documents/IDEA%20Papers/IDEA%20Papers/IDEA_Paper_69.pdf 
+
+Blumberg, P. (2014). Assessing and Improving Your Teaching: Strategies and Rubrics for Faculty Growth and Student Learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
+
+Doerer, K. (2019) “Colleges Are Getting Smarter About Student Evaluations. Here’s How., Chronicle of Higher Education, January 13, 2019 
+
+https://www.chronicle.com/article/Colleges-Are-Getting- Smarter/245457 
+
+Follmer Greenhoot, A., Ward, D., Bernstein, D., Patterson, M. M., & Colyott, K. (2020). Benchmarks for Teaching Effectiveness. (Revised 2020).
+
+https://cte.ku.edu/sites/cte.ku.edu/files/docs/KU%20Benchmarks%20Framework%202020update.pdf
+
+https://cte.ku.edu/benchmarks-teaching-effectiveness-project
+
+Linse, A.R. (2017), “Interpreting and using student ratings data: Guidance for faculty serving as administrators and on evaluation committees,” Studies in Educational Evaluation, Volume 54, September 2017, Pages 94-106
+
+https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.12.004 
+
+Poproski, R., Greene, R. (2018) Metrics and Measures of Teaching Effectiveness  
+
+https://ctl.gatech.edu/sites/default/files/documents/poproski_greene_2018_metrics_and_measures_of_teaching_effectiveness.pdf
+
+Uttl, B., White, C.A., Gonzalez, D.W. (2017) “Meta-analysis of faculty's teaching effectiveness: Student evaluation of teaching ratings and student learning are not related,” Studies in Educational Evaluation, Volume 54, September 2017, Pages 22-42, 
+
+https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/0191491X/54/supp/C 
+
+Wieman, Carl (2015) A Better Way to Evaluate Undergraduate Teaching, Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 47:1, 6-15
+
+DOI: 10.1080/00091383.2015.996077
+
+Scholarship, Creative Activity
+
+Boyer, E.L. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. Princeton, N.J.: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1990
+
+Report of the MLA Task Force on Evaluating Scholarship for Tenure and Promotion -MLA Task Force on Evaluating Scholarship for Tenure and Promotion (2007 by The Modern Language Association of America)
+
+https://www.mla.org/content/download/3362/81802/taskforcereport0608.pdf
+
+Note: Although this report was produced over 14 years ago, the findings, insights and recommendations remain relevant and applicable to addressing the evaluation of scholarship in a broad range of disciplines
+
+The Modern Language Association, Guidelines for Evaluating Work in Digital Humanities and Digital Media 
+
+https://www.mla.org/About-Us/Governance/Committees/Committee-Listings/Professional- Issues/Committee-on-Information-Technology/Guidelines-for-Evaluating-Work-in-Digital- Humanities-and-Digital-Media 
+
+The College Art Association (CAA), Case Studies and Examples for Evaluating Digital Scholarship 
+
+http://www.collegeart.org/news/2016/02/23/case-studies-and-examples-for-evaluating-digital- scholarship/ 
+
+American Historical Association, Suggested Guidelines for Evaluating Digital Media Activities in Tenure, Review, and Promotion: An AAHC Document 
+
+http://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/october- 2001/suggested-guidelines-for-evaluating-digital-media-activities-in-tenure-review-and- promotion-an-aahc-document 
+
+Benchmarking Analysis: Faculty Research and Scholarship (2020 by Hanover Research)	
+
+	(Will email PDF) 
+
+Other Literature Citations
+
+Bouwma-Gearhart, Jana, Cindy Lenhart, Rich Carter, Karl Mundorff, Holly Cho, and Jessica Knoch. 2021. ""Inclusively Recognizing Faculty Innovation and Entrepreneurship Impact within Promotion and Tenure Considerations"" Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 7, no. 3: 182.
+
+https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7030182
+
+Diamond, R. (1999). Aligning faculty rewards with institutional mission: Statements, policies, and guidelines. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company, Inc. 
+
+O’Meara, K. (2002). Uncovering the values in faculty evaluation of service as scholarship. Review of Higher Education, 26(1), 57-80.
+
+O’Meara, K., Eatman, T. & Peterson, S. (2015). Advancing Engaged Scholarship in Promotion and Tenure: A Roadmap and Call for Reform. Liberal Education, 101(3).
+
+http://www.aacu.org/liberaleducation/2015/summer/o'meara
+
+O’Meara, K., & Rice, R. E. (Eds.) (2005). Faculty priorities reconsidered: Encouraging multiple forms of scholarship. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
+
+O’Meara, K. (2010). Rewarding multiple forms of scholarship: Promotion and tenure. In H. Fitzgerald, C. Burack, & S. Seifer (Eds.), Handbook of engaged scholarship, volume 1: Institutional change (pp. 271-294). East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University Press.
+
+https://static1.squarespace.com/static/52aa1677e4b069d1317f42d0/t/5a00dd82ec212da4fc4aa244/1510006146723/OMeara+%282010%29+Rewarding+Multiple+Forms+of+Scholarship_Promotion+and+Tenure-2-24.pdf 
+
+Schimanski LA and Alperin JP. The evaluation of scholarship in academic promotion and tenure processes: Past, present, and future. F1000Research 2018, 7:1605 
+
+https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6325612/
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Service
+
+Baker, Diane F.; Neely, Walter P.; Prenshaw, Penelope J.; Taylor, Patrick A. (2015). Developing a Multi-Dimensional Evaluation Framework for Faculty Teaching and Service Performance. Journal of Academic Administration in Higher Education, v11 n2 p29-41 Fall 2015
+
+https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1139200.pdf
+
+“Based on the literature review, the most commonly used factors to assess faculty service performance are service to the department, service to the college and/or university, professional activities, service to the community, academic advising, and consulting. There are no studies describing or evaluating the way in which participation in these activities are assessed.”
+
+O’Meara, K. (1997). Rewarding faculty professional service, New England Resource Center for Higher Education publications. Paper 17. 
+
+http://scholarworks.umb.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1016& context=nerche_pubs 
+
+O’Meara, K. (2002). Uncovering the values in faculty evaluation of service as scholarship. Review of Higher Education, 26(1), 57-80. 
+
+Hanasono, L. K., Broido, E. M., Yacobucci, M. M., Root, K. V., Peña, S., & O'Neil, D. A. (2019). Secret service: Revealing gender biases in the visibility and value of faculty service. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 12(1), 85–98.
+
+https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000081
+
+Ward, K. (2003). Faculty service roles and the scholarship of engagement (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No 29-5.) San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Advising
+
+
+
+Ye He, Bryant Hutson; Assessment for Faculty Advising: Beyond the Service Component. NACADA Journal 1 January 2017; 37 (2): 66–75. 
+
+https://doi.org/10.12930/NACADA-16-028
+
+
+
+Diversity, Equity, and Inclusivity 
+
+Laursen, S. L., & Austin, A. E. (2014). Strategic intervention brief #6: Equitable processes of tenure and promotion. In S. L. Laursen and A. E. Austin, strategic Toolkit: Strategies for effecting gender equity and intuitional change. Boulder, CO, and East Lansing, MI. 
+
+www.strategictoolkit.org
+
+https://www.colorado.edu/eer/sites/default/files/attached-files/6_tenurepromotionbrief123015.pdf
+
+Trainer, S., & Miguel, A., & Jacoby, J. M., & O'Brien, J., Seattle University ADVANCE: Institutional Diversity Requires Recognizing and Rewarding Faculty Hidden Work, NCURA magazine, October/November 2020, page 72 
+
+https://www.seattleu.edu/media/advance/NCURA-Article_SU-ADVANCE.pdf
+
+Trainer, S., & Miguel, A., & Jacoby, J. M., & O'Brien, J. (2021, January), Exploring the Gendered Impacts of COVID-19 on Faculty Paper presented at 2021 CoNECD
+
+https://peer.asee.org/36087
+
+Chávez, Kerry, and Kristina M. W. Mitchell. 2020. “Exploring Bias in Student Evaluations: Gender, Race, and Ethnicity.” PS: Political Science & Politics 53(2):270–74. 
+
+Gonzalez, Leslie and Kimberly Ann Griffin. 2020. Supporting Faculty during & after COVID-19: Don't Let Go of Equity. Washington, DC: Aspire Alliance
+
+Lisnic R, Zajicek A, Morimoto S. Gender and Race Differences in Faculty Assessment of Tenure Clarity: The Influence of Departmental Relationships and Practices. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity. 2019;5(2):244-260. 
+
+https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2332649218756137
+
+Malisch, Jessica L., Breanna N. Harris, Shanen M. Sherrer, Kristy A. Lewis, Stephanie L. Shepherd, Pumtiwitt C. McCarthy, Jessica L. Spott, Elizabeth P. Karam, Naima Moustaid- Moussa, and Jessica McCrory Calarco. 2020. “Opinion: In the Wake of COVID-19, “Academia Needs New Solutions to Ensure Gender Equity.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117(27):15378–15381. 
+
+Matthew, P.A. Written/Unwritten: Diversity and the Hidden Truths of Tenure; University of North Carolina Press: Chapel Hill, NC, USA, 2016; ISBN 978-1-4696-2773-1. 
+
+https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=oKMwDAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&ots=fdDKVJue42&sig=7q7ee7J0MPbPDsNYORO8uRZOsR0#v=onepage&q&f=false
+
+Tierney, William G., and Estela Mara Bensimon. 1996. Promotion and Tenure: Community and Socialization in Academe. Albany, NY: SUNY Press. 
+
+Weisshaar, Katherine. 2017. “Publish and Perish? An Assessment of Gender Gaps in Promotion to Tenure in Academia.” Social Forces 96(2):529–60. 
+
+
+
+Recent DEI Article in the Press
+
+https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2021/08/24/academe-should-determine-what-specific-systemic-changes-are-needed-dei-opinion
+
+https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/05/14/iupui-creates-path-promotion-and-tenure-based-dei-work
+
+
+
+Examples of How Some Schools are Addressing DEI in Faculty Evaluation Policies
+
+Seattle University: Seattle University is poised to make significant changes to its promotion and tenure reviews because of the work of its SU ADVANCE Program, an NSF grant-funded research program focused on equity issues among Seattle University faculty.  Of note, the program focused on inequities in faculty workloads and promotion guidelines. Please visit the following link to review the changes being proposed (see green font):
+
+https://www.seattleu.edu/media/advance/documents/Approved-Revised-Promotion-Guidelines_6-3-21.pdf
+
+Chapman University: A Chapman University working group of faculty and staff recently issued a steering document addressing diversity, equity, and inclusion.  On pages 6-7 of the document, the working group advocates that the University develop a robust system for documentation, recognition, and reward for faculty professional activity in diversity, equity, and inclusion. 
+
+https://www.chapman.edu/diversity/_files/dei--roadmap-to-best-practices_september2020_compressed.pdf
+
+University of Illinois: The University of Illinois recently made several major revisions to its P&T evaluation policy (Communication 9) to (a) indicate that DEI efforts are valued and (b) incorporate such efforts into the evaluation of candidates: 
+
+The introduction to Communication 9 states that the University values DEI and contributions along these lines are evaluated and recognized (p. 4). 
+
+A new section (II.C.7) was drafted addressing the evaluation of DEI contributions (p. 14). In the section, candidates describe their DEI contributions in terms of research, teaching, and service. 
+
+Instructions were developed for internal evaluations of candidates’ DEI efforts in the internal service and research evaluations (e.g., p. 13 and 14) (p. 14).
+
+https://uofi.app.box.com/s/doyhfhr0534ffeym5u95j02grlwijcjl for specific text.
+
+University of Denver: The University of Denver is exploring ways in which to value DEI achievements in promotion decisions. The following blog advocates for DEI achievement to be valued in promotion decisions and outlined examples DEI achievements in the areas of teaching, research productivity/creative work, and service: 
+
+https://duvpfa.du.edu/blog/2021/05/27/making-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-in-promotion-tenure-and-re-appointment-decisions-visible/
+
+University of Delaware: A faculty task force at the University of Delaware recently issued a report addressing equity in faculty evaluation.   
+
+https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/sites.udel.edu/dist/9/2591/files/2021/02/Equity-in-Faculty-Evaluations-Task-Force-Report_2-11-21.pdf 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Mission
+
+
+
+Diamond, R. (1999). Aligning faculty rewards with institutional mission: Statements, policies, and guidelines. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company, Inc. 
+
+Ellison, J. & Eatman, T. K. (2008). Scholarship in public: Knowledge creation and tenure policy in the engaged university. Syracuse, NY: Imagining America. 
+
+Zahorski, K.J. (2005) Redefining scholarship: A small liberal arts college’s journey. In K. O’Meara & R. E. Rice (Eds.), Faculty Priorities Reconsidered: Rewarding Multiple Forms of Scholarship, pp. 6-65. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 
+
+Wagner, Joan, ""The Distinctive Mission of Catholic Colleges & Universities and Faculty Reward Policies for Community Engagement: Aspirational or Operational?"" (2017). Graduate College Dissertations and Theses. 749.
+
+https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/graddis/749
+
+
+
+Note: When we gather data on comparison institutions later in Phase One, we will also provide models examples of how some schools have attempted to align their faculty evaluation policies with the institution’s mission.  In the interim, the Wagner dissertation cited above is worth reviewing as it explores, in part, to what extent the faculty tenure and promotion policies of the Catholic schools studied reflected institutional mission through a commitment to community engaged teaching, scholarship and service.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Bethany Alternative Text.txt [/INST] Bethany Alternative Text
+
+Alternative Text: Assuming the College wants to keep its current notice provisions, I would suggest the following text for this subsection: 
+
+If the College determines to terminate the appointment of a notice faculty member pursuant to Subsection 4.8.5, the faculty member shall be notified, to the extent feasible, in accordance with the following guidelines:
+
+In the case of termination due to financial exigency or enrollment emergency, the faculty member will receive notice or severance salary in accordance with the following schedule:
+
+a. At least three months prior to the date of termination for the individual who has served less than eighteen months at Bethany;
+
+b. At least six months or one semester, whichever is greater, prior to the date of termination for the individual who has served at least eighteen months at Bethany.
+
+In the case of termination due to reorganization, elimination, or curtailment of academic programs of the College, the faculty member will receive notice or severance salary in accordance with the following schedule:
+
+a. At least three months prior to the date of termination for the individual who has served less than eighteen months at Bethany;
+
+b. At least six months or one semester, whichever is greater, prior to the date of termination for the individual who has served at least eighteen months at Bethany.
+
+In all cases, faculty members affected will be able to complete the semester in which notice is given.</s>"
+<s>[INST] Bethany IWPM Pro.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] BJU Intellectual Property Rights Policies 02 24 2022.txt [/INST] Intellectual Property Rights and Ownership
+
+BJU’s Intellectual Property Rights and Ownership Policy governs the protection and administration of intellectual property developed in support of the University’s mission.  It applies to all university faculty, employees and students who make use of BJU facilities, equipment or other resources.
+
+Definitions
+
+“Intellectual Property” is defined as any original work created by an individual or group of individuals.  This work might be written, oral, visual, recorded or digital.  Content considered intellectual property includes any works that are or may be protected by copyright law or patent law. 
+
+“Work for Hire” is a legal term defined in the Copyright Act as “a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment.”  This definition includes works prepared by employees in satisfaction of sponsored agreements between BJU and outside agencies.  Certain commissioned works also are works for hire if the parties so agree in writing.
+
+Duty to Disclose Inventions 
+
+Patentable inventions and other marketable forms of intellectual property may result from BJU-related activities.  Inventions conceived and/or reduced to practice which were made or conceived utilizing BJU facilities, equipment, funds or other contributions of the University or were made or conceived during a university-administered program or research project or under a university contract must be disclosed fully and in good faith to the provost or the vice president for business and finance.  
+
+Ownership of Intellectual Property
+
+Works written or composed by a BJU employee under commission from BJU and/or on work time and works prepared as “work for hire” become the property of BJU, and the writer or composer needs to secure university approval to reproduce the work.
+
+Textbooks, as distinguished from manuals, syllabi, etc., have a potential market outside BJU through the textbook division of BJU Press.  Textbooks written by BJU faculty/staff are to be published and marketed by BJU Press if used in BJU classrooms.  Faculty members will not receive any royalty or bonuses from any book or pamphlet used in their own classes but may receive royalties or bonuses for books or pamphlets used in campus classrooms other than their own.
+
+When BJU pays a faculty member to develop a distance learning course, the faculty member will need approval from BJU to use course materials in distance learning teaching for another Universityor university.  
+
+In addition, as identified below, certain circumstances may give rise to a claim of ownership or other rights by BJU.  
+
+Intellectual property ownership is related to factors including: 
+
+Whether the author/creator was hired specifically to produce intellectual property “work for hire”;
+
+Whether the author/creator engaged in a collaborative effort to produce intellectual property (in which case intellectual property might be shared);
+
+Whether or not the intellectual property was created as part of sponsored research.
+
+Author/Creator Owns Intellectual Property
+
+The following intellectual property will generally be considered author/creator-owned: Works, other than textbooks, written or composed by BJU employees on their own unpaid time and without BJU resources.
+
+BJU Owns Intellectual Property
+
+The following intellectual property will generally be considered BJU-owned:
+
+1.	Intellectual property created as a “work for hire” or pursuant to a written agreement with the University providing for the transfer of any intellectual property or ownership to BJU; 
+
+2.	Intellectual property developed in the course of, or pursuant to, BJU-sponsored research or other university agreement (as determined according to the terms of such agreement); and/or
+
+3.	Intellectual property that is made or conceived utilizing the facilities, equipment, funds or other contributions of BJU to a degree that is substantially in excess of what is normally provided.  For example, BJU may require assignment of an ownership interest in intellectual property in the following circumstances:
+
+	Publication Subvention: When BJU pays the full or a substantial part of the cost of publication (including such costs as printing, editing, etc., but excluding the salary of the primary author(s)).  In such case, BJU may request that a formal agreement concerning the ownership of the copyright and the division of applicable royalties be made to ensure that rights, responsibilities and prospective revenues are shared equitably between the author/creator and BJU.
+
+	Software and Digital Resources. The development of software and other digital resources (such as website development, video production and digital content materials) developed for the classroom typically receives extensive support from BJU and is made possible through the use of BJU resources.  In this circumstance, the tangible works developed (i.e., the website or the video production) are owned by BJU.  The tangible educational materials owned by BJU may be used by the creator while still employed by the University.  For use of these educational materials outside BJU, however, specific written permission of the University is required.  To encourage the development of technology-based educational materials, BJU may, at its sole discretion, choose not to exercise its claim to such intellectual property.  In particular, BJU may not require assignment of ownership for basic webpages or entries in a course management system that are created and maintained without substantial assistance and that simply provide information (including, but not limited to, reading assignments, other course requirements and links to relevant external Internet resources) specific to a faculty member’s course(s) and/or information about or copies of publications and other professional activities of a faculty member.
+
+Reconveyance of Copyright to the Creator
+
+When intellectual property is assigned to BJU because of the provisions of this policy, the creator of the copyrighted material may make a request to the provost that ownership be reconveyed back to the creator.  Such a request can, at the discretion of the provost, be granted if it does not: (i) violate any legal obligations of or to BJU, (ii) limit appropriate university uses of the materials, (iii) create a real or potential conflict of interest for the creator, or (iv) otherwise conflict with BJU goals or principles.
+
+Licensing and Income Sharing
+
+Licensing: Computer databases, software and firmware and other copyrightable works owned by BJU are licensed through Information Technologies.  The vice president for business and finance must approve in advance exceptions to this procedure.
+
+Assignments
+
+No assignment, license or other agreement may be entered into or will be considered valid with respect to copyrighted works owned by BJU except by an official specifically authorized by the president or Board of Trustees to do so.
+
+Consulting
+
+If a faculty or staff member is involved in consulting activities relating to the use of intellectual property developed with BJU resources, any consulting agreement must be reviewed in advance by the provost or the vice president for business and finance.  
+
+Consulting contracts cannot restrain University-related activities, including, but not limited to, the following:
+
+1.	Non-compete clauses that may hinder faculty from pursuing BJU-related work; or
+
+2.	Clauses which restrain or inordinately delay publication of BJU-related work, publications or intellectual property.
+
+Use of the BJU Name in Copyright Notices
+
+The following notice should be placed on BJU-owned materials:
+
+	Copyright © [year] Bob Jones University.  All Rights Reserved.
+
+No other institutional or departmental name is to be used in the copyright notice, although the name and address of the department to which readers can direct inquiries may be listed.  The date in the notice should be the year in which the work is first published, i.e., distributed to the public or any sizable audience. 
+
+Additionally, works may be registered with the United States Copyright Office using its official forms (http://www.copyright.gov/forms)
+
+
+
+
+
+ Student Intellectual Property
+
+The term “intellectual property” refers to creative works, such as works of an artistic nature (literature, art, music, performances, broadcasts, etc.), software, inventions, trademarks, etc.  For the most part, students own the intellectual property they generate in the course of their studies at Bob Jones University (BJU). There are a few exceptions to this, such as:
+
+1.	If the student was paid by BJU to produce the work in question as part of BJU employment or through grant or contract funding secured through BJU, then that intellectual property would be owned by BJU; or
+
+2.	If the student and BJU entered in an agreement defining ownership of student intellectual property as not the student’s. Such an agreement would need to have been entered into before any work started.  This is done in certain cases where there is a corporate sponsor of student class projects.  For such cases the student needs to be aware of what rights he/she has to use the intellectual property he/she generates as part of the sponsored project.
+
+Use of Student Intellectual Property
+
+BJU cannot use student-owned intellectual property without first obtaining permission from the student other than for reviewing and providing feedback and marking assignments the student submits as part of course and other project work and use of such student work for the purpose of assessing courses and programs.
+
+Students as Creators of BJU Intellectual Property
+
+There are situations where intellectual property developed by a student would be owned by BJU. This would occur if the student was paid by BJU to perform certain work and was the inventor or author of a creative work that came or resulted from that paid work.  The student, as the inventor or author of BJU-owned intellectual property, would be covered by the BJU Intellectual Property Rights and Ownership Policy in such cases.
+
+							
+
+
+
+
+Ownership of Copyrightable Materials and Intellectual Property 
+
+
+
+The purpose of this policy is to describe Bob Jones University’s policies and associated administrative procedures regarding the ownership of patentable and copyrightable works created by Bob Jones University (“BJU”) employees and students, as well as other individuals conducting activities under the supervision of BJU employees.  
+
+POLICY STATEMENT
+
+The University endorses the development of patentable and copyrightable works and, through this policy, endeavors to assist the its employees and students to utilize their talent and knowledge to realize discoveries and inventions for the benefit of themselves, BJU, and the general public.  Ownership of patentable and copyrightable works created by BJU employees and students, as well as other individuals conducting activities under the supervision of BJU employees, will be determined in accordance with policies set forth in the Procedures/Guidelines section below.  Additionally, the revenues from patentable and copyrightable works owned by BJU will be distributed according to the formula set forth in the Procedures/Guidelines below.  If any portion of this policy conflicts with a signed agreement between BJU and a creator (an inventor or any other person who assists in the creation of patentable and copyrightable works) or between the BJU and an external funding agency or other entity such as another university with a collaborative research agreement with BJU, the terms of the signed agreement will prevail. 
+
+							BJU may grant a waiver of any provision of this policy on a case-by-case basis.  All waivers must be approved in writing and signed by the President of the University or the President’s authorized designee. Any decision by the President to grant a waiver will take into account the best interests of BJU and the facts of the particular situation involved.  Any waiver granted pursuant to this paragraph will apply only to obligations imposed on the creator of the patentable and copyrightable work, unless otherwise agreed to by the creator. 
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+							Author: the creator of an original expression in a work of authorship that is subject to copyright protection. 
+
+							Copyright: an original work of authorship that has been fixed in any tangible medium of expression from which it can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.  Copyright includes a bundle of rights: the right to make reproductions of the work, the right to distribute copies of it, the right to make derivative works that borrow substantially from a copyrighted work, and the right to make public performances or displays of most works.
+
+Creator: any inventor, developer, or author, of Intellectual Property covered by this policy, including faculty, students, and staff of the University. 
+
+Directed Works: include works that are specifically funded by BJU (including, but not limited to, Works for Hire).
+
+							Employee: any individual employed by BJU, including any faculty member, administrator, staff member, or student employee. 
+
+Intellectual Property: any original work created by an individual or group of individuals that is or may be patentable, copyrightable, or otherwise marketable.  Examples include, but are not limited to, inventions, books, articles, study guides, syllabi, workbooks or manuals, bibliographies, instructional packages, tests, video or audio productions, films, charts, digital materials, graphic materials, photographic or similar visual materials, multi-media materials, three-dimensional materials, exhibits, and digital files and software. 
+
+Institutional Work: include works that are supported by a specific allocation of Bob Jones University funds or that are created at the direction of Bob Jones University for a specific Bob Jones University purpose.  Institutional Works also include works whose authorship cannot be attributed to one or a discrete number of authors but rather result from simultaneous or sequential contributions over time by multiple faculty and students. 
+
+							Personal Time: time other than that devoted to normal or assigned functions in teaching, University service, or direction or conduct of research on BJU premises or utilizing University facilities or assets.
+
+Significant Use: the utilization of BJU facilities, equipment, personnel, or other resources beyond that which is normally provided to carry out one’s assigned duties.  Normal use of assigned office space, office equipment, library resources, or administrative staff is not considered “Significant Use.” 
+
+Sponsored or Externally Contracted Works: any type of intellectual property developed using funds supplied under a contract, grant, or other arrangement between BJU and third parties, including sponsored research agreements.
+
+Student Works: papers, computer programs, theses, artistic and musical works, and other creative works made by BJU students.
+
+Traditional Works or Non-Directed Works: a pedagogical, scholarly, literary, or aesthetic (artistic) work originated by a faculty or other employee resulting from non-directed effort.  (Such works may include textbooks, manuscripts, scholarly works, fixed lecture notes, works of art or design, musical scores, poems, films, videos, audio recordings, or other works of the kind that have historically been deemed in academic communities to be the property of their creator.)
+
+							University Facilities or Assets: any facility or asset, including equipment, resources and material, available to the inventor as a direct result of the inventor's affiliation with BJU, and which would not be available to a non-BJU individual on the same basis. 
+
+Work for Hire: a legal term defined in the Copyright Act as “a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment” or a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work, as a part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, as a translation, as a supplementary work, as a compilation, as an instructional text, as a test, as answer material for a test, or as an atlas, if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire.
+
+POLICY AND PROCEDURES
+
+I.	Copyright Ownership 
+
+With respect to determining ownership of copyright, BJU’s policy addresses works by category of copyrightable work (including Traditional or Non-Directed Works, Directed Work, and Sponsored or Externally Contracted Works).  Ownership of copyrighted subject matter is dependent on which category of work and which category of author, pertain to the copyrightable work at issue.
+
+A.	Works by Faculty:
+
+Traditional Works or Non-Directed Works: The creator of traditional works or non-directed works is entitled to ownership of copyright and royalties, unless it is a directed work, sponsored work, or a work for hire described in a written agreement between the work’s creator and BJU (see below).  BJU does not claim ownership to pedagogical, scholarly or artistic works, regardless of their form of expression, and such works are not directed works.  These copyrighted works include, but are not limited to, textbooks, presentations, course materials, refereed literature, etc.  Furthermore, BJU claims no ownership in popular nonfiction, novels, poems, musical compositions, digital media, software, games, or other works of artistic imagination. 
+
+Electronic Courses: With respect to faculty materials produced for online instructions, copyright ownership is treated no differently than faculty materials produced for the classroom.  If the materials are not directed works, the faculty member owns the copyright for those materials created for online use.
+
+Licensing of Traditional Works or Non-Directed Works for BJU Courses: Faculty members who create teaching and classroom materials (including electronic courses), such as class notes, syllabi, curriculum guides, or laboratory notebooks, or online learning modules shall grant BJU a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use, display, copy, distribute, and prepare derivative works for administrative use, as well as use in educational programs and courses provided directly by BJU to its students for the duration of time that the faculty member is employed by BJU.  The details of the licensing agreement will specify, among other things, the end of the licensing agreement, for example when an originator of traditional works or non-directed works used in an online course retires or ceases to be employed by BJU.
+
+							Directed Works: Ownership of directed works resides with BJU.  This includes all copyrighted works, including but not limited to educational software and electronic courses, that are specifically funded by the University under a formal contractual arrangement with BJU to develop and/or revise courses or as a result of the terms of the individual’s employment or hiring agreement.  BJU may release or transfer its authorship rights to the work’s creator under a written agreement negotiated between the creator and BJU.  The parties may also negotiate for joint ownership of such works, with the written approval of the President or the President’s designee.
+
+							Sponsored or Externally Contracted Works: Whenever research or a related activity is subject to an agreement between a sponsor and BJU that contains restrictions concerning copyright or the use of copyrighted materials, all materials will be handled in accordance with such agreement.  In negotiating with sponsors or contractors, project directors and BJU should strive to obtain the greatest latitude and rights for the individual author and BJU consistent with the public interest and this policy.
+
+B.	Works by Staff/Administrators
+
+Whenever copyrightable work is created by a member of the non-teaching staff or administration as part of the individual’s university responsibilities, the work shall be treated as a work-for-hire under the terms of the Copyright Act of 1976, and the ownership will ordinarily be retained by BJU.  In special cases, BJU may enter into an agreement in advance that the staff/administrative employee shall own the copyright.  In addition, the President may waive institutional ownership.
+
+C.	Works by Independent Contractors
+
+Works by independent contractors engaged by BJU will be owned in accordance with the contract under which the work was created.  BJU will ensure that there is a written contract for work by an independent contractor specifying institutional ownership.
+
+D.	Works by Students
+
+Ownership of the copyright to these works belongs to the student unless the work falls within one of the exceptions described below:
+
+Sponsored or Externally Contracted Works: Ownership will be in accordance with the section of this policy on sponsored or externally contracted works made by faculty.
+
+Works for Hire: Student works created by students in the course of their employment with the University will be considered to fall within the scope of Work for Hire in accordance with the section of this policy on works for hire made by staff.
+
+Rights in student works may be transferred between the student and BJU.  In such cases, a written assignment agreement will specify the respective rights and obligations of the parties.  The parties may also negotiate for joint ownership of such works, with the approval of the Provost. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Copyright is the ownership and control of the Intellectual Property in original works of authorship that are subject to Copyright law.  It is the general policy of BJU that all rights in Copyright shall remain with the creator of the work, with certain stated exceptions. The exceptions to this policy that shall vest ownership of the copyright in a work with BJU, rather than with the creator, are:
+
+If the work is a Work-for-Hire as defined by United States copyright law;  
+
+If the work is defined as an Institutional Work: Institutional works include works that are supported by a specific allocation of Bob Jones University funds or that are created at the direction of Bob Jones University for a specific Bob Jones University purpose.  Institutional Works also include works whose authorship cannot be attributed to one or a discrete number of authors but rather result from simultaneous or sequential contributions over time by multiple faculty and students.  For example, software tools developed and improved over time by multiple faculty and students where authorship is not appropriately attributed to a single or defined group of authors would constitute an institutional work.  The mere fact that multiple individuals have contributed to the creation of a work shall not cause the work to constitute an institutional work;
+
+If the work is commissioned by Bob Jones University;
+
+If the work makes Significant Use of Bob Jones University resources or personnel. Bob Jones University resources are to be used solely for Bob Jones University purposes and not for personal gain or personal commercial advantage, nor for any other non-University purposes.  Therefore, if the creator of a copyrightable work makes Significant Use of the services of Bob Jones University non-faculty employees or Bob Jones University resources to create the work, the creator shall disclose the work to the Provost/Academic Dean and assign title to Bob Jones University.  Examples of non-significant use include ordinary use of desktop computers, the Library, and limited secretarial or administrative resources;
+
+If the work is otherwise subject to contractual obligations;
+
+If the work is an audio, video, photographic or any form of digital reproduction of a class, course, or presentation made by Bob Jones University faculty, staff, or students.  Courses taught and coursewares developed for teaching at Bob Jones University belong to Bob Jones University.  Courses, which are videotaped or recorded using any other media, are Bob Jones University property, and may not be further distributed without permission from the Provost/Academic Dean;
+
+If the work includes images of Bob Jones University-owned facilities, buildings, or property for purposes other than scholarly research and publication;
+
+If the work includes the name, seal, logo, insignia, trademark or watermark of Bob Jones University as an endorsement, enhancement, or sanction for a product or service.
+
+With respect to the foregoing works, Bob Jones University shall be the owner of the copyright in the work.  As such, the University may decide to assign its copyright to the author or authors of the work on a case-by-case basis.  
+
+Electronic Courses: With respect to faculty materials produced for online instructions, copyright ownership is treated no differently than faculty materials produced for the classroom.  If the materials are not Institutional Works or developed via the significant use of University resources, the faculty member owns the copyright for those materials created for online use.  Any electronic course materials that are Institutional Works or created or developed by faculty with the use of significant use of University resources will be considered the property of Bob Jones University.  This applies to electronic course material whether or not it was, is or may be eligible for copyright or patent. 
+
+Licensing: Faculty members who create teaching and classroom materials, such as class notes, syllabi, curriculum guides, or laboratory notebooks, or online learning modules shall grant the University a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use, display, copy, distribute, and prepare derivative works for administrative use, as well as use in educational programs and courses provided directly by the University to its students for the duration of time that the faculty member is employed by the University.  The details of the licensing agreement will specify, among other things, the end of the licensing agreement, for example when an originator of the used in an online course retires or ceases to be employed by the University.
+
+B.	Contractual Obligations of Bob Jones University
+
+This policy shall not be interpreted to limit Bob Jones University’s ability to meet its obligations for deliverables under any contract, grant, or other arrangement with third parties, including sponsored research agreements, license agreements and the like.  Copyrightable works that are subject to sponsored research agreements or other contractual obligations of Bob Jones University shall be owned by Bob Jones University, so that Bob Jones University may satisfy its contractual obligations.
+
+C.	Reconveyance of Copyright to the Creator
+
+When copyright is assigned to the Bob Jones University because of the provisions of this policy, the creator of the copyrighted material may make a request to the President of the University that ownership be reconveyed back to the creator.  Such a request may, at the discretion of the President, be granted if it does not:
+
+Violate any legal obligations of or to Bob Jones University;
+
+Limit appropriate University uses of the materials;
+
+Create a real or potential conflict of interest for the creator;
+
+Otherwise conflict with Bob Jones University’ goals or principles.
+
+D.	Administration of Copyright Policy
+
+Determination of Ownership and Policy: The President will resolve any questions of ownership or other matters pertaining to materials covered by this policy.
+
+Licensing: The University seeks the most effective means of technology transfer for public use and benefit and, toward that end, handles the evaluation, marketing, negotiations and licensing of Bob Jones University-owned inventions or copyrightable materials with commercial potential.  Computer databases, software and firmware, and other copyrightable works owned by Bob Jones University, are licensed through the President.  The President must approve in advance exceptions to this procedure;
+
+Royalty Distribution: The President will allocate royalties assigned to Bob Jones University.  If copyright protection alone is claimed, royalties normally will be allocated in a similar manner, with the “inventor’s share” allocated among individuals identified by the investigator (or department head if not under a sponsored agreement), based on their relative contributions to the work.  Where royalty distribution to individuals would be impracticable or inequitable (for example, when the copyrightable material has been developed as a laboratory project, or where individual royalty distribution could distort academic priorities), the “inventor’s share” may be allocated to a research or educational account in the laboratory where the copyrightable material was developed. 
+
+Assignments: No assignment, license or other agreement may be entered into or will be considered valid with respect to copyrighted works owned by Bob Jones University except by an official specifically authorized to do so;
+
+Use of the Bob Jones University Name in Copyright Notices: The following notice should be placed on Bob Jones University-owned materials in order to protect the copyright:  Copyright © [year].  The Board of Trustees of Bob Jones University.  All Rights Reserved.  No other institutional or departmental name is to be used in the copyright notice, although the name and address of the department to which readers can direct inquiries may be listed below the copyright notice.  The date in the notice should be the year in which the work is first published, i.e., distributed to the public or any sizable audience.  Additionally, works may be registered with the United States Copyright Office using its official forms. 
+
+
+
+III.	Intellectual Property
+
+Bob Jones University’s Intellectual Property Policy applies to all patentable inventions conceived or first reduced to practice by BJU faculty, administrators, staff, and students, or any other persons performing research or engaging in work at the University where such inventions may be created or discovered.  
+
+A.	Ownership
+
+University Ownership 
+
+Ownership on a worldwide basis in any patentable invention conceived, developed, or reduced to practice by BJU faculty, staff, administrators, and students under either of the following conditions shall reside with the University:
+
+During normal or assigned activities related to the creator’s employment or student responsibilities (e.g., teaching, performing University service, pursuing coursework, directing or conducting research, etc.); or 
+
+With the support of BJU facilities or assets, including equipment, material, personnel or any other resource available to the creator as a direct result of the creator’s affiliation with BJU and which would not be available to a non-BJU community member on the same basis.  
+
+							As a condition of employment or enrollment, all BJU faculty, staff, administrators, and students assign ownership of all inventions (or parts thereof) described above to the University. 
+
+							BJU, through the President, shall have the sole right to determine the disposition of Intellectual Property in which the University has a proprietary interest.  A decision to exercise this right will be transmitted in writing to the creator within 60 days of the date of disclosure of the invention (or parts thereof).  If the University decides to pursue a patent, it may recommend that the University alone, or with the assistance of an external organization such as a technology transfer company, make applications for letters of patent.  Title to all such patent applications and resulting patents will be held by the Board of Trustees of the University; however, BJU will share licensing revenues with the creator(s) according to Section VI of this policy.  If the University decides not to patent an invention, or not to commercialize a patented invention, the University will release to the creator its interest in the invention.
+
+Inventions Made on Personal Time
+
+Intellectual Property made BJU employees or students on their personal time and not involving the use of BJU facilities or assets are the property of the creator except in case of conflict with any applicable agreement between the University and a sponsoring agency.  
+
+Creators who claim that Intellectual Property is made on personal time have the responsibility to demonstrate that intellectual property was invented based on independent efforts.  All such Intellectual Property must be disclosed in accordance with the University’s disclosure procedures (see Section II.B) and demonstrate the basis of the creator’s claim that only personal time was utilized.  
+
+Inventions Arising from Sponsored Research 
+
+When Intellectual Property is developed through a sponsored grant or contract, the special provision contained in the grant or contract will prevail.  In the absence of such special provisions, the University’s policy will apply.  Generally, while the University is assigned the rights to Intellectual Property generated during the course of sponsored research activities, the sponsor retains the option to claim ownership under certain circumstances.  In the event that the sponsor does not exercise its option and regardless of ownership, the government retains a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable, royalty-free, worldwide license to the Intellectual Property produced under government sponsorship. 
+
+B.	Procedures for Reporting Intellectual Property 
+
+							Faculty, staff, and students are obligated to promptly and fully report to the University in a manner stipulated by the Provost any discovery, invention, possible device, or potentially useful biological or chemical material the individual has made and has reason to believe might be patentable or otherwise protectable.  This is to be done regardless of whether BJU funds or funds from an external source provided the immediate support for the work from which the invention resulted or if the intellectual property was developed on personal time. 
+
+C.	 Dispute Resolution 
+
+A dispute concerning application of any aspect of this policy must be submitted in writing to the Provost. The dispute will be reviewed by the Committee on Intellectual Property, which will prepare a report of its findings and make a recommendation to the Provost. See Section – below for additional information. 
+
+Royalty and Revenue Sharing 
+
+The University assumes financial responsibility for intellectual property to which it takes ownership.  This responsibility may include, for example, the costs of assessing patentability, filing and prosecuting patents, registering copyrights, marketing and licensing traditional works or non-directed works, electronic courses, and copyrighted works, and paying royalties for the use of copyrighted works in its courses.  The University is not, however, obligated to protect or commercialize any particular invention or copyrighted work unless it has made an explicit contractual commitment to do so.  The Provost is charged with the responsibility of using BJU’s resources carefully, with a view to promoting the fiduciary interest of the institution as a whole. Through the provisions of this policy, BJU maintains a right of first refusal to patents, directed works and work for hire developed by its employees; however, at anytime it may elect not to pursue intellectual property and will accordingly assign the rights to the inventor or originator. The Provost, after considering the recommendation of the Committee on Intellectual Property, will adjudicate conflicts between employers and BJU to enable that creative works to enrich the public good.
+
+All fees, legal and otherwise, associated with development of the invention and patent application shall be assumed by BJU but all such costs must be fully recovered by income generated by the invention before any net revenue accrues. The net income resulting from Intellectual Property to which BJU is afforded title will be divided as follows: 
+
+Creator								50%	 		
+
+Creator’s Department					15%		
+
+Provost Office						10%
+General Fund						25%
+
+Half the department’s share is to be used as determined by the creator so long as they remain at BJU.
+
+Where there is more than one creator, distribution shall be prorated according to the contribution of each as may be agreed in writing between the parties, or, if an agreement cannot be reached, then according to the Provost, after considering the recommendation of the Intellectual Property Committee.  Final appeals may be filed with the President.
+
+Creators may arrange for their personal share to be retained by BJU (e.g., to support their research).
+
+The Creators’ share will continue even if the inventors have left BJU.
+
+The portion of the department's share will normally follow a creator who has transferred to another part of BJU.  However, it will not follow a creator who has left BJU.
+
+In cases of large sums of income, departments are encouraged to arrange with BJU for the capitalization of their shares to create an endowment for support of their activities.
+
+The department and Provost’s shares will be used to support research-related activities, as well as technology transfer programs which may serve to maximize the effect of such income.
+
+Royalties are payable to creators only upon actual receipt by BJU and after expenses have been paid, however, the Provost will provide detail and evidence of the expenses upon request to the creator. After all costs are fully recovered, royalty distribution payments will be paid immediately to the creator. In the case of the death of a creator, all royalty distributions which would have been due to such a person shall be paid to the creator’s estate. 
+
+Committee on Intellectual Property
+
+							The Committee on Intellectual Property (“the Committee”) will be composed of rotating and permanent members. The rotating members consist of [INSERT MEMBERSHIP], and the Provost, who will serve as a non-voting member and chair. At the time of initial appointment or election, each non-permanent member shall be designated as serving a one-, two- , or three-year term, staggered so that the term of one faculty committee member will expire each year. After the first appointment subsequent members shall serve staggered three-year terms, commencing July 1 and terminating on June 30. Committee members may serve one additional three-year term consecutively. The Committee may also appoint additional faculty, staff or students on an ad hoc, non-voting basis with observer status. 
+
+The committee will receive and consider disputes over ownership, and its attendant rights, of intellectual property. The committee shall make a recommendation to the Provost as to whether the University or any other party has rights to the invention or other creation, and, if so, the basis and extent of those rights. The Committee shall also make recommendations to the Provost on competing faculty, staff, or student claims to ownership when the parties cannot reach an agreement on their own. The Committee will review the merits of patent-pending inventions and other creations and make recommendations to the Provost for their management. The Provost shall decide all such disputes. Decisions by the Provost may be appealed in writing to the President, who has final authority concerning University policies on intellectual property.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Board Code of Regulations - Faculty Article Memo - HR Policies.txt [/INST] Page | 2
+
+
+
+
+
+April 27, 2022
+
+
+
+TO:	Board of Trustees, President Jones, & Provost Crowley
+
+FROM: 	Stephen Lazarus
+Sr. Consultant
+Stevens Strategy
+
+RE: 	Faculty Article of the Code of Regulations
+
+In the sections that follow, I outline our firm’s general position on the inclusion of human resource and campus community policies of general applicability in faculty handbooks.  Thereafter, I review each of the policies referenced above, offering my professional judgment (see bold text) regarding whether they should remain in the Faculty Policies Handbook, as is, or in an edited form.  Finally, at the end of the document, I provide policy and content recommendations the Task Force may want to consider as it continues its work to update the Faculty Policies Handbook.
+
+I.	Inclusion of Human Resource and Campus Community Policies
+
+While many universities and colleges publish select employment and campus-community policies in their faculty handbooks, they do so at the risk of publishing contradictory policies by addressing a topic in more than one policy publication.  Indeed, oftentimes a revision to a general human resources or campus community policy will not find its way into the Faculty Handbook.  This is a risk management issue that could possibly expose an institution to legal liability.  Moreover, the tradition of publishing select general human resource and campus community policies in faculty handbooks emanates from a time when policies were not published online and therefore were often included for ease of reference.  With today’s technology, this is no longer a concern.  Also, faculty handbooks typically only include a small portion of the institutional policies applicable to the faculty.  This may give rise to the misimpression that only the policies published in the faculty handbook are applicable to the faculty.  A faculty handbook should not be intended to state all institutional employment and campus community policies.
+
+Another key question for purposes of determining which policies should be published in a faculty handbook is whether the policy addresses a faculty personnel matter that falls within an area of primary faculty responsibility, a unique faculty right, or a policy that only applies to the faculty.  If the policy does not fall within one of these areas, I believe the better practice is either not to publish it in the faculty handbook or link to such policies and adopt text comparable to the following clause from the University of Redlands Faculty Handbook’s “Changes to this Handbook” policy:
+
+Other University policies included in this Handbook by reference (e.g., the Policy Prohibiting Illegal Discrimination and Harassment), some of which are provided as Appendices, may be subject to change by procedures other than those required to change the policies and procedures of this Handbook proper. 
+
+See Section 1.4 of the University of Redlands’ Faculty Handbook.
+
+Note: If the above model is utilized, it should be tailored to California Lutheran University by referencing the ADRI Chart.
+
+Adopting either approach provides greater clarity regarding which policies must be approved by the faculty via the handbook amendment policy.  The determination regarding whether a policy falls within an area of faculty responsibility or unique faculty right is guided by the institution’s overarching governance documents.   At California Lutheran, these include the Amended and Restated Bylaws of the University, Faculty Constitution, and ADRI Charts.  
+
+Based on the above, I recommend that faculty handbooks generally be limited in scope to matters designated as a primary faculty responsibility (i.e., faculty status matters) as delineated in the University’s governance documents and other personnel matters applicable to a faculty right (e.g., sabbatical leave, faculty grievances, professional development leaves applicable only to faculty, etc.).  Policies that do not fall within the above areas should either be removed or linked to the primary policy source.  
+
+Adopting this approach lessens the legal risk of the institution adopting contradictory policy statements and provide greater clarity regarding which policies must be decided or approved by the faculty.  Of course, such a practice does not diminish the faculty’s ability to provide consultative recommendations or input on policy matters outside of the above in accordance with the ADRI Charts.   Such consultative input is typically provided via Faculty Senate resolutions, faculty membership on standing university committees and task forces, and constructive dialogue with university administrators.  In addition, the Senate may consider matters of professional interest and faculty welfare, make recommendations to the president and other administrative officers as reflected in the Faculty Senate section of the Faculty Policies Handbook. 
+
+
+
+II.	Specific Policies Requested to be Reviewed
+
+Consensual Relations
+
+Schools are split on whether they publish a Consensual Relations Policy in the faculty handbook.  The decision is primarily based on whether the institution’s policy in this area applies only to faculty or all university employees.  Since consensual relations is not addressed in the Employee Handbook or any other University policy publication that I am aware of, I believe the current policy should remain in the Faculty Policies Handbook.  However, it is my recommendation that the University consider adopting a consensual relations policy that applies to all employees for publication in the Employee Handbook.  There is no reason the same principles set forth in the Faculty Policies Handbook Consensual Relations Policy should not apply to administrators, staff, and coaches.
+
+In terms of other revisions, I suggest that the Task Force supplement the “Consensual Relationships in the Instructional Context” clause to also prohibit a faculty member from exercising academic responsibility over a student with whom the faculty member has had a consensual relationship in the past.   The same conflicts of interest concerns that pertain to current students also apply to situations where the instructor and student had a former relationship.  For example, if the relationship did not end well, the instructor’s objectivity may be clouded, giving rise to a potential conflict of interest.
+
+In addition, the Task Force may want to add a cross-reference to HR Policy-006, which prohibits employees from engaging in “sexual harassment” of students.  The policy defines sexual harassment as:
+
+“unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal, visual, or physical conduct of a sexual nature, made by someone from or in the work or educational setting, under any of the following conditions: (a) submission to the conduct is explicitly or implicitly made a term or a condition of a student’s employment, academic status, or progress; (b) submission to, or rejection of, the conduct by a student is used as the basis of academic decisions affecting the individual; (c) the conduct has the purpose or effect of having a negative impact upon the student’s academic performance, or of creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive educational environment; (d) submission to, or rejection of, the conduct by a student is used as the basis for any decision affecting a student regarding benefits and services, honors, programs, or activities available at or through the educational institution.”
+
+Compensation
+
+It is common to have a brief section in a stand-alone section of the faculty handbook proper (i.e., not in the Appendix) that addresses faculty-specific compensation matters only.   References to salary targets and/or compensation rates are usually stated in general terms given they are subject to revision due to market realities and are traditionally a legally reserved authority of the board (or delegated by the Board to the president, who may in turn delegate to the provost) to establish and approve.  Pursuant to shared governance principles, however, such ranges are developed in consultation with the Provost and a faculty standing committee or task force; or via faculty membership on an appropriate university standing committee.  See Chapman University’s Faculty Manual (Section VII) and Loyola Marymount University’s Handbook for examples of model text in this regard.  
+
+Based on the above, I recommend that the Task Force include a brief compensation section in the main body of the Faculty Policies Handbook that (1) includes a clause that refers and links to Section V of the Employee Handbook; (2) addresses the salary schedule and compensation rates in general terms as outlined above; (3) delineates the manner in which the Provost solicits input from the appropriate faculty committee on salary schedule and compensation rates; and (4) includes a clause stating that matters of faculty and staff grade levels, starting salary, and salary adjustments are delegated by the Board to the President, who, in turn, may delegate them to the appropriate vice president (see the ADRI Chart). 
+
+Fringe Benefits
+
+Some schools opt not to reprint Fringe Benefits in the handbook (see e.g., University of Redlands, Chapman University, Pacific Lutheran University) given these are within the board delegated purview of the administration, while other elect to include a benefit section.  For those that do include a benefit section, it is common for many to link to those benefits that are not unique to the faculty (see e.g., University of Santa Clara) rather than reprint the policy in totality.  Some institutions will reprint the benefit policies, but add a clause indicating the benefits, unless otherwise noted, are approved by the administration after appropriate notice and advisory consultation with the faculty.  See the University of Pacific Faculty Handbook for an example of this latter approach.  Of course, there are also representative examples where the benefit policies are reprinted without such a caveat.  
+
+Consistent with the Section I comments, I recommend that the fringe benefit policies currently reprinted in the Faculty Policies Handbook that apply to all eligible university employees be linked to the Employee Handbook or removed altogether.  My suggestion in this regard is based primarily on the ADRI Chart, which reflects that the faculty does not provide input on university benefits.
+
+Conflicts of Interest
+
+The Conflicts of Interest Policy published in the Faculty Policies Handbook applies to all university employees.  It essentially mirrors the version of the policy in the Employee Handbook; however, the two policies are not identical.  Thus, this is an example where publishing two policies in more than one publication can result in disparate policy statements.  Based on the above, I recommend the policy be removed from the Faculty Policies Handbook and replaced with a link to the Conflicts of Interest Policy published in the Employee Handbook.  
+
+Of note, the Task Force may also want to add a clause referring the reader to conflicts of interest in the sponsored research setting.  If the University does not have a policy in this regard, I advocate that such a policy be developed.  See the following examples of such policies: 
+
+https://www.fordham.edu/info/23841/financial_conflict_of_interest_in_research/5128/university_policy
+
+https://www.stmarytx.edu/policies/academic-affairs/conflicts-of-interest-policy-for-sponsored-research/
+
+https://www.ithaca.edu/sponsored-research/conflict-interest-and-disclosure
+
+Traditionally, the above policy is published either in a research manual, academic policy manual, or on the Office of Sponsored Research’s webpage.
+
+Political Activity and Public Statements
+
+Political activity is addressed in a subsection of the Outside Employment and Professional Activity Policy in the current Faculty Policies Handbook.  It is not unusual for some schools to include a political activities clause in the faculty handbook that is based on the AAUP Statement on Professors and Political Activity.  For those universities that do opt to include an outside activities policy in the faculty handbook, many will commonly reprint the policy under the Faculty Responsibility heading.  Since political activities is not addressed in the Employee Policies Handbook, I recommend that the clause remain in the current Faculty Policies Handbook.  I further advocate that text be developed indicating that if a leave of absence is required to accommodate the faculty member’s political activity, such leave should be formally approved pursuant to the Employee Handbook’s Personal Leave without Pay Policy.  Moreover, I advise that a sentence be added specifying that the terms of any approved leave (i.e., impact on probationary period, years in rank requirements for promotion, etc.) are documented and approved by either the Dean or Provost.
+
+External Relations Policy 
+
+There are three policies reprinted under the External Relations Policy: Controversial Issues or Speakers; Solicitations, Recognitions and Honors, and Access to Donor Lists.  Each of these policies are either campus community or employee policies and I therefore recommend that they be removed from the Faculty Policies Handbook or linked to the appropriate policy source.  Of note, there is a Workplace Solicitation/Distribution policy in the current Employee Handbook that does not mirror the text in the Faculty Policies Handbook.  
+
+I could not locate where the University publishes the Controversial Issues or Speakers Policy.  However, this is a policy that applies (or should apply) to the entire campus community, including student organizations.   I recommend that the administration consider adopting a campus community webpage or campus community manual that publishes policies such as this, as well as other broad ranging policies that impact everyone on campus (i.e., security, IT, Environmental Health and Safety, etc.).
+
+III.	Other Recommendations
+
+Although outside of the scope of the policies Dr. Heresco requested I review and comment upon, below I provide policy and content recommendations the Task Force may want to consider developing as it continues its work to update the Faculty Policies Handbook.
+
+Adherence to University Policies 
+
+Under the Faculty Responsibilities section of the handbook, paragraph 6 states that faculty members are responsible for “knowing and abiding by the policies and procedures published in the current version of the Faculty Governance Handbook, this Faculty Policies Handbook, and the undergraduate and graduate catalogs.”  I believe adding the Employee Handbook to the listing is appropriate since there are policies in that document that apply to faculty.  Also, there are other University policies that apply to faculty, including but not limited to the Policy on Sexual Harassment and Title IX, HR Policy 006, the Alcohol & Drug Free Policy, etc.  As such, I advise that consideration be given to amending paragraph 6 as follows:
+
+6. knowing and abiding by University policies that apply to them, including but not limited to the policies and procedures published in the current version of the Faculty Governance Handbook, this Faculty Policies Handbook, and the undergraduate and graduate catalogs, and the Employee Handbook.
+
+Freedom from Harassment Policy
+
+I recommend that this policy be removed and replaced with a link to the Freedom from Harassment policy published in the Employee Handbook.  Also, links to the Policy on Sexual Harassment Prohibited by Title IX and HR Policy 006 - Harassment, Discrimination, Biased Conduct and Retaliation Prohibition should be added. In this regard, I advise that the Task Force collaborate with Human Resources to develop appropriate text under the Freedom from Harassment (and Discrimination) heading that affirms the University’s commitment to a workplace environment free from unlawful harassment and discrimination and references and links to the policies referenced above.
+
+Working Conditions, Library and Computer Use, Expense Reimbursement, Chapel and Convocation
+
+I recommend that these policies be removed from the Handbook for the reasons set forth in Section I of this memorandum.  If, however, the Task Force elects to keep the policies in the handbook for ease of reference, I recommend that the policies be replaced with links to the extent they are published in other university policy publications.  
+
+Research and Publication 
+
+I recommend that the University consider developing an academic policy manual that houses relevant policies addressing issues such as program reviews and approvals, academic research misconduct, IRB, Animal Research, Sponsored Research Conflict of Interests, and the like.  
+
+Academic Honesty Policy
+
+I recommend that this policy be removed from the Handbook for the reasons set forth in Section I of this memorandum.  If, however, the Task Force elects to keep the policy in the handbook for ease of reference, I recommend that it be replaced with a link to the version of the policy in the Undergraduate Catalog.  
+
+Additional Policy Statements and Recommendations
+
+Develop an Introduction Statement
+
+I recommend that the Task Force develop an introductory clause at the beginning of the handbook.   Below is a sample from a prior client’s handbook for consideration; however, the Task Force should develop a tailored statement unique to California Lutheran University:
+
+The purpose of the Faculty Policies Handbook is to provide members of the Faculty as defined herein with information regarding the policies, procedures and regulations of the College as they pertain to matters of faculty status and rights.  It supersedes all previous faculty personnel policies and procedures published in prior Faculty Policies Handbooks.
+
+Official publications of the University are considered to be supplemental to the Faculty Policies Handbook.  These publications include but are not limited to the Amended and Restated Bylaws of California Lutheran University, the Employee Handbook, the Catalog, the Student Handbook, and other campus community and employee policies published by the administration.  Faculty members are responsible for being familiar with the contents of these and other University policy statements that have significance for their professional performance.
+
+Revisions to the Faculty Policies Handbook will be made in accordance with the Faculty Constitution, subject to the final approval of the Board of Regents.
+
+Develop a Faculty Policies Handbook Amendment Policy 
+
+The Task Force may want to consider supplementing the Faculty Constitution’s Amendments to the Bylaws of the Faculty Constitution with a policy addressing procedurally how the Faculty Policies Handbook is amended.  I recommend such a policy be included at the end of the Faculty Policies Handbook (before the Appendix if it remains).
+
+Faculty Handbook amendment policies typically identify who may submit or recommend proposed amendments (i.e., individual faculty member, Faculty Senate, faculty committee/task force, Deans, Provost, President, etc.) and the steps that must be followed to develop, vet, and revise the proposed amendment.  Further, such policies commonly outline the approval steps that must be followed.  If the Deans, Provost, or President, proposes an amendment or recommends that a policy be developed by the faculty, I also recommend that the following Association of Governing Boards of Colleges and Universities best practice be implemented: 
+
+Boards and presidents should plan reasonable time for consultative and decision-making processes and establish deadlines for their conclusion with the clear understanding that failure to act in accordance with these deadlines will mean that the next highest level in the governance process will have to proceed with decision making.  Even in the context of academic governance, a single individual or group should not be allowed to impede decisions through inaction.
+
+Association of Governing Boards of Colleges and Universities Statement on Board Responsibility for Institutional Governance, January 2010.  Model text can be provided upon request.
+
+Develop a Policy Addressing Administrators with Faculty Rank
+
+The Faculty Policies Handbook does not address administrators with faculty rank.  Such a policy is typically published in the Definition of Faculty section of a faculty handbook and includes a clause addressing retreat rights to join the faculty following the successful completion of the administrative assignment.  I recommended that a clause addressing this issue be developed by the Task Force.
+
+Develop a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Faculty Responsibility Policy
+
+I recommend that a clause be adopted for publication under the Faculty Responsibilities section of the handbook codifying that all faculty members are responsible for engaging in activities that enhance diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) at the University.  The text should align with the Contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion clause developed by the ART Task Force (assuming the ART Task Force clause is adopted by the faculty and approved by the Board of Regents).
+
+Reference Background Screens, Credential Verification in the Appointment of Faculty Section
+
+Some schools will include clauses in the Appointment Policies section of a faculty handbook indicating that candidates must successfully complete a background screen and have their academic credentials verified before final appointment.  The Department of Education also requires the University to provide a notice of the availability of the annual security report to those individuals it interviews if it solicits applications for a faculty position through an external advertisement.  
+
+
+
+
+
+Develop a Terminal Contract Clause
+
+I advocate that the Task Force develop a policy statement addressing Terminal Contracts under the Types of Contract section.  Terminal contracts are issued to probationary faculty who are not awarded tenure.
+
+Organizational Suggestions
+
+Finally, I believe the Task Force should consider moving the Appointment of Faculty section to a different location in the handbook.  Faculty appointment policies are normally published earlier in a faculty handbook, following the definition of faculty and faculty contract sections.  The Faculty Grievance Policy might also be better placed either under the Faculty Rights section or following the Faculty Separation section. Finally, to help better navigate the document and more easily reference policies, I propose that an automated numbering system be introduced to the handbook.
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Board Code of Regulations - Faculty Article Memo.txt [/INST] Page | 2
+
+
+
+
+
+April 27, 2022
+
+
+
+TO:	Board of Trustees, President Jones, & Provost Crowley
+
+FROM: 	Stephen Lazarus
+Sr. Consultant
+Stevens Strategy
+
+RE: 	Faculty Article of the Code of Regulations
+
+The Ohio Wesleyan Board of Trustees has requested that the University’s Faculty Handbook be reviewed and updated since it has been several years since the document has been substantively amended. Based on dialogue with President Jones and Provost Crowley, it is our understanding that one area of particular interest to the Board centers upon best practices with respect to whether human resource content such as leaves, salary level determinations, benefits, etc. should be included in the updated Faculty Handbook and, hence, subject to the Faculty approval.
+
+A comprehensive review of the University’s constitutional documents, including the Code of Regulations, Faculty Handbook, and any other applicable shared governance-related policy statements is therefore warranted. Accordingly, for this segment of the engagement, Dr. Stevens and Mr. Lazarus will analyze the above referenced constitutional documents to gain a clear understanding of the current delegation of responsibilities and decision-making authorities in place at the University and then issue a report as to whether these current practices align with best shared governance practices. If, in our professional judgement, there is misalignment with best shared governance practices, we will highlight those areas and outline at a high-level the changes we recommend be introduced to these documents so that they may better align with best practice and more clearly codify shared governance decision making authority at the University. We will then meet virtually with the Board’s Faculty Handbook Task Force to share the results of our report and recommendations
+
+In the sections that follow, I outline our firm’s general position on the inclusion of human resource and campus community policies of general applicability in faculty handbooks.  Thereafter, I review each of the policy areas referenced above, offering my professional judgment (see bold text) regarding whether they should remain in the Faculty Handbook. 
+
+I.	Analysis of Ohio Wesleyan’s Code of Regulations
+
+The answer to the above question centers primarily upon what authority has been delegated by the Board of Trustees to the Faculty and the President.  Pursuant to Article VIII, Section 2(d) of the of the University’s Code of Regulations, the Board of Trustees has delegated to the faculty primary responsibility, in part, for “faculty employment, promotions, tenure, merit increases, leaves of absences, and grants-in-aid for research.”   
+
+The above will undoubtedly be cited by the faculty if the administration or Board presses for the removal of the salary and leave of absence policies from the Faculty Handbook.  While the faculty has been granted primary responsibility in the above referenced areas, such responsibilities are subject to the review procedures provided elsewhere in the Code.  Primary responsibility does not equate to exclusive responsibility and the matters delegated to faculty are still subject to review by either the President or Board as delineated in the Code.  This raises the question, is the Board familiar with the above article vis-a-vis merit increases and leaves of absences and has it given consideration to amending the clause 2(d) to more closely align with the AUP/AGB/ACE Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities?  
+
+The proposed revisions more closely align the article with the AAUP/AGB/ACE Joint Statement on the Government of Colleges and Universities (“Joint Statement”), which can be found here:  https://www.aaup.org/report/statement-government-colleges-and-universities.  The pertinent clause in the Join Statement is found in Paragraph 5, which states in part:
+
+The faculty has primary responsibility for such fundamental areas as curriculum, subject matter and methods of instruction, research, faculty status, and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process.
+
+With respect to faculty status matters, the Joint Statement states:
+
+Faculty status and related matters are primarily a faculty responsibility; this area includes appointments, reappointments, decisions not to reappoint, promotions, the granting of tenure, and dismissal. The primary responsibility of the faculty for such matters is based upon the fact that its judgment is central to general educational policy. Furthermore, scholars in a particular field or activity have the chief competence for judging the work of their colleagues; in such competence it is implicit that responsibility exists for both adverse and favorable judgments. Likewise, there is the more general competence of experienced faculty personnel committees having a broader charge. Determinations in these matters should first be by faculty action through established procedures, reviewed by the chief academic officers with the concurrence of the board. The governing board and president should, on questions of faculty status, as in other matters where the faculty has primary responsibility, concur with the faculty judgment except in rare instances and for compelling reasons which should be stated in detail.
+
+As you can see from the above, it is apparent that the text in Article VIII - Faculty of the University’s Code of Regulations was informed by the Joint Statement; however, the listings of faculty responsibilities does not fully mirror the statement insomuch as it references merit increases and leaves of absences.  
+
+As I mentioned in my March 21st email, the Joint Statement does advocate later in Paragraph 5 that the faculty participate in the determination of ""policies and procedures governing salary increases.”  The fact that salary increases is not included in the listing of “primary” faculty responsibilities, however, is an important distinction because the term “primary responsibility” as used in Paragraph 5 of the Joint Statement imparts that the power of review or final decision lodged in the governing board or delegated by it to the president should be exercised adversely only in ""exceptional circumstances, and for reasons communicated to the faculty.”  Nonetheless, the Board should be prepared for the faculty to cite the salary increase clause from the Joint Statement if the Board elects to no longer delegate to the faculty responsibility for merit increases.  For this reason, I am suggesting that the Code’s clause be supplemented to state the faculty will have primary responsibility for “evaluation criteria for merit increases…” or words to this effect.  I think the key consideration is that the Board does not want to give faculty primary authority to set meet increase salaries.  Of course, as part of the shared governance process, the administration and faculty may work together to establish salary bands.
+
+Like salary increases, faculty leaves are not listed as an area of primary faculty responsibility in Paragraph 5 of the Joint Statement.  Regardless, the faculty will more than likely cite the AAUP ""Statement of the Principles on Leaves of Absence” (“Statement”) in opposition to the removal of leaves of absences from their delegated responsibilities (see attached for the AAUP statement).  The AAUP’s statement in this regard advocates that faculty leave policies and procedures ""be developed with full faculty participation.""  The primary focus of the AAUP statement centers upon leaves that support the professional development of faculty members.  However, there is a sentence in the Statement indicating that faculty leaves should also be granted for “illness, recovery, and maternity.”  Regarding the latter, it is important to note that the Statement was written in 1972 - well before the introduction of the Americans with Disabilities Act, which legislatively addresses these matters.  
+
+Based on the above, I am recommending that Article VIII of the Code be further amended to state that the faculty will have primarily responsibility for “professional development leave of absences.”   This, however, may be too generous and will need to be carefully weighed by the Board and President. It may be best to remove the reference to leaves altogether as it rare to see faculty leaves listed an area of primary responsibility in Board Bylaws in my experience. Out of curiosity, were the leaves set forth in the Faculty Handbook approved by the President or Board of Trustees?  I need to gain a better understanding of how policies in the handbook are approved as I do not see a Faculty Handbook amendment clause in the current Faculty Handbook.   
+
+With respect to how other schools address this issue outside of the Bylaws, leaves specifically applicable to faculty typically are published in Faculty Handbooks.  This includes sabbatical and other academic-related leaves.  Some also include faculty parental leave policies their handbooks.  For all other leaves generally available to benefit eligible employees (i.e., FMLA leaves, Bereavement, etc.), most faculty handbooks simply summarize the titles of the leaves and then reference or link to where they are published.  
+
+As I become more familiar with the handbook, it is apparent to me that any revisions or attempts to remove certain leaves from the handbook will be met with significant resistance.  Many of the leave policies are weighted heavily in favor of the faculty and in some instances are either mandatory (Pre and Post Tenure Regular Paid Leaves) or subject to faculty as opposed to administrative approval (i.e., Leaves without Pay).  
+
+We have discussed possibly connecting with the University’s attorney on the contract issue. It may also be useful to converse with her on revising the Code.  From a political standpoint, if revisions to the Code are advocated by legal counsel, there may perhaps be less pushback against the administration and Board.  
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+II.	Inclusion of Human Resource and Campus Community Policies
+
+While many universities and colleges publish select employment and campus-community policies in their faculty handbooks, they do so at the risk of publishing contradictory policies by addressing a topic in more than one policy publication.  Indeed, oftentimes a revision to a general human resources or campus community policy will not find its way into the Faculty Handbook.  This is a risk management issue that could possibly expose an institution to legal liability.  Moreover, the tradition of publishing select general human resource and campus community policies in faculty handbooks emanates from a time when policies were not published online and therefore were often included for ease of reference.  With today’s technology, this is no longer a concern.  Also, faculty handbooks typically only include a small portion of the institutional policies applicable to the faculty.  This may give rise to the misimpression that only the policies published in the faculty handbook are applicable to the faculty.  A faculty handbook should not be intended to state all institutional employment and campus community policies.
+
+Another key question for purposes of determining which policies should be published in a faculty handbook is whether the policy addresses a faculty personnel matter that falls within an area of primary faculty responsibility, a unique faculty right, or a policy that only applies to the faculty.  If the policy does not fall within one of these areas, I believe the better practice is either not to publish it in the faculty handbook or link to such policies and adopt text comparable to the following clause from the University of Redlands Faculty Handbook’s “Changes to this Handbook” policy:
+
+Other University policies included in this Handbook by reference (e.g., the Policy Prohibiting Illegal Discrimination and Harassment), some of which are provided as Appendices, may be subject to change by procedures other than those required to change the policies and procedures of this Handbook proper. 
+
+See Section 1.4 of the University of Redlands’ Faculty Handbook.
+
+Note: If the above model is utilized, it should be tailored to California Lutheran University by referencing the ADRI Chart.
+
+Adopting either approach provides greater clarity regarding which policies must be approved by the faculty via the handbook amendment policy.  The determination regarding whether a policy falls within an area of faculty responsibility or unique faculty right is guided by the institution’s overarching governance documents.   At California Lutheran, these include the Amended and Restated Bylaws of the University, Faculty Constitution, and ADRI Charts.  
+
+Based on the above, I recommend that faculty handbooks generally be limited in scope to matters designated as a primary faculty responsibility (i.e., faculty status matters) as delineated in the University’s governance documents and other personnel matters applicable to a faculty right (e.g., sabbatical leave, faculty grievances, professional development leaves applicable only to faculty, etc.).  Policies that do not fall within the above areas should either be removed or linked to the primary policy source.  
+
+Adopting this approach lessens the legal risk of the institution adopting contradictory policy statements and provide greater clarity regarding which policies must be decided or approved by the faculty.  Of course, such a practice does not diminish the faculty’s ability to provide consultative recommendations or input on policy matters outside of the above in accordance with the ADRI Charts.   Such consultative input is typically provided via Faculty Senate resolutions, faculty membership on standing university committees and task forces, and constructive dialogue with university administrators.  In addition, the Senate may consider matters of professional interest and faculty welfare, make recommendations to the president and other administrative officers as reflected in the Faculty Senate section of the Faculty Policies Handbook. 
+
+
+
+II.	Specific Policies Requested to be Reviewed
+
+. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Finally, I note that the Board has a Joint Trustee-Faculty Liaison Committee.  Does this committee need to play a role in revising Article VIII? 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Consensual Relations
+
+Schools are split on whether they publish a Consensual Relations Policy in the faculty handbook.  The decision is primarily based on whether the institution’s policy in this area applies only to faculty or all university employees.  Since consensual relations is not addressed in the Employee Handbook or any other University policy publication that I am aware of, I believe the current policy should remain in the Faculty Policies Handbook.  However, it is my recommendation that the University consider adopting a consensual relations policy that applies to all employees for publication in the Employee Handbook.  There is no reason the same principles set forth in the Faculty Policies Handbook Consensual Relations Policy should not apply to administrators, staff, and coaches.
+
+In terms of other revisions, I suggest that the Task Force supplement the “Consensual Relationships in the Instructional Context” clause to also prohibit a faculty member from exercising academic responsibility over a student with whom the faculty member has had a consensual relationship in the past.   The same conflicts of interest concerns that pertain to current students also apply to situations where the instructor and student had a former relationship.  For example, if the relationship did not end well, the instructor’s objectivity may be clouded, giving rise to a potential conflict of interest.
+
+In addition, the Task Force may want to add a cross-reference to HR Policy-006, which prohibits employees from engaging in “sexual harassment” of students.  The policy defines sexual harassment as:
+
+“unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal, visual, or physical conduct of a sexual nature, made by someone from or in the work or educational setting, under any of the following conditions: (a) submission to the conduct is explicitly or implicitly made a term or a condition of a student’s employment, academic status, or progress; (b) submission to, or rejection of, the conduct by a student is used as the basis of academic decisions affecting the individual; (c) the conduct has the purpose or effect of having a negative impact upon the student’s academic performance, or of creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive educational environment; (d) submission to, or rejection of, the conduct by a student is used as the basis for any decision affecting a student regarding benefits and services, honors, programs, or activities available at or through the educational institution.”
+
+Compensation
+
+It is common to have a brief section in a stand-alone section of the faculty handbook proper (i.e., not in the Appendix) that addresses faculty-specific compensation matters only.   References to salary targets and/or compensation rates are usually stated in general terms given they are subject to revision due to market realities and are traditionally a legally reserved authority of the board (or delegated by the Board to the president, who may in turn delegate to the provost) to establish and approve.  Pursuant to shared governance principles, however, such ranges are developed in consultation with the Provost and a faculty standing committee or task force; or via faculty membership on an appropriate university standing committee.  See Chapman University’s Faculty Manual (Section VII) and Loyola Marymount University’s Handbook for examples of model text in this regard.  
+
+Based on the above, I recommend that the Task Force include a brief compensation section in the main body of the Faculty Policies Handbook that (1) includes a clause that refers and links to Section V of the Employee Handbook; (2) addresses the salary schedule and compensation rates in general terms as outlined above; (3) delineates the manner in which the Provost solicits input from the appropriate faculty committee on salary schedule and compensation rates; and (4) includes a clause stating that matters of faculty and staff grade levels, starting salary, and salary adjustments are delegated by the Board to the President, who, in turn, may delegate them to the appropriate vice president (see the ADRI Chart). 
+
+Fringe Benefits
+
+Some schools opt not to reprint Fringe Benefits in the handbook (see e.g., University of Redlands, Chapman University, Pacific Lutheran University) given these are within the board delegated purview of the administration, while other elect to include a benefit section.  For those that do include a benefit section, it is common for many to link to those benefits that are not unique to the faculty (see e.g., University of Santa Clara) rather than reprint the policy in totality.  Some institutions will reprint the benefit policies, but add a clause indicating the benefits, unless otherwise noted, are approved by the administration after appropriate notice and advisory consultation with the faculty.  See the University of Pacific Faculty Handbook for an example of this latter approach.  Of course, there are also representative examples where the benefit policies are reprinted without such a caveat.  
+
+Consistent with the Section I comments, I recommend that the fringe benefit policies currently reprinted in the Faculty Policies Handbook that apply to all eligible university employees be linked to the Employee Handbook or removed altogether.  My suggestion in this regard is based primarily on the ADRI Chart, which reflects that the faculty does not provide input on university benefits.
+
+Conflicts of Interest
+
+The Conflicts of Interest Policy published in the Faculty Policies Handbook applies to all university employees.  It essentially mirrors the version of the policy in the Employee Handbook; however, the two policies are not identical.  Thus, this is an example where publishing two policies in more than one publication can result in disparate policy statements.  Based on the above, I recommend the policy be removed from the Faculty Policies Handbook and replaced with a link to the Conflicts of Interest Policy published in the Employee Handbook.  
+
+Of note, the Task Force may also want to add a clause referring the reader to conflicts of interest in the sponsored research setting.  If the University does not have a policy in this regard, I advocate that such a policy be developed.  See the following examples of such policies: 
+
+https://www.fordham.edu/info/23841/financial_conflict_of_interest_in_research/5128/university_policy
+
+https://www.stmarytx.edu/policies/academic-affairs/conflicts-of-interest-policy-for-sponsored-research/
+
+https://www.ithaca.edu/sponsored-research/conflict-interest-and-disclosure
+
+Traditionally, the above policy is published either in a research manual, academic policy manual, or on the Office of Sponsored Research’s webpage.
+
+Political Activity and Public Statements
+
+Political activity is addressed in a subsection of the Outside Employment and Professional Activity Policy in the current Faculty Policies Handbook.  It is not unusual for some schools to include a political activities clause in the faculty handbook that is based on the AAUP Statement on Professors and Political Activity.  For those universities that do opt to include an outside activities policy in the faculty handbook, many will commonly reprint the policy under the Faculty Responsibility heading.  Since political activities is not addressed in the Employee Policies Handbook, I recommend that the clause remain in the current Faculty Policies Handbook.  I further advocate that text be developed indicating that if a leave of absence is required to accommodate the faculty member’s political activity, such leave should be formally approved pursuant to the Employee Handbook’s Personal Leave without Pay Policy.  Moreover, I advise that a sentence be added specifying that the terms of any approved leave (i.e., impact on probationary period, years in rank requirements for promotion, etc.) are documented and approved by either the Dean or Provost.
+
+External Relations Policy 
+
+There are three policies reprinted under the External Relations Policy: Controversial Issues or Speakers; Solicitations, Recognitions and Honors, and Access to Donor Lists.  Each of these policies are either campus community or employee policies and I therefore recommend that they be removed from the Faculty Policies Handbook or linked to the appropriate policy source.  Of note, there is a Workplace Solicitation/Distribution policy in the current Employee Handbook that does not mirror the text in the Faculty Policies Handbook.  
+
+I could not locate where the University publishes the Controversial Issues or Speakers Policy.  However, this is a policy that applies (or should apply) to the entire campus community, including student organizations.   I recommend that the administration consider adopting a campus community webpage or campus community manual that publishes policies such as this, as well as other broad ranging policies that impact everyone on campus (i.e., security, IT, Environmental Health and Safety, etc.).
+
+III.	Other Recommendations
+
+Although outside of the scope of the policies Dr. Heresco requested I review and comment upon, below I provide policy and content recommendations the Task Force may want to consider developing as it continues its work to update the Faculty Policies Handbook.
+
+Adherence to University Policies 
+
+Under the Faculty Responsibilities section of the handbook, paragraph 6 states that faculty members are responsible for “knowing and abiding by the policies and procedures published in the current version of the Faculty Governance Handbook, this Faculty Policies Handbook, and the undergraduate and graduate catalogs.”  I believe adding the Employee Handbook to the listing is appropriate since there are policies in that document that apply to faculty.  Also, there are other University policies that apply to faculty, including but not limited to the Policy on Sexual Harassment and Title IX, HR Policy 006, the Alcohol & Drug Free Policy, etc.  As such, I advise that consideration be given to amending paragraph 6 as follows:
+
+6. knowing and abiding by University policies that apply to them, including but not limited to the policies and procedures published in the current version of the Faculty Governance Handbook, this Faculty Policies Handbook, and the undergraduate and graduate catalogs, and the Employee Handbook.
+
+Freedom from Harassment Policy
+
+I recommend that this policy be removed and replaced with a link to the Freedom from Harassment policy published in the Employee Handbook.  Also, links to the Policy on Sexual Harassment Prohibited by Title IX and HR Policy 006 - Harassment, Discrimination, Biased Conduct and Retaliation Prohibition should be added. In this regard, I advise that the Task Force collaborate with Human Resources to develop appropriate text under the Freedom from Harassment (and Discrimination) heading that affirms the University’s commitment to a workplace environment free from unlawful harassment and discrimination and references and links to the policies referenced above.
+
+Working Conditions, Library and Computer Use, Expense Reimbursement, Chapel and Convocation
+
+I recommend that these policies be removed from the Handbook for the reasons set forth in Section I of this memorandum.  If, however, the Task Force elects to keep the policies in the handbook for ease of reference, I recommend that the policies be replaced with links to the extent they are published in other university policy publications.  
+
+Research and Publication 
+
+I recommend that the University consider developing an academic policy manual that houses relevant policies addressing issues such as program reviews and approvals, academic research misconduct, IRB, Animal Research, Sponsored Research Conflict of Interests, and the like.  
+
+Academic Honesty Policy
+
+I recommend that this policy be removed from the Handbook for the reasons set forth in Section I of this memorandum.  If, however, the Task Force elects to keep the policy in the handbook for ease of reference, I recommend that it be replaced with a link to the version of the policy in the Undergraduate Catalog.  
+
+Additional Policy Statements and Recommendations
+
+Develop an Introduction Statement
+
+I recommend that the Task Force develop an introductory clause at the beginning of the handbook.   Below is a sample from a prior client’s handbook for consideration; however, the Task Force should develop a tailored statement unique to California Lutheran University:
+
+The purpose of the Faculty Policies Handbook is to provide members of the Faculty as defined herein with information regarding the policies, procedures and regulations of the College as they pertain to matters of faculty status and rights.  It supersedes all previous faculty personnel policies and procedures published in prior Faculty Policies Handbooks.
+
+Official publications of the University are considered to be supplemental to the Faculty Policies Handbook.  These publications include but are not limited to the Amended and Restated Bylaws of California Lutheran University, the Employee Handbook, the Catalog, the Student Handbook, and other campus community and employee policies published by the administration.  Faculty members are responsible for being familiar with the contents of these and other University policy statements that have significance for their professional performance.
+
+Revisions to the Faculty Policies Handbook will be made in accordance with the Faculty Constitution, subject to the final approval of the Board of Regents.
+
+Develop a Faculty Policies Handbook Amendment Policy 
+
+The Task Force may want to consider supplementing the Faculty Constitution’s Amendments to the Bylaws of the Faculty Constitution with a policy addressing procedurally how the Faculty Policies Handbook is amended.  I recommend such a policy be included at the end of the Faculty Policies Handbook (before the Appendix if it remains).
+
+Faculty Handbook amendment policies typically identify who may submit or recommend proposed amendments (i.e., individual faculty member, Faculty Senate, faculty committee/task force, Deans, Provost, President, etc.) and the steps that must be followed to develop, vet, and revise the proposed amendment.  Further, such policies commonly outline the approval steps that must be followed.  If the Deans, Provost, or President, proposes an amendment or recommends that a policy be developed by the faculty, I also recommend that the following Association of Governing Boards of Colleges and Universities best practice be implemented: 
+
+Boards and presidents should plan reasonable time for consultative and decision-making processes and establish deadlines for their conclusion with the clear understanding that failure to act in accordance with these deadlines will mean that the next highest level in the governance process will have to proceed with decision making.  Even in the context of academic governance, a single individual or group should not be allowed to impede decisions through inaction.
+
+Association of Governing Boards of Colleges and Universities Statement on Board Responsibility for Institutional Governance, January 2010.  Model text can be provided upon request.
+
+Develop a Policy Addressing Administrators with Faculty Rank
+
+The Faculty Policies Handbook does not address administrators with faculty rank.  Such a policy is typically published in the Definition of Faculty section of a faculty handbook and includes a clause addressing retreat rights to join the faculty following the successful completion of the administrative assignment.  I recommended that a clause addressing this issue be developed by the Task Force.
+
+Develop a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Faculty Responsibility Policy
+
+I recommend that a clause be adopted for publication under the Faculty Responsibilities section of the handbook codifying that all faculty members are responsible for engaging in activities that enhance diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) at the University.  The text should align with the Contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion clause developed by the ART Task Force (assuming the ART Task Force clause is adopted by the faculty and approved by the Board of Regents).
+
+Reference Background Screens, Credential Verification in the Appointment of Faculty Section
+
+Some schools will include clauses in the Appointment Policies section of a faculty handbook indicating that candidates must successfully complete a background screen and have their academic credentials verified before final appointment.  The Department of Education also requires the University to provide a notice of the availability of the annual security report to those individuals it interviews if it solicits applications for a faculty position through an external advertisement.  
+
+
+
+
+
+Develop a Terminal Contract Clause
+
+I advocate that the Task Force develop a policy statement addressing Terminal Contracts under the Types of Contract section.  Terminal contracts are issued to probationary faculty who are not awarded tenure.
+
+Organizational Suggestions
+
+Finally, I believe the Task Force should consider moving the Appointment of Faculty section to a different location in the handbook.  Faculty appointment policies are normally published earlier in a faculty handbook, following the definition of faculty and faculty contract sections.  The Faculty Grievance Policy might also be better placed either under the Faculty Rights section or following the Faculty Separation section. Finally, to help better navigate the document and more easily reference policies, I propose that an automated numbering system be introduced to the handbook.
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Board Talking Points.txt [/INST] Board Bylaw Changes
+
+  
+
+
+
+Middle States Guidance
+
+Middle States Standard 4, which is reprinted below, addresses expectations regarding an accredited institution’s system of governance.  
+
+Middle States Standard 4: Leadership and Governance: “The institution’s system of governance clearly defines the roles of institutional constituencies in policy development and decision-making.  The governance structure includes an active governing body with sufficient autonomy to assure institutional integrity and to fulfill its responsibilities of policy and resource development, consistent with the mission of the institution.” 
+
+The standard is more fully explained in Middle States’ written narrative describing the standard, as well as in the section entitled “Fundamental Elements of Leadership and Governance”, which is reprinted below.  
+
+Fundamental Elements of Leadership and Governance: “An accredited institution is expected to possess or demonstrate the following attributes or activities: 
+
+written governing documents, such as a constitution, by-laws, enabling legislation, charter or other similar documents, that: 
+
+delineate the governance structure and provide for collegial governance, and the structure’s composition, duties and responsibilities.  In proprietary, corporate and similar types of institutions, a separate document may establish the duties and responsibilities of the governing body as well as the selection process; 
+
+assign authority and accountability for policy development and decision making, including a process for the involvement of appropriate institutional constituencies in policy development and decision making; 
+
+provide for the selection process for governing body members.” 
+
+
+
+As set forth above, Middle States expects an accredited institution to possess bylaws that delineate the board’s duties and responsibilities.  The extent to which the Bylaws state specific duties and responsibilities admittedly varies amongst higher education institutions.  Dr. Robert O’Neil’s comments in the 2012 AGB publication, “Updating Board Bylaws: A Guide for Colleges and Universities” highlights this disparity in practice amongst higher education institutions:
+
+“A higher education institution’s bylaws give formal shape to the board’s responsibilities as a governing body.  Most bylaws give the board broadly specified powers to oversee and act on behalf of the institution, which allows the board to delegate responsibility as needed and provides flexibility in times of crisis.  
+
+Because this simple language offers little guidance about the respective responsibilities of the board and administration, however, some bylaws might outline the powers of the board more specifically….
+
+Occasionally, the bylaws outline specific responsibilities that reside with the board, thus enabling the board to understand its relationship with other governing authorities (such as the state, university system, or state higher education agency) and/or with the administration (most notably the president and occasionally the faculty).”
+
+We believe the better practice is for the bylaws to state the board’s powers in broad terms, but also list specific essential reserved powers so as to provide increased clarity and transparency.  Hence, we have provided suggested text in Article V of the Bylaws that delineates specific governing board duties referenced by Middle States in its written narrative describing Standard 4. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Handbook
+
+Middle States Guidance:
+
+As noted earlier, Middle States Standard 4 specifically addresses the Board’s role in overseeing personnel policy.  In its written narrative describing the requirements of the standard, Middle States’ notes that it is often the role of the governing body to “establish personnel policies and procedures (including salary schedules.)”
+
+
+
+AGB Guidance:
+
+The Association of Governing Boards also offers guidance with respect to the Board’s role in setting policy.
+
+“In the simplest terms, policy setting is the responsibility of the board, and administration is the business of the chief executive, whether he or she is called president or chancellor.” 
+
+“Typical examples of areas in which boards set policies include mission, degree requirements, tuition, affirmative action, executive compensation, conflict of interest, personnel matters, investment and budget guidelines, and descriptions of how the board will manage its own affairs. Trustees are responsible for developing policy (often—and appropriately—at the initiative of administrators) and approving or adopting policies developed by administrators.” 
+
+
+
+Source: Policy Making and Administrative Oversight, AGB Board Basics Series: The Fundamentals, Terrence J. MacTaggart
+
+
+
+AAUP Guidance:
+
+The American Association of University Professors (AAUP), in its Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities, also recognizes the governing board’s role in policy approval.  
+
+“One of the governing board’s important tasks is to ensure the publication of codified statements that define the overall policies and procedures of the institution under its jurisdiction.
+
+The board plays a central role in relating the likely needs of the future to predictable resources; it has the responsibility for husbanding the endowment; it is responsible for obtaining needed capital and operating funds; and in the broadest sense of the term it should pay attention to personnel policy.” 
+
+With respect to policy specifically addressing faculty status and related matters, such as those policies set forth in the Faculty Handbook, the AAUP statement reads:
+
+“Faculty status and related matters are primarily a faculty responsibility; this area includes appointments, reappointments, decisions not to reappoint, promotions, the granting of tenure, and dismissal. The primary responsibility of the faculty for such matters is based upon the fact that its judgment is central to general educational policy. Furthermore, scholars in a particular field or activity have the chief competence for judging the work of their colleagues; in such competence it is implicit that responsibility exists for both adverse and favorable judgments. Likewise, there is the more general competence of experienced faculty personnel committees having a broader charge.  Determinations in these matters should first be by faculty action through established procedures, reviewed by the chief academic officers with the concurrence of the board. The governing board and president should, on questions of faculty status, as in other matters where the faculty has primary responsibility, concur with the faculty judgment except in rare instances and for compelling reasons which should be stated in detail.”
+
+
+
+Finally, it is also important to note that the Gwyendd-Mercy governing board has traditionally approved the Faculty Handbook in the past.  The 2011 version of the Faculty Handbook provided to Stevens Strategy at the onset of our engagement reflects that either Board or the Academic Affairs Committee has approved prior iterations of the document in 1988, 1998, and 2006.  We would advocate that the Board not abdicate this past practice for all of the reasons delineated above.</s>"
+<s>[INST] Bob Jones University IWPM Proposal.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Boyer Scholarship Model.txt [/INST] All faculty members should be productive scholars, for scholarship is an intrinsic element of academic life at the University.  Scholarship involves on-going learning within one’s field of study, the creation of new knowledge and expressions of those new skills and knowledge, and active commitment to and participation in one’s affiliated profession.  To acknowledge that scholarly productivity is an essential component of a faculty member’s duties is not to diminish the importance of excellent teaching, but rather to ensure that teaching is able to draw upon the intellectual richness that typically characterizes a community of scholars. 
+
+																			Scholarship encompasses five basic types of scholarship as follows: 
+
+Scholarship of Discovery (Traditional Disciplinary Research): The Scholarship of Discovery involves rigorous investigation aimed at the discovery of new knowledge within a focused area of expertise, in its broadest sense.  It includes, but is not limited to, what is sometimes referred to as basic or original research.  Such scholarship includes recognition of the faculty member by peers as an independent, original, and substantive researcher who contributes to the field, as evidenced by:
+
+Publication of original research in rigorously refereed major journals;
+
+A record of externally-funded research awarded through peer review;
+
+National or international prizes or awards;
+
+Invitation to hold lectureships;
+
+Invited lectures, particularly at major professional meetings;
+
+Documented testimonials of research excellence;
+
+Postings to peer-reviewed, professionally affiliated websites and electronic databases; 
+
+The creation of peer-reviewed, research-oriented websites;
+
+Evidence of seminal work.
+
+																			Scholarship of Integration: The Scholarship of Integration emphasizes fitting one’s own research -- or the research of others -- into larger intellectual patterns.  Such scholarship makes meaningful connections between previously unrelated topics, facts, or observations, such as cross-disciplinary synthesis or an integrative framework within a discipline that results in a publication or presentation in a suitable forum.  Examples of such endeavors include:
+
+Authoring or co-authoring publications in peer reviewed journals;
+
+Serving as a principal investigator of externally-funded research; 
+
+Presentations at professional meetings with refereed publication in the proceedings, where the participants are from outside the faculty member’s discipline and the forum is outside of the faculty member’s discipline;
+
+The publication of peer-reviewed works of synthesis conveying or summarizing knowledge for specialists outside of the faculty member’s discipline;
+
+Conference participation as a panelist, discussant, or session chair where the forum is outside of the faculty member’s discipline;
+
+Participation as a panelist or speaker in campus colloquia and open seminars;
+
+Service as a referee for articles, extended reviews, editorial boards;
+
+Professional awards and recognition for such efforts.
+
+Scholarship of Application: The Scholarship of Application encompasses scholarly activities that seek to relate the knowledge in one’s field to the affairs of society.  Such scholarship includes the acquisition of knowledge through practice and the responsible application of knowledge to the solution of practical problems.  The scholarship of application can be measured by impact on the discipline and/or community, the scope of the project, the originality of design and methodology, the extent to which results can be generalized, the connection to industry, visibility gained for the researcher and the University through the dissemination process, the significance of the work to the discipline, and the peer review processes.  Examples of such scholarship include:
+
+Publications or juried presentations that focus on applications or practical problems in the field; 
+
+The development of new inventions, products, processes, or significant software;
+
+Activities to acquire or maintain certification/licensure for disciplinary specialties as outlined by the respective professional organization; 
+
+The provision of peer-reviewed technical assistance to outside constituencies;
+
+Giving workshops to train other faculty members in a certain method or approach;
+
+The award of external funding, including successful grant applications for projects that focus on application problems;
+
+Professional awards and recognition for such efforts.
+
+																			Scholarship of Teaching: The Scholarship of Teaching encompasses scholarly activities that focus on transforming and extending knowledge about pedagogy.  The scholarship of teaching is not equivalent to teaching.  Conversely, classroom teaching and remaining current in the discipline are not relevant criteria for evaluating teaching scholarship.  Examples of such scholarship include:
+
+Peer-reviewed publications, presentations at professional conferences, or being a speaker at an invited talk related to pedagogy in one’s area;
+
+Authoring textbooks;
+
+Participation in formal course work beyond the doctorate or terminal degree, special courses, and/or workshops to improve upon or acquire professional competencies in content-pedagogy, including emerging technologies;
+
+Writing extended reviews of recent books and/or articles in the content-pedagogy of the faculty member’s discipline, either for peer-reviewed publication or internal review as tangible evidence of remaining abreast of the successful instructional strategies of one's discipline;
+
+The creation and implementation of an innovative, original course with content-specific goals and a method for external assessment which is publicly documented;
+
+Professional awards and recognition for such efforts.
+
+Scholarship of Artistic Endeavor:  The Scholarship of Artistic Endeavor encompasses scholarly activities which are directly related to the creative process, especially in the fine or applied arts. Such scholarship may seek to bring about new artistic creations or to present existing works. Examples of such scholarship include:
+
+Stage presentations (both drama and music);
+
+Exhibitions;
+
+New editions of music or visual art; 
+
+Musical performances; 
+
+Art exhibits; 
+
+The creation of new art forms or new techniques within an art form.
+
+Assessment of Scholarship
+
+The evaluation of scholarship includes, but is not necessarily limited to, whether the work is well expressed, innovative, comprehensive, and visible, and whether it has been favorably reviewed by, and has influenced others according to the following criteria:
+
+Well Expressed: Scholarship is well expressed if it effectively communicates the content of the work.  At a minimum, the work must be appropriately organized and presented through a suitable medium.  The clarity of the work is typically an important consideration.
+
+Innovative: Scholarship is innovative if it is original in a meaningful sense.  The originality of the work may relate to the content of the work, its mode of dissemination, its source, and perhaps to other matters as well.  For instance, a written work may be innovative if it addresses a previously uncharted topic or brings a new perspective to bear upon previously identified ideas or issues; because it carries a message to a new audience or employs a new medium; or because it requires scholars to extend a personal range of scholarly competence.  
+
+Comprehensive: Scholarship is comprehensive if its presentation reflects a broad appreciation of existing information, relevant issues, and possible alternatives.  Whether the scholar has placed a work into context is a significant consideration.  Another important factor is whether the work has an appropriate degree of complexity in light of applicable limitations, such as those relating to space, time, or resources.  The comprehensiveness of the work is enhanced to the degree that the work is interdisciplinary.
+
+Visible: Scholarship is visible if it is communicated to an audience in a manner that is likely to enhance the reputation of the individual scholar and the University.  The size and nature of the audience reached by the work is relevant to this determination.  In addition, in the case of written works, consideration should be given to the prestige of the publisher and the prominence given to the work.  Similar considerations apply to the appraisal of non-written works. For instance, in the case of artistic endeavors, the prestige of a museum or concert hall and the prominence given to the work is relevant to this determination.
+
+Reviewed: Scholarship is reviewed when it is subject to scrutiny by others.  Review of a work may occur at several stages: (i) pre-dissemination; (ii) during the dissemination process; and (iii) post-dissemination.  Prior to dissemination, drafts and other tentative forms of a work may be evaluated by peers or others within or outside the University for the purpose of soliciting guidance.  During the dissemination process, potential publishers and others may evaluate the merits of a work with a view toward determining whether it deserves a forum.  After dissemination, the work may be the subject of reviews, which evaluate the final product of the scholarship. 
+
+Influential: Scholarship is influential if it affects the conduct or work of others.  For instance, there is evidence that a work is influential if a book is adopted for use in others’ classrooms or a visual art is displayed in a museum.</s>"
+<s>[INST] Bylaw Template.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Bylaws Memo Final Draft.txt [/INST] Colleagues, 
+
+This memorandum sets forth the reasons why the Working Group believes it critical to update current Faculty Legislation at this moment and highlights select sections within the Faculty Bylaws that serve to protect faculty interests and the College as a whole.  For transparency, we have also identified policies in current Legislation that are not included in the Faculty Bylaws.  
+
+We encourage our colleagues to carefully review this latest iteration of the Faculty Bylaws, which have been revised based on feedback provided during the various open meetings held earlier this month and entries to the Question/Feedback Form.  All newly introduced changes to the Bylaws are highlighted in blue text for ease of reference and are often accompanied by a “Final Draft” comment note explaining the rationale for the change. Also, please note that the Working Group has provided responses to colleague comments in the Question/Feedback Form.   
+
+
+
+Why Update Legislation
+
+Documentation of Accreditation Compliance
+
+Wheaton's Five-Year Interim Report is due to NECHE in early Spring 2024.  Below, we list those Articles and/or sections within the proposed Faculty Bylaws that, if adopted, may be cited in the Five-Year Interim Report to demonstrate compliance with applicable accreditation standards.
+
+Article II, Section 1: Faculty Status-Types of Appointments
+
+This section of Article II is new and was drafted to formally define and codify the various types of faculty appointments in place at Wheaton, including but not limited to the newly approved Professors of Practice-line and Visiting Faculty categories.  Per NECHE Standard 6.1, the college is expected to clearly define all faculty categories, including the role of each category in fulfilling the college’s mission.  Current Legislation does not include any references to either of the new faculty categories, nor does it address Administrative Faculty or Emeriti Faculty status. 
+
+Note: Both the Professors of Practice-line and Visiting Faculty categories have replaced the Associate and Non-Tenure Track Continuing Faculty sections of the current Legislation document.  
+
+Article III – Faculty Rights and Standards of Professional Conduct 
+
+Per NECHE Standard 6.9, the College is expected to have in place a “statement of expectations and processes to ensure that faculty act responsibly and ethically, observe the established conditions of their employment, and otherwise function in a manner consistent with the mission and purposes of the institution.”  Article III was developed by the Working Group to address this standard.  If adopted, this Article, as well as relevant policies in the Wheaton College Employee Handbook for Faculty, may be cited in the college’s Interim Report as evidence of compliance with NECHE Standard 6.9.
+
+
+
+Article IV, Section 1 – Duties and Responsibilities of the Full-time Teaching Faculty
+
+NECHE Standard 6.8 requires the College, in either a handbook or other written documents, to define “the responsibilities of faculty and other members of the instructional team; the criteria for their recruitment, appointment, retention, evaluation, promotion, and, if applicable, tenure; and policies for resolving grievances.”  Article IV, Section 1 has been developed by the Working Group to address the first element of the standard (i.e., the responsibilities of faculty).  
+
+In addition to Article IV, Section 1, the following sections and/or policies in the proposed Faculty Bylaws may be cited to further demonstrating compliance with Standard 6.8.  These include, but are not limited to:
+
+Article IV, Section 2.1 – Evaluation Criteria (New Section)
+
+Article IV, Section 2.1.2 – Academic Unit Evaluation Criteria (New Section)
+
+Article IV, Section 2.2 – Evaluation of Tenure Track Faculty for Reappointment (Amended to Include Detailed Evaluation Criterion and Align with YESE Form)
+
+Article IV, Section 2.3 – Annual Evaluation of Professor of the Practice-line Faculty for Reappointment (New Section)
+
+Article IV, Section 3.1.1 – Criteria for Promotion in Academic Rank (Amended to Provide More Detailed Criteria for Promotion to Full Professor)
+
+Article IV, Section 4.2 – Criteria for the Awarding of Tenure (Amended to Provide More Detailed Criteria for Awarding Tenure)
+
+Article IV, Section 1.2 – Scholarly or Creative Activity
+
+Per NECHE Standard 6.11, the College is expected to “clearly define the scholarly expectations for faculty in a manner consistent with its mission and purposes and the level of degrees offered.” The standard further requires that faculty, through their scholarly pursuits, “be current in the theory, knowledge, skills, and pedagogy of their discipline or profession.”  Per the standard, scholarship and instruction are mutually supportive.  Based on the above standard, the Working Group developed the text in Article IV, Section 1.2 addressing the responsibility of full-time teaching faculty to engage in scholarly and creative work activities.  While scholarly and creative activity is addressed in current Legislation as part of the criterion for promotion and tenure, the Working Group believes that this section more clearly articulates faculty responsibilities in this area.  See also the detailed evaluation criteria in Article IV, Subsection 2.1.1.2, which may similarly be cited in the Interim Report as evidence of compliance with the standard.
+
+Article IV, Sections 2, 3, and 4
+
+												Per NECHE Standard 6.10, the College is expected to “employ effective procedures for the regular evaluation of appointments, performance and retention.”  The standard further states that evaluative criteria should “reflect the mission and purposes of the institution and the importance it attaches to the various responsibilities of, e.g., teaching, advising, assessment, scholarship, creative activities, research, and professional and community service.”  Expectations in these areas should be “stated clearly and weighted appropriately.”  Based on this standard, and in keeping with best practice, the Working Group has developed general evaluation criteria for each category of performance, as well as adopted text permitting academic units to develop discipline-specific criteria (see Article IV, Section 2.1.2).  Clearly documented evaluation criteria, in the Working Group’s view, will allows for greater transparency, clarity, and consistency of application.  In addition to the above, the Working Group has developed more fully defined criteria for the awarding of tenure (see Article IV, Section 4.2) and promotion to full Professor (see Article IV, Section 3.1.1).  We have also more fully defined criteria for reappointment (see Article IV, Sections 2.2 and 2.3).
+
+												It is also important to note that DEI literature advocates for transparency and clarity with respect to faculty evaluations, including clearly defined evaluation criteria.  See the following white papers for further information:
+
+												https://www.acenet.edu/Documents/Equity-Minded-Faculty-Evaluation-Reform.pdf 
+
+												https://www.luminafoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/equity-minded-faculty-evaluation-principles.pdf
+
+
+
+Protect All of Wheaton's Faculty
+
+Current Legislation does not include and thus does not protect several important categories of faculty positions at Wheaton: e.g., faculty who hold joint appointments, Professor of the Practice-line faculty, faculty who support programs that do not have department status. They are scholars, scientists, artists, and practitioners who deliver crucial aspects of the Wheaton curriculum.  
+
+Below we list several areas within the proposed Faculty Bylaws that serve to protect Professor of the Practice-line faculty, as well as faculty who hold joint appointments and who support programs that do not have department status.
+
+Article I, Section 4.1 – Academic Departments and Programs: Defines academic department and programs and addresses joint appointments and faculty members who hold appointments in a non-departmental academic program.
+
+Article II, Section 1.1.2 - Professor of the Practice-line Faculty: Defines the Professor of the Practice-line faculty and references associated duties, rights, and protections.
+
+Article II, Section 1.5 – Academic Ranks and Titles: Defines that various academic ranks and titles and associated qualifications of all full-time teaching faculty, including but not limited to Professors of the Practice-line faculty.
+
+Article II, Section 2.2.1(2) - Duration of Appointment: Paragraph 2 delineates the duration of contracts issued to Professors of the Practice-line faculty.
+
+Article II, Section 2.5 - Joint Appointments: Addresses joint appointments at the college.  It contemplates the identification of a home department or program, as well as the use of MOU’s to clarify assignment of duties, the allocation of salary, departmental/program governance rights, and provision for office and laboratory space as applicable to both the primary and secondary department/program.
+
+Article IV, Section 2.3 – Annual Evaluation of Professor of the Practice-line Faculty for Reappointment: Sets forth detailed procedures and criteria for the annual evaluation of Professor of the Practice-line faculty members.
+
+Article IV, Section 3.2 – Promotion to Senior Professor of the Practice: Sets forth detailed procedures and criteria for promotion to Senior Professor of the Practice.
+
+Article IV, Section 5.2 – Full-Time Teaching Faculty Professional Development Funds: Codifies current college policy of providing annual professional developments funds to all full-time teaching faculty, including Professor of the Practice-line faculty.
+
+
+
+In addition to the above, it is important to note that several other new policies and/or amendments to current Legislation have been introduced in the Faculty Bylaws to protect all full-time teaching faculty members.  This includes, but is not limited to, the following:
+
+Article II, Section 2 – Faculty Contracts (New Section)
+
+Article IV, Section 5.2 – Full-Time Teaching Faculty Professional Development Funds (New Policy)
+
+Article IV, Section 7 – Disciplinary Action Short of Suspension or Dismissal (New Policy)
+
+Article IV, Section 8.2.1 – Dismissal for Adequate Cause (Amended to More Fully Define Adequate Cause and Introduce Additional Best Practices)
+
+Article IV, Section 8.2.3 – Termination of Appointment Due to Program Discontinuation (Amended to More Fully Define Educational Consideration and to More Fully Define Role of the Joint Committee)
+
+Article IV, Section 9.4 – Faculty Grievances: Cases in Which Improper Procedure or Inadequate Consideration is Alleged (Amended to Define Prejudicial Error and Inadequate Consideration)
+
+Article VI – Amendments to Faculty Bylaws (New Policy Developed to Provide Clarity Re: How Bylaws Will Be Updated)
+
+
+
+Removal of Gender Pronouns and Updating of Titles
+
+The Working Group has updated current Legislation text to remove reference to all gender pronouns.  It has also updated outdated administrative titles and offices.
+
+
+
+
+
+Current Legislation Not Included in Bylaws
+
+For transparency, we list below current Legislation that is not included in the Faculty Bylaws:
+
+Article I.O - Associate Faculty:  The Associate Faculty and Non-Tenure Track Continuing Faculty designations are being replaced going forward with the Professor of Practice-line and Visiting Faculty categories.  Text defining these new categories has been developed by the Working Group in accordance with the Full-time Faculty Contract Proposal and PoP Framework documents provided to the group by the Provost’s Office. Given the College’s anticipated adoption of the new Professor of Practice-line and Visiting Faculty categories, the Working Group has not reprinted the Associate and Non-Tenure Track Continuing Faculty legislation in the Faculty Bylaws.
+
+Article I.P - Non-Tenure Track Continuing Faculty: see comment above.
+
+Part Two - The Classroom: The Working Group recommends that the Faculty Bylaws be limited in scope to ‘faculty status’ matters, as well as other policies that address unique faculty rights or responsibilities.  As such, the Working Group recommends that the academic policies in Part Two of our current Legislation either be solely reprinted in the academic catalog or as a stand-alone Academic Policy Manual, which houses not only academic policy, but also policies addressing academic program administration and research related policies (i.e., approval/modification of academic programs, assigning of courses, academic program review, IRB and animal research, research misconduct, conflicts of interest in federal sponsored research, etc.). 
+
+Part Three - Honor Code and Judicial Procedures: The Working Group recommends that the Part Three of current Legislation not be reprinted in the Faculty Bylaws under the same reasoning as not reprinting the academic policies (i.e., not faculty status policy and the Judicial Code is published in other College policy documents).
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+1</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Bylaws Memo.txt [/INST] Below is an executive summary of the final draft of the Faculty Bylaws.  The Working Group has organized the summary as follows:
+
+Summary of New Policies: In this section of the summary, the Working Group lists new policies that were not addressed in our current Legislation.
+
+Current Legislation Not Included in Bylaws: In this section of the summary, the Working Group identifies current Legislation that was not incorporated into the Faculty Bylaws.
+
+Substantive Revisions to Current Legislation: In this section of the summary, the Working Group what it considers to be substantive revisions to current Legislation.  The Working Group acknowledges that this listing is subjective and urges our colleagues to carefully read the entirety of the Bylaws so that independent judgements regarding substantive judgements may be made.
+
+Current Legislation “Migrated” to Other Articles/Sections of the Bylaws: In this section of the summary, the Working Group lists policies addressed in our current Legislation that have been moved to new locations within the Faculty Bylaws.
+
+
+
+Colleagues, 
+
+This memorandum sets forth the reasons why the Working Group believes it critical to update current Faculty Legislation at this moment and highlights select sections within the Faculty Bylaws that serve to protect faculty interests and the College as a whole.  For transparency, we have also identified policies in current Legislation that are not included in the Faculty Bylaws.  
+
+We encourage our colleagues to carefully review this latest iteration of the Faculty Bylaws, which have been revised based on feedback provided during the various open meetings held earlier this month and comments entered in the Question/Feedback Form.  All newly introduced changes to the Bylaws are highlighted in blue text for ease of reference and are often accompanied by a “7th Draft” comment note explaining the rationale for the change. Also, please note that the Working Group has provided responses to each comment submitted in the Question/Feedback Form.   
+
+
+
+Why Update Legislation
+
+The Working Group believes that there are several reasons why updating Faculty Legislation is critical to the future of Wheaton College and serves to protect our colleagues.
+
+Documentation of Accreditation Compliance
+
+Wheaton's Five-Year Interim Report is due to NECHE in early Spring 2024.  In documenting compliance within the Interim Report, it will be necessary to include Faculty Legislation citations to demonstrate compliance with several NECHE accreditation standards.  Below, we list several Articles and/or sections within the proposed Faculty Bylaws that, if adopted, may be cited in the Five-Year Interim Report to demonstrate compliance with applicable accreditation standards.
+
+Article II, Section 1: Faculty Status-Types of Appointments
+
+This section of Article II is new and was drafted to formally define and codify the various types of faculty appointments in place at Wheaton, including but not limited to the newly approved Professors of Practice-line and Visiting Faculty categories.  Current Legislation is silent regarding the PoP-line.  Per NECHE Standard 6.1, the college is expected to clearly define all faculty categories, including the role of each category in fulfilling the college’s mission.  Current Legislation does not include any references to either of the new faculty categories, not does it address Administrative Faculty or Emeriti Faculty status.  Article II of Bylaws define all faculty categories and, if adopted, may be cited in to demonstrated compliance with NECHE Standard 6.1.
+
+Note: Both the Professors of Practice-line and Visiting Faculty categories have replaced the Associate and Non-Tenure Track Continuing Faculty sections of the current Legislation document.  
+
+Article III – Faculty Rights and Standards of Professional Conduct 
+
+Per NECHE Standard 6.9, the College is expected to have in place a “statement of expectations and processes to ensure that faculty act responsibly and ethically, observe the established conditions of their employment, and otherwise function in a manner consistent with the mission and purposes of the institution.”  Article III has been developed by the Working Group to address this standard.  If adopted, this Article, as well as the Wheaton College Employee Handbook for Faculty, may be cited in the Interim Report as evidence of compliance with NECHE Standard 6.9.
+
+Article IV, Section 1 – Duties and Responsibilities of the Full-time Teaching Faculty
+
+NECHE Standard 6.8 requires the College, in either a handbook or other written documents, to define “the responsibilities of faculty and other members of the instructional team; the criteria for their recruitment, appointment, retention, evaluation, promotion, and, if applicable, tenure; and policies for resolving grievances.”  Article IV, Section 1 has been developed by the Working Group to address the first element of the standard (i.e., the responsibilities of faculty…).  Other sections of the Bylaws, including those set forth in Article IV, should also be cited to demonstrate compliance with Standard 6.8.
+
+Article IV, Section 1.2 – Scholarly or Creative Activity
+
+Per NECHE Standard 6.11, the College is expected to “clearly define the scholarly expectations for faculty in a manner consistent with its mission and purposes and the level of degrees offered.” The standard further requires that faculty, through their scholarly pursuits, “be current in the theory, knowledge, skills, and pedagogy of their discipline or profession.”  Per the standard, scholarship and instruction, per the standard, are mutually supportive.  Based on the above standard, the Working Group developed affirmative text addressing the responsibility of full-time teaching faculty to engage in scholarly and creative work activities. While scholarly and creative activity is addressed in current Legislation a part of the criterion for promotion and tenure, the Working Group believes that this section more clearly articulates faculty responsibilities in this area.  See also the detailed evaluation criteria in Article IV, Subsection 2.1.1.2, which may similarly be cited in the Interim Report as evidence of compliance with the standard.
+
+Article IV, Section 2.1 – Evaluation Criteria
+
+												Per NECHE Standard 6.10, the College is expected to “employ effective procedures for the regular evaluation of appointments, performance and retention.”  The standard further states that evaluative criteria should “reflect the mission and purposes of the institution and the importance it attaches to the various responsibilities of, e.g., teaching, advising, assessment, scholarship, creative activities, research, and professional and community service.”  Expectations in these areas should be “stated clearly and weighted appropriately.”  Based on this standard, and in keeping with best practice, the Working Group has developed general evaluation criteria for each category of performance.  Moreover, as noted above, adoption of such criteria, will assist the College in documenting compliance with NECHE Standard 6.10. Current Legislation, as well as the current procedural guidelines for both promotion and tenure, do not formally define college-wide criteria for each category of performance.  Clearly documented evaluation criteria, in the Working Group’s view, will allows for greater transparency, clarity, and consistency of application.   
+
+												It is also important to note that DEI literature advocates for transparency and clarity with respect to faculty evaluations.  See the following white papers for further information:
+
+												https://www.acenet.edu/Documents/Equity-Minded-Faculty-Evaluation-Reform.pdf 
+
+https://www.luminafoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/equity-minded-faculty-evaluation-principles.pdf
+
+Protect all of Wheaton's Faculty
+
+Current Legislation does not include and thus does not protect several important categories of faculty positions at Wheaton: e.g., faculty who hold joint appointments, Professor of the Practice-line faculty, faculty who support programs that do not have department status. They are scholars, scientists, artists, and practitioners who deliver crucial aspects of the Wheaton curriculum.  
+
+Below we list several areas within the proposed Faculty Bylaws that serve to protect faculty who hold joint appointments, Professor of the Practice-line faculty, and faculty who support programs that do not have department status.
+
+Article II, Section 1.1.2 - Professor of the Practice-line Faculty
+
+This section formally defines the Professor of the Practice-line Faculty and references associated duties, rights, and protections.
+
+Article II, Section 1.5 – Academic Ranks and Titles
+
+This section defines that various academic ranks and titles and associated qualifications that will be in use at the college going forward, including but not limited to Professors of the Practice and Senior Professors of the Practice.
+
+Article II, Section 2.2.1(2) - Duration of Appointment
+
+Paragraph 2 of this section delineates the duration of contracts Professors of the Practice-line faculty will receive during their employment relationship with the college.
+
+Article II, Section 2.5 - Joint Appointments
+
+This new policy addresses joint appointments at the college.  It contemplates the identification of a home department or program, as well as the use of MOU’s to clarify assignment of duties, the allocation of salary, departmental/program governance rights, and provision for office and laboratory space as applicable to both the primary and secondary department/program.
+
+Article IV, Section 2.3 – Annual Evaluation of Professor of the Practice-line Faculty for Reappointment
+
+Section 2.3 sets forth detailed procedures and criteria for the annual evaluation of Professor of the Practice-line faculty members.
+
+Article IV, Section 3.2 – Promotion to Senior Professor of the Practice
+
+Section 2.3 sets forth detailed procedures and criteria for promotion to Senior Professor of the Practice.
+
+Article IV, Section 5.2 – Full-Time Teaching Faculty Professional Development Funds
+
+This new policy codifies current college policy of providing annual professional developments funds to all full-time teaching faculty, which includes Professor of the Practice-line faculty.
+
+
+
+
+
+In addition to the above, it is important to note that several new policies and/or amendments to current policy have been introduced to protect all full-time teaching faculty members.  This includes, but is not limited to, the following:
+
+Article IV, Section 7 – Disciplinary Action Short of Suspension or Dismissal (New Policy)
+
+
+
+Current Legislation Not Included in Bylaws
+
+Article I.O - Associate Faculty:  The Associate Faculty and Non-Tenure Track Continuing Faculty designations are being replaced going forward with the Professor of Practice-line and Visiting Faculty categories.  Text defining these new categories has been developed by the Working Group in accordance with the Full-time Faculty Contract Proposal and PoP Framework documents provided to the group by the Provost’s Office. Given the College’s anticipated adoption of the new Professor of Practice-line and Visiting Faculty categories, the Working Group has not reprinted the Associate and Non-Tenure Track Continuing Faculty legislation in the Faculty Bylaws.
+
+												Article I.P - Non-Tenure Track Continuing Faculty: see comment above.
+
+												Part Two - The Classroom: The Working Group recommends that the Faculty Bylaws be limited in scope to ‘faculty status’ matters, as well as other policies that address unique faculty rights or responsibilities.  As such, the Working Group recommends that the academic policies in Part Two of our current Legislation either be solely reprinted in the academic catalog or as a stand-alone Academic Policy Manual, which houses not only academic policy, but also policies addressing academic program administration and research related policies (i.e., approval/modification of academic programs, assigning of courses, academic program review, IRB and animal research, research misconduct, conflicts of interest in federal sponsored research, etc.). 
+
+												Part Three - Honor Code and Judicial Procedures: The Working Group recommends that the Part Three of current Legislation not be reprinted in the Faculty Bylaws under the same reasoning as not reprinting the academic policies (i.e., not faculty status policy and the Judicial Code is published in other College policy documents).
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+1</s>"
+<s>[INST] Cal Luth Faculty HB Task Force Proposal - Final.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Cal Luth P&T Revised Proposal - Final.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Cal Luth P&T Revised Proposal.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Calendar (5.11.22).txt [/INST] PROJECT CALENDAR
+
+
+
+	
+
+Proposed Date
+
+
+
+Completion Date
+
+Phase I – Introduction, Identify Needs, and Document Collection
+
+
+
+
+
+Project Manager is appointed.
+
+
+
+April 15th
+
+Members appointed to the Review Team.
+
+Week of May 9
+
+
+
+University posts all applicable internal faculty status-related documents (i.e., promotion and tenure guidelines, academic unit guidelines, etc.) and forms (e.g., evaluation forms), as well as a listing of peer schools.
+
+Week of May 9
+
+May 3rd
+
+Consultant meets with Review Team on campus to provide overview of process, project goals, answer questions and gain an understanding of current handbook’s strengths and opportunities for development.
+
+Week of May 30th
+
+[Exact Day TBD]
+
+
+
+Phase II – Faculty Handbook Updating
+
+		
+
+
+
+Consultant analyzes Faculty Handbook.  During this time frame, the consultant may send questions to the Review Team regarding current University processes
+
+June 1 – July 15
+
+
+
+Consultant meets with Review Team to solicit the team’s feedback on select topics.  
+
+Week of July 18
+
+[Exact Date TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultants deliver the first draft of the updated Faculty Handbook.  
+
+August 17 
+
+
+
+Review Team members review first draft & prepares for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+August 17 – September 2
+
+
+
+Consultant visits campus to facilitate the Review Team’s review of the 1st draft.  Two full days will be required; however, these can be split up between two trips.  Many clients prefer to schedule two half-day sessions over the course of two days for each trip.  Some of these meetings can be held virtually if preferable.  Time should be reserved at the end of the two-week window to hold a virtual meeting(s) in the event we do complete the review during the campus meetings.
+
+September 5 – September 16
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+		Consultant implements Review Team’s requested revisions and delivers 2nd draft.
+
+October 3
+
+
+
+		Review Team members individually review the 2nd draft and prepare for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+		October 3-7
+
+
+
+		Consultant facilitates Review Team’s review of 2nd draft via a series of 2-hour virtual meetings.
+
+October 10-11 – October 17 – 21
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 3rd draft to Review Team.
+
+November 7
+
+
+
+Review Team and consultant meet virtually to approve/implement changes to handbook in anticipation of delivery of the 4th draft to selected faculty governance committees and President for comments.
+
+Week of November 14 
+
+[Exact Date(s) TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 4th draft, which is distributed to selected faculty governance committees and President for comments. 
+
+November 28
+
+
+
+		Faculty governance committees and President deliver their respective comments to the Review Team and consultant.
+
+December 16 
+
+
+
+		Virtual meeting(s) is held with Review Team to review stakeholders’ comments.
+
+Week of January 9
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers 5th Draft for Review Team’s final approval.
+
+January 19
+
+
+
+		Virtual meeting(s) held with Review Team to approve 5th draft.
+
+Week of January 23
+
+[Exact Date(s) TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 5th draft and executive summary of key changes to the Board of Trustees’ Faculty Handbook Task Force. 
+
+January 30
+
+
+
+Board Faculty Handbook Task Force delivers comments/requested changes to consultant.
+
+February 6
+
+
+
+		Consultant and Review Team meet virtually to discuss/implement any revisions requested by the Board Faculty Handbook Task Force.
+
+February 6 – 17
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers final draft of the handbook, which is distributed to the Faculty at start of Phase III.
+
+February 17
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase III – Approval Process
+
+		Projected Date
+
+Completion Date
+
+		Review Team approved draft is submitted to the Faculty.
+
+February 17
+
+
+
+Review Team holds faculty forum(s) to review key changes to the handbook and answer questions.  Consultant will attend forum upon client request.
+
+Week of March 6
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+		Consultant facilitates virtual meeting(s) with Review Team to discuss any issues raised during faculty forum(s).
+
+Week of March 20
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant implements changes requested by the Review Team and delivers final version of the handbook.  Following delivery, the handbook will be submitted to Project Manager for distribution to the Faculty. The faculty and administration will then work independently from Stevens Strategy towards obtaining Faculty, President, and ultimately Board approval.
+
+March 31
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 4
+
+		
+
+		
+
+
+
+			         Page 1</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Calendar (5.16.22) REVISED.txt [/INST] PROJECT CALENDAR
+
+
+
+	
+
+Proposed Date
+
+
+
+Completion Date
+
+Phase I – Introduction, Identify Needs, and Document Collection
+
+
+
+
+
+Project Manager is appointed.
+
+
+
+April 15th
+
+Members appointed to the Review Team.
+
+Week of May 9
+
+
+
+University posts all applicable internal faculty status-related documents (i.e., promotion and tenure guidelines, academic unit guidelines, etc.) and forms (e.g., evaluation forms), as well as a listing of peer schools.
+
+Week of May 9
+
+May 3rd
+
+Consultant meets with Review Team on campus to provide overview of process, project goals, answer questions and gain an understanding of current handbook’s strengths and opportunities for development.
+
+Week of May 30th
+
+[Exact Day TBD]
+
+
+
+Phase II – Faculty Handbook Updating
+
+		
+
+
+
+Consultant analyzes Faculty Handbook.  During this time frame, the consultant may send questions to the Review Team regarding current University processes.
+
+June 1 – July 15
+
+
+
+Consultant meets with Review Team to solicit the team’s feedback on select topics.  
+
+Week of July 18
+
+[Exact Date TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultants deliver the first draft of the updated Faculty Handbook.  
+
+August 17 
+
+
+
+Review Team members review first draft & prepares for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+August 17 – September 2
+
+
+
+Consultant visits campus to facilitate the Review Team’s review of the 1st draft.  Two full days will be required; however, these can be split up between two trips.  Many clients prefer to schedule two half-day sessions over the course of two days for each trip.  Some of these meetings can be held virtually if preferable.  Time should be reserved at the end of the two-week window to hold a virtual meeting(s) in the event we do complete the review during the campus meetings.
+
+September 5 – September 16
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+		Consultant implements Review Team’s requested revisions and delivers 2nd draft.
+
+October 3
+
+
+
+		Review Team members individually review the 2nd draft and prepare for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+		October 3-7
+
+
+
+		Consultant facilitates Review Team’s review of 2nd draft via a series of 2-hour virtual meetings.
+
+October 10 - 11 – October 17 – 21
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 3rd draft to Review Team.
+
+November 7
+
+
+
+Review Team and consultant meet virtually to approve/implement changes to handbook in anticipation of delivery of the 4th draft to selected faculty governance committees and President for comments.
+
+Week of November 14 
+
+[Exact Date(s) TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 4th draft, which is distributed to selected faculty governance committees and President for comments. 
+
+November 28
+
+
+
+		Faculty governance committees and President deliver their respective comments to the Review Team and consultant.
+
+December 16 
+
+
+
+		Virtual meeting(s) is held with Review Team to review stakeholders’ comments.
+
+Week of January 9
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers 5th Draft for Review Team’s final approval.
+
+January 19
+
+
+
+		Virtual meeting(s) held with Review Team to approve 5th draft.
+
+Week of January 23
+
+[Exact Date(s) TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 5th draft to legal counsel.
+
+January 30
+
+
+
+Legal counsel delivers comments/requested changes to consultant.
+
+February 6
+
+
+
+		Consultant and Review Team meet virtually to discuss/implement any revisions requested by legal counsel.
+
+February 6 – 10
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers legal counsel reviewed draft of the handbook and an executive summary to the Board of Trustees’ Faculty Handbook Task Force at start of Phase III.
+
+February 17
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase III – Approval Process
+
+		Projected Date
+
+Completion Date
+
+Board of Trustees’ Faculty Handbook Task Force submits comments to Consultant and Review Team.
+
+		February 24
+
+
+
+Final draft submitted to Faculty.
+
+		March 3
+
+
+
+		
+
+
+
+
+
+Review Team holds faculty forum(s) to review key changes to the handbook and answer questions.  Consultant will attend forum upon client request.
+
+Week of March 20
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+		Consultant facilitates virtual meeting(s) with Review Team to discuss any issues raised during faculty forum(s).
+
+March 27 - 29
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers final version of the handbook.  
+
+
+
+Following delivery, the handbook will be submitted to Project Manager for distribution to the Faculty. The faculty and administration will then work independently from Stevens Strategy towards obtaining Faculty, President, and ultimately Board approval.
+
+April 3
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 4
+
+		
+
+		
+
+
+
+			         Page 1</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Calendar (5.16.22).txt [/INST] PROJECT CALENDAR
+
+
+
+	
+
+Proposed Date
+
+
+
+Completion Date
+
+Phase I – Introduction, Identify Needs, and Document Collection
+
+
+
+
+
+Project Manager is appointed.
+
+
+
+April 15th
+
+Members appointed to the Review Team.
+
+Week of May 9
+
+
+
+University posts all applicable internal faculty status-related documents (i.e., promotion and tenure guidelines, academic unit guidelines, etc.) and forms (e.g., evaluation forms), as well as a listing of peer schools.
+
+Week of May 9
+
+May 3rd
+
+Consultant meets with Review Team on campus to provide overview of process, project goals, answer questions and gain an understanding of current handbook’s strengths and opportunities for development.
+
+Week of May 30th
+
+[Exact Day TBD]
+
+
+
+Phase II – Faculty Handbook Updating
+
+		
+
+
+
+Consultant analyzes Faculty Handbook.  During this time frame, the consultant may send questions to the Review Team regarding current University processes.
+
+June 1 – July 15
+
+
+
+Consultant meets with Review Team to solicit the team’s feedback on select topics.  
+
+Week of July 18
+
+[Exact Date TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultants deliver the first draft of the updated Faculty Handbook.  
+
+August 17 
+
+
+
+Review Team members review first draft & prepares for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+August 17 – September 2
+
+
+
+Consultant visits campus to facilitate the Review Team’s review of the 1st draft.  Two full days will be required; however, these can be split up between two trips.  Many clients prefer to schedule two half-day sessions over the course of two days for each trip.  Some of these meetings can be held virtually if preferable.  Time should be reserved at the end of the two-week window to hold a virtual meeting(s) in the event we do complete the review during the campus meetings.
+
+September 5 – September 16
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+		Consultant implements Review Team’s requested revisions and delivers 2nd draft.
+
+October 3
+
+
+
+		Review Team members individually review the 2nd draft and prepare for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+		October 3-7
+
+
+
+		Consultant facilitates Review Team’s review of 2nd draft via a series of 2-hour virtual meetings.
+
+October 10 - 11 – October 17 – 21
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 3rd draft to Review Team.
+
+November 7
+
+
+
+Review Team and consultant meet virtually to approve/implement changes to handbook in anticipation of delivery of the 4th draft to selected faculty governance committees and President for comments.
+
+Week of November 14 
+
+[Exact Date(s) TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 4th draft, which is distributed to selected faculty governance committees and President for comments. 
+
+November 28
+
+
+
+		Faculty governance committees and President deliver their respective comments to the Review Team and consultant.
+
+December 16 
+
+
+
+		Virtual meeting(s) is held with Review Team to review stakeholders’ comments.
+
+Week of January 9
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers 5th Draft for Review Team’s final approval.
+
+January 19
+
+
+
+		Virtual meeting(s) held with Review Team to approve 5th draft.
+
+Week of January 23
+
+[Exact Date(s) TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 5th draft to legal counsel.
+
+January 30
+
+
+
+Legal counsel delivers comments/requested changes to consultant.
+
+February 6
+
+
+
+		Consultant and Review Team meet virtually to discuss/implement any revisions requested by legal counsel.
+
+February 6 – 10
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers legal counsel reviewed draft of the handbook and an executive summary to the Board of Trustees’ Faculty Handbook Task Force at start of Phase III.
+
+February 17
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase III – Approval Process
+
+		Projected Date
+
+Completion Date
+
+Board of Trustees’ Faculty Handbook Task Force submits comments to Consultant and Review Team.
+
+		February 24
+
+
+
+Final draft submitted to Faculty.
+
+		March 3
+
+
+
+		
+
+
+
+
+
+Review Team holds faculty forum(s) to review key changes to the handbook and answer questions.  Consultant will attend forum upon client request.
+
+Week of March 20
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+		Consultant facilitates virtual meeting(s) with Review Team to discuss any issues raised during faculty forum(s).
+
+March 27 - 29
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers final version of the handbook.  
+
+
+
+Following delivery, the handbook will be submitted to Project Manager for distribution to the Faculty. The faculty and administration will then work independently from Stevens Strategy towards obtaining Faculty, President, and ultimately Board approval.
+
+April 3
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 4
+
+		
+
+		
+
+
+
+			         Page 1</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Calendar (5.17.22).txt [/INST] PROJECT CALENDAR
+
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+Proposed Date
+
+
+
+Completion Date
+
+Phase I – Introduction, Identify Needs, and Document Collection
+
+
+
+
+
+Project Manager is appointed.
+
+
+
+April 15th
+
+Members appointed to the Review Team.
+
+Week of May 9
+
+
+
+University posts all applicable internal faculty status-related documents (i.e., promotion and tenure guidelines, academic unit guidelines, etc.) and forms (e.g., evaluation forms), as well as a listing of peer schools.
+
+Week of May 9
+
+May 3rd
+
+Consultant meets with Review Team on campus to provide overview of process, project goals, answer questions and gain an understanding of current handbook’s strengths and opportunities for development.
+
+Week of May 30th
+
+[Exact Day TBD]
+
+
+
+Phase II – Faculty Handbook Updating
+
+		
+
+
+
+Consultant analyzes Faculty Handbook.  During this time frame, the consultant may send questions to the Review Team regarding current University processes.
+
+June 1 – July 15
+
+
+
+Consultant meets with Review Team to solicit the team’s feedback on select topics.  
+
+Week of July 18
+
+[Exact Date TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultants deliver the first draft of the updated Faculty Handbook.  
+
+August 17 
+
+
+
+Review Team members review first draft & prepares for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+August 17 – September 2
+
+
+
+Consultant visits campus to facilitate the Review Team’s review of the 1st draft.  Two full days will be required; however, these can be split up between two trips.  Many clients prefer to schedule two half-day sessions over the course of two days for each trip.  Some of these meetings can be held virtually if preferable.  Time should be reserved at the end of the two-week window to hold a virtual meeting(s) in the event we do complete the review during the campus meetings.
+
+September 5 – September 16
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+		Consultant implements Review Team’s requested revisions and delivers 2nd draft.
+
+October 10
+
+
+
+		Review Team members individually review the 2nd draft and prepare for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+		October 10-17
+
+
+
+		Consultant facilitates Review Team’s review of 2nd draft via a series of 2-hour virtual meetings.
+
+October 17 – 28
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 3rd draft to Review Team, faculty governance committees, and President for comments.
+
+November 7
+
+
+
+		Review Team, Faculty governance committees, and President deliver their respective comments to the Review Team and consultant.
+
+November 18
+
+
+
+		Virtual meeting(s) is held with Review Team to review stakeholders’ comments.
+
+November 21 & 22 & 
+
+November 28 – December 2
+
+
+
+		Consultant implements Review Team’s requested changes and delivers 4th Draft to Legal Counsel.
+
+December 15
+
+
+
+		Legal counsel delivers comments/requested changes to Review Team and consultant.
+
+January 2
+
+
+
+		Consultant and Review Team meet to discuss/implement any revisions requested by legal counsel.
+
+Week of January 9
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers 5th Draft.
+
+January 20
+
+
+
+		Virtual meeting(s) held with Review Team to approve 5th draft.
+
+January 23 - 25
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers legal counsel reviewed draft of the handbook and an executive summary to the Board of Trustees’ Faculty Handbook Task Force at start of Phase III.
+
+January 30
+
+
+
+		Board Faculty Handbook Task Force delivers comments/requested changes to consultant and Review Team.
+
+February 6
+
+
+
+		Consultant and Review Team meet virtually to discuss/implement any revisions requested by the Board Faculty Handbook Task Force.
+
+February 6-10
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers final draft of the handbook, which is distributed to Faculty at start of Phase III.
+
+February 17
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase III – Approval Process
+
+		Projected Date
+
+Completion Date
+
+Review Team approved draft is submitted to the Faculty.
+
+February 17
+
+
+
+		Review Team holds faculty forum(s) to review key changes to the handbook and answer questions.  Consultant will attend forum upon client request.
+
+Week of March 6
+
+
+
+		Consultant facilitates virtual meeting(s) with Review Team to discuss any issues raised during faculty forum(s).
+
+Week of March 20
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers final version of the handbook.  
+
+
+
+Following delivery, the handbook will be submitted to Project Manager for distribution to the Faculty. The faculty and administration will then work independently from Stevens Strategy towards obtaining Faculty, President, and ultimately Board approval.
+
+March 31
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 4
+
+		
+
+		
+
+
+
+
+
+			         Page 1</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Calendar (Proposed Revision)(12.21) .txt [/INST] PROJECT CALENDAR 
+
+	
+
+Proposed Date
+
+
+
+Completion Date
+
+Draft 4 is submitted to Working Group, Stakeholder Group, and President.
+
+January 16
+
+
+
+Stakeholder Group and President delivers comments to the Working Group.
+
+February 3
+
+
+
+Virtual meetings with the Working Group (and President if she wishes to attend) to discuss and address Stakeholder Group’s comments.  
+
+February 6-17
+
+
+
+Consultant implements requested changes and delivers Draft 5 of the Bylaws to Working Group, Stakeholder Group, and President.  
+
+February 24
+
+
+
+Working Group, Stakeholder Group, and President provide any final requested changes to consultant.
+
+March 10
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers final drafts (one marked and one “clean”) to Working Group for distribution to Faculty.  
+
+March 17
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase III – Approval Process
+
+		Projected Date
+
+Completion Date
+
+Final Draft distributed to Faculty by Working Group and President.
+
+March 17
+
+
+
+Faculty forums held to answer any questions regarding the updated Faculty Bylaws document. 
+
+Note: Per our contract, the engagement ends at this step.  If the College requires our assistance in implementing changes to the Bylaws based on feedback received during the Forum meetings, we can enter into an hourly contract agreement.
+
+April 3-7
+
+
+
+Working Group, in consultation with the Provost and President, implements changes to address feedback received during the Forum meetings and distributed final version to Faculty in advance of the May 5th faculty meeting.
+
+April 17
+
+
+
+Faculty vote on Bylaws.
+
+May 5th
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+			         Page 1
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Calendar (Propsoed Revision)(12.21) .txt [/INST] PROJECT CALENDAR 
+
+	
+
+Proposed Date
+
+
+
+Completion Date
+
+Draft 4 is submitted to Working Group, Stakeholder Group, and President.
+
+January 13
+
+
+
+Stakeholder Group and President delivers comments to the Working Group.
+
+February 3
+
+
+
+Virtual meetings with the Working Group (and President if she wishes to attend) to discuss and address Stakeholder Group’s comments.  
+
+February 6-17
+
+
+
+Consultant implements requested changes and delivers Draft 5 of the Bylaws to Working Group, Stakeholder Group, and President.  
+
+February 24
+
+
+
+Working Group, Stakeholder Group, and President provide any final requested changes to consultant.
+
+March 10
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers final drafts (one marked and one “clean”) to Working Group for distribution to Faculty.  
+
+March 17
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase III – Approval Process
+
+		Projected Date
+
+Completion Date
+
+Final Draft distributed to Faculty by Working Group and President.
+
+March 17
+
+
+
+Faculty forums held to answer any questions regarding the updated Faculty Bylaws document. 
+
+Note: Per our contract, the engagement ends at this step.  If the College requires our assistance in implementing changes to the Bylaws based on feedback received during the Forum meetings, we can enter into an hourly contract agreement.
+
+April 3-7
+
+
+
+Working Group, in consultation with the Provost and President, implements changes to address feedback received during the Forum meetings and distributed final version to Faculty in advance of the May 5th faculty meeting.
+
+April 17
+
+
+
+Faculty vote on Bylaws.
+
+May 5th
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+			         Page 1
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Calendar (Revised) .txt [/INST] PROJECT CALENDAR 
+
+	
+
+Proposed Date
+
+
+
+Completion Date
+
+Phase I – Introduction, Identify Needs, and Document Collection
+
+
+
+
+
+Project Manager is appointed.
+
+
+
+March 10
+
+Members appointed to the Working Group.
+
+Week of May 2nd
+
+May 20
+
+University posts all applicable internal faculty status-related documents (i.e., promotion and tenure guidelines, academic unit guidelines, etc.) and forms (e.g., evaluation forms), as well as a listing of peer schools.
+
+Week of May 2nd
+
+April 20
+
+Consultant meets with Working Group to provide overview of process, project goals, answer question, gain an understanding of current Faculty Legislation document’s strengths and opportunities for development.
+
+Week of May 9
+
+[Exact Date TBD]
+
+May 25
+
+Consultant presents overview of process at Faculty Meeting.
+
+May 19
+
+May 19
+
+Phase II – Faculty Handbook Preparation
+
+		
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers first draft of updated Faculty Handbook.  
+
+June 20
+
+June 20
+
+Working Group members review first draft & prepares for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+June 20 – June 27
+
+June 20 – June 27
+
+Consultant facilitates the Working Group’s review of the 1st draft.  These meetings should be scheduled in two-to-three-hour increments and will take roughly 18 to 24 hours to complete.  We will have a better sense of this after delivery of the first draft.
+
+June 27 – July 1
+
+July 18 – 22
+
+August 22 & 26
+
+June 29, 30, 15, 19, 20, 26; August 22 & 26
+
+		Consultant implements Working Group’s requested revisions and delivers 2nd draft.
+
+September 9 
+
+
+
+		Working Group members individually review the 2nd draft and prepare for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+		September 12 - 25
+
+
+
+		Consultant facilitates Working Group’s review of 2nd draft via campus visit and virtual meetings.
+
+September 26 & 27 October 3 – 7 (Virtual)
+
+
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 3rd draft to Working Group.
+
+
+
+October 21
+
+
+
+Consultant facilitates Working Group’s review of 3rd draft via a series of 2-hour virtual meetings.
+
+November 7 - 18
+
+
+
+Draft 4 is submitted to Stakeholder Group.
+
+December 5
+
+
+
+Stakeholder Group submits comments and suggested revisions to Working Group.
+
+December 16
+
+
+
+Working Group and consultant meet virtually to discuss and address President’s comments.  If the Working Group disagrees with a revisions requested by the President, consultant will facilitate dialogue between parties.
+
+January 16 - 20
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase III – Approval Process
+
+		Projected Date
+
+Completion Date
+
+Draft 5 is submitted to the President.  
+
+December 5
+
+
+
+President submits comments and suggested revisions to Working Group.
+
+December 16
+
+
+
+Working Group and consultant meet virtually to discuss and address President’s comments.  If the Working Group disagrees with a revisions requested by the President, consultant will facilitate dialogue between parties.
+
+January 16 - 20
+
+
+
+Consultant implements changes requested by the Working Group and delivers final version of the handbook, which is distributed to the Faculty.  
+
+February 3rd
+
+
+
+The consultant will, upon the College’s request, virtually attend a Faculty forums or meetings to answer any questions regarding the updated Faculty Bylaws document.
+
+Late March
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+			         Page 1
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Calendar (Revised-Final) .txt [/INST] PROJECT CALENDAR 
+
+	
+
+Proposed Date
+
+
+
+Completion Date
+
+Phase I – Introduction, Identify Needs, and Document Collection
+
+
+
+
+
+Project Manager is appointed.
+
+
+
+March 10
+
+Members appointed to the Working Group.
+
+Week of May 2nd
+
+May 20
+
+University posts all applicable internal faculty status-related documents (i.e., promotion and tenure guidelines, academic unit guidelines, etc.) and forms (e.g., evaluation forms), as well as a listing of peer schools.
+
+Week of May 2nd
+
+April 20
+
+Consultant meets with Working Group to provide overview of process, project goals, answer question, gain an understanding of current Faculty Legislation document’s strengths and opportunities for development.
+
+Week of May 9
+
+[Exact Date TBD]
+
+May 25
+
+Consultant presents overview of process at Faculty Meeting.
+
+May 19
+
+May 19
+
+Phase II – Faculty Handbook Preparation
+
+		
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers first draft of updated Faculty Handbook.  
+
+June 20
+
+June 20
+
+Working Group members review first draft & prepares for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+June 20 – June 27
+
+June 20 – June 27
+
+Consultant facilitates the Working Group’s review of the 1st draft.  These meetings should be scheduled in two-to-three-hour increments and will take roughly 18 to 24 hours to complete.  We will have a better sense of this after delivery of the first draft.
+
+June 27 – July 1
+
+July 18 – 22
+
+August 22 & 26
+
+June 29, 30, 15, 19, 20, 26; August 22 & 26
+
+		Consultant implements Working Group’s requested revisions and delivers 2nd draft.
+
+September 9 
+
+September 9
+
+		Working Group members individually review the 2nd draft and prepare for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+		September 12 - 25
+
+
+
+		Consultant facilitates Working Group’s review of 2nd draft via virtual meetings.
+
+September 26 & 27 October 3 – 7 (Virtual)
+
+
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 3rd draft to the Working Group and President. 
+
+
+
+October 21
+
+
+
+President delivers 3rd draft comments to Working Group.
+
+October 28
+
+
+
+Consultant facilitates the Working Group’s review of 3rd draft via a series of 2-hour virtual meetings.
+
+November 7 - 18
+
+
+
+Draft 4 is submitted to Working Group and Stakeholder Group.
+
+December 5
+
+
+
+Stakeholder Group delivers comments to the Working Group and President.
+
+January 13
+
+
+
+Virtual meetings with the Working Group (and President if she wishes to attend) to discuss and address Stakeholder Group’s comments.  
+
+January 16 - 20
+
+
+
+Consultant implements requested changes and delivers Draft 5 of the Bylaws to Working Group, Stakeholder Group, and President.  
+
+January 27
+
+
+
+Working Group, Stakeholder Group, and President provide any final requested changes to consultant.
+
+February 3rd
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers final drafts (one marked and one “clean”) to Working Group for distribution to Faculty.  
+
+February 13
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase III – Approval Process
+
+		Projected Date
+
+Completion Date
+
+Final Draft distributed to Faculty by Working Group and President.
+
+February 13
+
+
+
+Faculty forums held to answer any questions regarding the updated Faculty Bylaws document. 
+
+Note: Per our contract, the engagement ends at this step.  If the College requires our assistance in implementing changes to the Bylaws based on feedback received during the Forum meetings, we can enter into an hourly contract agreement.
+
+Week of March 6th
+
+
+
+Working Group, in consultation with the Provost and President, implements changes to address feedback received during the Forum meetings and distributed final version to Faculty in advance of the April 7th faculty meeting.
+
+March 27
+
+
+
+Faculty vote on Bylaws.
+
+April 7th
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+			         Page 1
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Calendar (Revised-Final)(9.26) .txt [/INST] PROJECT CALENDAR 
+
+	
+
+Proposed Date
+
+
+
+Completion Date
+
+Phase I – Introduction, Identify Needs, and Document Collection
+
+
+
+
+
+Project Manager is appointed.
+
+
+
+March 10
+
+Members appointed to the Working Group.
+
+Week of May 2nd
+
+May 20
+
+University posts all applicable internal faculty status-related documents (i.e., promotion and tenure guidelines, academic unit guidelines, etc.) and forms (e.g., evaluation forms), as well as a listing of peer schools.
+
+Week of May 2nd
+
+April 20
+
+Consultant meets with Working Group to provide overview of process, project goals, answer question, gain an understanding of current Faculty Legislation document’s strengths and opportunities for development.
+
+Week of May 9
+
+[Exact Date TBD]
+
+May 25
+
+Consultant presents overview of process at Faculty Meeting.
+
+May 19
+
+May 19
+
+Phase II – Faculty Handbook Preparation
+
+		
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers first draft of updated Faculty Handbook.  
+
+June 20
+
+June 20
+
+Working Group members review first draft & prepares for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+June 20 – June 27
+
+June 20 – June 27
+
+Consultant facilitates the Working Group’s review of the 1st draft.  These meetings should be scheduled in two-to-three-hour increments and will take roughly 18 to 24 hours to complete.  We will have a better sense of this after delivery of the first draft.
+
+June 27 – July 1
+
+July 18 – 22
+
+August 22 & 26
+
+June 29, 30, 15, 19, 20, 26; August 22 & 26
+
+		Consultant implements Working Group’s requested revisions and delivers 2nd draft.
+
+September 9 
+
+September 9
+
+		Working Group members individually review the 2nd draft and prepare for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+		September 12 - 25
+
+
+
+		Consultant facilitates Working Group’s review of 2nd draft via virtual meetings.
+
+September 26 & 27 October 3 – 7 (Virtual)
+
+
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 3rd draft to the Working Group and President. 
+
+
+
+October 21
+
+
+
+President delivers 3rd draft comments to Working Group.
+
+October 28
+
+
+
+Consultant facilitates the Working Group’s review of 3rd draft via a series of 2-hour virtual meetings.
+
+November 7 - 18
+
+
+
+Draft 4 is submitted to Working Group and Stakeholder Group.
+
+November 28
+
+
+
+Stakeholder Group delivers comments to the Working Group and President.
+
+January 13
+
+
+
+Virtual meetings with the Working Group (and President if she wishes to attend) to discuss and address Stakeholder Group’s comments.  
+
+January 16 - 20
+
+
+
+Consultant implements requested changes and delivers Draft 5 of the Bylaws to Working Group, Stakeholder Group, and President.  
+
+January 27
+
+
+
+Working Group, Stakeholder Group, and President provide any final requested changes to consultant.
+
+February 3rd
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers final drafts (one marked and one “clean”) to Working Group for distribution to Faculty.  
+
+February 13
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase III – Approval Process
+
+		Projected Date
+
+Completion Date
+
+Final Draft distributed to Faculty by Working Group and President.
+
+February 13
+
+
+
+Faculty forums held to answer any questions regarding the updated Faculty Bylaws document. 
+
+Note: Per our contract, the engagement ends at this step.  If the College requires our assistance in implementing changes to the Bylaws based on feedback received during the Forum meetings, we can enter into an hourly contract agreement.
+
+Week of March 6th
+
+
+
+Working Group, in consultation with the Provost and President, implements changes to address feedback received during the Forum meetings and distributed final version to Faculty in advance of the April 7th faculty meeting.
+
+March 27
+
+
+
+Faculty vote on Bylaws.
+
+April 7th
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+			         Page 1
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] CAMPUS COMMUNITY DEFINITIONS.txt [/INST] CAMPUS COMMUNITY DEFINITIONS
+
+
+
+A
+
+Aid Animals: include Service and Emotional Support Animals.  
+
+Accessible: means that individuals with disabilities are able to independently acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services within the same timeframe as individuals without disabilities, with substantially equivalent ease and effectiveness of use.
+
+Alcohol or Alcoholic Beverage: any liquid suitable for drinking by human beings, except prescription drugs or over-the-counter medications, which contains one-half of one percent or more of alcohol by volume.
+
+Artistic Expression: includes but is not limited to the fine arts, the performing arts, the graphic arts or less traditional forms of creative expression, i.e., electronic, computer, etc.
+
+Audit Event: any observable occurrence within an applicable information system that is significant and relevant to the security of the system and the environment in which it operates in order to meet specific and ongoing audit needs.  Audit events include any auditable event required by applicable local, state, and federal laws. Audit events can include, for example, password changes, failed logons, or failed accesses related to information systems, etc.
+
+Authorized Users: individuals, including, but not limited to, employees, temporary employees, faculty, students, alumni, trustees, campus visitors, contractors, vendors, consultants and their related personnel authorized by the College to access College Computing Equipment or Information Systems that collect, process, maintain, use, share, disseminate or dispose of College Data.
+
+B
+
+Baseless Claim: an allegation made with reckless disregard for its truth or falsity.
+
+Bookmaking Activities: accepting the bets of others on the outcome of sports or other contests.
+
+C
+
+Campus Security Authority: College employees that have significant responsibility for student and campus activities, and as such are trained by the College to report certain crimes occurring on campus or at College sanctioned events to the Department of Public Safety for inclusion in the College’s Annual Security and Fire Report.
+
+Cardholder Data: any personal information of the cardholder. This could be an account number, expiration date, name, address, telephone number, social security number, card validation code (CVC), or any other cardholder identifying information.
+
+Cardholder Information Security Program (CISP): a program originally established by Visa USA. Implemented in June of 2001, the program was created to ensure the security of cardholder information. This information must be secure as it is being processed and stored by merchants and service providers.  CISP has since been superseded in favor of the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard.
+
+Child Abuse: means the non-accidental commission of any act by a caretaker upon a Minor Child which causes or creates a substantial risk of physical or emotional injury; or any act by a caretaker involving a Minor Child that constitutes a sexual offense under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts; or any sexual contact between a caretaker and a Minor Child under the care of that individual.
+
+Child Neglect: means failure by a caretaker, either deliberately or through negligence or inability, to take those actions necessary to provide a child with minimally adequate food, clothing, shelter, medical care, supervision, emotional stability and growth, or other essential care.
+
+Cloud Computing/Cloud Computing Environment: encompasses utilizing any external computing, software services, or hosting environment that is not directly controlled by the College.
+
+College Activities with Minor Children: means services, programs, or activities that Olin College operates or sponsors, or in which College students or employees engage in through their College roles and through which they will have contact with Minor Children. Examples of College Activities include: residential and non-residential programs operated by Olin College on campus; off-campus programs operated or formally facilitated by the Olin College; and programs which Olin College does not operate, sponsor, or formally facilitate but in which College students or employees participate in their capacity as students or employees.  College Activities do not include programs or activities that College students or staff engage in on their own time and that are not related to their College role or status.
+
+College Data: any information collected, manipulated, stored, reported, or presented in any format, on any medium, at any location by any department, program or office of the College in support of Olin College’s mission.  There are three types of College Data:
+
+Confidential College Data: College Data which is legally regulated and data that would provide access to confidential or restricted data.
+
+Restricted College Data: College Data which the Data Managers have decided NOT to publish or make public and data protected by contractual obligations.
+
+Public College Data: College Data which there is no expectation for privacy or confidentiality (i.e., is available to the public) and that the loss of such data would not cause significant personal, institutional, or other harm.
+
+College Information System(s): a set of information resources organized expressly for the collection, processing, maintenance, use, sharing, dissemination, or disposition of information. The term system is used throughout this policy to represent all types of computing equipment and platforms that can process, store, or transmit College Data.
+
+Commercial Solicitation: means peddling or otherwise selling, purchasing or offering goods and services for sale or purchase, distributing advertising materials, circulars or product samples, or engaging in any other conduct relating to any outside business interests or for profit or personal economic benefit on College property or using College resources.
+
+Communicable Diseases: any disease that can be transmitted from one individual directly to another individual.  Some communicable diseases can be spread by casual contact.  For example, colds, flu, and tuberculosis can be spread from respiratory droplets that may be transmitted through coughing, sneezing, or a runny nose.  Other communicable diseases require contact with an infected individual’s blood, body fluids, or genitalia, such as Hepatitis B, the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (the virus that causes AIDS), chlamydia, genital herpes, and syphilis.  College policy is concerned only with those communicable diseases that pose a significant threat to the life or health of others, and all references to “communicable diseases” are to be understood as having that more restricted meaning.
+
+Computing Equipment: any Olin or non-Olin desktop, laptop, or portable device or system.
+
+Controlled Substance: a drug or other substance, or immediate precursor, included in schedule I, II, III, IV, or V of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as amended).
+
+Convicted Sex Offender—a person convicted of a crime involving a sexual offense that is required to register with government authorities.
+
+Copyright: copyright grants to the author or originator of a work of original authorship, art or a work that conveys information or ideas, the right to control how the work is used.  Copyright grants to the author or originator the sole and exclusive privilege of creating multiple copies of literary or artistic productions and publishing and selling them.  Copyright protection exists for original works fixed in any tangible medium of expression, including: literary works; musical works, including any accompanying words; dramatic works, including any accompanying music; pantomimes and choreographic work; pictorial, graphic, and sculpture work; motion pictures and other audiovisual works; and sound recordings.
+
+Covered Data and Information: means all Non-Public Personal Information of customers required to be protected under the Title V of the Gramm Leach Bliley Act of 1999 (“GLBA”), including Student Financial Information. In addition to this coverage, which is required under federal law, the college chooses as a matter of policy to also include in this definition any Cardholder Data received in the course of business by the college, whether or not such Cardholder Data is covered by GLBA. Covered Data and Information includes both paper and electronic records.
+
+Covered Federal Official: includes covered legislative branch officials and covered executive branch officials.  
+
+A covered legislative branch official is defined as any of the following:
+
+members of Congress;
+
+an elected officer of either House of Congress;
+
+an employee of a member of Congress, a committee of either House of Congress, the leadership staff of either House of Congress, a joining committee of Congress, and a working group or caucus organized to provide legislative services or other assistance to members of Congress;
+
+all officers of the House and Senate (Clerk of the House, Secretary of the Senate, etc.), and other highly compensated employees ($114,200 and above for 2008). Please check with us if uncertain about eligibility.
+
+Those designated in section 109(13) of the Ethics in Government Act as an “officer or employee of the Congress.”
+
+A covered executive branch official is defined as any of the following:
+
+the President;
+
+the Vice President;
+
+any officer or employee in the Executive Office of the President;
+
+generally the top three levels in an agency (agency Heads, Deputies, Assistant Secretaries, Assistant Administrators) but there are exceptions;
+
+any officer or employee serving in a position in Level I-V of the Executive Schedule;
+
+all Generals and Admirals;
+
+any member of the uniformed armed services whose pay grade is at or above O-7;
+
+""Schedule C"" employees (positions in which the incumbent serves at the pleasure of the agency head, such as an Undersecretary or Director); and
+
+political appointees regardless of title.
+
+D
+
+Data Administration: Olin College is considered the data owner of all College Data; individual units or departments may have stewardship responsibilities for portions of the data.
+
+Data Custodians: an individual who has administrative and/or operational responsibility over the specific College Data sets delegated to them by a Data Manager. 
+
+Data Managers: College officials who have planning and policy-level responsibilities for College Data in their functional areas.
+
+Data Ownership: Olin College is considered the data owner of all College Data; individual units or departments may have stewardship responsibilities for portions of the data.
+
+Data Request(s): a request for information about Olin College students, courses, faculty, finances, research, units, department that is used to support the administration of the College or its programs.
+
+Data Security Standards: standards developed by the PCI Council to assure consumers that their brands and credit cards are reliable and secure. These standards include controls for safe handling of sensitive consumer information.
+
+Deadly Weapon: any instrument, device, or thing, including a firearm, designed, made, adapted, or used, for the purpose of inflicting death or serious physical injury.
+
+Digital Millennium Copyright Act (P.L. 105-304): a 1998 amendment to the Copyright Act of 1976 that establishes certain limitations of copyright infringement liability for online service providers (OSPs), including Colleges and universities, when certain requirements are met by the OSP.  The Act contains a number of other provisions, including prohibitions on circumvention of technological protection measures among others.
+
+Disability: a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the Major Life Activities of an individual; and a record of such an impairment.  A sensory, mental, or physical impairment that (i) Is medically cognizable or diagnosable; or (ii) Exists as a record or history.  A physical or mental chronic or episodic condition, including, without limitation, HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, epilepsy, seizure disorder, diabetes, clinical depression, bipolar disorder, multiple sclerosis, and heart disease, that limit one or more major life activities of an individual.  Whether the individual’s physical or mental condition limits a major lift activity shall be determined without respect to any mitigating measures, such as medication, unless the mitigating measure itself limits a Major Life Activity.
+
+Discrimination: conduct directed at a specific individual or group of individuals that subjects the individual or group to treatment that adversely affects their employment or education at the College because of their race, color, citizenship status, national origin or ancestry, sex, sexual orientation or preference, age, religion, physical or mental disability, of a qualified individual, pregnancy or pregnancy-related condition, genetic information, membership in Uniformed Services, veteran status, or any other legally protected status (“protected characteristic”).  
+
+Divisions Safety Officers (DSO): those individuals responsible for monitoring and assessing safety hazards or unsafe conditions within a division that conducts academic teaching or research activities; facilities support functions; or other activities that utilize hazardous materials or equipment.  A DSO is appointed by the area vice president or dean and has delegated authority to coordinate division safety program implementation with IDENTIFY DEPARTMENT.
+
+DMCA Notice or Takedown Request: a warning or request issued from a copyright holder or a representative of the copyright holder.  These copyright holders have identified computers on the College’s Network as having potentially violated the DMCA and issue warnings regarding the particular infringement to the College.
+
+E
+
+E-cigarette: means any electronic oral device, such as one composed of a heating element, battery, and/or electronic circuit, which provides a vapor of nicotine or any other substances, and the use or inhalation of which simulates smoking.  The term shall include any such device, whether manufactured, distributed, marketed, or sold as an e-cigarette, e-cigar, e-pipe, or under any other product name or descriptor. 
+
+Electronic Mail Account: the “olin.edu” electronic mail account assigned to an Authorized User by the Division of Information Services. 
+
+Electronic Mail System: the “olin.edu” enterprise electronic mail system managed by Information Technology. 
+
+Emergency Notification—a communication triggered when there is confirmation of a dangerous situation or emergency with immediate impact to life or property at the College.
+
+Emotional Injury: means an impairment to or disorder of the intellectual or psychological capacity of a Minor Child as evidenced by observable and substantial reduction in the Minor Child’s ability to function within a normal range of performance and behavior.
+
+Emotional Support Animal: an animal that provides comfort to an individual with a disability upon the recommendation of a healthcare or mental health professional.  An Assistance Animal does not assist a person with a disability with activities of daily living, is not required to be trained to perform work or tasks, and does not accompany a person with a disability at all times.  An Emotional Support Animal can be species other than dogs.  The role of the assistance animal is to live with a student and alleviate the symptoms of an individual’s disability to provide equal opportunities to use and enjoy College housing.  An Emotional Support Animal is not considered to be a Service Animal under applicable law.
+
+Endorse: public statements of opinion and/or contributions, monetary, in-kind, or otherwise, to political campaigns.
+
+Equally Effective Alternative Access: means an alternative format, medium or other aid that accurately and in a timely manner communicates the same content as does the original format or medium, and which is appropriate to an individual’s disability.  To provide equally effective alternative access, the College need not ensure that qualified individuals with disabilities achieve the identical result or level of achievement as individuals without disabilities, but the College must provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services as necessary to afford individuals with disabilities an equal opportunity to obtain the same result, gain the same benefit or reach the same level of achievement, in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs.  In providing equally effective alternative access, the College may rely on any commonly accepted standard or combination of standards provided the remainder of this definition is met.  The College is not required to take any action that results in a fundamental alteration in the nature of a service, program or activity, or in undue financial and administrative burden, but must nevertheless ensure, to the maximum extent possible, that qualified individuals with disabilities receive the benefits or services provided by the College.
+
+F
+
+Fair Use: Fair Use limits the exclusive rights of copyright owners and gives the user rights to reproduce in copies or phonorecords for “purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research.”
+
+Fire: any instance of open flame or other burning in a place not intended to contain the burning or in an uncontrolled manner.
+
+Fire Safety System: any mechanism or system related to the detection of a fire, the warning resulting from a fire, or the control of a fire. This may include sprinkler systems or other fire extinguishing systems, fire detection devices, stand-alone smoke alarms, devices that alert one to the presence of a fire, such as horns, bells, or strobe lights; smoke-control and reduction mechanisms; and fire doors and walls that reduce the spread of a fire.
+
+G
+
+Gambling: playing a game of chance, with an uncertain outcome, for money or some other valuable item.
+
+Good Faith Report: an allegation of Wrongful Conduct made by an individual who believes that Wrongful Conduct may have occurred.  However, an allegation is not in Good Faith if it is made with reckless disregard for or willful ignorance of facts that would disprove the allegation.
+
+Guest Speakers and Performers: a person or group neither attending the College, nor otherwise employed by the College, who is invited to make a public address or give a public performance or lecture outside of the classroom environment. 
+
+H
+
+High Risk Area: includes any area with hazardous levels of radiation; hazardous chemicals or substances; hazardous biological agents or vectors; or hazardous equipment or processes. Examples of areas with these characteristics include, but are not limited to: laboratories; machine shops, woodworking shops, or similar workshop areas; mechanical rooms; boiler rooms; construction areas; maintenance garages; animal care or animal research facilities; food preparation areas; sensitive areas such as college data processing center(s), data equipment closets, and areas that house systems that store, process, or transmit College Data classified as Restricted pursuant to Policy No. : Data Classification .
+
+Hostile Environment Harassment: as a form of unlawful Discrimination, Hostile Environment Harassment is defined as the unlawful harassment against an individual on the basis of the individual or group’s race, color, citizenship status, national origin or ancestry, sex, sexual orientation or preference, age, religion, physical or mental disability, of a qualified individual, pregnancy or pregnancy-related condition, genetic information, membership in Uniformed Services, veteran status, or any other legally protected status (“protected characteristic”) when such conduct is sufficiently severe or pervasive so as to have the purpose or effect of interfering with an individual or group's academic or work performance; or of creating a hostile academic or work environment.
+
+The determination of whether an environment is “hostile” must be based on all of the circumstances, giving consideration to whether a reasonable person in a similar situation would have perceived the conduct as objectively offensive.  
+
+A single or isolated incident of Hostile Environment Harassment may create a hostile environment if the incident is sufficiently severe.  The more severe the conduct, the less need there is to show a repetitive series of incidents to provide a hostile environment, particularly if the Hostile Environment Harassment is physical in nature.
+
+Depending upon the circumstances, examples of unlawful Discrimination and/or Hostile Environment Harassment could include the following types of conduct:
+
+	Epithets, slurs, negative stereotyping, jokes, or threatening, intimidating or hostile acts that relate to a protected characteristic;
+
+	Verbal abuse or innuendo or use of derogatory words, which is continued or repeated, concerning a protected characteristic;
+
+	An open display of objects or pictures offensive to another person’s protected characteristic;
+
+	Making decisions about an employee’s employment or student’s admission to a College program or activity based upon the individual’s protected characteristic.
+
+The above listing is not exhaustive.  The listing provides some examples of conduct which could constitute unlawful discrimination and/or harassment, depending upon the circumstances.  In addition, behaviors similar to those described above, depending on the circumstances, may not rise to the level of unlawful harassment or discrimination within the meaning of state and federal law, but are nonetheless inappropriate for the workplace or academic environment.  Such inappropriate conduct may result in disciplinary action under this Policy regardless of whether the conduct is unlawful.
+
+I
+
+Independent Contractor: an individual or firm engaged in an established business, trade or profession who provides services to the College and the fees are reported on the IRS Form 1099-MISC.  An Independent Contractor is not an employee of the College; an Independent Contractor is a worker who: (a) is engaged in an independently established profession or business; (b) provides a service outside of the College’s usual course of business; and (c) is free from the College’s control or direction when providing services.
+
+Information and Communication Technologies: includes any equipment or interconnected system or subsystem of equipment that is used in the creation, conversion, or duplication of data or information, including but not limited to, the internet and intranet websites, content delivered in digital form, electronic books and electronic book reading systems, search engines and databases, learning management systems, classroom technology and multimedia, personal response systems (“clickers”), and office equipment such as classroom podiums, copiers and fax machines. It also includes any equipment or interconnected system or subsystem of equipment that is used in the automatic acquisition, creation, storage, manipulation, management, movement, control, display, switching, interchange, transmission, or reception of data or information.  This term includes telecommunications products (such as telephones), information kiosks, Automated Teller Machines (ATMs) transaction machines, computers, ancillary equipment, software, firmware and similar procedures, services (including support services), and related resources.
+
+Information Security Officer: College official who has oversight responsibility for the College’s data security program as well as compliance with relevant regulations, security policies, standards and guidelines
+
+Information System: a set of Information Technology Resources organized expressly for the collection, processing, maintenance, use, sharing, dissemination, or disposition of information.  The term system is used throughout this policy to represent all types of computing platforms that can process, store, or transmit College Data.
+
+Information Technology Resources: computing resources, information technologies, networks, voice messaging equipment, computer software, data networking systems, including remote and wireless and electronically stored institutional data and messages owned, controlled, or managed by the College.
+
+Information Technology Security Incident: occurs when there is a serious threat of or unauthorized access or acquisition to a College Information System or an Authorized User’s computerized data that compromises the security, confidentiality, or integrity of the data, including Restricted and Confidential Data. A Security Incident also occurs where there has been unauthorized access or acquisition of encrypted data and the confidential process or key to the encryption is also compromised. Security Incidents can range from the unauthorized use of another Authorized User’s account or system privileges to the execution of malicious code, viruses, worms, Trojan horses, cracking utilities, or attacks by crackers or hackers. Security Incidents may also involve the physical theft of a college information system, a component thereof, or an Authorized User’s technology, such as a computer, mobile device, or other electronic media, or may occur as the result of a weakness in information systems or components (e.g., hardware design or system security procedures).
+
+A non-exhaustive list of symptoms of incidents that qualify as Security Incidents include:
+
+A system alarm or similar indication from an intrusion detection tool;
+
+Suspicious entries in a system or network accounting;
+
+Accounting discrepancies; unexplained new user accounts or file names;
+
+Unexplained modification or deletion of data; system crashes or poor system performance;
+
+Unusual time of usage; and
+
+Unusual usage patterns.
+
+Intellectual Property: property of an intellectual nature belonging to an individual or an entity, including, but not limited to, proprietary information that is protected by patent, copyright, trademark, or a non-disclosure agreement.
+
+Intimidation: implied threats or acts that cause an unreasonable fear of harm in another.
+
+J
+
+
+
+K
+
+L
+
+Legal Name: the name that is recorded on an individual's legal identification and used on formal legal records at the College.
+
+Listserv: an Internet communication tool that offers its members the opportunity to exchange ideas, make suggestions, or ask questions to a large number of people at the same time.
+
+Lobbying Activities: are lobbying contacts and efforts in support of such contacts, including preparation and planning activities, research and other background work that is intended, at the time it is performed, for use in contacts, and coordination with the lobbying activities of others.
+
+Lobbying Contacts: include letters, phone calls, emails, and face-to-face meetings made on behalf of the College with covered executive branch and legislative branch officials intended to influence a covered official on appropriations; specific legislation; legislative proposals, rules, regulations; Executive Orders; programs, policies, or positions of the U.S. government; administration or execution of federal programs or policies (including federal contracts and grants); and nomination or confirmation of a person for a position subject to confirmation by the U.S. Senate.  Lobbying contacts do not include contacts made as part of a professional association.
+
+M
+
+Mandated Reporters: Pursuant to M.G.L. c. 119, §§ 51A-E, Mandated Reporters include but are not limited to: Physicians; Psychologists; Clinical social workers; Medical interns; Dentists; Teachers; Counselors; Police officers; Allied mental health and licensed human services professionals; Early childhood education and childcare staff; and Clergy members.
+
+Mass Electronic Mail Message: any unsolicited electronic mailing sent to more than 50 addressees.
+
+Media: includes, but is not limited to, paper, hard drives, random access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), disks, flash drives, memory devices, phones, Mobile Devices, networking devices, and all-in-one printers.
+
+Merchant Account: an account established for a unit by a bank to credit sale amounts and debit processing fees.
+
+Merchant: an organization, department, institution or unit that accepts credit cards as a method payment for goods, services, information, or gifts.
+
+Minor Child: means any person under the age of 18 who is not a matriculated Olin College student or employee and who is unaccompanied by a parent or legal guardian.
+
+Missing Student: a student may be considered to be a missing person if the person’s absence is contrary to his/her usual pattern of behavior and unusual circumstances may have caused the absence.  Such circumstances could include, but not be limited to, a report or suspicion that the missing person may be the victim of foul play, has expressed suicidal thoughts, is drug dependent, is in a life-threatening situation, or has been with persons who may endanger the student’s welfare.
+
+Mobile Device: any handheld or portable computing device including running an operating system optimized or designed for mobile computing. Any device running a full desktop version operating system is not included in this definition.
+
+N
+
+Non-Forcible Sex Offense—unlawful, non-forcible sexual intercourse: a) incest – non-forcible sexual intercourse between persons who are related to each other within the degrees wherein marriage is prohibited by law, and b) statutory rape – non-forcible sexual intercourse with a person who is under the statutory age of consent.
+
+O
+
+Official Electronic Mail Message: an electronic mail message which alerts the College Community to substantial changes in governance, policy, or practice; to immediate threats to health, safety, property, or research; to computer or telecommunications issues; and to shared community interests.
+
+P
+
+Payment Card Industry Council (PCI): a group formed by the credit card industry (VISA, MasterCard, Discover and American Express to establish Data Security Standards (DSS) for the industry. https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org.
+
+Payment Card Information: as regulated by the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS), Payment Card Information is defined as Cardholder Data or Sensitive Authentication Payment Data:
+
+Cardholder Data: full magnetic stripe or the Primary Account Number (PAN) plus any of the following: cardholder name; expiration date; service code; CVC2/CVV2/CID (a three- or four-digit number displayed on the signature panel of the card or, in the case of American Express, on the face of the card; and
+
+Sensitive Authentication Data: magnetic strip data or equivalent on a chip, CAV2/CVC2/CVV2/CID, and PINs/PIN blocks.
+
+Personal Items: any personal effects, including items such as: money, books, decorations, clothing, electronic devices, or other items that are kept in offices, desks, or personal vehicles, either on campus.
+
+Personally Identifiable Information or PII—any information about an individual that (i) can be used to distinguish or trace an individual’s identity, such as name, date and place of birth, mother’s maiden name or biometric records, (ii) is linked or linkable to an individual, such as medical, educational, financial and employment information, which if lost, compromised or disclosed without authorization, could result in harm to that individual; and (iii) is protected by federal, state or local laws and regulations or industry standards.
+
+Physical Injury: means death, fracture of bone, a subdural hematoma, burns, impairment of any organ, any other nontrivial injury, soft tissue swelling or skin bruising, addiction to a drug, or failure to thrive.
+
+Political Activity/Political Activities: activity, including oral or written statements and financial support, that is directed toward the success or failure of a political party, candidate for election in a partisan political campaign for public office, a partisan political group or ballot initiative.
+
+Political Campaign: a race between candidates for elective office, or other organized effort towards a particular election result, including for ballot initiatives.
+
+Preferred Name: the name by which a person wishes to be known and to have appear in College systems and when conducting day-to-day College business because it affirms that individual’s gender, culture and other aspects of social identity.  The Preferred Name will consist of a preferred first name, and preferred middle name when provided.  The Preferred Name does not affect the individual’s last name, which must remain the person’s legal name.
+
+
+
+Private Areas: areas in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, including, but not limited to non-common areas of residence halls, residence hall corridors, bathrooms, shower areas, locker and changing rooms and other areas where a reasonable person might change clothes.  Additionally, areas designed for the personal comfort of College employees or the safeguarding of their possessions, such as lounges and locker rooms, and areas dedicated to medical, physical, or mental therapy or treatment are considered private areas.
+
+Protected Disclosure: communication about actual or suspected unethical behavior or Wrongful Conduct engaged in by a member of the College community based on a good faith and reasonable belief that the conduct has both occurred and is wrongful under applicable law and/or College policy.
+
+Protected Health Information: “Protected Health Information” or PHI is all individually identifiable information that relates to the health or health care of an individual and is protected under federal or state law.
+
+Public Areas: areas made available for use by the public, including, but not limited to, campus grounds, parking areas, building exteriors, loading docks, areas of ingress and egress, classrooms, lecture halls, study rooms, lobbies, theaters, libraries, dining halls, gymnasiums, recreation areas, and retail establishments.  Areas of the College in which persons would not have a reasonable expectation of privacy, but to which access is restricted to certain College employees, such as storage areas, are also be considered public areas.
+
+Public Facing Content: means any content that is intended for access by the general public, without restrictions.  Content that is not public-facing is termed “controlled” content, and encompasses content where authentication or authorization is required for access, and/or content is targeted to and delivered for those enrolled in specific programs, majors or classes.
+
+Q
+
+Qualified Machine: A “Qualified Machine” is a computing device located in a secure facility that is managed by IT or has access control protections that meet Olin’s IT standards.
+
+R
+
+Reasonable Accommodations: modifications or adjustments that enable an individual with a disability to enjoy equal benefits and privileges of access to a campus event as enjoyed by similarly situated individual without a disability.
+
+Regulation Monitors: College officials who have oversight responsibility for one or more regulations.  Regulation monitors stay abreast of updates to their respective regulations, ensure policies are up to date and notify the Information Security Officer and Data Managers about changes.  The Compliance group meets on a regular basis.
+
+Retaliation: taking adverse action against an individual making a complaint under a College policy or against any person cooperating in the investigation of a complaint under a College policy.  Retaliation includes intimidation, threats, harassment, and other adverse action including adverse job action and adverse academic action against any such complainant or third party.
+
+S
+
+Self-Assessment Questionnaire: The PCI Self-Assessment Questionnaire (SAQ) is a validation tool that is primarily used by merchants to demonstrate compliance to the PCI DSS.  The current version of the SAQ is based on the current version of the Payment Card Industry (PCI) Data Security Standard (DSS). The document can be found at https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/security_standards/documents.php?category=saqs.
+
+Sensitive Data: include the account number, magnetic stripe data, CVV2/CVC2, and expiration date.
+
+Service Animal: the American with Disabilities Act (ADAAA) defines a service animal as “any guide dog, signal dog, or other animal individually trained to provide assistance to an individual with a disability.”   The work or tasks performed by a Service Animal must be directly related to the individual’s disability.
+
+Sexual Misconduct: a broad term used to encompass a range of behaviors including but not limited to sex discrimination, sexual harassment, sexual assault, sexual coercion, sexual exploitation, relationship violence (domestic violence and dating violence), stalking and/or acts perpetrated against a person’s will or when a person is incapable of giving consent.  All such acts of Sexual Misconduct are prohibited by Olin College.  Sexual Misconduct can occur between individuals who know each other, have an established relationship, have previously engaged in consensual sexual activity, and/or between individuals who do not know each other.  Sexual Misconduct can be committed by persons of any gender identity, and can occur between people of the same or different biological sex or gender identity.  See Policy No. - : Sexual Misconduct for additional information.
+
+Smoking: means inhaling, exhaling, burning, or carrying any lighted or heated cigar, cigarette, or pipe, including a hookah pipe, or any other lighted or heated tobacco or plant product intended for inhalation, including hookahs and marijuana, whether natural or synthetic, in any manner or in any form.  Smoking also includes the use of an E-cigarette which creates an aerosol or vapor, in any manner or in any form, or the use of any oral smoking device for the purpose of circumventing the prohibition of Smoking in Policy No. - : Smoking and Tobacco Use. 
+
+Solicitation: includes, canvassing, soliciting or seeking to obtain membership in or support for any organization, requesting contributions, and posting or distributing handbills, pamphlets, petitions, and the like of any kind on College property or using College resources (including without limitation bulletin boards, computers, mail, e-mail and telecommunication systems, photocopiers and telephone lists and databases).
+
+Student Records: “Student Records” are those that are required to be maintained as non-public by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).  Student Records include Olin-held student transcripts (official and unofficial), and Olin-held records related to (i) academic advising, (ii) health/disability, (iii) academic probation and/or suspension, (iv) conduct (including disciplinary actions), and (v) directory information maintained by the Registrar’s Office and requested to be kept confidential by the student.  Applications for student admission are not considered to be Student Records unless and until the student attends Olin College.
+
+Student Financial Information: information the College or its affiliates have obtained from a student in the process of offering a financial product or service, or such information provided to the college by another financial institution.  Offering a financial product or service includes offering student loans to students, receiving income tax information from a student’s parent when offering a financial aid package, and other miscellaneous financial services as defined in 12 CRF §225.28. Examples of student financial information include addresses, phone numbers, bank and credit card account numbers, income and credit histories and Social Security numbers, in both paper and electronic format.
+
+T
+
+Technology, Education and Copyright Harmonization Act (TEACH Act) (Section 110(2) of the U.S. copyright law): a copyright exemption that addresses teaching conducted through digital transmission.  
+
+Threats: any conduct which causes another person to believe that their physical safety, or the security of College property, is endangered.
+
+Timely Warning: a communication triggered when a crime is reported and the College determines there is a continuing threat to the campus community.  Crime reports do not always require an Emergency Notification, but are released once the pertinent information is available..
+
+Tobacco Product: means any substance containing tobacco leaf, including but not limited to, cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, hookah tobacco, snuff, chewing tobacco, dipping tobacco, bidis, blunts, clove cigarettes, or any other preparation of tobacco; and any product or formulation of matter containing biologically active amounts of nicotine that is manufactured, sold, offered for sale, or otherwise distributed with the expectation that the product or matter will be introduced into the human body.  “Tobacco Product” does not include any cessation product specifically approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for use in treating nicotine or tobacco dependence.
+
+U
+
+Undue Administrative Burden: are created when a proposed course of action causes significant difficulty.  Because the College must consider all resources available when reviewing claims of undue administrative burdens, the decision to invoke undue administrative burdens will be carefully weighed, sufficiently documented and ultimately authorized by the Cabinet.  In situations where undue administrative burdens can be documented, equally effective alternative access must still be provided.
+
+Unfounded Reports: reports that have been fully investigated by sworn or commissioned law enforcement personnel who, based on the results of this full investigation and evidence, have made formal determination that the crime report is false or baseless.  Recovery of stolen property, stolen property that is of low value, the refusal of a victim to cooperate with law enforcement or the failure to make an arrest do not justify classifying a report as “unfounded.”
+
+Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS): commonly known as a drone, is an aircraft without a human pilot aboard, which include a Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, a ground-based controller, and a system of communications between the two.  The operation of a UAS is regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA.)
+
+V
+
+Violence: includes threatening, harassing, and/or violent behavior that causes a disruption to the work environment and leads a reasonable person to fear for their physical safety; physical conduct that results in harm to people or property; possession of deadly weapons on College property; and/or use of College property or resources to engage in threatening, harassing, or violent behavior.
+
+Violent Behavior: the use of physical force, violence, or other actions that have the capacity to inflict harm or to endanger the physical safety of another person or the property of the College.
+
+Violent Crimes: For purposes of Clery Act reporting, violent crimes are those offenses which involve force or threat of force including murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.
+
+W
+
+Wheeled Vehicles: with the exception of the use of mobility devices by individuals with disabilities, means all motorized and wheeled vehicles, including: bicycles (traditional and motorized), delivery/maintenance and landscaping cars, trucks, and carts, electric carts, inline and roller skates, scooters, Segway® personal mobility devices or transporter, skateboards, and/or hoverboards, and other similar conveyances.
+
+Willful Infringement: the action of one who has been told by College authorities (i.e., the CIO or librarians) that a proposed action is an infringement of the US Copyright Law – but does it anyway.
+
+Work Areas: all areas of the College in which regular College activity takes place, including without limitation offices, classrooms, lecture halls, libraries, dining areas, etc.
+
+Work Time: that time when an employee is scheduled and expected to be properly engaged in performing work tasks.   Work time does not include break time, meal periods, or other periods during which an employee is not required to perform their job duties.
+
+Wrongful Conduct: violations of applicable state and federal laws or regulations, fraud, accounting irregularities, auditing abuse, falsification or records, improper destruction of College records, conflicts of interest, impeding a College or law enforcement investigation, violation of a government contract or grant requirement, research misconduct, serious violation of College policy, or the use of College property, resources, or authority for personal gain or other non-College related purpose except as provided under College policy.
+
+X
+
+
+
+Y
+
+
+
+Z</s>"
+<s>[INST] Campus Community Policies (2nd Draft).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Canisius College IWPM Proposal (2.16).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Canisius College Proposal (2.16).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Canisius Policy Update Listing.txt [/INST] 2018-2019
+
+2.2.4: Smoking and Tobacco Use 
+
+2.4.1: Acceptable Use of College Computer and Network Systems
+
+2.4.2: Access Control Policy
+
+2.4.3: Cloud Computing Policy
+
+2.4.4: Computer Asset Disposal Policy
+
+2.4.5: Computer Asset Replacement Policy
+
+2.4.6: Electronic Accessibility Policy
+
+2.4.8: Information Security Program
+
+2.4.9 Information Technology Change Control Policy
+
+2.4.11 Mobile Device Use and Support Policy
+
+2.4.12 Password Policy
+
+2.4.15 IT Maintenance Policy
+
+2.4.16 Wireless Access Points Policy
+
+2.6.3 Contact with Government Agencies Policy
+
+2.6.5 Photography, Digital Recording, and Filming Policy
+
+2.6.6 Social Media Policy
+
+3.2.7: Work Authorization and Immigration Sponsorship Policy
+
+3.3.13: Outside Activities (Staff) Policy
+
+3.3.15: Reportable Business Relationships Policy
+
+3.4.2: FMLA Policy
+
+3.5.7: Moving Expenses Policy
+
+3.5.8: Employee Campus Housing Policy
+
+3.6.7: Secondary Assignments Policy
+
+
+
+New Policies
+
+College Intern Policy
+
+Website Privacy Policy
+
+Audit and Accountability Control Policy
+
+Configuration Management Policy
+
+ITS Personnel Security Policy
+
+Data Classification Policy
+
+Identification and Authentication Policy
+
+Media Protection Policy
+
+Information Security and Awareness Policy
+
+IT Physical and Environmental Protection Policy
+
+Updated Director Questionnaire
+
+Admission of Applicant with Prior History of Criminal Behavior or Disciplinary Action 
+
+For Conduct
+
+Human Subjects Research
+
+
+
+2019-2020
+
+Sexual Misconduct (Updated for new Title IX regulations)
+
+Workers Compensation Light Duty Policy
+
+Anti-Discrimination and Harassment
+
+Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy
+
+Emergency Responder Leave
+
+Community Standards
+
+Staff Disciplinary Action and Termination Policy
+
+Staff Remote Work and Telecommuting Policy
+
+Contract Policy
+
+Fundraising and Gift Acceptance Policy
+
+
+
+2021-2021
+
+Information Technology Incident Response Policy
+
+Payment Card Information Security Policy
+
+Student Identity Verification Policy
+
+Alcohol and Drug Prevention Program Policy
+
+Catastrophic Events and Continuity of Operations Policy 
+
+Updated ITS Contingency Plan document
+
+Employee Covid Vaccine Policy
+
+
+
+2021-2022
+
+DEI Materials
+
+Transcript Holds (to comply with NY law)</s>"
+"<s>[INST] CATASTROPHIC EVENTS AND CONTINUITY OF OPERATIONS.txt [/INST] CATASTROPHIC EVENTS AND CONTINUITY OF OPERATIONS
+
+Effective Date:
+
+
+
+Policy Number:
+
+II – 
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+PLEASE INSERT
+
+Applicability:
+
+All Canisius College employees.
+
+History:
+
+ 
+
+
+
+
+
+The purpose of this policy is to define standard methods for a safe and efficient response to catastrophic events that impact the college’s operations. 
+
+POLICY 
+
+It is the policy of Canisius College Crisis to mitigate the impact of crisis situations and operational disruptions on its campus community through implementing policies and procedures that provide for continuity of operations in cases of a catastrophic event.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Catastrophic Event—a catastrophic casualty loss suffered due to a terrorist attack, fire, or natural disaster that results in operational disruptions. 
+
+College Data— any information collected, manipulated, stored, reported, or presented in any format, on any medium, at any location by any department, program or office of the college in support of the college’s mission.
+
+College Information System—a set of information resources organized expressly for the collection, processing, maintenance, use, sharing, dissemination, or disposition of information.  The term system is used throughout this policy to represent all types of computing platforms that can process, store, or transmit College Data.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+I.	Continuity of Operations
+
+A.	Operational Systems
+
+The college’s administrative software systems, as well as its educational technologies such as [LIST], are hosted in the “cloud” to minimize the likelihood of noticeable service interruption. Further, the college’s Information Security Program and associated policies have been developed to protect College Information Systems from vulnerabilities, as well as secure and back up College Data.
+
+B.	Policies Ensuring Continuity of Operations & Emergency/Crisis Response
+
+The following Canisius College policies are also intended to help mitigate the impact of emergency, catastrophic events on College operations: 
+
+Information Security Program and Information Security Policies: The College’s Information Security Program and associated information security policies provide guidance for ensuring the integrity, confidentiality, and security of College Data received or maintained during college business operations.  These policies include, but are not limited to:
+
+Access Control Policy
+
+Acceptable Use of College Computer and Network Systems Policy
+
+Audit and Accountability Control Policy 
+
+Computer Assets Disposal Policy
+
+Computer Asset Replacement Policy
+
+Confidential Information Policy
+
+Configuration Management Policy
+
+Data Classification Policy
+
+Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Policy
+
+Identification and Authentication Policy
+
+Identity Theft Prevention Policy
+
+Information Technology Incident Response Policy
+
+Information Technology Personnel Security Policy
+
+Information Technology Physical and Environmental Protection Policy
+
+Information Technology Security Awareness and Training Policy 
+
+Media Protection Policy
+
+Mobile Device Use and Support Policy
+
+Payment Card Information Security Policy
+
+Risk and Security Assessment Policy
+
+Student Records (FERPA) Policy
+
+System and Communication Protection Policy
+
+System and Information Integrity Policy
+
+Refund Policies: The college’s refund policies provide guidance for ensuring that financial refunds are processed timely and consistently and in accordance with college policy, and applicable federal, state and accreditation requirements. In the event a catastrophic event occurs, the college maintains the authority to enact additional financial refunds to students that are deemed appropriate during such circumstances.
+
+Canisius College Crisis Response Plan: The college’s Crisis Response Plan provides detailed emergency instructions for the college community to ensure safety and protection of property during fire, severe weather, loss of utilities, and other emergencies.
+
+II. Program Discontinuances 
+
+In the unlikely event that the college cannot deliver the instruction for which students have enrolled, the college will develop an appropriate courses of action on a case by case.  Possible outcomes may include, but are not limited to:
+
+Providing a reasonable alternative for delivering instruction and/or services for which students have paid as approved by the Board of Trustees;
+
+Providing reasonable financial refund for the education students did not receive as may be applicable;
+
+Providing assistance for transferring earned credits to other institutions.
+
+Canisius College students will be notified by the administration and then counseled about their options by their advisors.   In accordance with institutional accreditation requirements, a teach-out plan may be adopted.
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+See Procedures/Guidelines section</s>"
+<s>[INST] CC Annual Update Proposal - Final.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC Annual Update Proposal.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.1 (Final Draft)(4.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.1 (Final)(4.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.2 (Final)(5.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.3 (1st Draft)(7.2016).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.3 (3rd Draft)(1.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.3 (4th Draft)(2.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.3 (Final Draft)(4.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.3 (Final Draft)(4.29.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.3 (Final)(5.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.4 (1st Client Draft)(8.26.2016).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.4 (Complete 2nd Draft) (12-19-16).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.4 (Pre-Draft)(8.22.2016).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.4 (Pre-Draft)(8.26.2016).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.5 (2nd Draft)(10.19.2016).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.5 (Final Draft)(4.25.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.5 (Final)(5.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.7 (Final Draft)(April 2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.7 (Final)(5.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.8 (Final)(5.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC V.9 (Final)(5.22.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC. V.1 (1st Draft)(7.27.2016).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC. V.6 (Final Draft)(4.18.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] CC. V.6 (Final)(5.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Cedar Crest FacultyAnnualSelf-EvaluationForm2021.txt [/INST] REV.5.13.2021
+
+
+
+
+
+ 
+
+
+
+Faculty Self-Evaluation
+
+Tenured faculty, due to Provost September 1st
+
+All others, due to Chair or Dean September 1st
+
+
+
+Submit through Interfolio: https://account.interfolio.com/login 
+
+
+
+Name:
+
+
+
+Title:
+
+
+
+Department or School:
+
+
+
+Chair, Dean, or Other Supervisor:
+
+
+
+Date:
+
+
+
+	Please complete the evaluation and forward to your department Chair along with any accompanying materials, including an up-to-date curriculum vitae; if tenured or non-tenure track, please also send a copy to the administrative assistant within the Office of the Provost.  Your narrative should reflect your analysis of how you meet the “Responsibilities and Expectations of Faculty Members” as set forth in Book III of the Faculty Handbook.  You should refer to additional materials such as course and peer evaluations and discuss areas where new methods have been tried, improvements have been made, and where improvement is needed.
+
+
+
+Review of Preceding Academic Year: Teaching
+
+  
+
+List and summarize teaching assignments using the abbreviations and the table below.
+
+Session: F, Fall; W, Winter; Sp, Spring; M, May; SI, Summer I; SII Summer II, etc.
+
+Format: T, traditional; O, online; H, hybrid; 2Wd, 2-weekend; AW6, accelerated 6-week, etc. as needed
+
+Time: time of day (D = day, E = evening, etc)
+
+New: Y or N, was this a new course preparation?
+
+
+
+Course # - Name
+
+Session
+
+Credits
+
+Format
+
+Time
+
+New
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Record your scores from the questions about teaching effectiveness (labeled with “instructor” or the instructor’s name) from the student evaluation surveys.  The Avg should be in column four and DEPT Avg in column seven.  Numbers can be transferred directly from the student evaluation surveys to this form and then calculations from the four lines performed as described in the last line in the grid below.
+
+
+
+Question text
+
+Avg
+
+DEPT Avg
+
+This instructor was effective in teaching the subject matter to the class 
+
+
+
+
+
+Instructor gave me constructive and timely feedback 
+
+
+
+
+
+Instructor displayed a personal interest in students 
+
+
+
+
+
+Instructor was well-prepared and used class time effectively 
+
+
+
+
+
+Add the scores from the four lines above and divide by 4
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Reflect on your teaching effectiveness over the past year with regard to the Performance Standards for Teaching identified in the Faculty Handbook III. Such standards shall include, among other elements, content that is current, diverse, and inclusive in the discipline and a classroom climate that is inclusive of all members of the learning community.
+
+E.g. How were you effective in your teaching?  What worked and what didn’t work?  What did you try differently?  What would you do the same or differently next year?  What were some of the challenges?  What would you like to improve?  What worked well?  What would you like to share?  Refer to the Faculty Handbook III Performance standards.
+
+
+
+Evaluation of Performance
+
+Attach peer reviews as appropriate (according to the Faculty Handbook II Article F).
+
+Attach student course evaluations /surveys.
+
+
+
+
+
+Professional Development and Scholarship
+
+
+
+Professional Development
+
+List professional development activities (refer to the list provided in Book III.)
+
+Reflect on how these activities contributed to your professional development, teaching effectiveness, and their significance/contribution to your field (note any support received for these activities).
+
+
+
+Scholarship
+
+Using the table below, list scholarly activities provided in Book III. If desired, categorize each activity according to its primary type(s) of scholarship as defined in the Faculty Handbook: 
+
+“D”: Discovery, scholarship that involves the search or pursuit of new knowledge; original research or creative scholarship
+
+“T”: Teaching, scholarship that involves the search for innovative approaches and best practices to develop skills and disseminate knowledge
+
+“A”: Application, scholarship that uses knowledge responsibly to solve consequential problems, especially those that affect on-campus communities and society as a whole.
+
+“I”: Integration, scholarship that interprets, synthesizes, and brings new insights to original research or creative scholarship.
+
+Reflect on how these activities contributed to your scholarship, teaching effectiveness, and their significance/contribution to your field (note any support received for these activities).
+
+
+
+#
+
+Activity Title
+
+Description
+
+Project Date(s)
+
+Category (D, T, A, or I)
+
+1
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+2
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+3
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+4
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+5
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Service
+
+
+
+Service to the Department (List contributions to advising, assessment, recruitment, and/or planning process within department, etc..)
+
+
+
+Service to the College 
+
+Committee Work (List standing faculty committee assignments, ad hoc and other types of committee assignments.)
+
+Recruitment and Student Life (List contributions to admissions, recruitment and retention activities, or to Student Life activities.)
+
+Administrative Assignments (List any administrative assignments within department/college-wide and any institutional accommodations provided, e.g. release time, stipends.)
+
+
+
+Service to the Profession (List contributions to professional organizations.)
+
+
+
+Service to the Community (List community service as it relates to your profession or your role as a Cedar Crest College faculty member.) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Plans for Next Academic Year
+
+Teaching – in light of the results of this self-evaluation, list any initiatives you may (or will) pursue to enhance your teaching effectiveness and/or instructional role at the College
+
+Professional Development and Scholarship – list any initiatives you plan to pursue to promote your professional development and scholarship. If it is helpful, use the table to organize future projects.  You may choose to include the Boyer category / categories of the scholarship and plans for peer review and dissemination, according to the criteria described above above under “Scholarship” for the preceding year.
+
+
+
+#
+
+Activity Title
+
+Description
+
+Project Date(s)
+
+Category (D, T, A, or I)
+
+1
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+2
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+3
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+4
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+5
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Service – list any initiative you may (or will) pursue to promote your service contributions to the College
+
+
+
+Institutional Support (e.g. indicate any plans you may have to request support for any of these plans.)
+
+
+
+Outside Pursuits and Employment
+
+
+
+List and describe all outside employment or pursuits, if any, that you maintained during the previous academic year. (See the Faculty Handbook, Book III)
+
+
+
+
+
+List and describe all outside employment or pursuits, if any, that you plan to accept in the forthcoming academic year. (See the Faculty Handbook, Book III)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+______________________________________________________
+
+Faculty Member Signature & Date
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Chapter Two-Faculty Bylaws and Committee Descritions (Clean).txt [/INST] Chapter Two: Faculty Governance 
+
+Faculty Bylaws
+
+	Article I: Organization of the Faculty
+
+	Section 1.	Members of the Faculty shall be (a) the President, the Provost, the Vice Presidents; (b) all persons appointed with the ranks of professor, associate professor, assistant professor, or instructor; (c) University librarians; and (d) others admitted to membership by vote of the Faculty.  Voting members shall be those of the above who hold full-time University appointments. When voting takes place at meetings of the Faculty, voting members must be present if they wish to vote. However, in the event a person is unable to attend a faculty meeting due to illness or a family or medical emergency, that person may either vote by absentee ballot or electronic ballot for elections to faculty committees only. The person must arrange with the Office of the Provost both to pick up and deliver any absentee ballot. If the person is to vote in the election by electronic ballot, the Office of the Provost will email the electronic ballot to the eligible faculty member’s official University email address.
+
+	Section 2.	The permanent officers of the Faculty shall be the President of the University, the Provost, and the Secretary of the Faculty. The Secretary shall be elected by the Faculty at the regular April meeting for a term of two years, commencing on the June first following such election. 
+
+	Section 3.	The Provost shall be the presiding officer over all faculty meetings except when the President of the University chooses to preside. In the event neither the President of the University nor the Provost can preside at a regular meeting of the Faculty, the senior full professor, in terms of service, on the Executive Committee shall be the presiding officer of the meeting.  
+
+	Section 4.	The Secretary of the Faculty shall prepare and keep full and complete minutes of all faculty meetings. If, for any reason, the Secretary is unable to perform the secretarial duties, the Provost shall appoint a secretary pro tempore who shall perform the functions of the Secretary.
+
+	Section 5	The Faculty may elect a Parliamentarian of the Faculty, who shall give interpretations of procedure when requested to do so by the presiding officer, or on the Parliamentarian’s own volition. Any interpretation by the Parliamentarian shall hold unless it is overruled by a two-thirds majority of those Faculty members present and voting.  The Parliamentarian shall be elected by the Faculty at the regular April meeting, commencing on the June first following such election.  There are no term limitations.
+
+	Section 6	The Secretary and Parliamentarian may be removed for cause by a two-thirds majority vote of the faculty at any meeting whenever, in the judgment of the faculty, the best interests of the faculty would thereby be served, provided, however, that the proposal for removal is presented at one meeting and acted upon at the next meeting.
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+	Article II: Committees of the Faculty
+
+	Section 1.	Standing Committees of the Faculty shall be designated, elected and directed by the Faculty and shall have as ex officio members the President of the University and the Provost. Ad hoc committees of the Faculty are to be established by the Faculty only when the subject matter is outside the area of responsibility of a standing committee.
+
+	Section 2.	Except as may otherwise be provided in these Faculty Bylaws, the term of office for committee members shall be six semesters and shall commence on July 1 and end on June 30 of the sixth semester thereafter, or when successors have been elected or appointed. Leave time of up to one year is included as part of a faculty member's term. In the event that a faculty member takes leave time in excess of one year, the faculty member is required to relinquish committee assignments. No member of the Faculty shall serve more than 14 consecutive semesters on the same standing committee of the Faculty. Any faculty member that has completed 14 consecutive semesters of service on the same standing committee may not serve on that committee during the next two consecutive semesters.  If a faculty member vacates a term of office on any standing committee because of election to another standing committee, the faculty member may not resume service on the first committee when the term on the second committee expires.
+
+	Section 3.	Normally, a faculty member shall serve on no more than one standing committee. Exceptions to this rule may be adopted as provisions in the official descriptions of particular committees.
+
+	Section 4.	Except as otherwise provided, it shall be the duty of each committee of the Faculty: 1. To keep the Faculty informed of agenda items on which the committee is working that may affect the long-term future of the institution, its faculty or students.  The committee shall provide opportunity for Faculty response and questions where feasible and appropriate, whether at the time of an oral report to the Faculty, at an open meeting, in surveys or by other means.  2. To act for the Faculty when and as directed by the Faculty. 3. To make recommendations to the Faculty on matters of policy relevant to its area of responsibility.
+
+	Section 5.	Except as otherwise provided, each committee of the Faculty shall elect its chair and vice chair and be responsible to the Faculty for its own organization and procedures.
+
+	Section 6.	A committee of the Faculty can, upon a majority vote of its members, invite other persons to participate in its deliberations, but only members of the committee shall be permitted to vote.  
+
+	Section 7.	With the exception of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee and the Academic Conduct Review Board, each committee of the Faculty shall make a full and complete report of its activities during the academic year at the regularly scheduled meeting in April.
+
+	Section 8.	In the event an elected member of a standing or ad hoc committee of the Faculty is unable to complete the faculty member’s full term of office, the Executive Committee of the Faculty shall seek a replacement at the earliest opportunity, applying the methods outlined in Chapter II, Article II, Section 2 above and Article IV, Section 3, below.  A faculty member elected to fill a vacancy shall serve the unexpired committee term of the individual whom the newly elected faculty member succeeds. If a faculty member is unable to complete a period of the term of office due to a semester leave, the Executive Committee of the Faculty will appoint a temporary replacement for the length of the semester leave. The faculty member will resume service upon return from the leave. 
+
+	Section 9.	Whenever provision is made for faculty representation on Trustee, Administration, University, Divisional, or Departmental Councils, Boards, Committees, Task Forces, or Working Groups it shall be the responsibility of such faculty representatives to keep the Faculty informed of the activities of these bodies and act as liaison between them and the Faculty.
+
+	Section 10.	In consultation with the President and the Provost, the Executive Committee will set the initial meeting time for new faculty committees prior to the election of faculty committee members. For all existing faculty committees except the Wesleyan Council on Student Affairs (“WCSA”), the initial meeting time may be changed, beginning the following academic year, by 1) a unanimous vote of all faculty and administrators with a continuing term of office and 2) a majority vote of the Faculty. Faculty committee meeting dates and times for the remainder of the academic year are scheduled by the unanimous vote of the members of the respective committees, reported to the Executive Committee, and shared with the Faculty.  
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+	Article III: Meetings
+
+	Section 1.	Regular monthly meetings of the University Faculty shall be held during the academic year. No regular monthly meeting shall last longer than ninety minutes unless it is extended by a majority vote of those present. At the last regular meeting of each academic year, a schedule of meeting dates for the coming year shall be adopted by the Executive Committee, provided that the time or place of meetings may be changed or the meeting may be canceled by the presiding officer or the Executive Committee, when it is deemed in the interest of the Faculty to do so.  If ten members of the Faculty request by written petition that a cancelled meeting be reinstated, the presiding officer of the Faculty shall call the meeting.
+
+	Section 2.	Special meetings of the Faculty shall be held at the call of the presiding officer or the Executive Committee or upon the request of 10 members of the Faculty transmitted in writing to the Secretary of the Faculty.
+
+	Section 3.	In-person meetings are the usual method for conducting Faculty meetings, with electronic meetings held when circumstances make it advisable that the Faculty not gather as a whole in person.  Determinations of whether the meeting shall be held electronically are made by the presiding officer in consultation with the Chair of the Executive Committee.  When meetings of the Faculty are to be conducted electronically, voting shall be through use of an electronic ballot designated by the Executive Committee.  When a meeting is held electronically, that meeting will function as a regular meeting of the Faculty and all actions and deliberations within such a meeting will have the same standing as an in-person meeting.  A vote conducted through the designated electronic balloting system shall be deemed a valid vote, fulfilling any requirement in these Bylaws that a vote be conducted by ballot.
+
+	Section 4	Consistent with our shared governance system, attendance at Faculty meetings of all members of the Faculty with voting privileges is encouraged. 
+
+	Section 5	Except for executive sessions, faculty meetings shall be open to all members of the Ohio Wesleyan University staff and guests invited by a majority vote of the Faculty.  Reporters, whether affiliated with the University or not, shall not be admitted as guests to the monthly meetings of the Ohio Wesleyan University faculty.  Minutes of the meeting shall be documented by the Secretary and distributed to the Faculty within seven business days of the meeting.
+
+	Section 6.	After the completion of the regular order of business, the Faculty shall go into executive session at the request of any member of the Faculty; it may vote to do so at any other time on motion to that effect.
+
+	Section 7.	The agenda of each faculty meeting shall include the following items in the order specified: 1. Call to order. 2. Introduction of guests. 3. Approval of minutes. 4. Old business. 5. New business. 6. Reports of Faculty committees. 7. Report of University officers. 8. Announcements. 9. Adjournment. The agenda of each faculty meeting shall be emailed 96 hours in advance of the meeting.  On any subject requiring a vote, a detailed report should accompany the agenda, such report should include the proposal to be voted on and substantiating statements. On a subject not requiring a vote, advance materials for the Faculty are desirable but optional. The Faculty shall have the right to waive the 96 hour rule by majority vote. The motion to waive must be accompanied by a rationale for suspending the rule. The motion to waive is debatable.
+
+	Section 8.	A majority of the voting members of the Faculty who are not on approved leave shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.  Unless otherwise provided in these Bylaws, when a vote is taken on any matter at a meeting of the Faculty, a quorum being present, a majority of the votes of the members present shall determine the outcome.  While voting for motions must be in person if the meeting is not held electronically, voting members of the faculty are eligible to vote for elections to faculty standing committees through electronic ballots.  If voting is by electronic ballot, a majority of votes cast shall determine the outcome for committee elections; in the case of motions, a majority of those present at the meeting shall determine the outcome.  
+
+	Section 9.	The proceedings and deliberations of the Faculty shall be governed by Robert's Rules of Order, except that upon the request of a voting member of the meeting the body will vote by secret or electronic ballot.
+
+	Section 10.	Faculty action within an area of primary responsibility as defined in the Article VIII, Section 2 of the Code of Regulations shall be transmitted to the Board of Trustees by the President, along with any administrative recommendations.
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+	Article IV: Nominations and Election Procedures
+
+	Section 1.	The Executive Committee of the Faculty shall act as a Nominating Committee of the Faculty. The agenda of the February faculty meeting shall include a slate of nominees for those faculty committees the members of which do not, under the provisions of Bylaws Article II, Section 3, normally serve on more than one standing committee of the Faculty. The elections for these committees will occur in the March faculty meeting. For all other committees or other responsibilities to which faculty members are elected, the Executive Committee will prepare a slate of nominees for the March faculty meeting; the elections for these positions shall be in the April faculty meeting. In preparing all ballots, the slate will consist of, insofar as possible, at least fifty percent more nominees than positions to be filled. After the Executive Committee's slate has been presented, there shall be a call for nominations from the floor.  
+
+	Section 2.	At all elections, each member of the Faculty shall have as many votes as there are positions to be filled for each office. Depending upon the number of offices to be filled, the candidate, or candidates, receiving the greatest number of votes shall be certified as elected by the Chair of the Executive Committee of the Faculty or the Chair’s designate. In the event of ties, a runoff election will be held by electronic ballot. The official announcement of the election results shall be made by the presiding officer as soon as possible after each of the March and April elections.
+
+	Section 3.	The Executive Committee shall fill, or cause to be filled by election, vacancies on committees created when members cannot serve some or all of their terms of service. A vacancy for an unexpired term of one or more full academic years shall be filled by election in the spring or at the earliest possible fall meeting of the Faculty, depending on when the vacancy becomes known to the Executive Committee. Vacancies of less than a full academic year on all committees other than Faculty Personnel Committee shall be filled by appointment by the Executive Committee, unless such partial year vacancies can be summed to one or more full academic years, in which case each summed vacancy shall be filled by election. When such summed vacancies are known in time, the election(s) shall be held in the spring. Otherwise, summed vacancies shall be filled by special election at the first possible faculty meeting in the fall.  Pending the election, the Executive Committee may temporarily appoint a replacement faculty member so as to not delay the work of the committee.
+
+	Section 4.	On occasion, the President may appoint, after consultation with the Executive Committee, members of the faculty to University-wide ad hoc Committees, Work Groups, or Task Forces that are formed to address issues of institutional strategic importance and are not intended to become standing committees of the University. On those occasions when a University-wide ad hoc Committee, Task Force, or Working Group addresses an issue that falls within the purview of the faculty as outlined in Article VIII, Section 2 of the Code of Regulations, the recommendations of the University-wide ad hoc Committee, Task Force, or Working Group will be forwarded to the Executive Committee of the faculty for referral to the appropriate faculty standing committee for consideration and action. 
+
+	
+
+
+
+
+	Article V: Amendments
+
+Upon the motion of any members of the Faculty at any one of its regularly scheduled meetings, a motion to amend, alter, or abolish any bylaw of the Faculty may be entertained. No vote shall be taken on any such motion, however, until it has been submitted in written form to the Secretary of the Faculty and, by the Secretary, circulated among the Faculty at least 12 full class days before the vote at the next regularly scheduled Faculty meeting or at a meeting called especially for that purpose. If approved by a three-fifths majority of the members present and voting where a quorum is present, the amendment shall have carried.
+
+
+Descriptions of Faculty Committees
+
+For the purpose of determining eligibility for membership on Faculty Committees, the word ""faculty"" appearing under Membership or Membership Qualifications shall be understood to include all persons appointed with the ranks of professor, associate professor, assistant professor, instructor, or University librarian and to not include all persons that serve half-time or more in the administration.
+
+The committees described below are considered non-overlap committees.  Faculty may not serve on two non-overlap committees at the same time:
+
+Committee on University Governance
+
+Duties
+
+It shall be the responsibility of the Chair and Vice Chair to meet with the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees and for the total committee to meet with the full Board and to cooperate with the officers of the University in fiscal planning and budgeting. Such responsibility shall include consideration of the size of the administration and of the number of faculty in relation to the number of students, seen from the overall institutional perspective. On matters affecting academic programs, the committee shall work together with the Committee on Academic Programs and the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee. The Committee on University Governance shall also act as liaison between faculty and administration on such matters of faculty welfare as pensions, insurance programs, sick leaves, group health, retirement, tuition benefits, and faculty aid.
+
+Membership
+
+Four faculty members.
+
+Membership Qualification
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Personnel Committee
+
+Duties
+
+	To develop for faculty consideration recommendations on policies related to the employment and reappointment of faculty members, their promotions, tenure, merit increases, and leaves of absence.
+
+	To evaluate faculty members for retention, promotion, tenure, merit increases, and leaves of absences, and to recommend on individual cases to the administration; 
+
+	To recommend to the administration appointments to vacant endowed or named chairs.
+
+	To evaluate the performance of the Provost and to report these evaluations to the President of the University. An evaluation will be performed in the 3rd year of service and every four years thereafter, unless more frequent evaluations is deemed necessary by the President. 
+
+	As a full committee, to interview candidates for the senior ranks (full and associate professors) and to make recommendations in regard to their appointment.
+
+	To provide a member of the committee to work with two faculty members appointed by the Provost to interview all candidates in other than senior ranks for each particular position or vacancy.
+
+	To recommend to the President of the University the recipients of the Welch Award for Scholarly or Artistic Achievement and for the Sherwood Dodge Shankland Award for Encouragement of Teachers.
+
+Membership
+
+Seven faculty members, with inclusive and diverse representation. Administrative members are not considered voting member when the issue on the floor of the committee concerns a recommendation to the administration.  If a member cannot serve in either semester in any year of an unexpired term (due to a leave or for other reasons), that member must be replaced for the entire year.  The one-year vacancy will be filled by election as described in Article IV, Section 3.  Pending the election, the Executive Committee may temporarily appoint a replacement faculty member so as to not delay the work of the committee.
+
+Membership Qualification
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.  
+
+
+
+Executive Committee of the Faculty
+
+Duties
+
+	To review the structure, and function of all existing faculty committees when deemed necessary by the committee, but at least once every ten years; to review the structure and function of all proposed faculty committees; to review the annual reports of all existing faculty committees once per year; to recommend such changes as seem desirable.
+
+	To work with the Provost on updating the Faculty Handbook as necessary.  
+
+	To nominate members of standing and ad hoc committees and to fill committee vacancies of less than one year's duration.
+
+	To conduct the necessary elections of members to all faculty committees.
+
+	To make available and count secret ballots at faculty meetings.
+
+	To be responsible for assigning to the appropriate standing committee, or committees, any problem or issue not already allocated as a regular function of any existing committee, when consideration of such problem or issue has been requested by appropriate faculty action or deemed advisable by the Executive Committee.
+
+	To provide the election process for faculty members to serve on committees outside the regular Faculty Standing Committee structure of Ohio Wesleyan University that require elected faculty members pursuant to the charge of the committee and consult with the President on the appointment of faculty members to University-wide ad hoc committees, task forces, or working groups whose charge call for the appointment of faculty members.
+
+	To consider a grievance, brought by any member of the Faculty, for which no regular committee channel or University policy is available, providing attempts have been made to resolve the matter through the offices of the Chair, or Provost (as appropriate), or President (in that order). In such matters, the Executive Committee will operate in an advisory capacity to the President.
+
+	To act as liaison between faculty and administration on matters not specifically assigned to other regular standing committees.
+
+	To act for the Faculty during extended vacation periods or in an emergency of such urgency as to make impractical the timely assembly of the Faculty.
+
+Membership
+
+Five faculty members.
+
+Membership Qualification
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+
+
+Committee on Academic Programs
+
+An academic program is any set of courses that leads to a degree granted by the institution.
+
+Duties
+
+	To review the functioning of academic programs as needed, taking into consideration the academic plan of the institution; and to bring recommendations to the Faculty regarding:
+
+	changes in course offerings; including temporary, permanent, summer, and online courses;
+
+	changes to a major or minor;
+
+	University wide requirements and policies including competency and distribution requirements;
+
+	changes in the academic program structure of the University, including the creation or termination of academic programs.
+
+	To collect program reviews from all academic programs and to work with the Provost’s office to ensure that all program reviews are stored securely and accessible to the Faculty.
+
+Membership
+
+Seven faculty members, one member of the administration, and one student.  At least one of the seven faculty members shall be engaged in high-level University assessment, especially as related to accreditation.  Administrative members are not considered voting members when the issue on the floor of the committee concerns a recommendation to the administration.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration: By virtue of the office or appointment by the President.
+
+Students: As selected by WCSA.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Academic Planning and Allocation Committee
+
+The total academic program is the aggregate of all academic programs.
+
+Duties
+
+To review the functioning of the total academic program across the previous two academic years; to provide a report on the review to the Faculty.
+
+To review the academic plan of the institution reported by the administration in the previous academic year; to provide a report on the review of the Faculty.
+
+To develop short- and long-term policy goals for advancing the total academic program, taking into consideration the functioning of the total academic program and the academic plan of the institution; to provide a report on the goals the Faculty.
+
+To convene an academic planning meeting twice each year with all APAC members and the faculty chairs of all non-overlap committees for the purposes of sharing information and providing feedback:
+
+In September, the committee chairs shall provide an update on planned committee actions that affect the academic programs;
+
+In March, the administration shall provide an update on the academic plan of the institution.
+
+To keep under continuing review the resources required for the total academic program and for proposed or adopted changes in academic programs as follows:
+
+To consult with the Committee on University Governance during the preparation of the University budget, especially concerning those portions which may affect the academic programs. Such responsibility shall include consideration of the number of Faculty om relation to the number of students, seen from a program perspective.
+
+To recommend for faculty consideration and appropriate action policies and procedures regarding changes in faculty positions, after the necessary review, consultation, and analysis of relevant data.
+
+To recommend to the administration on the allocation of faculty positions among teaching areas, taking into account the potential effects of such allocations on the total academic program.
+
+To report to the Faculty on the work of the committee regarding faculty position changes, as fully as is compatible with the confidentiality of personnel information.
+
+Membership
+
+Five faculty members.  Administrative members are not considered voting members when the issue on the floor of the committee concerns a recommendation to the administration.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Academic Status Committee
+
+Duties
+
+To serve in an advisory capacity for policies and procedures related to academic counseling, academic advising and new student registration and orientation.
+
+To formulate and recommend for faculty consideration and to implement all policies governing academic warning, academic standing, dismissal of students for academic reasons, and re-admittance of students following academic dismissal.
+
+To review student petitions for exceptions to university academic policies and procedures.  These include, but are not limited to, course registration and graduation requirements.
+
+To review appeals of academic dismissals and applications for re-admittance following dismissal.
+
+Membership
+
+Four faculty members, the Registrar, one administrator involved in advising from the office of Academic Affairs, one administrator from the Division of Student Affairs, and two students.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration: By virtue of the office or appointment by the Provost or Vice President of Student Affairs.
+
+Students: As selected by WCSA.
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+Committee on Gender and Equity
+
+Duties
+
+To review all policies and procedures insofar as they affect faculty, staff, administration, or students on the basis of their sex, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, disability or immigration status. 
+
+To recommend to the Faculty and appropriate committees such changes as seem desirable. 
+
+To act as liaison between the faculty, administration, the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Council and all other interested groups on issues related to sex, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, disability or immigration status. 
+
+To collect and communicate data and other information related to sex, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, disability or immigration status to the university community. 
+
+Membership
+
+Four faculty members and the Chief Diversity Office, one staff member, and two students. 
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+	Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+	Administration: Chief Diversity Officer.
+
+	Staff: As selected by appropriate staff action.
+
+	Students: As selected by appropriate student action.
+
+
+The committees described below are considered overlap committees. Faculty may serve on both an overlap committee and other faculty committees at the same time:
+
+
+
+Faculty Admissions Liaison Committee 
+
+Duties
+
+Serve as a liaison between the faculty and the admissions office.
+
+Develop recommendations in collaboration with the admissions office to enhance the admission process and events.
+
+Provide input on how admissions standards may be enhanced or revised to reflect the needs of the institution and the students.
+
+Promote the admission process to faculty and encourage their participation in admission-related events and activities. 
+
+Membership
+
+Three faculty members, the Vice President for Enrollment and Communications, and two students. The administrative members is not considered a voting member when the issue on the floor of the committee concerns a recommendation to the administration.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration: By virtue of the office.
+
+Students: As selected by WCSA.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Committee on Intercollegiate Athletics
+
+Duties
+
+	To recommend to the administration and faculty policies under which the intercollegiate athletics program of the University shall be maintained.
+
+	To participate in and approve of the scheduling of all intercollegiate athletic events and post-season competition. To formulate policy guidelines for the scheduling of intercollegiate athletic events.
+
+	To formulate policies for the review and approval of athletic awards to student participants in the intercollegiate athletic program.
+
+	To establish procedures by which groups or clubs apply for varsity sport status, and to make recommendations to the administration and faculty regarding approval of a sport for varsity status.
+
+	To establish and review policies and procedures regarding the use of university recreational and athletic facilities.
+
+Membership
+
+The chair of the Department of Health and Human Kinetics.
+
+Three faculty members not in the Department of Health and Human Kinetics, one of whom shall serve as chair.
+
+The Men's and Women's Faculty Athletic Representatives (FARs) to the North Coast Athletic Conference.
+
+Two University administrators.
+
+The University’s Title IX Representative for Athletics.
+
+Two Athletic administrators.
+
+Two students, one representing women’s sports and one representing men’s sports.
+
+Two alumni, on representing women’s sports and one representing men’s sports, shall be non-voting members.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+	Department of Health and Human Kinetics chair: By virtue of the office.
+
+	Other Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty, but not a member of the Department of Health and Human Kinetics. Faculty may simultaneously be members of other standing committees of the Faculty, Article II, Section 3 of the Faculty Bylaws notwithstanding.
+
+	Faculty Representatives to the North Coast Conference: By virtue of the office.
+
+	University Administration: By appointment of the President.
+
+	The University’s Title IX Representative for Athletics: By virtue of the position.
+
+	Athletic Administration:
+
+	Director of Athletics
+
+	Ranking male athletic administrator if Director of Athletics is a woman; or Senior Women’s Administrator if Director of Athletics is a man.
+
+	Students: As selected by WCSA; one representing women’s sports and one representing men’s sports.
+
+	Alumni: A member of the “W” Association appointed by the Director of Alumni Relations.  Term limit of 3 years (renewable).  
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+Reappointment Appeals Committee
+
+Duties
+
+To entertain appeals from faculty members who have been denied reappointment (including denials of tenure) according to procedures and policies developed by the Faculty, approved by the Board of Trustees, and described in the Faculty Handbook.
+
+Membership
+
+Five faculty members and three faculty alternates elected for overlapping three-year terms. The alternates shall replace faculty members who disqualify themselves for consideration of specific individual appeal cases.
+
+Membership Qualification
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan Faculty. Members and alternates may simultaneously be members of other standing committees of the Faculty (except current members and members elect of the Faculty Personnel Committee), Article II, Section 3 of the Faculty Bylaws notwithstanding.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Trustee-Faculty Committee
+
+Duties
+
+To fulfill the responsibilities designated in the Code of Regulations to the Trustee-Faculty Liaison Committee and the Committee on Honorary Degrees.
+
+Membership
+
+Six faculty members.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Ohio Wesleyan Council on Student Affairs
+
+Duties
+
+To formulate basic policies on all matters related to student life outside the classroom.
+
+To make regular written reports to the President, to the Faculty at its regular meeting, and to the Board of Trustees through the President.
+
+To prepare an annual report to be made available to all constituencies prior to the end of the academic year.
+
+Membership
+
+Thirty-two students.
+
+One faculty member, non-voting.
+
+Two members of the administration, non-voting.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty:  A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration:  By appointment of the President.
+
+Students:  As selected by appropriate student action.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Academic Conduct Review Board
+
+Duties
+
+To hear and rule on alleged cases of academic dishonesty according to procedures and policies in the Academic Honesty Policy.
+
+Membership
+
+Three faculty members and one faculty alternate, the Dean of Academic Affairs, and two students.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+	Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.  Faculty may simultaneously be members of other standing committees of the Faculty, Article II, Section 3 of the Faculty Bylaws notwithstanding.
+
+	Administration:  By appointment of the President.
+
+	Students:  As selected by WCSA.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Chapter Two-Faculty Bylaws and Committee Descritions (Tracked).txt [/INST] Chapter Two: Faculty Governance 
+
+Faculty Bylaws
+
+	Article I: Organization of the Faculty
+
+	Section 1.	Members of the Faculty shall be (a) the President, the Provost, the Vice Presidents; (b) all persons appointed with the ranks of professor, associate professor, assistant professor, or instructor; (c) professional University librarians; and (d) others admitted to membership by vote of the Faculty.  Voting members shall be those of the above who hold full-time University appointments. When voting takes place at meetings of the Faculty, voting members  must be present if they wish to vote. However, in the event a person is unable to attend a faculty meeting due to illness or a family or medical emergency, that person may either vote by absentee ballot or electronic ballot for elections to faculty committees only. The person must arrange with the Office of the Provost both to pick up and deliver any absentee ballot. If the person is to vote in the election by electronic ballot, the Office of the Provost will email the electronic ballot to the eligible faculty member’s official University email address.
+
+	Section 2.	The permanent officers of the Faculty shall be the President of the University, the Provost, and the Secretary of the Faculty. The Secretary shall be elected by the Faculty at the regular April meeting for a term of two years, commencing on the June first following such election. 
+
+	Section 3.	The Provost shall be the presiding officer over all faculty meetings except when the President of the University chooses to preside. In the event neither the President of the University nor the Provost can preside at a regular meeting of the Faculty, the senior full professor, in terms of service, on the Executive Committee shall be the presiding officer of the meeting.  
+
+	Section 4.	The Secretary of the Faculty shall prepare and keep full and complete minutes of all faculty meetings. If, for any reason, the Secretary is unable to perform  the secretarial duties, the Provost shall appoint a secretary pro tempore who shall perform the functions of the Secretary.
+
+	Section 5	The Faculty may elect a Parliamentarian of the Faculty, who shall give interpretations of procedure when requested to do so by the presiding officer, or on the Parliamentarian’s own volition. Any interpretation by the Parliamentarian shall hold unless it is overruled by a two-thirds majority of those Faculty members present and voting.  The Parliamentarian shall be elected by the Faculty at the regular April meeting, commencing on the June first following such election.  There are no term limitations.
+
+	Section 6	The Secretary and Parliamentarian may be removed for cause by a two-thirds majority vote of the faculty at any meeting whenever, in the judgment of the faculty, the best interests of the faculty would thereby be served, provided, however, that the proposal for removal is presented at one meeting and acted upon at the next meeting.
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+	Article II: Committees of the Faculty
+
+	Section 1.	Standing Committees of the Faculty shall be designated, elected and directed by the Faculty and shall have as ex officio members the President of the University and the Provost. Ad hoc committees of the Faculty are to be established by the Faculty only when the subject matter is outside the area of responsibility of a standing committee.
+
+	Section 2.	Except as may otherwise be provided in these Faculty Bylaws, the term of office for committee members shall be six semesters and shall commence on July 1 and end on June 30 of the sixth semester thereafter, or when successors have been elected or appointed. Leave time of up to one year is included as part of a faculty member's term. In the event that a faculty member takes leave time in excess of one year, the faculty member is required to relinquish committee assignments. No member of the Faculty shall serve more than 14 consecutive semesters on the same standing committee of the Faculty. Any faculty member that has completed 14 consecutive semesters of service on the same standing committee may not serve on that committee during the next two consecutive semesters.  If a faculty member vacates a term of office on any standing committee because of election to another standing committee, the faculty member may not resume service on the first committee when the term on the second committee expires.
+
+	Section 3.	Normally, a faculty member shall serve on no more than one standing committee. Exceptions to this rule may be adopted as provisions in the official descriptions of particular committees.
+
+	Section 4.	Except as otherwise provided, it shall be the duty of each committee of the Faculty: 1. To keep the Faculty informed of agenda items on which the committee is working that may affect the long-term future of the institution, its faculty or students.  The committee shall provide opportunity for Faculty response and questions where feasible and appropriate, whether at the time of an oral report to the Faculty, at an open meeting, in surveys or by other means.  2. To act for the Faculty when and as directed by the Faculty. 3. To make recommendations to the Faculty on matters of policy relevant to its area of responsibility.
+
+	Section 5.	Except as otherwise provided, each committee of the Faculty shall elect its chair and vice chair and be responsible to the Faculty for its own organization and procedures.
+
+	Section 6.	A committee of the Faculty can, upon a majority vote of its members, invite other persons to participate in its deliberations, but only members of the committee shall be permitted to vote.  
+
+	Section 7.	With the exception of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee and the Academic Conduct Review Board, each committee of the Faculty shall make a full and complete report of its activities during the academic year at the regularly scheduled meeting in April.
+
+	Section 8.	In the event an elected member of a standing or ad hoc committee of the Faculty is unable to complete the faculty member’s full term of office, the Executive Committee of the Faculty shall seek a replacement at the earliest opportunity, applying the methods outlined in Chapter II, Article II, Section 2 above and Article IV, Section 3, below.  A faculty member elected to fill a vacancy shall serve the unexpired committee term of the individual whom the newly elected faculty member succeeds. If a faculty member is unable to complete a period of the term of office due to a semester leave, the Executive Committee of the Faculty will appoint a temporary replacement for the length of the semester leave. The faculty member will resume service upon return from the leave. 
+
+	Section 9.	Whenever provision is made for faculty representation on Trustee, Administration, University, Divisional, or Departmental Councils, Boards, Committees, or ad hoc Committees, Task Forces, or Working Groups, it shall be the responsibility of such faculty representatives to keep the Faculty informed of the activities of these bodies and act as liaison between them and the Faculty.
+
+	Section 10.	In consultation with the President and the Provost, the Executive Committee will set the initial meeting time for new faculty committees prior to the election of faculty committee members. For all existing faculty committees except the Wesleyan Council on Student Affairs (“WCSA”), the initial meeting time may be changed, beginning the following academic year, by 1) a unanimous vote of all faculty and administrators with a continuing term of office and 2) a majority vote of the Faculty. Faculty committee meeting dates and times for the remainder of the academic year are scheduled by the unanimous vote of the members of the respective committees, reported to the Executive Committee, and shared with the Faculty.  
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+	Article III: Meetings
+
+	Section 1.	Regular monthly meetings of the University Faculty shall be held during the academic year. No regular monthly meeting shall last longer than ninety minutes unless it is extended by a majority vote of those present. At the last regular meeting of each academic year, a schedule of meeting dates for the coming year shall be adopted by the Executive Committee, provided that the time or place of meetings may be changed or the meeting may be canceled by the presiding officer or the Executive Committee, when it is deemed in the interest of the Faculty to do so.  If ten members of the Faculty request by written petition that a cancelled meeting be reinstated, the presiding officer of the Faculty shall call the meeting.
+
+	Section 2.	Special meetings of the Faculty shall be held at the call of the presiding officer or the Executive Committee or upon the request of 10 members of the Faculty transmitted in writing to the Secretary of the Faculty.
+
+	Section 3.	In-person meetings are the usual method for conducting Faculty meetings, with electronic meetings held when circumstances make it advisable that the Faculty not gather as a whole in person.  Determinations of whether the meeting shall be held electronically are made by the presiding officer in consultation with the Chair of the Executive Committee.  When meetings of the Faculty are to be conducted electronically, voting shall be through use of an electronic ballot designated by the Executive Committee.  When a meeting is held electronically, that meeting will function as a regular meeting of the Faculty and all actions and deliberations within such a meeting will have the same standing as an in-person meeting.  A vote conducted through the designated electronic balloting system shall be deemed a valid vote, fulfilling any requirement in these Bylaws that a vote be conducted by ballot.
+
+	Section 4	Consistent with our shared governance system, attendance at Faculty meetings of all members of the Faculty with voting privileges is encouraged. 
+
+	Section 5	Except for executive sessions, faculty meetings shall be open to all members of the Ohio Wesleyan University staff and guests invited by a majority vote of the Faculty.  Reporters, whether affiliated with the University or not, shall not be admitted as guests to the monthly meetings of the Ohio Wesleyan University faculty.  Minutes of the meeting shall be documented by the Secretary and distributed to the Faculty within seven business days of the meeting.
+
+	Section 6.	After the completion of the regular order of business, the Faculty shall go into executive session at the request of any member of the Faculty; it may vote to do so at any other time on motion to that effect.
+
+	Section 7.	The agenda of each faculty meeting shall include the following items in the order specified: 1. Call to order. 2. Introduction of guests. 3. Approval of minutes. 4. Old business. 5. New business. 6. Reports of Faculty committees. 7. Report of University officers. 8. Announcements. 9. Adjournment. The agenda of each faculty meeting shall be emailed 96 hours in advance of the meeting.  On any subject requiring a vote, a detailed report should accompany the agenda, such report should include the proposal to be voted on and substantiating statements. On a subject not requiring a vote, advance materials for the Faculty are desirable but optional. The Faculty shall have the right to waive the 96 hour rule by majority vote. The motion to waive must be accompanied by a rationale for suspending the rule. The motion to waive is debatable.
+
+	Section 8.	A majority of the voting members of the Faculty who are not on approved leave shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.  Unless otherwise provided in these Bylaws, when a vote is taken on any matter at a meeting of the Faculty, a quorum being present, a majority of the votes of the members present shall determine the outcome.  While voting for motions must be in person if the meeting is not held electronically, voting members of the faculty are eligible to vote for elections to faculty standing committees through electronic ballots.  If voting is by electronic ballot, a majority of votes cast shall determine the outcome for committee elections; in the case of motions, a majority of those present at the meeting shall determine the outcome.  
+
+	Section 9.	The proceedings and deliberations of the Faculty shall be governed by Robert's Rules of Order, except that upon the request of a voting member of the meeting the body will vote by secret or electronic ballot.
+
+	Section 10.	Faculty action within an area of primary responsibility as defined in the Article VIII, Section 2 of the Code of Regulations shall be transmitted to the Board of Trustees by the President, along with any administrative recommendations.
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+	Article IV: Nominations and Election Procedures
+
+	Section 1.	The Executive Committee of the Faculty shall act as a Nominating Committee of the Faculty. The agenda of the February faculty meeting shall include a slate of nominees for those faculty committees the members of which do not, under the provisions of Bylaws Article II, Section 3, normally serve on more than one standing committee of the Faculty. The elections for these committees will occur in the March faculty meeting. For all other committees or other responsibilities to which faculty members are elected, the Executive Committee will prepare a slate of nominees for the March faculty meeting; the elections for these positions shall be in the April faculty meeting. In preparing all ballots, the slate will consist of, insofar as possible, at least fifty percent more nominees than positions to be filled. After the Executive Committee's slate has been presented, there shall be a call for nominations from the floor.  
+
+	Section 2.	At all elections, each member of the Faculty shall have as many votes as there are positions to be filled for each office. Depending upon the number of offices to be filled, the candidate, or candidates, receiving the greatest number of votes shall be certified as elected by the Chair of the Executive Committee of the Faculty or the Chair’s designate. In the event of ties, a runoff election will be held by electronic ballot. The official announcement of the election results shall be made by the presiding officer as soon as possible after each of the March and April elections.
+
+	Section 3.	The Executive Committee shall fill, or cause to be filled by election, vacancies on committees created when members cannot serve some or all of their terms of service. A vacancy for an unexpired term of one or more full academic years shall be filled by election in the spring or at the earliest possible fall meeting of the Faculty, depending on when the vacancy becomes known to the Executive Committee. Vacancies of less than a full academic year on all committees other than Faculty Personnel Committee shall be filled by appointment by the Executive Committee, unless such partial year vacancies can be summed to one or more full academic years, in which case each summed vacancy shall be filled by election. When such summed vacancies are known in time, the election(s) shall be held in the spring. Otherwise, summed vacancies shall be filled by special election at the first possible faculty meeting in the fall.  Pending the election, the Executive Committee of the faculty may temporarily appoint a replacement faculty member so as to not delay the work of the committee.
+
+	Section 4.	Unless otherwise stipulated by appointment provisions in the Faculty Handbook (e.g., appointment to dismissal for cause Hearing Panel), the Executive Committee shall cause to be filled by election, or appointment if an election is unsuccessful, members of the Faculty to administrative committees, ad hoc committees, task forces, and working groups that are charged with addressing matters that fall within an area of primary faculty responsibility as defined in the Article VIII, Section 2 of the Code of Regulations.
+
+			On occasion, the President may appoint, after consultation with the Executive Committee, members of the faculty to University-wide ad hoc Committees, Work Groups, or Task Forces that are formed to address issues of institutional strategic importance and are not intended to become standing committees of the University. On those occasions when a University-wide ad hoc Committee, Task Force, or Working group addresses an issue that falls within the purview of the faculty as outlined in Article VIII, Section 2 of the Code of Regulations, the recommendations of the University-wide ad hoc Committee, Task Force, or Working Group will be forwarded to the Executive Committee of the faculty for referral to the appropriate faculty standing committee for consideration and action. 
+
+	Section 5	The President or Provost may appoint, in consultation with the Executive Committee, members of the Faculty to University administrative committees, ad hoc committees, task forces, and working groups charged with addressing matters outside of an area of primary faculty responsibility as defined in the Article VIII, Section 2 of the Code of Regulations. A written statement of the purpose, scope, and expected timetable of University administrative committees, ad hoc committees, task forces, or working groups will be presented to the Executive Committee, and reports will be distributed to the Executive Committee and to any appropriate Faculty committees at the conclusion of the work of the ad hoc committee, task force, or working group.
+
+	
+
+
+
+
+	Article V: Amendments
+
+Upon the motion of any members of the Faculty at any one of its regularly scheduled meetings, a motion to amend, alter, or abolish any bylaw of the Faculty or description of faculty committee may be entertained. No vote shall be taken on any such motion, however, until it has been submitted in written form to the Secretary of the Faculty and, by the Secretary, circulated among the Faculty at least 12 full class days before the vote at the next regularly scheduled Faculty meeting or at a meeting called especially for that purpose. If approved by a three-fifths majority of the members present and voting where a quorum is present, the amendment shall have carried.
+
+
+Descriptions of Faculty Committees
+
+For the purpose of determining eligibility for membership on Faculty Committees, the word ""faculty"" appearing under Membership or Membership Qualifications shall be understood to include all persons appointed with the ranks of professor, associate professor, assistant professor, instructor, or professional University librarian and to not include all persons that serve half-time or more in the administration.
+
+The committees described below are considered non-overlap committees.  Faculty may not serve on two non-overlap committees at the same time:
+
+Committee on University Governance
+
+Duties
+
+It shall be the responsibility of the Chair and Vice Chair to meet with the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees and for the total committee to meet with the full Board and to cooperate with the officers of the University in fiscal planning and budgeting. Such responsibility shall include consideration of the size of the administration and of the number of faculty in relation to the number of students, seen from the overall institutional perspective. On matters affecting academic programs, the committee shall work together with the Committee on Academic Programs and the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee. The Committee on University Governance shall also act as liaison between faculty and administration on such matters of faculty welfare as pensions, insurance programs, sick leaves, group health, retirement, tuition benefits, and faculty aid.
+
+Membership
+
+Four faculty members.
+
+Membership Qualification
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Personnel Committee
+
+Duties
+
+	To develop for faculty consideration recommendations on policies related to the employment and reappointment of faculty members, their promotions, tenure, merit increases, and leaves of absence.
+
+	To evaluate faculty members for retention, promotion, tenure, merit increases, and leaves of absences, and to recommend on individual cases to the administration; 
+
+	To recommend to the administration appointments to vacant endowed or named chairs.
+
+	To evaluate the performance of the Provost and to report these evaluations to the President of the University. An evaluation will be performed in the 3rd year of service and every four years thereafter, unless more frequent evaluations is deemed necessary by the President. 
+
+	As a full committee, to interview candidates for the senior ranks (full and associate professors) and to make recommendations in regard to their appointment.
+
+	To provide a member of the committee to work with two faculty members appointed by the Provost to interview all candidates in other than senior ranks for each particular position or vacancy.
+
+	To recommend to the President of the University the recipients of the Welch Award for Scholarly or Artistic Achievement and for the Sherwood Dodge Shankland Award for Encouragement of Teachers.
+
+	To contribute to the annual performance evaluation of the people who report directly to the Provost by collecting evaluative comments from selected faculty and reporting a summary to the Provost. Comments will be collected beginning in the second year of service and every three years thereafter unless a greater frequency is deemed necessary by the Committee.
+
+Membership
+
+Seven faculty members, with inclusive and diverse representation. Administrative members are not considered voting member when the issue on the floor of the committee concerns a recommendation to the administration.  If a member cannot serve in either semester in any year of an unexpired term (due to a leave or for other reasons), that member must be replaced for the entire year.  The one-year vacancy will be filled by election as described in Article IV, Section 3.  Pending the election, the Executive Committee may temporarily appoint a replacement faculty member so as to not delay the work of the committee.
+
+Membership Qualification
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.  
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Executive Committee of the Faculty
+
+Duties
+
+	To review the structure, and function of all existing faculty committees when deemed necessary by the committee, but at least once every ten years; to review the structure and function of all proposed faculty committees; to review the annual reports of all existing faculty committees once per year; to recommend such changes as seem desirable.
+
+	To work with the Provost on updating the Faculty Handbook as necessary.  
+
+	To nominate members of standing and ad hoc committees and to fill committee vacancies of less than one year's duration.
+
+	To conduct the necessary elections of members to all faculty committees.
+
+	To make available and count secret ballots at faculty meetings.
+
+	To be responsible for assigning to the appropriate standing committee, or committees, any problem or issue not already allocated as a regular function of any existing committee, when consideration of such problem or issue has been requested by appropriate faculty action or deemed advisable by the Executive Committee.
+
+	To provide the election process for faculty members to serve on committees outside the regular Faculty Standing Committee structure of Ohio Wesleyan University that require elected faculty members pursuant to the charge of the committee and consult with the President on the appointment of faculty members to University-wide ad hoc committees, task forces, or working groups whose charge call for the appointment of faculty members.
+
+	To consider a grievance, brought by any member of the Faculty, for which no regular committee channel or University policy is available, providing attempts have been made to resolve the matter through the offices of the Chairperson, or Provost (as appropriate), or President (in that order). In such matters, the Executive Committee will operate in an advisory capacity to the President.
+
+	To act as liaison between faculty and administration on matters not specifically assigned to other regular standing committees.
+
+	To act for the Faculty during extended vacation periods or in an emergency of such urgency as to make impractical the timely assembly of the Faculty.
+
+Membership
+
+Five faculty members.
+
+Membership Qualification
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Committee on Academic Programs
+
+An academic program is any set of courses that leads to a degree granted by the institution.
+
+Duties
+
+	To review the functioning of academic programs as needed, taking into consideration the academic plan of the institution; and to bring recommendations to the Faculty regarding:
+
+	changes in course offerings; including temporary, permanent, summer, and online courses;
+
+	changes to a major or minor;
+
+	University wide requirements and policies including competency and distribution requirements;
+
+	changes in the academic program structure of the University, including the creation or termination of academic programs.
+
+	To collect program reviews from all academic programs and to work with the Provost’s office to ensure that all program reviews are stored securely and accessible to the Faculty.
+
+Membership
+
+Seven faculty members, one member of the administration, and one student.  At least one of the seven faculty members shall be engaged in high-level University assessment, especially as related to accreditation.  Administrative members are not considered voting members when the issue on the floor of the committee concerns a recommendation to the administration.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration: By virtue of the office or appointment by the President.
+
+Students: As selected by WCSA.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Academic Planning and Allocation Committee
+
+The total academic program is the aggregate of all academic programs.
+
+Duties
+
+To review the functioning of the total academic program across the previous two academic years; to provide a report on the review to the Faculty.
+
+To review the academic plan of the institution reported by the administration in the previous academic year; to provide a report on the review of the Faculty.
+
+To develop short- and long-term policy goals for advancing the total academic program, taking into consideration the functioning of the total academic program and the academic plan of the institution; to provide a report on the goals the Faculty.
+
+To convene an academic planning meeting twice each year with all APAC members and the faculty chairs of all non-overlap committees for the purposes of sharing information and providing feedback:
+
+In September, the committee chairs shall provide an update on planned committee actions that affect the academic programs;
+
+In March, the administration shall provide an update on the academic plan of the institution.
+
+To keep under continuing review the resources required for the total academic program and for proposed or adopted changes in academic programs as follows:
+
+To consult with the Committee on University Governance during the preparation of the University budget, especially concerning those portions which may affect the academic programs. Such responsibility shall include consideration of the number of Faculty om relation to the number of students, seen from a program perspective.
+
+To recommend for faculty consideration and appropriate action policies and procedures regarding changes in faculty positions, after the necessary review, consultation, and analysis of relevant data.
+
+To recommend to the administration on the allocation of faculty positions among teaching areas, taking into account the potential effects of such allocations on the total academic program.
+
+To report to the Faculty on the work of the committee regarding faculty position changes, as fully as is compatible with the confidentiality of personnel information.
+
+Membership
+
+Five faculty members.  Administrative members are not considered voting members when the issue on the floor of the committee concerns a recommendation to the administration.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+Teaching and Assessment Committee
+
+Duties
+
+Taking into consideration the learning assessment report collected from each academic program every two years, analyze the educational environment at Ohio Wesleyan University and encourage and assist Faculty in reaching the education goals of the University. This is accomplished by supporting and assessing the educational efforts of the Faculty and academic programs in the following ways:
+
+Promote faculty development, support the teaching and learning goals of academic programs, support efforts to create and maintain inclusive learning environments.
+
+Develop and promote on-campus programs and workshops; advocate for resources to support these initiatives.
+
+Review the recommendations made by the Director of International and Off Campus Programs on the awarding of Theory to Practice Grants, and make changes deemed necessary by the committee to these recommendations.
+
+Review the policies and adequacy of academic facilities including the library, information services and bookstore, and recommend priorities regarding University pedagogical resources.
+
+Review the policies and procedures for international, domestic, and summer off-campus programs in consultation with the Director of International and Off Campus Programs.
+
+Encourage faculty involvement in international off-campus education and faculty development in international issues through the faculty’s own international study and research.
+
+Assessment of student learning within and across academic programs; assessment of the educational goals of the University.  
+
+To collect and evaluate a learning assessment report from each academic program once every two years.
+
+To offer assistance to academic programs and administrative units in the construction and implementation of assessment plans and assessment instruments.
+
+To develop and implement, in consultation with academic departments and others, an assessment plan for our general education program.
+
+To respond to the Higher Learning Commission’s initiatives regarding assessment.
+
+To communicate in a timely manner with the Chair of the Committee on Academic Programs regarding assessment issues that are pertinent to the work of the Committee on Academic Programs.
+
+Membership
+
+Five faculty members, at least one from each academic division (Social Sciences, Humanities, Fine and Performing Arts, Natural Sciences/Mathematics), the Academic Administrator who oversees assessment, the Director of Libraries, the Director of International and Off-Campus Programs, and two students.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty:  A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration:  By virtue of the office.
+
+Students:  As selected by WCSA.
+
+	
+
+Academic Status Committee
+
+Duties
+
+To serve in an advisory capacity for policies and procedures related to academic counseling, academic advising and new student registration and orientation.
+
+To formulate and recommend for faculty consideration and to implement all policies governing academic warning, academic standing, dismissal of students for academic reasons, and re-admittance of students following academic dismissal.
+
+To review student petitions for exceptions to university academic policies and procedures.  These include, but are not limited to, course registration and graduation requirements.
+
+To review appeals of academic dismissals and applications for re-admittance following dismissal.
+
+Membership
+
+Four faculty members, the Registrar, one administrator involved in advising from the office of Academic Affairs, one administrator from the Division of Student Affairs, and two students.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration: By virtue of the office or appointment by the Provost or Vice President of Student Affairs.
+
+Students: As selected by WCSA.
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+Committee on Gender and Equity
+
+Duties
+
+To review all policies and procedures insofar as they affect faculty, staff, administration, or students on the basis of their sex, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, disability or immigration status. 
+
+To recommend to the Faculty and appropriate committees such changes as seem desirable. 
+
+To act as liaison between the faculty, administration, the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Council and all other interested groups on issues related to sex, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, disability or immigration status. 
+
+To collect and communicate data and other information related to sex, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, disability or immigration status to the university community. 
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+Membership
+
+Four faculty members and the Chief Diversity Office, one staff member, and two students. 
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+	Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+	Administration: Chief Diversity Officer.
+
+	Staff: As selected by appropriate staff action.
+
+	Students: As selected by appropriate student action.
+
+
+The committees described below are considered overlap committees. Faculty may serve on both an overlap committee and other faculty committees at the same time:
+
+
+
+Faculty Admissions Liaison Committee 
+
+Duties
+
+Serve as a liaison between the faculty and the admissions office.
+
+Develop recommendations in collaboration with the admissions office to enhance the admission process and events.
+
+Provide input on how admissions standards may be enhanced or revised to reflect the needs of the institution and the students.
+
+	Promote the admission process to faculty and encourage their participation in admission-related events and activities.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ 
+
+Membership
+
+Three faculty members, the Vice President for Enrollment and Communications, and two students. The administrative members is not considered a voting member when the issue on the floor of the committee concerns a recommendation to the administration.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration: By virtue of the office.
+
+Students: As selected by WCSA.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Committee on Intercollegiate Athletics
+
+Duties
+
+	To recommend to the administration and faculty policies under which the intercollegiate athletics program of the University shall be maintained.
+
+	To participate in and approve of the scheduling of all intercollegiate athletic events and post-season competition. To formulate policy guidelines for the scheduling of intercollegiate athletic events.
+
+	To formulate policies for the review and approval of athletic awards to student participants in the intercollegiate athletic program.
+
+	To establish procedures by which groups or clubs apply for varsity sport status, and to make recommendations to the administration and faculty regarding approval of a sport for varsity status.
+
+	To establish and review policies and procedures regarding the use of university recreational and athletic facilities.
+
+Membership
+
+The chair of the Department of Health and Human Kinetics.
+
+Three faculty members not in the Department of Health and Human Kinetics, one of whom shall serve as chair.
+
+The Men's and Women's Faculty Athletic Representatives (FARs) to the North Coast Athletic Conference.
+
+Two University administrators.
+
+The University’s Title IX Representative for Athletics.
+
+Two Athletic administrators.
+
+Two students, one representing women’s sports and one representing men’s sports.
+
+Two alumni, on representing women’s sports and one representing men’s sports, shall be non-voting members.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+	Department of Health and Human Kinetics chair: By virtue of the office.
+
+	Other Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty, but not a member of the Department of Health and Human Kinetics. Faculty may simultaneously be members of other standing committees of the Faculty, Article II, Section 3 of the Faculty Bylaws notwithstanding.
+
+	Faculty Representatives to the North Coast Conference: By virtue of the office.
+
+	University Administration: By appointment of the President.
+
+	The University’s Title IX Representative for Athletics: By virtue of the position.
+
+	Athletic Administration:
+
+	Director of Athletics
+
+	Ranking male athletic administrator if Director of Athletics is a woman; or Senior Women’s Administrator if Director of Athletics is a man.
+
+	Students: As selected by WCSA; one representing women’s sports and one representing men’s sports.
+
+	Alumni: A member of the “W” Association appointed by the Director of Alumni Relations.  Term limit of 3 years (renewable).  
+
+	
+
+Reappointment Appeals Committee
+
+Duties
+
+To entertain appeals from faculty members who have been denied reappointment (including denials of tenure) according to procedures and policies developed by the Faculty, approved by the Board of Trustees, and described in the Faculty Handbook.
+
+Membership
+
+Five faculty members and three faculty alternates elected for overlapping three-year terms. The alternates shall replace faculty members who disqualify themselves for consideration of specific individual appeal cases.
+
+Membership Qualification
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan Faculty. Members and alternates may simultaneously be members of other standing committees of the Faculty (except current members and members elect of the Faculty Personnel Committee), Article II, Section 3 of the Faculty Bylaws notwithstanding.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Trustee-Faculty Committee
+
+Duties
+
+To fulfill the responsibilities designated in the Code of Regulations to the Trustee-Faculty Liaison Committee and the Committee on Honorary Degrees.
+
+Membership
+
+Six faculty members.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Ohio Wesleyan Council on Student Affairs
+
+Duties
+
+To formulate basic policies on all matters related to student life outside the classroom.
+
+To make regular written reports to the President, to the Faculty at its regular meeting, and to the Board of Trustees through the President.
+
+To prepare an annual report to be made available to all constituencies prior to the end of the academic year.
+
+Membership
+
+Thirty-two students.
+
+One faculty member, non-voting.
+
+Two members of the administration, non-voting.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty:  A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration:  By appointment of the President.
+
+Students:  As selected by appropriate student action.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Academic Conduct Review Board
+
+Duties
+
+To hear and rule on alleged cases of academic dishonesty according to procedures and policies in the Academic Honesty Policy.
+
+Membership
+
+Three faculty members and one faculty alternate, the Dean of Academic Affairs, and two students.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+	Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.  Faculty may simultaneously be members of other standing committees of the Faculty, Article II, Section 3 of the Faculty Bylaws notwithstanding.
+
+	Administration:  By appointment of the President.
+
+	Students:  As selected by WCSA.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Citations.txt [/INST] Buller, J. L. (2012). Best practices in faculty evaluation: A practical guide for academic leaders. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. 
+
+https://books.apple.com/us/book/best-practices-in-faculty-evaluation/id543865584
+
+
+
+Quantitative Evaluation Approach: 
+
+Arreola, R. A. (2007). Developing a comprehensive faculty evaluation system: A guide to designing, building, and operating large-scale faculty evaluation systems. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Anker.
+
+Qualitative Evaluation Approach:
+
+Seldin, P. (2006). Evaluating faculty performance: A practical guide to assessing teaching, research, and service. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Anker.
+
+
+
+“Seldin, P., Miller, J. E., & Seldin, C. A. (2010). The teaching portfolio: A practical guide to improved performance and promotion/tenure decisions (4th ed.) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
+
+
+
+American Council on Education, American Association of University Professors, and United Educators. (2000) Good practice in tenure evaluation: Advice for tenured faculty, department chairs, and academic administrators.
+
+
+
+https://blogs.umflint.edu/aaup/wp-content/uploads/sites/27/2016/11/App2d-Good-Practice-in-Tenure-Evaluation.pdf
+
+
+
+Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education. (2014). Benchmark Best Practices: Tenure & Promotion. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Education. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS
+
+Teaching effectiveness is the single-most studied topic in education, with thousands of published articles and several books and journals devoted to it. A common interpretation of teaching effectiveness is that the teaching was effective if the resulting student performance in the class was good. A common way to measure teaching effectiveness is to administer end-of-term student opinion surveys, such as CIOS, that are student evaluations of teaching (SET). There is a great deal of debate whether SETs, such as CIOS, correlate to student performance. Two meta-analyses of the relationship between SETs and learning outcomes found a low-to-moderate correlation between the two [Cohen, 1980; Feldman, 1989]. 
+
+Studies included in those meta-analyses focused on multisection studies, that is, instances in which a number of sections of a given course are taught by different instructors using the same syllabus and the same exams. 
+
+A recent article that performs a meta study of many of the earlier published results casts doubt on this correlation [Uttl, 2017]. This recent study subjects the meta-analyses of the previous papers to rigorous scrutiny and re-ran the analyses using a methodology that could account for the effects of small sample sizes and publication bias; they also conducted a more comprehensive meta-analysis of their own. This particular study found that previous studies indicate a weak-to-moderate correlation between student performance and student ratings of instructor when the number of sections, N, of the course was small (<10). The correlation dropped when the number of sections for a course was increased, with N=194 as the largest number of course sections studied. (There was no explanation in this reference on how a common test or common performance evaluation was done across such large number of sections.) The paper contends that once the effects of sample size, that is, the number of course sections N in a study, and publication bias are taken into account, any perceived correlation between SET and student learning washes out. 
+
+A simple example demonstrates the limitations of student opinion surveys: 
+
+Consider two instructors who are teaching the same course, and both receive a 4.5 score on the CIOS “effective teacher” score. One instructor covers the entire syllabus and meets all the learning objectives. The other instructor only covers 3⁄4 of the syllabus and does not meet the learning objectives. Which is the more effective teacher? If student opinions are the only metrics, then they would appear to be equal. 
+
+If student opinion surveys are questionable as a good measure of student learning, what do they measure? The findings of the CIOS statistical analysis discussed in the previous section show a strong correlation between the student response to the question “Considering everything, the instructor was an effective teacher” to the other questions on CIOS that revolve more around how the instructor engages with the students, specifically, those instructor characteristics listed in Table 3. 
+
+The Task Force did a literature survey to examine alternatives to student surveys as means of measuring teaching effectiveness, see the report on the literature survey in Appendix E. The report identifies fifteen different ways of measuring teaching effectiveness and gives an analysis on how and why each method might be used and gives a summary of research studies on those methods. The report in Appendix E is partitioned into four categories of measures: student perspectives, peer review of teaching, instructor reflection and review, and evidence of student learning. The literature supports that student evaluations of teaching are important but not sufficient. The consensus is that the assessment of teaching effectiveness is most accurate with a combination of measurements that come from the four categories. As a side note, we would like to recommend the use of mid-semester student evaluations, as discussed in the literature survey, these can be a very effective way to improve teaching and to improve end-of-term evaluations because the instructor has time to react to the feedback and make changes. The Task Force on the Learning Environment also recommended mid-semester evaluations. 
+
+In addition to archival studies on the topic, there is a national debate on the use of student evaluations of teaching, especially with regard to bias. For example, the Chronicle of Higher Education reported in January 2019 that many universities are grappling with the opposing perspectives that student evaluations of teaching are flawed in that students are not experts in education and they may have biased opinions, yet students do give valuable information about the instruction and the course [Doerer, 2019]. This article discusses approaches that different universities are taking, including de-emphasizing student evaluations of teaching in faculty evaluations and augmenting them with peer evaluation and self-evaluations; educating students and faculty about the potential for bias; and removing the “effective teacher” question while leaving the more specific questions on how the course was conducted. 
+
+More notably, the American Sociological Association came out with a position statement discussing the limitations of student evaluations of teaching and stating that “their use in personnel decisions is problematic”. They recommend that institutions do not use student evaluations of teaching as the sole metric of teaching effectiveness, that evaluators for personnel decisions have training on interpreting student evaluations, and that the trends in scores over time of an individual is more important than an absolute comparison among others instructors. The position statement is contained in Appendix D. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Benton, S. L., & Young, S. (2018). Best Practices in the Evaluation of Teaching. IDEA Paper, 69. 
+
+https://www.ideaedu.org/Portals/0/Uploads/Documents/IDEA%20Papers/IDEA%20Papers/IDEA_Paper_69.pdf
+
+AAUP. (2015). Statement on teaching evaluation. In Policy Documents and Reports. 11th ed. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 219-22. 
+
+
+
+Follmer Greenhoot, A., Ward, D., Bernstein, D., Patterson, M. M., & Colyott, K. (2020). Benchmarks for Teaching Effectiveness. (Revised 2020).
+
+https://cte.ku.edu/sites/cte.ku.edu/files/docs/KU%20Benchmarks%20Framework%202020update.pdf
+
+https://cte.ku.edu/benchmarks-teaching-effectiveness-project
+
+
+
+Carl Wieman (2015) A Better Way to Evaluate Undergraduate Teaching, Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 47:1, 6-15, DOI: 10.1080/00091383.2015.996077
+
+
+
+
+
+Metrics and Measures of Teaching Effectiveness  Ruth Poproski and Rebekah Greene (2018)  https://ctl.gatech.edu/sites/default/files/documents/poproski_greene_2018_metrics_and_measures_of_teaching_effectiveness.pdf
+
+
+
+
+
+SCHOLARSHIP/RESEARCH/PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
+
+
+
+Pelco, L. & Howard, C. (2016). Incorporating Community Engagement Language into Promotion and Tenure Policies: One University’s Journey.  Metropolitan Universities 27(2): 87-98.
+
+
+
+Bouwma-Gearhart, Jana, Cindy Lenhart, Rich Carter, Karl Mundorff, Holly Cho, and Jessica Knoch. 2021. ""Inclusively Recognizing Faculty Innovation and Entrepreneurship Impact within Promotion and Tenure Considerations"" Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 7, no. 3: 182. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7030182
+
+
+
+
+
+O’Meara, K., & Rice, R. E. (Eds.) (2005). Faculty priorities reconsidered: Encouraging multiple forms of scholarship. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 
+
+
+
+O’Meara, K., Eatman, T. & Peterson, S. (2015). Advancing Engaged Scholarship in Promotion and Tenure: A Roadmap and Call for Reform. Liberal Education, 101(3). http://www.aacu.org/liberaleducation/2015/summer/o'meara
+
+
+
+
+
+Boyer, E.L. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate.  Princeton, N.J.: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1990
+
+
+
+O’Meara, K. (2010). Rewarding multiple forms of scholarship: Promotion and tenure. In H. Fitzgerald, C. Burack, & S. Seifer (Eds.), Handbook of engaged scholarship, volume 1: Institutional change (pp. 271-294). East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University Press. View PDF
+
+
+
+
+
+Schimanski LA and Alperin JP. The evaluation of scholarship in academic promotion and tenure processes: Past, present, and future. F1000Research 2018, 7:1605 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.16493.1)
+
+
+
+https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6325612/
+
+
+
+https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2018/08/22/academe-needs-better-evaluate-engaged-scholarship-opinion?utm_source=Inside+Higher+Ed&utm_campaign=d4383a1059-DNU_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1fcbc04421-d4383a1059-198228137&mc_cid=d4383a1059&mc_eid=0e307ffb34
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Ringuette, D. (2008). We Need to Talk: Scholarship, Tenure, and Promotion in the Balance. <i>Profession,</i> 185-193. Retrieved August 28, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/25595893
+
+ 
+
+Report of the MLA Task Force on Evaluating Scholarship for Tenure and Promotion -MLA Task Force on Evaluating Scholarship for Tenure and Promotion (2007 by The Modern Language Association of America)
+https://www.mla.org/content/download/3362/81802/taskforcereport0608.pdf
+
+Although this report was produced over 14 years  ago, the findings , insights and recommendations remain relevant  and applicable to addressing the evaluation of scholarship in a broad range of disciplines
+
+ 
+
+Rethinking Tenure, A Chronicle of Higher Education publication(2021) 
+
+It is a collection of essay. Very pertinent especially the following sections
+
+“Faculty Evaluation After the Pandemic’ (pp 35-39);
+
+“Diversity, Inclusion, and Tenure,” (pp 54-55);
+
+“How to Create More Equitable Tenure Policies,” ( 56-57). Junior Faculty Don’t Need More Time, Senior Faculty Need More  Imagination: A template for Change( pp 62-63)
+
+Discusses teaching load issues for new faculty - heavy teaching load may limit research ambitions and realization. Suggests redefining what constitutes “publication”. “instead of focusing on ‘publication’ why not focus on ‘scholarly works’? Develop a rubric that expanded the definition of what counted as one scholarly work:
+
+ 
+
+One academic journal article
+
+Two published pieces of media outlet
+
+Two submitted articles that are under review
+
+One external grant application 
+
+Two internal grant applications 
+
+Two IRB protocols
+
+Three professional reviews of manuscripts 
+
+This helps reward research advancement and credible work in progress.
+
+“Tenure by the Book: Revising Tenure Expectations is on the Table. We should take caution “( pp 64- 65)
+
+important work is being done that does not look like traditional scholarship— such as digital projects, community engagement or research whose purpose is primarily focused on administering an academic program.
+
+“ Bringing the Humanities to the Public— and the Public to the Humanities (85-86) a case for valuing and rewarding public scholars/ intellectuals
+
+·         Rethinking Tenure, A Chronicle of Higher Education publication(2021) 
+
+ 
+
+The Baruch College  Report  you shared is  a good addition. It recognizes the need  to recognize, clarify expectations, and effectively assess “new and emerging modes of scholarly communication.” It may also be a good peer comparison as both BC and CLU are liberal arts institutions.
+
+ 
+
+Ditto on the KerryAnn O’Meare article. On “Rewarding Multiple Forms of Scholarship: Promotion and Tenure.” She is a leading authority on this topic and has an extensive body of work on the subject
+
+ 
+
+I am familiar  with the impact factor critiqued in The Leiden Manifesto. The ten principles for evaluating research are good, and some of the steps  ( e.g. #2 3, and 6) are  not uncommon in T&P policies. Others however are not that easy to implement, especially given the time constraint and demand on faculty . Furthermore they are more suited to Research institutions.
+
+ 
+
+
+
+
+
+DEI
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+The Effects of Instructor Gender and Discipline Group on Student Ratings of Instruction 
+
+Dan Li and Stephen L. Benton 
+
+
+
+https://ideacontent.blob.core.windows.net/content/sites/2/2020/01/Research_Report_10.pdf
+
+
+
+Sarah Trainer, Jodi O’Brien, and Jean Jacoby 
+
+
+
+https://duvpfa.du.edu/blog/2021/05/27/making-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-in-promotion-tenure-and-re-appointment-decisions-visible/
+
+
+
+EQUITY AND INCLUSION: Effective Practices and Responsive Strategies 
+
+https://www.acenet.edu/Documents/Equity-and-Inclusion-Effective-Practices-and-Responsive-Strategies.pdf
+
+Seattle University ADVANCE: Institutional Diversity Requires Recognizing and Rewarding Faculty Hidden Work 
+
+
+
+https://www.seattleu.edu/media/advance/NCURA-Article_SU-ADVANCE.pdf
+
+
+
+
+
+MacNell, L., Driscoll, A. & Hunt, A.N. (2015) “What’s in a Name: Exposing Gender Bias in Student Ratings of Teaching”, Innov High Educ 40: 291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-014-9313-4 
+
+Mitchell, K., & Martin, J. (2018). “Gender Bias in Student Evaluations.” PS: Political Science& Politics, Cambridge University Press, 51(3), 648-652. https://doi.org/10.1017/S104909651800001X. 
+
+Peterson , D.A.M, Biederman, L.A., Andersen, D. , Ditonto, T.M. , Roe, K. (2019), “Mitigating gender bias in student evaluations of teaching,” PLOT:ONE, Published: May 15, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0216241 
+
+
+
+
+
+Laursen, S. L., & Austin, A. E. (2014). Strategic intervention brief #6: Equitable processes of tenure and promotion. In S. L. Laursen and A. E. Austin, strategic Toolkit: Strategies for effecting gender equity and intuitional change. Boulder, CO, and East Lansing, MI. www.strategictoolkit.org. 
+
+Tierney, William G., and Estela Mara Bensimon. 1996. Promotion and Tenure: Community and Socialization in Academe. Albany, NY: SUNY Press. 
+
+Weisshaar, Katherine. 2017. “Publish and Perish? An Assessment of Gender Gaps in Promotion to Tenure in Academia.” Social Forces 96(2):529–60. 
+
+
+
+
+
+“A recipe for change: Creating a more inclusive academe”
+
+Beth Mitchneck, Jessi L. Smith, Melissa Latimer
+
+
+
+https://science.sciencemag.org/content/352/6282/148
+
+
+
+
+
+https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2021/08/24/academe-should-determine-what-specific-systemic-changes-are-needed-dei-opinion
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Purdue University has created a policy to promote and give tenure to faculty for the scholarship of engagement. 
+
+
+
+Seattle University is poised to make significant changes to promotion and tenure reviews. 
+
+
+
+And recently, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis unveiled its first nontraditional pathway to tenure: DEI work in the academy.
+
+
+
+
+
+https://www.purdue.edu/provost/faculty/promotion/criteria-tenure.html
+
+
+
+A broad literature documents gender and racial bias across key areas of faculty experience, including grant funding (Ginther et al. 2011), peer review (Tamblyn et al. 2018), student evaluations of teaching (Chavez and Mitchell 2020), teaching and service load (Tierney and Bensimon 1996), and the tenure evaluation processes (Weisshaar 2017). 
+
+
+
+Chávez, Kerry, and Kristina M. W. Mitchell. 2020. “Exploring Bias in Student Evaluations: Gender, Race, and Ethnicity.” PS: Political Science & Politics 53(2):270–74. 
+
+Ginther, Donna K., Walter T. Schaffer, Joshua Schnell, Beth Masimore, Faye Liu, Laurel L. Haak, and Raynard Kington. 2011. “Race, Ethnicity, and NIH Research Awards.” Science 333(6045):1015–19. 
+
+Gonzalez, Leslie and Kimberly Ann Griffin. 2020. Supporting Faculty during & after COVID-19: Don't Let Go of Equity. Washington, DC: Aspire Alliance 
+
+Goodwin, Stephanie and Beth Mitchneck. 2020 “STEM Equity and Inclusion (Un)Interrupted?"" Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved August 15, 2020 (https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2020/05/13/ensuring-pandemic-doesnt-negatively- impact-women-stem-especially-those-color). 
+
+
+
+Malisch, Jessica L., Breanna N. Harris, Shanen M. Sherrer, Kristy A. Lewis, Stephanie L. Shepherd, Pumtiwitt C. McCarthy, Jessica L. Spott, Elizabeth P. Karam, Naima Moustaid- Moussa, and Jessica McCrory Calarco. 2020. “Opinion: In the Wake of COVID-19, Academia Needs New Solutions to Ensure Gender Equity.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117(27):15378–15381. 
+
+Myers, Kyle, Wei Yang Tham, Yian Yin, Nina Cohodes, Jerry G. Thursby, Marie Thursby, Peter Schiffer, Joseph Walsh, Karim R. Lakhani, and Dashun Wang. 2020. Quantifying the Immediate Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Scientists. SSRN Scholarly Paper. ID 3608302. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. 
+
+Tamblyn, Robyn, Nadyne Girard, Christina J. Qian, and James Hanley. 2018. “Assessment of Potential Bias in Research Grant Peer Review in Canada.” Canadian Medical Association Journal 190(16):E489–99. 
+
+Tierney, William G., and Estela Mara Bensimon. 1996. Promotion and Tenure: Community and Socialization in Academe. Albany, NY: SUNY Press. 
+
+Weisshaar, Katherine. 2017. “Publish and Perish? An Assessment of Gender Gaps in Promotion to Tenure in Academia.” Social Forces 96(2):529–60. 
+
+
+
+Bouwma-Gearhart, Jana, Cindy Lenhart, Rich Carter, Karl Mundorff, Holly Cho, and Jessica Knoch. 2021. ""Inclusively Recognizing Faculty Innovation and Entrepreneurship Impact within Promotion and Tenure Considerations"" Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 7, no. 3: 182. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7030182
+
+
+
+Matthew, P.A. Written/Unwritten: Diversity and the Hidden Truths of Tenure; University of North Carolina Press: Chapel Hill, NC, USA, 2016; ISBN 978-1-4696-2773-1. [Google Scholar]
+
+
+
+
+
+Lisnic R, Zajicek A, Morimoto S. Gender and Race Differences in Faculty Assessment of Tenure Clarity: The Influence of Departmental Relationships and Practices. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity. 2019;5(2):244-260. doi:10.1177/2332649218756137
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Examples of materials that might be submitted as part of a dossier in support of the advising portion of a dossier include: workshop, conference, or any other presentation materials or publications (of all kinds related to advising), awards, materials developed in support of advising activities, materials developed in connection with any committee work, evidence of leadership in area, any other materials that are related to advising that would help the committee to understand the quality, scope, and breadth and depth of contributions in this area, evidence of collaborative work with other areas of the College or campus, evidence of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)-related work in this area, evidence of other leadership activities in this area. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+POST-TENURE EVALUATION
+
+
+
+Tamara Beauboeuf-Lafontant, Karla A. Erickson & Jan E. Thomas (2019) Rethinking Post-Tenure Malaise: An Interactional, Pathways Approach to Understanding the Post-Tenure Period, The Journal of Higher Education, 90:4, 644-664, DOI: 10.1080/00221546.2018.1554397</s>"
+"<s>[INST] clery_report_jan 2011_december 2013.txt [/INST] Vaughn College of Aeronautics and Technology
+
+Jeanne Clery Act Reporting Statistics 
+
+2013 Annual Crime Statistics
+
+
+Fire Log
+
+Vaughn College maintains a fire log available for review at the Student Affairs Office. 
+
+
+
+2011 ANNUAL FIRE REPORT ON RESIDENCE HALL
+
+Building 
+
+Fires
+
+Fire Cause
+
+Injuries
+
+Deaths
+
+Property Damage
+
+Residence Hall
+
+0
+
+N/A
+
+0
+
+0
+
+$0.00
+
+
+
+2012 ANNUAL FIRE REPORT ON RESIDENCE HALL
+
+Building 
+
+Fires
+
+Fire Cause
+
+Injuries
+
+Deaths
+
+Property Damage
+
+Residence Hall
+
+0
+
+N/A
+
+0
+
+0
+
+$0.00
+
+
+
+2013 ANNUAL FIRE REPORT ON RESIDENCE HALL
+
+Building 
+
+Fires
+
+Fire Cause
+
+Injuries
+
+Deaths
+
+Property Damage
+
+Residence Hall
+
+0
+
+N/A
+
+0
+
+0
+
+$0.00
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Crime Reporting Statistics
+
+In Compliance with the Jeanne Clery Act
+
+Complied by Vaughn College Office of Student Affairs for January 2010 to December 2012.
+
+
+
+Criminal Offenses – On Campus
+
+Total occurrences on campus
+
+Criminal Offense
+
+2011
+
+2012
+
+2013
+
+Murder/Non-negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offenses-Forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+1
+
+Sex offense-Non-forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Incest
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Statutory rape
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Robbery
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Aggravated assault
+
+1
+
+1
+
+0
+
+Burglary
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Motor vehicle theft (Not including theft from a motor vehicle)
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Arson
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+For the following criminal offenses, the number is reported of the amount of occurrences on campus
+
+
+
+Criminal Offenses – On Campus Student Housing Facilities
+
+For the following criminal offenses, the number is reported of the amount of occurrences on campus
+
+Total occurrences on campus
+
+Criminal Offense
+
+2011
+
+2012
+
+2013
+
+Murder/Non-negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offenses-Forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+1
+
+Sex offense-Non-forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Incest
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Statutory rape
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Robbery
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Aggravated assault
+
+1
+
+1
+
+0
+
+Burglary
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Motor vehicle theft (Not including theft from a motor vehicle)
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Arson
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+
+
+Criminal Offenses – Public Property
+
+Total occurrences on campus
+
+Criminal Offense
+
+2011
+
+2012
+
+2013
+
+Murder/Non-negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offenses-Forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offense-Non-forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Incest
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Statutory rape
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Robbery
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Aggravated assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Burglary
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Motor vehicle theft (Not including theft from a motor vehicle)
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Arson
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+For the following criminal offenses, the number is reported of the amount of occurrences on campus
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Hate Crimes – On Campus
+
+Total occurrences on campus for 2013
+
+Criminal Offense
+
+Total
+
+Race
+
+Religion
+
+Sexual Orientation
+
+Gender
+
+Disability
+
+Ethnicity/National Origin
+
+Murder/Non-negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offenses-Forcible
+
+1
+
+0
+
+0
+
+1
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offense-Non-forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Incest
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Statutory rape
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Robbery
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Aggravated assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Burglary
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Motor vehicle theft (Not including theft from a motor vehicle)
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Arson
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Simple Assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Larceny-theft
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Intimidation
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Destruction/damage/vandalism of property
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+For the following hate crimes, the number is reported of the amount of occurrences on campus
+
+
+
+
+
+Hate Crimes – On Campus
+
+For the following hate crimes, the number is reported of the amount of occurrences on campus
+
+Total occurrences on campus for 2012
+
+Criminal Offense
+
+Total
+
+Race
+
+Religion
+
+Sexual Orientation
+
+Gender
+
+Disability
+
+Ethnicity/National Origin
+
+Murder/Non-negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offenses-Forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offense-Non-forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Incest
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Statutory rape
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Robbery
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Aggravated assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Burglary
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Motor vehicle theft (Not including theft from a motor vehicle)
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Arson
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Simple Assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Larceny-theft
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Intimidation
+
+1
+
+1
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Destruction/damage/vandalism of property
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Hate Crimes – On Campus
+
+Total occurrences on campus for 2011
+
+Criminal Offense
+
+Total
+
+Race
+
+Religion
+
+Sexual Orientation
+
+Gender
+
+Disability
+
+Ethnicity/National Origin
+
+Murder/Non-negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offenses-Forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offense-Non-forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Incest
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Statutory rape
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Robbery
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Aggravated assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Burglary
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Motor vehicle theft (Not including theft from a motor vehicle)
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Arson
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Simple Assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Larceny-theft
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Intimidation
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Destruction/damage/vandalism of property
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+For the following hate crimes, the number is reported of the amount of occurrences on campus
+
+
+
+
+
+Hate Crimes – On Campus Student Housing Facilities
+
+For the following hate crimes, the number is reported of the amount of occurrences on campus
+
+Total occurrences on campus for 2013
+
+Criminal Offense
+
+Total
+
+Race
+
+Religion
+
+Sexual Orientation
+
+Gender
+
+Disability
+
+Ethnicity/National Origin
+
+Murder/Non-negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offenses-Forcible
+
+1
+
+0
+
+0
+
+1
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offense-Non-forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Incest
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Statutory rape
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Robbery
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Aggravated assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Burglary
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Motor vehicle theft (Not including theft from a motor vehicle)
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Arson
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Simple Assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Larceny-theft
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Intimidation
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Destruction/damage/vandalism of property
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Hate Crimes – On Campus On Campus Student Facilities
+
+For the following hate crimes, the number is reported of the amount of occurrences on campus
+
+Total occurrences on campus for 2012
+
+Criminal Offense
+
+Total
+
+Race
+
+Religion
+
+Sexual Orientation
+
+Gender
+
+Disability
+
+Ethnicity/National Origin
+
+Murder/Non-negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offenses-Forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offense-Non-forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Incest
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Statutory rape
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Robbery
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Aggravated assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Burglary
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Motor vehicle theft (Not including theft from a motor vehicle)
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Arson
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Simple Assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Larceny-theft
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Intimidation
+
+1
+
+1
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Destruction/damage/vandalism of property
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+
+
+
+
+Hate Crimes – On Campus On Campus Student Facilities
+
+Total occurrences on campus for 2011
+
+Criminal Offense
+
+Total
+
+Race
+
+Religion
+
+Sexual Orientation
+
+Gender
+
+Disability
+
+Ethnicity/National Origin
+
+Murder/Non-negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offenses-Forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offense-Non-forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Incest
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Statutory rape
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Robbery
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Aggravated assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Burglary
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Motor vehicle theft (Not including theft from a motor vehicle)
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Arson
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Simple Assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Larceny-theft
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Intimidation
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Destruction/damage/vandalism of property
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+For the following hate crimes, the number is reported of the amount of occurrences on campus
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Hate Crimes – Public Property
+
+Total occurrences on campus for 2012
+
+Criminal Offense
+
+Total
+
+Race
+
+Religion
+
+Sexual Orientation
+
+Gender
+
+Disability
+
+Ethnicity/National Origin
+
+Murder/Non-negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offenses-Forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offense-Non-forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Incest
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Statutory rape
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Robbery
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Aggravated assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Burglary
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Motor vehicle theft (Not including theft from a motor vehicle)
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Arson
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Simple Assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Larceny-theft
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Intimidation
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Destruction/damage/vandalism of property
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+For the following hate crimes, the number is reported of the amount of occurrences on campus
+
+
+
+Total occurrences on campus for 2012
+
+Criminal Offense
+
+Total
+
+Race
+
+Religion
+
+Sexual Orientation
+
+Gender
+
+Disability
+
+Ethnicity/National Origin
+
+Murder/Non-negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offenses-Forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offense-Non-forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Incest
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Statutory rape
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Robbery
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Aggravated assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Burglary
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Motor vehicle theft (Not including theft from a motor vehicle)
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Arson
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Simple Assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Larceny-theft
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Intimidation
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Destruction/damage/vandalism of property
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Hate Crimes – Public Property
+
+Total occurrences on campus for 2013
+
+Criminal Offense
+
+Total
+
+Race
+
+Religion
+
+Sexual Orientation
+
+Gender
+
+Disability
+
+Ethnicity/National Origin
+
+Murder/Non-negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offenses-Forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offense-Non-forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Incest
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Statutory rape
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Robbery
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Aggravated assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Burglary
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Motor vehicle theft (Not including theft from a motor vehicle)
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Arson
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Simple Assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Larceny-theft
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Intimidation
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Destruction/damage/vandalism of property
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+For the following hate crimes, the number is reported of the amount of occurrences on campus
+
+Total occurrences on campus for 2012
+
+Criminal Offense
+
+Total
+
+Race
+
+Religion
+
+Sexual Orientation
+
+Gender
+
+Disability
+
+Ethnicity/National Origin
+
+Murder/Non-negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offenses-Forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offense-Non-forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Incest
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Statutory rape
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Robbery
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Aggravated assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Burglary
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Motor vehicle theft (Not including theft from a motor vehicle)
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Arson
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Simple Assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Larceny-theft
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Intimidation
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Destruction/damage/vandalism of property
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Hate Crimes – Public Property
+
+Total occurrences on campus for 2011
+
+Criminal Offense
+
+Total
+
+Race
+
+Religion
+
+Sexual Orientation
+
+Gender
+
+Disability
+
+Ethnicity/National Origin
+
+Murder/Non-negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Negligent manslaughter
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offenses-Forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Sex offense-Non-forcible
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Incest
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+                       Statutory rape
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Robbery
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Aggravated assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Burglary
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Motor vehicle theft (Not including theft from a motor vehicle)
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Arson
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Simple Assault
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Larceny-theft
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Intimidation
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Destruction/damage/vandalism of property
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+For the following hate crimes, the number is reported of the amount of occurrences on campus
+
+
+
+Arrests – On Campus
+
+This does not include drunkenness or driving under the influence in Liquor law violations
+
+Number of Arrests
+
+Crime
+
+2011
+
+2012
+
+2013
+
+Weapons: carrying, possessing, etc.
+
+0
+
+0
+
+1
+
+Drug abuse violations
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Liquor law violations
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+
+
+Arrests – On Campus Student Housing Facilities
+
+This does not include drunkenness or driving under the influence in Liquor law violations
+
+Number of Arrests
+
+Crime
+
+2011
+
+2012
+
+2013
+
+Weapons: carrying, possessing, etc.
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Drug abuse violations
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Liquor law violations
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+
+
+Arrests – Public Property
+
+This does not include drunkenness or driving under the influence in Liquor law violations
+
+Number of Arrests
+
+Crime
+
+2011
+
+2012
+
+2013
+
+Weapons: carrying, possessing, etc.
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Drug abuse violations
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Liquor law violations
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+
+
+Disciplinary Actions – On Campus
+
+This does not include drunkenness or driving under the influence in Liquor law violations
+
+Number of Arrests
+
+Crime
+
+2011
+
+2012
+
+2013
+
+Weapons: carrying, possessing, etc.
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Drug abuse violations
+
+6
+
+8
+
+15
+
+Liquor law violations
+
+11
+
+15
+
+12
+
+
+
+Disciplinary Actions – On Campus Student Housing Facilities
+
+This does not include drunkenness or driving under the influence in Liquor law violations
+
+Number of Arrests
+
+Crime
+
+2011
+
+2012
+
+2013
+
+Weapons: carrying, possessing, etc.
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Drug abuse violations
+
+6
+
+8
+
+15
+
+Liquor law violations
+
+11
+
+15
+
+12
+
+
+
+Disciplinary Actions – Public Property
+
+This does not include drunkenness or driving under the influence in Liquor law violations
+
+Number of Arrests
+
+Crime
+
+2011
+
+2012
+
+2013
+
+Weapons: carrying, possessing, etc.
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Drug abuse violations
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0
+
+Liquor law violations
+
+0
+
+0
+
+0</s>"
+<s>[INST] CMC Audit Report.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] COLLEGE INTERN POLICY.txt [/INST] COLLEGE INTERN POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+
+
+Policy Number:
+
+III –
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President, Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+All Canisius College departments that engage Interns.
+
+History:
+
+
+
+
+
+PURPOSE 
+
+The purpose of this policy is to provide guidance for college departments seeking to provide a structured learning environment to unpaid Interns. Note that this policy does not apply to the approval of a student internships for academic credit as part of an academic degree earned at Canisius College or a course offered at Canisius College.
+
+POLICY
+
+College departments may provide a structured learning environment to unpaid Interns. Internships must be properly authorized by the host department and Human Resources in accordance with the procedures set forth in this policy. Authorized Interns are agents of the college; therefore, qualifications, background, and suitability of the individual must be considered before offering an Intern opportunity. Moreover, any individual listed on a sex offender registry or who has been convicted of an offense for which he or she must register as a sex or violent offender may not serve as an Intern. No department may discriminate in selecting Interns based on any status protected by state or federal law.
+
+The college shall have no liability for personal injury or property damage which may be suffered by the Intern, unless such injury or damage directly results from the negligent acts or omissions of the college or its employees. 
+
+Department heads providing internship opportunities are accountable and responsible for compliance with this policy and may be subject to disciplinary action for the department’s failure to comply.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Intern(s)a student or trainee who accepts a short-term unpaid, supervised work experience at Canisius College for the purposes of educational or professional interest. In determining whether an individual is an Intern, the college will consider the following criteria:
+
+The extent to which the intern and the college clearly understand that there is no expectation of compensation. Any promise of compensation, express or implied, suggests that the intern is an employee—and vice versa;
+
+The extent to which the internship provides training that would be similar to that which would be given in an educational environment, including the clinical and other hands-on training provided by educational institutions;
+
+The extent to which the internship is tied to the intern’s formal education program by integrated coursework or the receipt of academic credit; 
+
+The extent to which the internship accommodates the intern’s academic commitments by corresponding to the academic calendar; 
+
+The extent to which the internship’s duration is limited to the period in which the internship provides the intern with beneficial learning; 
+
+The extent to which the Intern’s work complements, rather than displaces, the work of paid employees while providing significant educational benefits to the intern; and 
+
+The extent to which the Intern and the college understand that the internship is conducted without entitlement to a paid job at the conclusion of the internship. 
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+I.	Eligibility
+
+Any Intern may serve at Canisius College with the following restrictions:
+
+An Intern cannot replace or be substituted for current employees or perform work that would otherwise require another individual to be employed;
+
+Individuals under the age of 14 may not serve as an Intern. Individuals who are at least 14 years old but under the age of 18 must have parental consent;
+
+Interns who do not hold U.S. Citizenship or permanent residency should consult IDENTIFY OFFICE for any information related to visa status. An individual with a pending H-1B visa application to work at the college may not serve as an Intern; and
+
+Any individual listed on a registry that is part of the college’s criminal record check or who has been convicted of an offense for which he or she must register as a sex or violent offender may not serve as an Intern.
+
+II.	Selection and Assignment
+
+The following procedures are required to engage an Intern:
+
+A department that desires to accommodate an Intern must complete a description of the duties to be performed by the Intern and obtain written approval from the appropriate vice president and Human Resources. The description of duties must include the following:
+
+Title and name of supervisor;
+
+Dates of the internship;
+
+Schedule / hours of work;
+
+Where duties will be performed;
+
+Activities to be performed;
+
+Training provided by supervisor or others in the department;
+
+Personal, educational, or professional benefits the Intern should derive from the internship;
+
+How the internship relates to the Intern’s course of study, including whether the Intern will receive course credit from Canisius College or another college or university;
+
+Benefits, if any, to the college;
+
+Safety or risk issues; and
+
+How the Intern’s services will be measured or evaluated.
+
+After receiving approval form the appropriate vice president, each Intern (or their parent/guardian) must complete applicable Human Resources paperwork and, if determined necessary by Human Resources, satisfactorily complete a background check (see the Background, Reference, and Verification Screens Policy);
+
+Each Intern must complete a Release and Waiver of Liability Form. The completed form is then forwarded to Human Resources for filing; and
+
+The department head must ensure that the Intern receives appropriate training prior to their beginning the internship at the college.
+
+IV.	Intern Responsibilities
+
+An Intern must complete and sign a Release and Waiver of Liability Form and any other forms required by Human Resources.
+
+An Intern must comply with all applicable college and department policies and procedures, as well as legal requirements that govern their actions. These include but are not limited to those relating to employee conduct, safety, confidentiality, sensitive information, protected health information, college computer and network system use, financial responsibility, and drug or alcohol use. Department heads are responsible for making certain Interns comply with all applicable college and department policies and procedures, as well as applicable laws and regulations.
+
+V.	Dismissal
+
+The department sponsoring the internship or Human Resources may decline and/or discontinue the Internship at any time and without advance notice. Similarly, the Intern may end service at any time.
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Background, Reference, and Verification Screens Policy</s>"
+"<s>[INST] COllegiality Responsibility Text.txt [/INST] Members of the college community should contribute to the creation of a collegial culture. As colleagues, all faculty have responsibilities derived from common membership in the community of scholars. Faculty do not discriminate against or harass colleagues. They respect and defend the free inquiry of associates, even when it leads to findings and conclusions different from their own. Faculty accept their share of faculty responsibilities for the governance of the institution (drawn from AAUP Statement on Professional Ethics, 1966, Revised 1987, 2009). 
+
+Faculty members are expected to: 
+
+  Collaborate with faculty, staff, and stakeholders from the College and the community to create, preserve, and enhance important partnerships. 
+
+  Provide support for adjunct and full-time colleagues in the form of consultation and cooperation; work as effective team members, when required. 
+
+  Treat all members of the college community with dignity and respect demonstrating professional, courteous behavior and engage in constructive conflict resolution, when needed.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Comparison Group List.txt [/INST] Appendix: Our Comparison Group
+
+We recommend modifying the current institutional comparison group.
+
+As with the previous comparison group, a few caveats are in order:
+
+The included peer institutions serve as benchmarks for us at the institutional level, but
+
+not necessarily across all relevant dimensions of comparison.
+
+Schools, colleges, divisions and other units of the university may develop their own
+
+comparison groups that are appropriate to their particular work.
+
+The included institutions may compete with us for students, but not in every case. For
+
+many programs, our enrollment competitors are public institutions and occasionally are
+
+private for-profit institutions. The economic and financial foundations of these
+
+institutions make them unsuitable for the comparison group. Of course, individual units
+
+may choose to include such institutions in their comparison set.
+
+Financial data from the comparison group, among other uses, may help to identify
+
+best practices in many areas of university life from academic programs to deferred
+
+maintenance.
+
+
+
+Our new set of comparison institutions skews heavily to California but includes a few from
+
+other states. No matter their location, they have been chosen for their similarity to Cal
+
+Lutheran in these areas:
+
+Degrees offered
+
+Endowment
+
+Location/setting (urban or suburban with similar cost of living)
+
+Undergraduate enrollment
+
+Undergraduate tuition
+
+Graduate enrollment
+
+Graduation rates
+
+Number and type of schools or colleges within the university
+
+
+
+The comparison institutions are:
+
+Chapman University – 
+
+https://www.chapman.edu/faculty-staff/faculty/_files/faculty-manual.pdf
+
+Loyola Marymount University
+
+https://academics.lmu.edu/media/lmuacademics/facultydevelopment/documents/Faculty%20Resource%20Guide%202021-2022%208.16.21.pdf
+
+https://academics.lmu.edu/media/lmuacademics/provost/documents/LMU%20Faculty%20Handbook%202021-2022_Rev.81221.pdf
+
+
+
+Pacific Lutheran University (WA)
+
+Santa Clara University
+
+St. Edward’s University (TX)
+
+St. Mary’s College of California
+
+University of La Verne
+
+University of the Pacific
+
+University of Redlands
+
+University of San Diego
+
+University of San Francisco
+
+Valparaiso University (IN) – 
+
+https://www.valpo.edu/general-counsel/files/2018/07/Faculty-Handbook_August-2018.pdf</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Contract Analysis- GLCA & BNCH INSTITUTIONS.txt [/INST] GLCA INSTITUTIONS
+
+Contractual
+
+
+
+Antioch
+
+Yes. 
+
+The aim of the Faculty Personnel Handbook is to provide faculty members with a clear, accurate, and comprehensive overview of their contractual relationship to the College so that important personnel practices and related matters are as transparent as possible. 
+
+
+
+Allegheny
+
+Silent
+
+
+
+College of Wooster
+
+Chapter 1, The Statutes of Instruction, is contractual.
+
+Chapter 1, The Statute of Instruction is a contract between the Faculty and Board of Trustees and explains the duties and rights of the Faculty as defined and adopted by the Board of Trustees after consultation with Faculty. The remaining Chapters serve primarily as a supplement to the College Catalogue and handbooks for students (The Scot’s Key), staff (available on the Human Resources wiki), and all employees of the College (The Handbook of Selected College Policies). 
+
+Oberlin College
+
+No
+
+The Faculty Guide and the policies contained herein do not in any way constitute and should not be construed as a contract or agreement, express or implied, of employment between a member of the Faculty and the College, or a promise of employment. 
+
+Kenyon
+
+Silent
+
+There is no introduction statement to the Kenyon Faculty HB
+
+Denison
+
+Silent
+
+There is no introduction statement to the Denison contract.  However, there is the following disclaimer: Academic offerings, practices, and personnel policies are subject to change in the event of exigent circumstances, including the ongoing COVID-19 situation 
+
+Kalamazoo
+
+Silent
+
+
+
+Hope College
+
+Yes.  Sections B and C
+
+The Handbook is the authoritative document on the role of the faculty in college governance (Section A). It also sets forth certain conditions of the contractual relationship between the college and the faculty. These include both faculty personnel policies (Section B) and faculty responsibilities (Section C). Hope faculty and staff are expected to follow the agreed-upon procedures and principles described in the Handbook.
+
+
+
+Albion College
+
+Silent
+
+
+
+Wabash
+
+Silent
+
+
+
+Earlham 
+
+Part One of the handbook is contractual.
+
+This document contains two parts. The first is the faculty handbook which is an extension of the College’s contract with teaching and administrative faculty.
+
+The second part contains the administrative policies and procedures of the College that pertain to faculty. These policies and procedures are not considered extensions of the College’s contract with faulty members.
+
+
+
+Depauw
+
+No
+
+These policies and procedures are not contractual.  Therefore, the University, including its trustees, the faculty, and the administration reserve the right to change those sections for which each respectively has responsibility as identified in the handbook itself. Further, the University, including the trustees, reserves the right to add to or delete from this handbook from time to time as they decide is appropriate.
+
+BNCH INSTITUTIONS
+
+
+
+
+
+Southwestern 
+
+Silent
+
+
+
+Augustana
+
+No
+
+The policies set forth in the Faculty Handbook are the current policies and procedures of the College. However, these practices and procedures are subject to be changed and amended from time to time. Nothing in the Faculty Handbook should be construed as any guarantee of continued employment and the Faculty Handbook should not be construed as an employment contract 
+
+Ursinus
+
+Silent
+
+
+
+Lewis and Clark
+
+No
+
+While faculty should find the handbook useful as a guide to employment policies at the College, this document is not a contract of employment. The contract of employment is embodied in the individual faculty member’s letter of employment. 
+
+Drew
+
+Silent
+
+
+
+College of St. Benedict/St. John’s University
+
+Part II is contractual.
+
+Note: This handbook is the closet in terms of organization to OWU’s handbook.
+
+Luther College 
+
+Silent
+
+
+
+Lake Forest
+
+Silent
+
+
+
+Susquehanna 
+
+Silent</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Copy of DRAFT Handbook Updates - Grievance and Dismissal.txt [/INST] 1
+
+Dismissal and Complaint/Grievance Policy Revisions
+
+Version 3 (2/24 Update)
+
+
+
+Executive Summary: Proposal to revise the Grievance and Dismissal processes in the Faculty Policies Handbook.  This proposal offers five shifts from current policy: 1) disentangle the dismissal and grievance processes; 2) clarify which elected faculty bodies hear and/or adjudicate dismissal and grievance proceedings; 3) incorporate AAUP guidelines and procedural protections in dismissal proceedings; 4) simplify the Complaint/Grievance processes such that the adjudicating committee can gather data and statements without the structure, demands and timeline of an evidentiary hearing, and 5) the creation of a new standing Complaints and Grievance Committee that will hear faculty complaints and grievances (the bar for grievable items has been lowered substantially).  Of these proposed changes, #1 is a matter of good governance policy, #2, #4, and #5 are merely streamlining and clarifying policies and structures that already exist, and #3 is incorporating the policy recommendation regarding academic freedom and tenure that have been considered the standard in higher education since 1968.    
+
+
+
+Context: The Faculty Affairs Committee would be slightly expanded (probably to 6 members) and would be the adjudicating body in the event of faculty dismissals.  The FAC would offer its professional recommendations on dismissal proceedings without its opinion being binding upon the President or Board of Regents.  This would not be a substantial departure from current practices: such faculty hearing committees already exist. In dismissal proceedings, the Faculty Policies Handbook (pg. 79) currently charges ART/FAC as an adjudicating committee: 
+
+
+
+Prior to the implementation of the dismissal, the data supporting the adequate cause for such action will be presented in writing to the ART Committee by the President or the President’s designee. If the ART Committee has engaged in post-tenure review of the faculty member and in monitoring a development plan, the Faculty Affairs Committee will serve as the initial review committee. The committee will obtain a written or oral statement from the faculty member (depending on which is preferred by the faculty member) with regard to the charges, and any other data the committee deems pertinent. The committee as a whole will consider the evidence and render an opinion. The opinion will be given to the faculty member and to the President without the opinion being binding upon the President.
+
+
+
+In addition to the ambiguity of the “development plan” language, there is also the notion that the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure committee is likely to be a party/witness to dismissal cases. Having it also function in an adjudicative capacity, in addition to the presence of the Provost on the ART committee, is procedurally problematic.  
+
+
+
+In the case of Grievance proceedings, the Faculty Policies Handbook (pg. 47) currently charges the Grievance Committee as a hearing committee: 
+
+
+
+The parties shall submit their evidence and witness lists to the Grievance Committee no later than seven calendar days prior to the hearing date. The Grievance Committee will cooperate with the grievant in securing witnesses and making available documentary and other evidence to the extent possible. The Grievance Committee shall promptly provide each party’s submitted evidence and witness lists to the other party. The committee may also request witnesses and documents that it believes would assist members in their deliberation. The Grievance Committee retains the right to exclude evidence if it determines it is irrelevant or prejudicial . . . The Grievance Committee will present its decision in writing within 15 business days of the hearing to the parties, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the President of the University . . . The President shall review the record and respond within 30 business days as to the final disposition of the grievance.
+
+
+
+The grievance proceedings, as currently written, define grievable actions too narrowly and are not sufficiently specific in their charges to the grievance committee and assume a “hearing structure” that is unnecessarily complex for the task.  Expanding the committee charge to hear what were formerly deemed “complaints,” and simplifying the fact-finding process, rightly situates an elected faculty body in a position of responsibility regarding faculty discipline whilst making clearer the relationship between the recommendations of the committee and the decision-making process and power of the university provost and president.
+
+
+
+
+
+Policy Proposals Below
+
+Dismissal Procedures (with minor modifications from AAUP Statement on Ac. Freedom and Tenure)
+
+a. Adequate cause for a dismissal will be related, directly and substantially, to the fitness of faculty members in their professional capaci­ties as teachers or researchers. Dismissal will not be used to restrain faculty members in their exercise of academic freedom or other rights of American citizens.9
+
+b. Dismissal of a faculty member with continu­ous tenure, or with a probationary or other nontenured appointment before the end of the specified term, will be preceded by (1)  discussions, including a documented history thereof, between the faculty member and appropri­ate administrative officers looking toward a mutual settlement (2) informal inquiry by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, which may, if it fails to effect an adjustment, determine whether in its opinion dismissal proceedings should be undertaken, without its opinion being binding upon the president; (3) a statement of charges, framed with reasonable particularity by the president or the president’s delegate.
+
+c. A dismissal, as defined in Regulation 1a, will be preceded by a statement of charges, and the individual concerned will have the right to be heard initially by the Faculty Affairs Committee.10 Members of the committee deeming themselves disqualified for bias or interest will remove themselves from the case, either at the request of the chair of the committee or on their own initiative. When assembling the Dismissal Panel from the membership of the Faculty Affairs Committee, each party to the dismissal will have a maximum of one challenge without stated cause.11  After recusals and removals, the remaining members who will be adjudicating the case will hereafter be referred to as the hearing committee or Dismissal Panel.  If there are not enough remaining members to form a panel the chair of the Faculty Affairs Committee will contact the Committee on Committees to request additional members, ideally selected from faculty in elected positions.
+
+(1) Pending a final decision by the hearing committee, the faculty member will be suspended, or assigned to other duties in lieu of suspension, only if immediate harm to the faculty member or others is threat­ened by continuance. Before suspending a faculty member, pending an ultimate determination of the faculty member’s status through the institution’s hearing procedures, the administration will consult with the Faculty Affairs Committee concerning the propriety, the length, and the other conditions of the suspension. A suspension that is intended to be final is a dismissal and will be treated as such. Salary will continue during the period of the suspension.
+
+(2) The hearing committee may, with the consent of the parties concerned, hold joint prehearing meetings with the par­ties in order to (i) simplify the issues, (ii) effect stipulations of facts, (iii) provide for the exchange of documentary or other information, and (iv) achieve such other appropriate prehearing objectives as will make the hearing fair, effective, and expeditious.
+
+(3) Service of notice of hearing with specific charges in writing will be made at least twenty days prior to the hearing. The faculty member may waive a hearing or may respond to the charges in writing at any time before the hearing. If the faculty member waives a hearing, but denies the charges or asserts that the charges do not support a finding of adequate cause, the hearing tribunal will evaluate all available evidence and rest its recommendation upon the evidence in the record.
+
+(4) The hearing committee, in consultation with the president and the faculty member, will exercise its judgment as to whether the hearing should be public or private.
+
+(5) During the proceedings the faculty mem­ber will be permitted to have an academic adviser and counsel of the faculty member’s choice.
+
+(6) At the request of either party or the hearing committee, a representative of a responsible educational association will be permitted to attend the proceedings as an observer.
+
+(7) A verbatim record of the hearing or hear­ings will be taken, and a copy will be made available to the faculty member without cost, at the faculty member’s request.
+
+(8) The burden of proof that adequate cause exists rests with the institution and will be satisfied only by clear and convincing evi­dence in the record considered as a whole.
+
+(9) The hearing committee will grant adjourn­ments to enable either party to investigate evidence as to which a valid claim of sur­prise is made.
+
+(10) The faculty member will be afforded an opportunity to obtain necessary witnesses and documentary or other evidence. The administration will cooperate with the hearing committee in securing witnesses and in making available documentary and other evidence.
+
+(11) The faculty member and the administration will have the right to confront and cross-examine all witnesses. Where the witnesses cannot or will not appear, but the commit­tee determines that the interests of justice require admission of their statements, the committee will identify the witnesses, disclose their statements, and, if possible, provide for interrogatories.
+
+(12) In the hearing of charges of incompetence, the testimony will include that of qualified faculty members from this or other institu­tions of higher education.
+
+(13) The hearing committee will not be bound by strict rules of legal evidence and may admit any evidence which is of probative value in determining the issues involved. Every possible effort will be made to obtain the most reliable evidence available.
+
+(14) The findings of fact and the decision will be based solely on the hearing record.
+
+(15) Except for such simple announcements as may be required, covering the time of the hearing and similar matters, public statements and publicity about the case by either the faculty member or admin­istrative officers will be avoided so far as possible until the proceedings have been completed, including consideration by the governing board of the institution. The president and the faculty member will be notified of the decision in writing and will be given a copy of the record of the hearing.
+
+(16) If the hearing committee concludes that adequate cause for dismissal has not been established by the evidence in the record, it will so report to the president. If the presi­dent rejects the report, the president will state the reasons for doing so, in writing, to the hearing committee and to the faculty member and provide an opportunity for response before transmitting the case to the governing board. If the hearing commit­tee concludes that adequate cause for a dismissal has been established, but that an academic penalty less than dismissal would be more appropriate, it will so recommend, with supporting reasons.
+
+Action by the Governing Board
+
+If dismissal or other severe sanction is recommended, the president will, on request of the faculty member, transmit to the governing board the record of the case. The governing board’s review will be based on the record of the committee hearing, and it will provide opportunity for argument, oral or written or both, by the principals at the hearing or by their represen­tatives. The decision of the hearing committee will either be sustained or the proceedings returned to the committee with specific objections. The committee will then reconsider, taking into account the stated objec­tions and receiving new evidence, if necessary. The governing board will make a final decision only after study of the committee’s reconsideration.
+
+Procedures for Imposition of Sanctions other than Dismissal
+
+a. If the administration believes that the conduct of a faculty member, although not constitut­ing adequate cause for dismissal, is sufficiently grave to justify imposition of a severe sanction, such as suspension from service for a stated period, the administration may institute a proceeding to impose such a severe sanction; the procedures outlined in “Dismissal Proceedings” herein will govern such a proceeding.
+
+b. If the administration believes that the conduct of a faculty member justifies imposition of a minor sanction, such as a reprimand, it will notify the faculty member of the basis of the proposed sanction and provide the faculty member with an opportunity to persuade the administration that the proposed sanction should not be imposed. A faculty member who believes that a major sanction has been incorrectly imposed under this paragraph, or that a minor sanction has been unjustly imposed, may, pursuant to Regulation 11, petition the faculty grievance committee for such action as may be appropriate.
+
+Terminal Salary or Notice
+
+If the appointment is terminated, the faculty member will receive salary or notice in accordance with the following schedule: at least three months, if the final decision is reached by March 1 (or three months prior to the expiration) of the first year of probationary ser­vice; at least six months, if the decision is reached by December 15 of the second year (or after nine months but prior to eighteen months) of probationary service; at least one year, if the decision is reached after eigh­teen months of probationary service or if the faculty member has tenure.12
+
+This provision for terminal notice or salary need not apply in the event that there has been a finding that the conduct which justified dismissal involved moral turpitude. On the recommendation of the fac­ulty hearing committee or the president, the governing board, in determining what, if any, payments will be made beyond the effective date of dismissal, may take into account the length and quality of service of the faculty member.
+
+Academic Freedom and Protection against Discrimination
+
+a. All members of the faculty, whether tenured or not, are entitled to academic freedom as set forth in the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, formulated by the Association of American Colleges and Universities and the American Association of University Professors.
+
+b. All members of the faculty, whether tenured or not, are entitled to protection against illegal or unconstitutional discrimination by the institution, or discrimination on a basis not demonstrably related to the faculty member’s professional performance, including but not lim­ited to race, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation.
+
+Complaints of Violation of Academic Freedom or of Discrimination in Nonreappointment
+
+If a faculty member on probationary or other non­tenured appointment alleges that a decision against reappointment was based significantly on consider­ations that violate (a) academic freedom or (b) govern­ing policies on making appointments without prejudice with respect to race, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation, the allegation will be given preliminary consideration by the Faculty Affairs Committee, which will seek to settle the matter by informal methods. The allegation will be accompanied by a statement that the faculty member agrees to the presentation, for the consideration of the faculty committee, of such reasons and evidence as the institution may allege in support of its decision. If the difficulty is unresolved at this stage and if the committee so recommends, the matter will be heard in the manner set forth in “Dismissal Proceedings” above, except that the faculty member making the complaint is responsible for stating the grounds upon which the allegations are based and the burden of proof will rest upon the faculty member. If the faculty member succeeds in establishing a prima facie case, it is incumbent upon those who made the decision against reappointment to come forward with evidence in support of their decision. Statistical evidence of improper discrimination may be used in establishing a prima facie case.
+
+Administrative Personnel
+
+The foregoing regulations apply to administrative personnel who hold academic rank, but only in their capacity as faculty members. Administrators who allege that a consideration that violates academic freedom or governing policies against improper dis­crimination, as stated in Regulation 6, significantly contributed to a decision to terminate their appoint­ment to an administrative post or not to reappoint them are entitled to the procedures set forth in Regula­tion 6.
+
+Political Activities of Faculty Members
+
+Faculty members, as citizens, are free to engage in political activities. Where necessary, leaves of absence may be given for the duration of an election cam­paign or a term of office, on timely application, and for a reasonable period of time. The terms of such leave of absence will be set forth in writing, and the leave will not affect unfavorably the tenure status of a faculty member, except that time spent on such leave will not count as probationary service unless otherwise agreed to.13
+
+Part-Time Faculty Appointments 
+
+a. After having been reappointed beyond an initial term, a part-time faculty member who is subsequently notified of nonreappointment will be advised upon request of the reasons that contributed to the decision. Upon the faculty member’s further request, the reasons will be confirmed in writing. The faculty member will be afforded opportunity for review of the deci­sion by the Faculty Affairs Committee].
+
+b. For part-time faculty members who have served for three or more terms within a span of three years, the following additional protections of academic due process apply:
+
+(1) Written notice of reappointment or non­reappointment will be issued no later than one month before the end of the existing appointment. If the notice of reappointment is to be conditioned, for example, on suffi­ciency of student enrollment or on financial considerations, the specific conditions will be stated with the issuance of the notice.
+
+(2) When the part-time faculty member is denied reappointment to an available assignment (one with substantially identical responsibilities assigned to another part-time faculty member with less service), if the nonreappointed faculty member alleges that the decision was based on inadequate consideration, the allegation will be subject to review by the Faculty Affairs Committee. If this body, while not providing judgment on the merits of the decision, finds that the consideration has been inadequate in any substantial respects, it will remand the matter for fur­ther consideration accordingly.15
+
+c. Prior to consideration of reappointment beyond a seventh year, part-time faculty members who have taught at least twelve courses or six terms within those seven years shall be provided a comprehensive review with the potential result of (1) appointment with part-time tenure [where such exists], (2) appointment with part-time con­tinuing service, or (3) nonreappointment. Those appointed with tenure shall be afforded the same procedural safeguards as full-time tenured faculty. Those offered additional appointment without tenure shall have continuing appoint­ments and shall not be replaced by part-time appointees with less service who are assigned substantially identical responsibilities without having been afforded the procedural safeguards associated with dismissal.
+
+Other Academic Staff 
+
+a. In no case will a member of the academic staff who is not otherwise protected by the preceding regulations that relate to dismissal proceedings be dismissed without having been provided with a statement of reasons and an opportunity to be heard before a duly constituted committee.20 (A dismissal is a termination before the end of the period of appointment.)
+
+b. With respect to the nonreappointment of a member of such academic staff who establishes a prima facie case to the satisfaction of a duly constituted committee that considerations that violate academic freedom, or of governing poli­cies against improper discrimination as stated in “Complaints of Violation of Academic Freedom or of Discrimination in Nonreappointment,” significantly contributed to the nonreappointment, the academic staff member will be given a statement of reasons by those responsible for the nonreappointment and an opportunity to be heard by the committee.
+
+Grievance Procedures
+
+
+a. Before pursuing a formal grievance procedure, if the grievant feels comfortable in doing so, they should appeal to the person or official body responsible for the actions to which the grievant has objection or to the immediate supervisor, if any, of that person or body to determine if the complaint or problem may be resolved without resorting to formal action. This would normally be the department chair, program director or the dean, and such a meeting, including suggested remedies and points of discussion, should be documented by both parties. If the complainant is not comfortable addressing it with an immediate supervisor, they may address the issue with the next highest administrator or supervisor.  Formal grievance procedures may be initiated when a complainant has been unsuccessful in resolving the matter informally. 
+
+
+
+b. If any faculty member alleges cause for grievance in any matter not covered by the procedures described in the foregoing regulations, the faculty member may petition the elected Faculty Grievance Committee for redress. Such grievable issues include, but are not limited to: workload, teaching assignments, annual evaluation, disputes among faculty members, infringement of academic freedom, disciplinary actions, retaliation, improper scheduling, denial of sabbatical, denial of reappointment, denial of promotion, or prejudicial denial of salary increases. 
+
+
+
+c. The faculty grievant will prepare a petition that sets forth in detail the nature of the grievance and shall state against whom the grievance is directed. It shall contain any data which the grievant deems pertinent to the case.  The grievance consists of a written appeal, and any supporting documentation, which is transmitted by the faculty member to the Grievance Committee and to the University Provost, or where the grievance is against the action of the University Provost or President, to the President.  The grievance petition should include the following:
+
+A clear statement of facts upon which the grievance is based, including an explanation of how the faculty member alleges he or she has been adversely affected and the specific relief requested
+
+An identification of the person(s) or the college or University policy or procedure consid­ered responsible for the alleged adverse condition, action, or inaction upon which the grievance is based and an explanation of why the person(s) is considered responsible or why the college or University policy or procedure is considered improper
+
+d. Upon receiving a grievance petition, any member of the Grievance Committee should recuse themselves from the case if they have or could be perceived to have a bias or a conflict of interest.
+
+e. The Grievance Committee (absent any recused members) will decide whether the grievance merits further investigation. The submission of a petition will not automatically result in an investigation or detailed consideration of the grievance. If the Grievance Committee determines that a further investigation is not warranted, it shall report that finding to the grievant within thirty days of receipt of the grievance. If the Grievance Committee determines that further action is warranted, it will be provided with all relevant information and will seek, in consultation with the Provost, or where the grievance is against the action of the University Provost the President, to bring about a settlement of the issue. The Provost or President shall indicate in writing their proposed terms of settlement.
+
+f. If such a settlement is not possible or is inappropriate, the Grievance Panel can request further information on the matters relevant to the grievance petition. Upon receipt of the statement of charges, the person(s) against whom, or representing the unit against which, the grievance is lodged shall, if they wish to reply, have twenty (20) business days to present a response to the charges to the chair of the Grievance Committee.  The response must be in writing, and should include any relevant information, argumentation, or evidence that bears upon the matters relevant to the grievance. 
+
+g. Within five (5) business days after receipt of the response to the statement of charges from the party(ies) against whom the grievance has been lodged, the chair of the Grievance Committee shall have prepared and distributed to the grievant and to each member of the committee a complete copy of the response.  The Grievance Committee shall, within twenty (20) days of receipt of the response, deliver its final recommendation and/or position to the Provost, or if the Provost if party to the Grievance, to the University President.  
+
+Appeal to the President    Ordinarily the decision of the Provost shall be final and conclusive. However, an affected party may present a request, in writing, to the President within ten (10) business days after receipt of the Provost’s decision, asking to review the record of the process.  Within twenty (20) business days after receipt of a request from an affected party, the President will either affirm the decision of the Provost or make additional or different determinations. The decision of the President is final.
+
+Membership of the Grievance Committee: The Grievance Committee should be a standing committee, elected by the faculty from within its ranks, with the charge of representing and governing the business of the faculty. If, after recusals and removals there are not enough remaining members to assemble at least a 3-member panel, the Grievance Committee chair should contact the Committee on Committees chair to request the temporary appointment of additional members for the purpose of constituting a sufficient committee.  No officer of the administration will serve on the committee (including Deans, Associate Deans, and Assistant Deans). 
+
+Conflict of Interest and Recusal. Conflicts of Interest include situations in which an individual’s financial, professional, or other personal considerations may directly or indirectly affect, or have the appearance of affecting, an individual’s professional judgment in exercising any University duty or responsibility. In both grievance and dismissal proceedings members should recuse themselves from a grievance or dismissal proceeding if they deem themselves unable to exercise professional judgment. 
+
+Confidentiality: It is expected that confidentiality will be maintained in the conduct of the all committee deliberations. The mere suspicion of wrongdoing, even if totally unjustified, is potentially damaging. Information concerning any grievance and/or dismissal proceedings must be held in strictest confidence and should be available only to those with a right or a need to know.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Course Equivalencies.txt [/INST] Course Equivalencies
+
+
+
+Trinity
+
+The following rules define the standard course: 
+
+I. Classes without laboratories: 
+
+All classes regularly scheduled for 150 minutes/week for the entire semester count as 1.0 course. Some classes meet for longer class times because of the nature of the work, [e.g., Math. 100], many dance classes or choir [Music 103, 104]; each such class will also count as 1.0 course. 
+
+Classes regularly scheduled for 75 minutes/week for the entire semester count as 0.5 course. 
+
+Classes regularly scheduled for 150 minutes/week for half the semester calendar count as 0.5 course. 
+
+Classes regularly scheduled for 300 minutes/week for the entire semester, when the additional meeting time is due to intensive work such as completing a year’s work in a single semester, e.g., double-credit language classes, count as 2.0 courses. 
+
+Directing a major production in the performing arts, e.g., Theatre and Dance or Music, counts as 1.0 course. 
+
+Classes in Studio Arts regularly scheduled for 180 minutes/week for the entire semester calendar count as 1.0 course. 
+
+Physical Education classes scheduled for about 100 minutes/week for half a semester count as 0.25 course; in addition, acting as head coach for an entire season for one intercollegiate team, when such duties include recruiting, supervising daily practice and games, scouting and athletic counseling, counts as 1.5 courses; acting as assistant coach for an entire season for one intercollegiate team counts as 0.75 course. 
+
+II. Classes with laboratories or practica. When laboratories or practica are attached to a lecture section and bear the same number as that section followed by “L,” then: 
+
+A. All lectures scheduled for 150 minutes/week for the entire semester count as 1.0 course. B. Laboratories count as 1.0 course if 1. the single laboratory section enrolls all of the students from the lecture required or electing to be enrolled in the laboratory, or 
+
+2. there is more than one laboratory attached to a single lecture, and the number of students enrolled in each laboratory is 24 or greater. 
+
+Otherwise each laboratory counts as 0.5 course, except that in consideration of safety or important pedagogical values, the department chair and/or program director, in consultation with the Dean of the Faculty and the individual Faculty member, may decide to allow laboratory sections to count as 1.0 course each. Such consul- tation and determination of equivalencies shall take place within the context of guidelines established by the Faculty of the department concerned. In these cases, the best interests of the department and the College must be taken into account. 
+
+Each practicum [e.g., Engin. 115] counts as 0.25 course. 
+
+V. Teaching done on an optional, individual basis, and not regularly scheduled, e.g., independent studies, senior 
+
+thesis, honors thesis, internships, will not normally count as part of the 10 courses/two years.</s>"
+<s>[INST] Credit Card Security Policy.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] DATA CLASSIFICATION POLICY.txt [/INST] DATA CLASSIFICATION POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+
+
+Policy Number:
+
+
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Chief Information Officer
+
+Applicability:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+All College Information Systems that collect, process, maintain, use, share, disseminate or dispose of Private College Data (“applicable information system(s)”), as well as all Authorized Users who access, use, or handle those resources.
+
+History:
+
+ 
+
+______________________________________________________________________________
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to provide a framework for classifying College Data based on its level of sensitivity, value, regulatory requirements, and criticality to the college. Classification of data will aid in determining baseline security policies and corresponding controls for the protection of College Data.
+
+POLICY
+
+It is the policy of Canisius College to maintain College Data in a secure, accurate, and reliable manner and to make it readily available for authorized use. Data security controls at the college are implemented commensurate with data value, sensitivity, and risk.  
+
+Members of the college community designated as Data Owners are responsible for evaluating and classifying College Data for which they are responsible according to the classification system adopted by the college and described below. If College Data of more than one level of classification exists in the same collection of data, such data must be classified at the highest level of classification. Data Owners must communicate the data security classifications and associated security controls to Data Custodians and Authorized Users granted administrative access to such data.  
+
+Data Custodians and Authorized Users must (i) understand the college’s data classifications; (ii) consider how these classifications apply to College Data under their control; (iii) implement the security controls for each classification as specified by applicable college and departmental policies; and (iv) consult with the applicable Data Owner or Information Technology Services (“ITS”) regarding circumstances that may warrant the application of higher security standards.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Authorized User—are all individuals, including, but not limited to, employees, temporary employees, faculty, students, alumni, trustees, campus visitors, contractors, vendors, consultants and their related personnel, and other individuals authorized by the college to access a college computer, the college network(s), or information systems that collect, process, maintain, use, share, disseminate or dispose of College Data.
+
+Cardholder Data - full magnetic stripe or the Primary Account Number (PAN) plus any of the following: cardholder name; expiration date; service code; CVC2/CVV2/CID (a three- or four-digit number displayed on the signature panel of the card or, in the case of American Express, on the face of the card.
+
+College Data— any information collected, manipulated, stored, reported, or presented in any format, on any medium, at any location by any department, program or office of the college in support of the college’s mission.
+
+College Employees—includes Canisius College executive officers, administrators, faculty, staff, student employees, contractors, and others who act on behalf of the college.
+
+College Information System—a set of information resources organized expressly for the collection, processing, maintenance, use, sharing, dissemination, or disposition of information. The term system is used throughout this policy to represent all types of computing platforms that can process, store, or transmit College Data.
+
+Covered Data and Information—means all Non-Public Personnel Information of customers required to be protected under the Title V of the Gramm Leach Bliley Act of 1999 (“GLBA”), including Student Financial Information. In addition to this coverage, which is required under federal law, the college chooses as a matter of policy to also include in this definition any Cardholder Data received in the course of business by the college, whether or not such Cardholder Data is covered by GLBA. Covered Data and Information includes both paper and electronic records. Covered Data and Information is classified as Private, Highly Restricted College Data pursuant to the College Data Classification Policy.
+
+Data Custodians—the custodian of College Data is generally responsible for the processing and storage of College Data. The custodian is responsible for the administration of controls as specified by the Data Owner. By definition, Data Custodians are also Authorized Users.
+
+Data Owners—the owner of a collection of College Data is usually the manager responsible for the creation of that data or the primary user of that information. This role often corresponds with the management of department. In this context, ownership does not signify proprietary interest, and ownership may be shared. By definition, Data Owners are also Authorized Users.
+
+Members of the College Community—includes any person who is a student, college employee, volunteer, trustee, alumni, as well as college organizations, clubs, groups, and teams. This definition also includes all college departments, offices and programs.
+
+Non-Public Personal Information—any personally identifiable financial or other personal information, not otherwise publicly available, that the college has obtained from a customer in the process of offering a financial product or service; such information provided to the college by another financial institution; such information otherwise obtained by the college in connection with providing a financial product or service; or any list, description, or other grouping of customers (and publicly available information pertaining to them) that is derived using any information listed above that is not publicly available. Examples of personally identifiable financial information include names, date and place of birth, mother’s maiden name, biometric records, addresses, telephone numbers, bank and credit card account numbers, income and credit histories, tax returns, asset statements, and social security numbers, both in paper and electronic form.
+
+Personally Identifiable Information or PII—any information about an individual that (i) can be used to distinguish or trace an individual’s identity, such as name, date and place of birth, mother’s maiden name or biometric records, (ii) is linked or linkable to an individual, such as medical, educational, financial and employment information, which if lost, compromised or disclosed without authorization, could result in harm to that individual; and (iii) is protected by federal, state or local laws and regulations or industry standards.
+
+Private College Data—any College Data classified as Private-Highly Restricted and Private-Restricted pursuant to this policy. By definition, Private College Data includes, but is not limited to, Covered Data and Information, Student Financial Information, Personally Identifiable Information, Student Education Records, Human Subjects Research Data or Other Sensitive Research Data, Protected Health Information, Cardholder Data, and Sensitive Authentication Data.
+
+Public College Data—College Data that by law are available to the public upon request, and that the loss of the data would not cause significant personal, institutional, or other harm.
+
+Sensitive Authentication Data—Full track data (magnetic strip data or equivalent on a chip, CAV2/CVC2/CVV2/CID, and PINs/PIN blocks.
+
+Student Education Records—as defined by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), student education records are all records which contain information directly related to a student and maintained by the college, including those files, documents, and other materials (in handwriting, print, computer media, video or audio tape, film, microfilm, and microfiche) that contain information directly related to a student which are maintained by the college or by a person acting for the college pursuant to college or department policy. Information that is captured as a result of a student’s various activities at the college is part of the student record. This information includes, but may not be limited to, logs, databases or other records of: websites the student has visited, purchases made at college facilities, entry day/time into college facilities, library use and biometric records.
+
+Student Financial Information—information the college or its affiliates have obtained from a student in the process of offering a financial product or service, or such information provided to the college by another financial institution. Offering a financial product or service includes offering student loans to students, receiving income tax information from a student’s parent when offering a financial aid package, and other miscellaneous financial services as defined in 12 CRF §225.28. Examples of student financial information include addresses, phone numbers, bank and credit card account numbers, income and credit histories and Social Security numbers, in both paper and electronic format.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+I.	Data Classification Categories
+
+Data classification, in the context of data security, is the classification of data based on its level of sensitivity and the impact to the college should that data be disclosed, altered, or destroyed without authorization. The classification of data helps determine what baseline security controls are appropriate for safeguarding that data. All College Data must be classified into one of three sensitivity levels, or classifications:
+
+A	Private-Highly Restricted
+
+Private-Highly Restricted College Data is College Data that is not Public and is available within the college only to those with a legitimate need to know and are so highly sensitive that the loss of confidentiality of the data could either (a) cause significant personal, college, or other harm or (b) a law, regulation or contract require a high degree of security.  
+
+Examples of Private-Highly Restricted College Data include, but is not limited to:
+
+Personally Identifiable Information or PII: any information about an individual that:
+
+Can be used to distinguish or trace an individual’s identity, such as name, date and place of birth, mother’s maiden name or biometric records
+
+Is linked or linkable to an individual, such as medical, educational, financial and employment information, which if lost, compromised or disclosed without authorization, could result in harm to that individual; and 
+
+Is protected by federal, state or local laws and regulations or industry standards;
+
+Student Education Records: as defined by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), student education records are all records which contain information directly related to a student and maintained by the college, including those files, documents, and other materials (in handwriting, print, computer media, video or audio tape, film, microfilm, and microfiche) that contain information directly related to a student which are maintained by the college or by a person acting for the college pursuant to college or departmental policy. Information that is captured as a result of a student’s various activities at the college is part of the student record. This information includes, but may not be limited to, logs, databases or other records of: websites the student has visited, purchases made at college facilities, entry day/time into college facilities, library use and biometric records;
+
+Covered Data and Information within the meaning of Title V of the Gramm Leach Bliley Act of 1999 (Public Law 106-102, 11 Statute 1338) (as amended) and its implementing regulations;
+
+Human Subjects Research Data or Other Sensitive Research Data;
+
+Protected Health Information (“PHI”): As defined by Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), PHI is information, whether oral or recorded in any form or medium, that: is created or received by a healthcare provider, health plan, public health authority, employer, life insurer, school or university; and relates to past, present or future physical or mental health or condition of an individual, the provision of health care to an individual, or the past present or future payment for the provision of health care to an individual; and includes demographic data, that permits identification of the individual or could reasonably be used to identify the individual;
+
+Payment Card Information: as regulated by the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS), payment card information is defined as Cardholder Data or Sensitive Authentication Payment Data:
+
+Cardholder Data - full magnetic stripe or the Primary Account Number (PAN) plus any of the following: cardholder name; expiration date; service code; CVC2/CVV2/CID (a three- or four-digit number displayed on the signature panel of the card or, in the case of American Express, on the face of the card; and
+
+Sensitive Authentication Data—magnetic strip data or equivalent on a chip, CAV2/CVC2/CVV2/CID, and PINs/PIN blocks;
+
+An Authentication Verifier: any piece of information that is held in confidence by an individual and used to prove that the person is who they say they are. In some rare instances, an Authentication Verifier may be shared amongst a small group of individuals. An Authentication Verifier may also be used to prove the identity of a system or service. Examples include passwords and cryptographic private keys;
+
+Export Controlled Materials: any information or materials that are subject to United States export control regulations including, but not limited to, the Export Administration Regulations (“EAR”) published by the U.S. Department of Commerce and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (“ITAR”) published by the U.S. Department of State;
+
+Federal Tax Information: any return, return information or taxpayer return information that is entrusted to the college by the Internal Revenue Services;
+
+Passport and social security numbers; and  
+
+Legal investigation records conducted by the college.
+
+Unauthorized access to, or disclosure of, Private-Highly Restricted College Data will generally require notification to affected parties under the guidelines of state and federal breach notification laws or applicable contract provisions.
+
+B.	Private-Restricted
+
+Private-Restricted College Data is College Data that by law is not Public and is available within the college only to those with a legitimate need to know but are not so highly sensitive that the loss of confidentiality of the data would cause significant personal, institutional, or other harm, and no law, regulation, or contract require a higher degree of security.
+
+Examples of Private-Restricted College Data include, but is not limited to:
+
+Student Directory Information (if student has requested non-disclosure (suppressed): name, address, email address, telephone/mobile device number, dates of enrollment/registration, enrollment/registration status, major, adviser, college/school, class, academic awards and honors received, and degree received;
+
+Linking a library patron’s personal identity with materials requested or borrowed by the person or with a specific subject about which the person has requested information or materials;
+
+Exam questions or answers;
+
+Human Resources employment data;
+
+Law enforcement investigation data, judicial proceedings data; includes student disciplinary or judicial action information;
+
+Information Technology infrastructure data;
+
+Trade secret data;
+
+Protected data related to research;
+
+College intellectual property;
+
+College proprietary data;
+
+Data protected by external non-disclosure agreements;
+
+Inter- or intra-agency data which are not: statistical or factual tabulations; instructions to staff that affect the public; final agency policy or determination; external audit data;
+
+A student or employee college identification card number; 
+
+Licensed software;
+
+Information created by a health care provider and used or maintained for the purposes of patient treatment, patient payment, or health care provider operations that is not regulated by HIPAA.
+
+C	Public
+
+College Data that by law are available to the public upon request, and that the loss of the data would not cause significant personal, institutional or other harm.
+
+Examples of Public College Data include, but is not limited to:
+
+General access data on a college webpage;
+
+Student Directory Information (if student has not requested non-disclosure (suppressed): name, address, email address, telephone/mobile device number, dates of enrollment/registration, enrollment/registration status, major, adviser, college/school, class, academic awards and honors received, and degree received;
+
+Employee Directory/Contact Information (not designated by the owner as private): name, addresses (campus and home), email address, listed college telephone and mobile device number(s), dates of current employment, and position(s);
+
+Campus maps, job postings, press releases, course information, research publications, newsletters, newspapers and magazines.
+
+II.	Reclassification of College Data
+
+Data Owners should periodically reevaluate information classifications to ensure the delegated classification is still appropriate. Changes to laws and rules, contractual obligations, or how certain information is used can result in modification to the information’s value to the college and its classification.
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Acceptable Use of College Computer and Network Systems Policy
+
+Access Control Policy
+
+Audit and Accountability Control Policy 
+
+Cloud Computing Policy
+
+Confidential Information Policy 
+
+Configuration Management Policy
+
+Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Policy
+
+Identification and Authentication Policy
+
+Information Security Program
+
+Information Technology Personnel Security Policy
+
+Information Technology Physical and Environmental Protection Policy
+
+Information Technology Security Awareness and Training Policy 
+
+Media Protection Policy
+
+Mobile Device Use and Support Policy
+
+Password Policy
+
+Payment Card Information Security Policy
+
+Risk and Security Assessment Policy
+
+Student Records (FERPA) Policy
+
+System and Communications Protection Policy 
+
+System and Data Integrity Policy</s>"
+<s>[INST] Davis and Elkins IWPM Pro 2013.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Davis and Elkins IWPM Pro revised.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Davis and Elkins IWPM Pro.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.1 (Final)(Clean) Publish.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.10 (Final Clean Version)(Updated).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.10 (Final Clean Version).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.10 (Final with Comments).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.2 (3rd Draft Clean).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.2 (3rd Draft with Comments).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.2 (Final Clean Version).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.3 (Final Clean Version).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.3 (Final).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.3 (HR 3rd Draft)(Employee HB Policies).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.4 (Final).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.5 (avademic adm Final Draft - Clean Version).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.5 (Fina Draft with TC & Comments).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.7 (Final w_ Comments).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.7 (Final w_ out TC and Comments).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.7 (Final)(Revised Header).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.8 (3rd Draft w Comments).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.8 (Financial Final Clean Version).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.9 (3rd Draft w Comments).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.9 (3rd Draft)(Added Text).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.9 (3rd Draft)(Clean Version).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.9 (FInal)(Clean) (Sponsored Programs 002).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.9 (FInal)(Clean).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.XI (Final) environmental health Revised Header.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V.XI (Final).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V3 (DONT USE - HR 3rd Draft)(Non-Truncated Version).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V3 (HR 3rd Draft)(Non-Truncated Version).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DC V3 (Sample).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Definitions (Final).txt [/INST] Definitions
+
+
+
+Academic Program
+
+An academic unit that offers a coordination of courses across multiple departments and other instructional activities that has a curriculum leading to a degree or certification.
+
+Academic Unit
+
+A department, academic program, or group of academic departments or programs that reports to the Office of the Provost.
+
+Academic Year
+
+The period which begins the week before classes begin through the week after Commencement.
+
+Annual Contract Period
+
+The period of employment under a full-time faculty contract shall be for the 12-month period beginning July 1 and ending June 30, during which the individual shall receive salary and benefits. The contract will cover the duties associated with the position performed during the academic year.
+
+Assistant Professor
+
+A Tenure-track faculty member possessing the Ph.D., the terminal degree, or its professional equivalent from an accredited institution of higher learning.
+
+Assistant Professor, Visiting
+
+A Visiting faculty member possessing the rank of Assistant Professor from an accredited institution of higher learning.
+
+Associate Professor
+
+A Tenure-track faculty member possessing the Ph.D., the terminal degree, or its professional equivalent from an accredited institution of higher learning, a minimum of six years of teaching at the college or university level at an accredited institution, five of which have been in the rank of Assistant Professor.  In addition, an Associate Professor shall demonstrate teaching excellence, research or creative productivity, and effective service as detailed in the Faculty Bylaws.
+
+Associate Professor, Vising
+
+A Visiting faculty member possessing the rank of Associate Professor from an accredited institution of higher learning.
+
+Bylaws, Faculty
+
+The primary faculty policy document that guides faculty governance and faculty status at Wheaton College.
+
+Contract, Appointment
+
+A written agreement between an individual faculty member and the College that establishes or modifies the individual’s employment status with the College.
+
+Contract, Tenure-track
+
+An academic year appointment contract awarded to Tenure-line Faculty who have not attained tenured status. Tenure-track contracts may be issued for a maximum of six academic years, subject to non–reappointment at the end of each designated period. Tenure-track contracts are also known as “probationary” contracts.
+
+Contract, Tenured
+
+An academic year appointment contract awarded to Tenure-line Faculty who have attained tenured status.  A tenured faculty member has the contractual right to continuous appointments until the faculty member resigns, is dismissed for adequate cause, or is terminated.
+
+Contract, Term
+
+A full or part-time appointment contract issued to Professor of the Practice-line and Visiting Faculty for a designated period that automatically expires at the end of that period.  
+
+Contract, Terminal
+
+A contract that does not include the possibility of reappointment.
+
+Committee, Ad hoc
+
+A temporary committee established by the Faculty to consider and recommend actions and propose policies in an area under its designated jurisdiction.
+
+Committee, Standing
+
+A permanent committee established by the Faculty to consider and recommend actions and propose policies in the functional areas under its designated jurisdiction.
+
+Committee, Sub-
+
+A temporary committee established by a standing faculty committee to consider and recommend actions and propose policies in the functional area under its designated jurisdiction.
+
+Criteria, Evaluation
+
+Areas of performance and qualitative descriptions of performance that must be satisfied in order to warrant favorable personnel judgments.
+
+Day, Business
+
+Any Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday during the calendar year that the College is officially open.
+
+Day, Calendar
+
+A time period running from one midnight to the next midnight on a given date.
+
+Department
+
+An academic unit with departmental status, offering academic, for-credit programs of study generally leading to a degree and serving as primary administrative home for faculty members holding an academic, tenure-line appointment. 
+
+Department Chair
+
+A member of the full-time teaching faculty in a given academic department, appointed by the President to manage that department.
+
+Division, Academic
+
+One of the three academic divisions established by the Committee on Committees and Agenda (i.e., sciences and mathematics; social sciences; humanities) for purposes of electing or appointing faculty to standing or ad hoc committees.
+
+Faculty
+
+The Faculty consists of all Tenure-line faculty members, which includes Professors, Associate Professors, Assistant Professors, and Instructors; Professors of the Practice, which includes Professors of the Practice and Senior Professors of the Practice; Visiting Faculty; the President; the Provost; the Dean of Students; the Dean of Advising; the Dean of Library Services; the Dean of Global Education; the Dean of Admission; and the Registrar.  Other persons may be appointed to the faculty by the President in consultation with the Advisory Committee.
+
+Faculty, Administrative
+
+Pursuant to Article I, Section 1 of the Faculty Bylaws, administrative faculty include administrators who serve in one of the following positions: 
+
+College President 
+
+Provost 
+
+Dean of Students 
+
+Dean of Advising
+
+Dean of Library Services
+
+Dean of Global Education
+
+Dean of Admission
+
+Registrar
+
+Faculty, Emeriti
+
+An honorary designation conferred, at the discretion of the Board, upon former full-time teaching faculty who have separated from the College after twenty or more years of distinguished service.
+
+Faculty, Full-time Teaching
+
+Full-time faculty teaching include faculty appointed either to a Tenure-Line (Tenure Track or Tenured) or Professor of the Practice (Professor of the Practice or Senior Professor of the Practice) position in one of the College’s academic departments or program areas.  Regardless of the type of appointment line, members of the full-time teaching faculty have a full-time teaching load and other duties and responsibilities as delineated in the faculty member’s appointment contract.
+
+Faculty, Tenure-line
+
+Tenure-Line faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who either hold a tenure-track appointment or tenured appointment. Individuals appointed to the Tenure-Line Faculty are assigned the academic rank of Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor.
+
+Faculty, Tenure-track
+
+Tenure-track faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who normally hold probationary appointments to one of two academic ranks: Instructor or Assistant Professor.  An initial appointment may also be made at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor. Tenure-track faculty are eligible to stand for tenure at the conclusion of the candidate’s probationary period.
+
+Faculty, Tenured
+
+Tenured faculty are full-time teaching faculty who hold tenured (continued) appointments at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.
+
+Faculty, Visiting
+
+Visiting faculty are appointed to carry out instructional and any other responsibilities as delineated in the individual faculty member’s appointment letter for a specified contract term on either a full or part-time basis.
+
+Full-time Teaching Load
+
+See the Employee Handbook for Faculty.
+
+Full Professor
+
+A Tenured faculty member possessing the Ph.D., the terminal degree, or its professional equivalent from an accredited institution of higher learning, and a minimum of six years of teaching at an accredited institution at the rank of Associate Professor. In addition, an Associate Professor shall demonstrate teaching excellence, research or creative productivity, and effective service as detailed in the Faculty Bylaws
+
+Full Professor, Visiting 
+
+A Visiting faculty member possessing the rank of Full Professor from an accredited institution of higher learning.
+
+Half-time Teaching Load
+
+For purposes of determining Visiting faculty voting rights, half-time is defined as a Visiting faculty member with a teaching load that is fifty percent or more, but less than one hundred percent of the full-time teaching load as defined in the Employee Handbook for Faculty.
+
+Handbook, Faculty
+
+
+
+Instructor
+
+A Tenure-track faculty member possessing a master's degree from an accredited institution of higher learning or its equivalent, as well as the potential to obtain a doctorate.
+
+Instructor, Visiting
+
+A Visiting faculty member possessing the rank of Instructor from an accredited institution of higher learning.
+
+Non-reappointment
+
+A means of separation by which the College ends its employment relationship at the conclusion of a contractual term of appointment with a Tenure-track faculty member, a Professor of the Practice-line faculty member, or a Visiting faculty member.
+
+Professors of the Practice-line Faculty
+
+Full-time teaching faculty who possess expertise and achievements in a relevant field of instruction.  Individuals appointed to the Professor of the Practice-line are assigned the academic title of Professor of the Practice or Senior Professor of the Practice.
+
+Half-time Teaching Load
+
+See the Employee Handbook for Faculty.
+
+Program Coordinator
+
+A member of the full-time teaching faculty in a given academic program, appointed by the President to manage that program.
+
+Reappointment
+
+The appointment of a faculty member to a new contract for an additional term of service to the College. 
+
+
+
+Research or Creative Activity
+
+Professional activity representing active and continuing engagement with a faculty member’s field(s) as broadly defined in the Faculty Bylaws.
+
+Sabbatical
+
+A leave for the purpose of enhancing the value of the recipient’s further contribution to the College through scholarly, creative, or pedagogical work, to solve an administrative problem(s) in consultation with and the support of the appropriate administrative office(s) or broaden the scope of knowledge in the faculty member’s discipline or field of research.
+
+Service
+
+The shared work of the faculty that is necessary for the proper functioning of the University and the well-being of the College community as defined in the Faculty Bylaws.
+
+Untenured Faculty
+
+Full-time teaching faculty who have not been awarded tenure.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Definitions (Final-Post Faculty Meeting).txt [/INST] Definitions
+
+
+
+Academic Program
+
+An academic unit that offers a coordination of courses across multiple departments and other instructional activities that has a curriculum leading to a degree or certification.
+
+Academic Unit
+
+A department, academic program, or group of academic departments or programs that reports to the Office of the Provost.
+
+Academic Year
+
+The period which begins the week before classes begin through the week after Commencement.
+
+Annual Contract Period
+
+The period of employment under a full-time faculty contract shall be for the 12-month period beginning July 1 and ending June 30, during which the individual shall receive salary and benefits. The contract will cover the duties associated with the position performed during the academic year.
+
+Assistant Professor
+
+A Tenure-track faculty member possessing the Ph.D., the terminal degree, or its professional equivalent from an accredited institution of higher learning.
+
+Assistant Professor, Visiting
+
+A Visiting faculty member possessing the rank of Assistant Professor from an accredited institution of higher learning.
+
+Associate Professor
+
+A Tenure-track faculty member possessing the Ph.D., the terminal degree, or its professional equivalent from an accredited institution of higher learning, a minimum of six years of teaching at the college or university level at an accredited institution, five of which have been in the rank of Assistant Professor.  In addition, an Associate Professor shall demonstrate teaching excellence, research or creative productivity, and effective service as detailed in the Faculty Bylaws.
+
+Associate Professor, Vising
+
+A Visiting faculty member possessing the rank of Associate Professor from an accredited institution of higher learning.
+
+Bylaws, Faculty
+
+The primary faculty policy document that guides faculty governance and faculty status at Wheaton College.
+
+Contract, Appointment
+
+A written agreement between an individual faculty member and the College that establishes or modifies the individual’s employment status with the College.
+
+Contract, Tenure-track
+
+An academic year appointment contract awarded to Tenure-line Faculty who have not attained tenured status. Tenure-track contracts may be issued for a maximum of six academic years, subject to non–reappointment at the end of each designated period. Tenure-track contracts are also known as “probationary” contracts.
+
+Contract, Tenured
+
+An academic year appointment contract awarded to Tenure-line Faculty who have attained tenured status.  A tenured faculty member has the contractual right to continuous appointments until the faculty member resigns, is dismissed for adequate cause, or is terminated.
+
+Contract, Term
+
+A full or part-time appointment contract issued to Professor of the Practice-line and Visiting Faculty for a designated period that automatically expires at the end of that period.  
+
+Contract, Terminal
+
+A contract that does not include the possibility of reappointment.
+
+Committee, Ad hoc
+
+A temporary committee established by the Faculty to consider and recommend actions and propose policies in an area under its designated jurisdiction.
+
+Committee, Standing
+
+A permanent committee established by the Faculty to consider and recommend actions and propose policies in the functional areas under its designated jurisdiction.
+
+Committee, Sub-
+
+A temporary committee established by a standing faculty committee to consider and recommend actions and propose policies in the functional area under its designated jurisdiction.
+
+Criteria, Evaluation
+
+Areas of performance and qualitative descriptions of performance that must be satisfied in order to warrant favorable personnel judgments.
+
+Day, Business
+
+Any Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday during the calendar year that the College is officially open.
+
+Day, Calendar
+
+A time period running from one midnight to the next midnight on a given date.
+
+Department
+
+An academic unit with departmental status, offering academic, for-credit programs of study generally leading to a degree and serving as primary administrative home for faculty members holding an academic, tenure-line appointment. 
+
+Department Chair
+
+A member of the full-time teaching faculty in a given academic department, appointed by the President to manage that department.
+
+Division, Academic
+
+One of the three academic divisions established by the Committee on Committees and Agenda (i.e., sciences and mathematics; social sciences; humanities) for purposes of electing or appointing faculty to standing or ad hoc committees.
+
+Faculty
+
+The Faculty consists of all Tenure-line faculty members, which includes Professors, Associate Professors, Assistant Professors, and Instructors; Professors of the Practice, which includes Professors of the Practice and Senior Professors of the Practice; Visiting Faculty; the President; the Provost; the Dean of Students; the Dean of Advising; the Dean of Library Services; the Dean of Global Education; the Dean of Admission; and the Registrar.  Other persons may be appointed to the faculty by the President in consultation with the Advisory Committee.
+
+Faculty, Administrative
+
+Pursuant to Article I, Section 1 of the Faculty Bylaws, administrative faculty include administrators who serve in one of the following positions: 
+
+College President 
+
+Provost 
+
+Dean of Students 
+
+Dean of Advising
+
+Dean of Library Services
+
+Dean of Global Education
+
+Dean of Admission
+
+Registrar
+
+Faculty, Emeriti
+
+An honorary designation conferred, at the discretion of the Board, upon former full-time teaching faculty who have separated from the College after twenty or more years of distinguished service.
+
+Faculty, Full-time Teaching
+
+Full-time faculty teaching include faculty appointed either to a Tenure-Line (Tenure Track or Tenured) or Professor of the Practice (Professor of the Practice or Senior Professor of the Practice) position in one of the College’s academic departments or program areas.  Regardless of the type of appointment line, members of the full-time teaching faculty have a full-time teaching load and other duties and responsibilities as delineated in the faculty member’s appointment contract.
+
+Faculty, Tenure-line
+
+Tenure-Line faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who either hold a tenure-track appointment or tenured appointment. Individuals appointed to the Tenure-Line Faculty are assigned the academic rank of Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor.
+
+Faculty, Tenure-track
+
+Tenure-track faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who normally hold probationary appointments to one of two academic ranks: Instructor or Assistant Professor.  An initial appointment may also be made at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor. Tenure-track faculty are eligible to stand for tenure at the conclusion of the candidate’s probationary period.
+
+Faculty, Tenured
+
+Tenured faculty are full-time teaching faculty who hold tenured (continued) appointments at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.
+
+Faculty, Visiting
+
+Visiting faculty are appointed to carry out instructional and any other responsibilities as delineated in the individual faculty member’s appointment letter for a specified contract term on either a full or part-time basis.
+
+Full-time Teaching Load
+
+See the Employee Handbook for Faculty.
+
+Full Professor
+
+A Tenured faculty member possessing the Ph.D., the terminal degree, or its professional equivalent from an accredited institution of higher learning, and a minimum of six years of teaching at an accredited institution at the rank of Associate Professor. In addition, an Associate Professor shall demonstrate teaching excellence, research or creative productivity, and effective service as detailed in the Faculty Bylaws
+
+Full Professor, Visiting 
+
+A Visiting faculty member possessing the rank of Full Professor from an accredited institution of higher learning.
+
+Half-time Teaching Load
+
+For purposes of determining Visiting faculty voting rights, half-time is defined as a Visiting faculty member with a teaching load that is fifty percent or more, but less than one hundred percent of the full-time teaching load as defined in the Employee Handbook for Faculty.
+
+Handbook, Faculty
+
+
+
+Instructor
+
+A Tenure-track faculty member possessing a master's degree from an accredited institution of higher learning or its equivalent, as well as the potential to obtain a doctorate.
+
+Instructor, Visiting
+
+A Visiting faculty member possessing the rank of Instructor from an accredited institution of higher learning.
+
+Non-reappointment
+
+A means of separation by which the College ends its employment relationship at the conclusion of a contractual term of appointment with a Tenure-track faculty member, a Professor of the Practice-line faculty member, or a Visiting faculty member.
+
+Professors of the Practice-line Faculty
+
+Full-time teaching faculty who possess expertise and achievements in a relevant field of instruction.  Individuals appointed to the Professor of the Practice-line are assigned the academic title of Professor of the Practice or Senior Professor of the Practice.
+
+Half-time Teaching Load
+
+See the Employee Handbook for Faculty.
+
+Program Coordinator
+
+A member of the full-time teaching faculty in a given academic program, appointed by the President to manage that program.
+
+Reappointment
+
+The appointment of a faculty member to a new contract for an additional term of service to the College. 
+
+
+
+Research or Creative Activity
+
+Professional activity representing active and continuing engagement with a faculty member’s field(s) as broadly defined in the Faculty Bylaws.
+
+Sabbatical
+
+A leave for the purpose of enhancing the value of the recipient’s further contribution to the College through scholarly, creative, or pedagogical work, to solve an administrative problem(s) in consultation with and the support of the appropriate administrative office(s) or broaden the scope of knowledge in the faculty member’s discipline or field of research.
+
+Service
+
+The shared work of the faculty that is necessary for the proper functioning of the University and the well-being of the College community as defined in the Faculty Bylaws.
+
+Untenured Faculty
+
+Full-time teaching faculty who have not been awarded tenure.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Definitions.txt [/INST] Definitions
+
+
+
+Academic Program
+
+An academic unit that offers a coordination of courses across multiple departments and other instructional activities that has a curriculum leading to a degree or certification.
+
+Academic Unit
+
+A department, academic program, or group of academic departments or programs that reports to the Office of the Provost.
+
+Academic Year
+
+The period which begins the week before classes begin through the week after Commencement.
+
+Annual Contract Period
+
+The period of employment under a full-time faculty contract shall be for the 12-month period beginning July 1 and ending June 30, during which the individual shall receive salary and benefits. The contract will cover the duties associated with the position performed during the academic year.
+
+Assistant Professor
+
+A Tenure-track faculty member possessing the Ph.D., the terminal degree, or its professional equivalent from an accredited institution of higher learning.
+
+Assistant Professor, Visiting
+
+A Visiting faculty member possessing the rank of Assistant Professor from an accredited institution of higher learning.
+
+Associate Professor
+
+A Tenure-track faculty member possessing the Ph.D., the terminal degree, or its professional equivalent from an accredited institution of higher learning, a minimum of six years of teaching at the college or university level at an accredited institution, five of which have been in the rank of Assistant Professor.  In addition, an Associate Professor shall demonstrate teaching excellence, research or creative productivity, and effective service as detailed in the Faculty Bylaws.
+
+Associate Professor, Vising
+
+A Visiting faculty member possessing the rank of Associate Professor from an accredited institution of higher learning.
+
+Bylaws, Faculty
+
+The primary faculty policy document that guides faculty governance and faculty status at Wheaton College.
+
+Contract, Appointment
+
+A written agreement between an individual faculty member and the College that establishes or modifies the individual’s employment status with the College.
+
+Contract, Tenure-track
+
+An academic year appointment contract awarded to Tenure-line Faculty who have not attained tenured status. Tenure-track contracts may be issued for a maximum of six academic years, subject to non–reappointment at the end of each designated period. Tenure-track contracts are also known as “probationary” contracts.
+
+Contract, Tenured
+
+An academic year appointment contract awarded to Tenure-line Faculty who have attained tenured status.  A tenured faculty member has the contractual right to continuous appointments until the faculty member resigns, is dismissed for adequate cause, or is terminated.
+
+Contract, Term
+
+A full or part-time appointment contract issued to Professor of the Practice-line and Visiting Faculty for a designated period that automatically expires at the end of that period.  
+
+Contract, Terminal
+
+A contract that does not include the possibility of reappointment.
+
+Committee, Ad hoc
+
+A temporary committee established by the Faculty to consider and recommend actions and propose policies in an area under its designated jurisdiction.
+
+Committee, Standing
+
+A permanent committee established by the Faculty to consider and recommend actions and propose policies in the functional areas under its designated jurisdiction.
+
+Committee, Sub-
+
+A temporary committee established by a standing faculty committee to consider and recommend actions and propose policies in the functional area under its designated jurisdiction.
+
+Criteria, Evaluation
+
+Areas of performance upon which evaluative judgments are based.
+
+Day, Business
+
+Any Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday during the calendar year that the College is officially open.
+
+Day, Calendar
+
+A time period running from one midnight to the next midnight on a given date.
+
+Department
+
+An academic unit with departmental status, offering academic, for-credit programs of study generally leading to a degree and serving as primary administrative home for faculty members holding an academic, tenure-line appointment. 
+
+Department Chair
+
+A member of the full-time teaching faculty in a given academic department, appointed by the President to manage that department.
+
+Division, Academic
+
+One of the three academic divisions established by the Committee on Committees and Agenda (i.e., sciences and mathematics; social sciences; humanities) for purposes of electing or appointing faculty to standing or ad hoc committees.
+
+Faculty
+
+The Faculty consists of all Tenure-line faculty members, which includes Professors, Associate Professors, Assistant Professors, and Instructors; Professors of the Practice, which includes Professors of the Practice and Senior Professors of the Practice; Visiting Faculty; the President; the Provost; the Dean of Students; the Dean of Advising; the Dean of Library Services; the Dean of Global Education; the Dean of Admission; and the Registrar.  Other persons may be appointed to the faculty by the President in consultation with the Advisory Committee.
+
+Faculty, Administrative
+
+Pursuant to Article I, Section 1 of the Faculty Bylaws, administrative faculty include administrators who serve in one of the following positions: 
+
+College President 
+
+Provost 
+
+Dean of Students 
+
+Dean of Advising
+
+Dean of Library Services
+
+Dean of Global Education
+
+Dean of Admission
+
+Registrar
+
+Faculty, Emeriti
+
+An honorary designation conferred, at the discretion of the Board, upon former full-time teaching faculty who have separated from the College after twenty or more years of distinguished service.
+
+Faculty, Full-time Teaching
+
+Full-time faculty teaching include faculty appointed either to a Tenure-Line (Tenure Track or Tenured) or Professor of the Practice (Professor of the Practice or Senior Professor of the Practice) position in one of the College’s academic departments or program areas.  Regardless of the type of appointment line, members of the full-time teaching faculty have a full-time teaching load and other duties and responsibilities as delineated in the faculty member’s appointment contract.
+
+Faculty, Tenure-line
+
+Tenure-Line faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who either hold a tenure-track appointment or tenured appointment. Individuals appointed to the Tenure-Line Faculty are assigned the academic rank of Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor.
+
+Faculty, Tenure-track
+
+Tenure-track faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who normally hold probationary appointments to one of two academic ranks: Instructor or Assistant Professor.  An initial appointment may also be made at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor. Tenure-track faculty are eligible to stand for tenure at the conclusion of the candidate’s probationary period.
+
+Faculty, Tenured
+
+Tenured faculty are full-time teaching faculty who hold tenured (continued) appointments at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.
+
+Faculty, Visiting
+
+Visiting faculty are appointed to carry out instructional and any other responsibilities as delineated in the individual faculty member’s appointment letter for a specified contract term on either a full or part-time basis.
+
+Full-time Teaching Load
+
+See the Employee Handbook for Faculty.
+
+Full Professor
+
+A Tenured faculty member possessing the Ph.D., the terminal degree, or its professional equivalent from an accredited institution of higher learning, and a minimum of six years of teaching at an accredited institution at the rank of Associate Professor. In addition, an Associate Professor shall demonstrate teaching excellence, research or creative productivity, and effective service as detailed in the Faculty Bylaws
+
+Full Professor, Visiting 
+
+A Visiting faculty member possessing the rank of Full Professor from an accredited institution of higher learning.
+
+Half-time Teaching Load
+
+For purposes of determining Visiting faculty voting rights, half-time is defined as a Visiting faculty member with a teaching load that is fifty percent or more, but less than one hundred percent of the full-time teaching load as defined in the Employee Handbook for Faculty.
+
+Instructor
+
+A Tenure-track faculty member possessing a master's degree from an accredited institution of higher learning or its equivalent, as well as the potential to obtain a doctorate.
+
+Instructor, Visiting
+
+A Visiting faculty member possessing the rank of Instructor from an accredited institution of higher learning.
+
+Non-reappointment
+
+A means of separation by which the College ends its employment relationship at the conclusion of a contractual term of appointment with a Tenure-track faculty member, a Professor of the Practice-line faculty member, or a Visiting faculty member.
+
+Professors of the Practice-line Faculty
+
+Full-time teaching faculty who possess expertise and achievements in a relevant field of instruction.  Individuals appointed to the Professor of the Practice-line are assigned the academic title of Professor of the Practice or Senior Professor of the Practice.
+
+Half-time Teaching Load
+
+See the Employee Handbook for Faculty.
+
+Program Coordinator
+
+A member of the full-time teaching faculty in a given academic program, appointed by the President to manage that program.
+
+Reappointment
+
+The appointment of a faculty member to a new contract for an additional term of service to the College. 
+
+
+
+Research or Creative Activity
+
+Professional activity representing active and continuing engagement with a faculty member’s field(s) as broadly defined in the Faculty Bylaws.
+
+Sabbatical
+
+A leave for the purpose of enhancing the value of the recipient’s further contribution to the College through scholarly, creative, or pedagogical work, to solve an administrative problem(s) in consultation with and the support of the appropriate administrative office(s) or broaden the scope of knowledge in the faculty member’s discipline or field of research.
+
+Service
+
+The shared work of the faculty that is necessary for the proper functioning of the University and the well-being of the College community as defined in the Faculty Bylaws.
+
+Untenured Faculty
+
+Full-time teaching faculty who have not been awarded tenure.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] DEI EXAMPLES FOR GUIDELINES DOC.txt [/INST] DEI EXAMPLES – FOR PLACEMENT IN GUIDELINES DOC
+
+
+
+Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Teaching Activities
+
+Examples of teaching activities that contributes to diversity, equity, or inclusion might include: 
+
+Curricular Diversity: Curriculum that prepares students to critically interrogate and engage with a global, multicultural, and rapidly changing world as scholars and citizens 
+
+Access and Success: Pedagogy that aims to promote equitable access to resources and opportunities that provide conditions for success in the classroom and other learning environments
+
+Inclusive Climate: Pedagogy that fosters learning environments in which students who are members of underrepresented populations are socially and culturally included
+
+
+
+Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Advising/Mentoring Activities
+
+Examples of advising or mentoring activities that contributes to diversity, equity, or inclusion might include:
+
+mentoring and advising students, faculty, and staff on diversity, equity, and inclusion related issues
+
+mentoring and advising students, faculty, and staff from underrepresented or underserved groups 
+
+
+
+Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Activities
+
+Examples of advising or mentoring activities that contributes to diversity, equity, or inclusion might include:
+
+Research or creative activity in a faculty member’s area of expertise that involves inequalities or barriers for inclusion of underrepresented groups
+
+Intellectual themes or trajectories that examine patterns of representation, incorporation, or inclusion within a faculty member’s area of expertise
+
+Grant seeking or obtaining that provides funding for research that focuses on equity, inclusion, and diversity
+
+Scholarly productivity in particular texts, data sets, methodological practices, theories, or creative discourses that involve equity and inclusion within a faculty member’s area of expertise
+
+Research interests that contribute to diversity and equal opportunity, for example, research that addresses:
+
+Race, ethnicity, gender, multiculturalism, and inclusion on health disparities, educational access and achievement, political engagement, economic justice, social mobility, civil, and human rights
+
+Questions of interest to communities historically excluded by higher education
+
+Artistic expression and cultural production that reflect culturally diverse communities or voices not well represented in the arts and humanities.
+
+
+
+
+
+Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Activities
+
+Examples of service activities that contributes to diversity, equity, or inclusion might include:
+
+Curricular Diversity: Service that works to ensure a curriculum that prepares students to critically interrogate and engage with a global, multicultural and rapidly changing world as scholars and citizens
+
+Access and Success: Service that aims to promote equitable access to resources and opportunities that provide conditions for success for students, faculty and staff
+
+Inclusive Climate: Service that fosters environments in which students, faculty and staff who are members of underrepresented populations are socially and culturally included
+
+
+
+Work with diverse groups of individual students and/or organizations on and off campus
+
+
+
+Working with students from historically marginalized or underrepresented groups on and off campus; serving as a diversity advocate on staff or faculty searches; advocating for students or faculty from historically marginalized or underrepresented groups; professional development to learn about and then implement effective allyship practices; (e.g., a business faculty helps students by sponsoring a new Latinx business group) 
+
+Establishing or taking a leadership role in a new program serving community constituencies; works—often in an administrative position—to develop and implement plans aimed at recruiting, retaining, and graduating a diverse and inclusive student body; (e.g., engineering faculty establishes summer pipeline program for low-income high school students) 
+
+
+
+Involvement in DEI program building efforts; organization of seminars, workshops, or informal discussions relevant to diversity and inclusion; (e.g., environmental studies faculty collaborates with indigenous groups to produce multiple environmental impact studies)</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Denison University appointment text.txt [/INST] Denison University commits itself to an open application system where all interested and qualified individuals are given an equal opportunity to apply for continuing appointments. Denison employs full-time, tenure-track faculty members insofar as possible to teach its curriculum and perform the other educational tasks of the institution. The University may employ part-time faculty in situations where the institution may want to offer special courses or take advantage of special skills for which there is not a full-time need or where temporary replacement staffing is needed. 
+
+Tenure-track positions are filled through national searches conducted expressly for the position in question. These searches must comply with Denison's Affirmative Action Plan and Hiring Procedures and the relevant provisions of the Faculty Handbook. Internal candidates may apply for tenure-track positions, in which case they will be considered on the same basis as all other candidates. 
+
+This section outlines the normal process by which faculty appointments are made. However, circumstances may require the length of appointments and designation of faculty rank to vary in certain cases. The contract letter will specify any exceptions to the normal practice. 
+
+
+
+
+
+a. Instructor. If an individual who is appointed to the faculty has not received a Ph.D. (or an equivalent advanced degree), the appointment ordinarily shall be at the rank of Instructor. If that appointment is to a tenure-track position, it will be for two years. Reappointment beyond two years will normally not occur unless all requirements for the appropriate advanced degree are completed prior to the beginning of the second year of the contract. If the requirements are completed, the faculty member will be promoted to Assistant Professor and the faculty member's contract will be extended through a fourth year. 
+
+Faculty at the rank of Instructor who complete all the requirements for the appropriate advanced degree by December 15 of their first year will be retroactively promoted to Assistant Professor and their salary adjusted accordingly. 
+
+b. Assistant Professor. If an individual who is appointed to the faculty has received a Ph.D. (or equivalent advanced degree), the initial appointment is at the rank of Assistant Professor. Normally, the initial appointment to a tenure track position is four years with a maximum reappointment of one three-year contract, or a total of seven years. 
+
+An Assistant Professor holding a tenure-track position shall be considered for tenure during the sixth year of full-time service as a member of the faculty at Denison. (See paragraph “e” regarding credit for prior experience.) If tenure is granted, the individual is promoted to Associate Professor with tenure, effective at the beginning of the subsequent academic year. 
+
+c. Appointment of Associate Professors and Professors. Denison normally does not make initial appointments at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor and normally does not make initial appointments with tenure. When extraordinary circumstances make such an appointment desirable, the Provost seeks the advice both of the department affected and the President's Advisory Board prior to making the appointment. 
+
+d. Notification of Non-renewal. Normally, faculty with tenure-track and continuing appointments will be notified at least one year in advance if their contracts will not be renewed. For full-time coaches, the notification of non-renewal will come early in the fall semester of the final year of the contract. In all other cases, every effort will be made to give notification of non-renewal as quickly as possible. 
+
+e. Prior Experience. Denison normally does not accept more than two years of prior experience either from other institutions or from Denison experience when making tenure-track appointments at the rank of Assistant Professor. The number of years of prior experience to be claimed by a candidate will be negotiated between the candidate and the Provost in consultation with the members of the department at the time of hire. The years of prior credit may be changed during the first nine months of the initial appointment with the concurrence of the new faculty member, the appropriate department chair, and the Provost. Tenure decisions are based primarily upon work done at Denison, particularly with respect
+to teaching and contributions to the other purposes of the University. Faculty should be aware that sabbatical leaves are awarded only after six years of service at Denison, whether or not prior experience has been claimed.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Department Evaluation.txt [/INST] Members of a department have the important responsibilities of evaluating a candidate's performance and making recommendations for the good of the university and future generations of students. 
+
+Each member of the department is expected to be familiar with the procedures, criteria, and standards for reappointment, tenure, promotion, and merit and to provide their input in ways consistent with these guidelines. Department colleagues are expected to review thoroughly all the materials a candidate submits as part of the Self-Report. 
+
+After the members of the department have had time to evaluate the candidate's Self-Report, they will meet without the candidate to discuss the dossier and their evaluation of the candidate's performance before they submit their individual letters to the chair. 
+
+Each colleague (including the chair) then prepares an letter of evaluation that discusses the candidate's performance, based on the Self-Report and on observations of the candidate, and that addresses the criteria and standards for reappointment, tenure, and promotion. The letter should provide objective evaluation of the specific strengths and weaknesses of the candidate, and a clear positive or negative recommendation for reappointment, tenure, or promotion. These letters must be sent to the chair at a date early enough so that the chair may prepare a departmental letter for inclusion in the Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file. 
+
+Once the chair has written the first draft of the departmental letter and has shared it with all members of the department, each member should respond in a timely fashion to the chair with comments, suggestions, or other feedback. 
+
+In cases of tenure and promotion where outside reviewers submit evaluations of scholarship or creative works, tenured members of the department may read those reviews, and department chairs must read those reviews, but only after the department letter is completed. Colleagues who, after reading these reviews, wish to write an amendment to their letters addressing issues raised by the external reviews may do so. However, these amendments must be submitted to the chair who must then write an amendment to the departmental letter, following the procedures for approval of the draft departmental letter and sharing the completed amendment with the candidate as described below. Candidates in turn may submit a response to the amendment through the chair. In other words, all amendments to individual and departmental letters must follow the same procedures as those for departmental letters.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] DEPT CHAIR DUTIES.txt [/INST] 1.1.3 Departments 
+
+1.1.3.2 Department Chairs
+
+The department chair serves as the principal liaison between the department and the rest of the college. The department chair is typically a full-time faculty member who serves in the additional capacity by appointment of the Provost.  A department chair appointment carries responsibilities for departmental leadership and management and for liaison to administrative offices, faculty groups, and students. 
+
+Responsibilities of the Department Chair
+
+The department chair serves as the principal interface between their department and administrative offices, other departments, outside agencies and organizations, vendors of goods and services, other academic institutions and employers, and students. In their role in the leadership and management of the department’s affairs, the chair carries principal responsibility for carrying out or delegating the following tasks: 
+
+Facilitatingtheacademicandpre-professionalprogramsofthedepartment 
+
+Promotingtheacademicqualityofthedepartmentanddiscipline 
+
+Conductingsearchesforfacultypositions 
+
+Developing the departmental budget request 
+
+Monitoring the departmental budget 
+
+Submitting department course schedules to Registrar 
+
+Managing the program for faculty leaves 
+
+Managing the work-study program within the department 
+
+Supervising departmental assistants 
+
+Processing paperwork for various committees and offices (January term proposals, area 
+
+proposals, course proposals, etc.) 
+
+Following regulations and guidelines from all manner of sources 
+
+Managing external grants, special programs and development projects 
+
+Conducting periodic departmental reviews 
+
+Managing specialized facilities, laboratories, equipment 
+
+Organizing and presiding at department meetings 
+
+Encouraging faculty professional development 
+
+Providing liaison, information, and evaluations to administrative offices 
+
+Providing liaison and information to faculty committees, ad hoc committees, accrediting 
+
+organizations, and other groups 
+
+Providing liaison to other departments 
+
+Representing the department at the meetings of the department chairs 
+
+Responding to student petitions, degree applications, complaints, requests, etc. 
+
+The dual role of the chair includes both administrative and departmental leadership functions. The chair functions as a member of the academic administration when acting on behalf of the College in carrying out assigned management responsibilities such as recruiting, supervising, and evaluating faculty and staff. The chair functions as a first among equals when acting on behalf of their department in carrying out internal management and liaison responsibilities such as allocating resources, submitting course schedules, managing facilities, and communicating department views. In order to carry out these responsibilities on behalf of the department and college, the chair will be kept informed by all administrators, committees, and other groups and individuals who share responsibilities for the efficient management of the college’s programs. Those offices, groups and individuals requesting the department chair’s assistance need to be mindful of the fact that the chair is a member of the faculty with their own teaching, research, professional responsibilities and other commitments. Academic departments have very limited support staffs and typically operate on the academic calendar. 
+
+1.1.3.2.2 Authority of the Department Chair
+
+The department chair has the primary responsibility for communicating the department’s views to the college community and college community concerns to the department. Because the chair acts on behalf of the department, the chair must distinguish between personal views and those that reflect the consensus of the department. In consultation with departmental members, the department chair has the primary responsibility and authority for: 
+
+Formulatingandcommunicatingrecommendationsforhiring,tenure,promotion,retention, and evaluation of faculty and departmental support staff 
+
+Establishing departmental budget priorities and allocations 
+
+RecommendingteachingassignmentstotheProvostandregulatingfacultyworkloads 
+
+Recommending leaves and special assignments to the Provost 
+
+Developing and articulating departmental goals 
+
+Appointment and Term of the Department Chair
+
+The department chair is appointed upon recommendation of the department faculty. The recommendation of the department for the appointment or reappointment of a chair is determined by a majority vote. A majority vote of regular and joint appointment department faculty will constitute the recommendation of the department. In those cases in which a recommendation reflecting departmental consensus cannot be achieved, the Provost will make an offer of appointment to a member of the faculty. The term of the chair is normally three years and chairs may be reelected for successive terms. The meeting of the department to elect the chair should be held during the last year of the current appointment. 
+
+In those unusual cases in which the department chair is clearly unwilling or unable to represent a department and manage its affairs in a professional manner, or where conflicts within a department have become irreconcilable, the Provost may appoint a new chair or make other arrangements for the temporary management of the department’s affairs.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] DIRECTOR QUESTIONNAIRE.txt [/INST] DIRECTOR QUESTIONNAIRE – REPORTABLE BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP
+
+This questionnaire is being sent to all Canisius College board members, officers, officers, directors or High-Level Individuals pursuant to the Reportable Business Relationship Policy.  Such members of the college community are subject to certain disclosure requirements if they have a Reportable Business Relationship with a State Person.
+
+To assist the college in determining whether a Reportable Business Relationship exits that requires the college to file a report with the New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics, we request that you answer the following questions.  Please complete, attach any requested additional detailed information, sign the acknowledgment below, and return this questionnaire to the Secretary of the Board of Trustees.
+
+For purposes of this questionnaire, please refer to the following definitions and the definitions set forth in the Reportable Business Relationship Policy:
+
+Name:		_____________________________________
+
+Title:		_____________________________________
+
+Address:	_____________________________________
+
+
+
+1. Do you currently have any business relationships in which you purchased or will purchase goods or services valued at more than $1,000 annually from a person or entity located within the State of New York? 
+
+Yes: ____ No: ____
+
+If “Yes,” go to Question #2. If “No,” sign and date the form. 
+
+NOTE: Reportable Business Relationships include formal and informal relationships that may or may not be based on written contracts. 
+
+The value of any outstanding Compensation owed as well the value of goods or services to be performed must be considered when determining if the $1,000 threshold is met. 
+
+
+
+2. Do the services you are purchasing fall into one or more of the following categories:
+
+Treatments for medical, dental, and mental health services; 
+
+Legal services with respect to: investigation or prosecution by law enforcement; bankruptcy; domestic relations. 
+
+Yes: ____ No: ____
+
+If “Yes,” go to Question #3. If “No,” sign and date the form. 
+
+3. (a) If the business relationship is with a person, is that individual a New York State employee or a New York State elected official? 
+
+Yes: ____ No: ____ Not that I am aware of: ____ 
+
+NOTE: The answer “Not that I am aware of” is only appropriate when, based on the totality of the circumstances, the person signing this form does not have a “reason to know” that the business relationship is with a New York State employee or a New York State elected official. 
+
+3.(b) If the business relationship is with an entity, is a New York State employee or a New York State elected official a proprietor, partner, director, officer, or manager of the entity? 
+
+Yes: ____ No: ____ Not that I am aware of: ___ 
+
+ NOTE: The answer “Not that I am aware of” is only appropriate when, based on the totality of the circumstances, the person signing this form does not have a “reason to know” that the business relationship is with an entity in which a New York State employee or a New York State elected official is the proprietor, partner, director, officer, or manager. 
+
+3. (c) If the business relationship is with an entity, does a New York State employee or a New York State elected official own or control 10% or more of the stock of the entity (or 1% in the case of a corporation whose stock is regularly traded on an established securities exchange)? 
+
+Yes: ____ No: ____ Not that I am aware of: ____ 
+
+NOTE: The answer “Not that I am aware of” is only appropriate when, based on the totality of the circumstances, the person signing this form does not have a “reason to know” that the business relationship is with an entity in which a New York State employee or a New York State elected official owns or controls 10% or more of the stock of the entity (or 1% in the case of a corporation whose stock is regularly traded on an established securities exchange). 
+
+
+
+
+
+I attest and affirm that the foregoing information is, to the best of my knowledge, true and accurate. 
+
+_____________________________________________________________________________
+
+Name 												Date</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Dismissal Model Text FEC Consultation.txt [/INST] The Provost’s Consultation with the Faculty Member
+
+If the Provost has evidence that a faculty member has demonstrated or is demonstrating conduct that may constitute adequate cause for dismissal defined above, the Provost will meet with the faculty member to discuss the concerns and to consider the faculty member’s response. If requested by the faculty member, the Provost will provide the faculty member with a written statement of concerns.  At the Provost’s discretion, the Provost may request further investigation into the matter by appropriate University personnel or agents before or after meeting with the faculty member. However, before moving beyond this stage in these procedures, the Provost will afford the faculty member a reasonable opportunity to respond to any information that the Provost believes would constitute adequate cause for dismissal and, if possible, to arrive at a mutually agreeable settlement. 
+
+If the matter cannot be mutually resolved and the Provost determines that dismissal proceedings should be undertaken, action will be initiated under the procedures specified in Step 4 below.  The recommendation of the Committee shall not be binding on the Provost.
+
+Policies and Procedures Governing Dismissal For Cause
+
+
+
+															l.	Dismissal Defined
+
+															Dismissal is a severance action by which the University ends its professional relationship with a tenured or non-tenured faculty member for adequate cause. Dismissal may remove a member from service, for adequate cause, either at or before the end of a current appointment.
+
+Dismissal can occur only for reasons that are related directly and substantially to the fitness of faculty members in their professional capacities as teachers, researchers or creative artists, and citizens of the University.  Dismissal will not be used by the University to restrain faculty members in their exercise of academic freedom. 
+
+															2.	Adequate Cause Defined
+
+															Except in those instances where there has been a final judicial determination of a faculty member's legal conviction on a felony charge or on a charge involving moral turpitude, a faculty member shall be dismissed for cause only if after a hearing according to the provisions set forth below, the preponderance of evidence shall establish the faculty member’s unfitness to teach because of:
+
+															Incompetence: the faculty member either lacks, or is unwilling to demonstrate, the skills and abilities necessary to fulfill the duties of a faculty member, 
+
+															Continued neglect of duties in spite of written warnings, 
+
+															Lack of scholarly objectivity or integrity, 
+
+															Inability to perform the essential functions of the position despite reasonable accommodation(s) (see the University’s ADA/Accommodations Policy),
+
+															Serious misuse of the classroom or of academic prestige, or 
+
+															Gross personal misconduct rendering the faculty member unfit for association with students or colleagues (e.g., physical assault, sexual or unlawful discrimination or harassment, violation of standards of professional ethics or conduct in teaching, scholarship, and service, such as would evoke general condemnation from the academic community generally.
+
+The burden of proof to establish the existence of adequate cause for dismissal rests with the administration of the University.  A faculty member accused of an action or actions that would constitute grounds for dismissal will be presumed innocent until adequate cause is established through a dismissal proceedings as described below. 
+
+Note: The parties may mutually stipulate in writing to modify the timelines set forth below in extraordinary circumstances and for good cause shown in order to achieve full and fair evaluations or resolution of disputes.
+
+															3.	Steps Prior to Dismissal
+
+An administrative decision to seek dismissal of a faculty member will be preceded by: 
+
+Consultation between the Provost and the faculty member toward the goal of achieving a mutually agreeable settlement,
+
+Informal consultation by the Provost with the Faculty Executive Committee, and 
+
+Written notification to the faculty member of a statement of charges, framed with reasonable particularity, by the Provost.
+
+The Provost will proceed in accordance with the following procedures: 
+
+The Provost’s Consultation with the Faculty Member
+
+If the Provost has evidence that a faculty member has demonstrated or is demonstrating conduct that may constitute adequate cause for dismissal defined above, the Provost will meet with the faculty member to discuss the concerns and to consider the faculty member’s response. If requested by the faculty member, the Provost will provide the faculty member with a written statement of concerns.  At the Provost’s discretion, the Provost may request further investigation into the matter by appropriate University personnel or agents before or after meeting with the faculty member. However, before moving beyond this stage in these procedures, the Provost will afford the faculty member a reasonable opportunity to respond to any information that the Provost believes would constitute adequate cause for dismissal and, if possible, to arrive at a mutually agreeable settlement. 
+
+Informal Consultation with the Faculty Review Committee 
+
+If the matter cannot be resolved through consultation with the faculty member and if the Provost will request the Faculty Executive Committee to informally and confidentially consider the evidence.  The faculty member will be notified of this action by the Provost. The Faculty Executive Committee may recommend a settlement acceptable to both the faculty member and the Provost, administrative disciplinary actions short of dismissal, that no administrative action be taken, or that dismissal proceedings be initiated. 
+
+If the Faculty Executive Committee recommends that dismissal proceedings be initiated or if the Provost, even after considering an alternative recommendation of the Committee, determines that dismissal proceedings should be undertaken, action will be initiated under the procedures specified below.  The recommendation of the Committee shall not be binding on the Provost.
+
+After considering the recommendations of the Faculty Executive Committee, the Provost notifies the faculty member: 
+
+That no action will be taken and the matter is concluded, 
+
+That the Provost intends to impose sanctions short of dismissal, or 
+
+That the Provost intends to seek dismissal and will proceed as specified below. 
+
+															4. Notification to Faculty Member of Intent to Dismiss for Cause
+
+															In those instances where the Provost deems it in the best interests of the University to recommend the dismissal of a faculty member's employment for cause, the following procedures shall apply:
+
+															At least thirty (30) days prior to the date on which the Provost plans to present to the President of the University a recommendation for dismissal of a faculty member's contract, the Provost shall notify the faculty member of the intended action either by registered mail (return receipt requested) to the faculty member’s home address or personal delivery, with signature required for delivery.  The Provost’s notification will set forth in specific terms the basis for the proposed action and inform the faculty member of the right to a formal hearing and adjudication of the case.
+
+															An email will also be sent to the faculty member’s University email address notifying the faculty member of the fact that a notice required by this Policy has been sent by one of the methods described above.  If the faculty member refuses to acknowledge the personal delivery or certified mailing by signature, the University will email the notice to the faculty member’s University email address, which shall be considered receipt of the notice.</s>"
+<s>[INST] DRAFT - Faculty Handbook.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Draft 3 Changes.txt [/INST] Draft 3 Changes
+
+
+
+https://www.forbes.com/sites/hvmacarthur/2020/04/29/parental-discrimination-what-are-the-legal-implications-companies-should-be-considering-during-and-after-covid-19/?sh=203d655146e0
+
+https://publications.umw.edu/facultyhandbook/files/2022/07/Faculty_Handbook_22-23_Final7-29.pdf 
+
+GOOD GOVERNANCE TEXT
+
+Lecturers will maintain their rank until such time as they are promoted to Part-time Senior Lecturer pursuant to Section 4.3.2.5, even if there is a break in service.
+
+If promotion to Lecturer is granted, the Lecturer will maintain their status and terms as a Part-time Lecturer (unless promoted to Part-time Senior Lecturer pursuant to 4.3.2.5) for any subsequent appointments and normally will have assignment priority over Part-Time Instructors. and canThey may also expect, contingent upon need for part-time faculty, as explained in 4.3.6 below, a minimum of two units of teaching per year for a two-year term. Assignments will may also take into consideration seniority within level, with preference normally given to those with higher seniority.
+
+
+
+Amendments to Chapters Three through Six of the Faculty Handbook, as well as it appendices  may be proposed by Faculty Standing Committees, University Committees, ad-hoc committees or task forces, individual faculty members, the Provost, the President, or the Board of Trustees. Recommendations for such changes are submitted first to the Faculty Executive Committee for review and possible recommendation; then to the Faculty; then to the Provost and President; then to the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees; then to the full Board of Trustees. The Board of Trustees must act to effect any substantive change in the Faculty Handbook. 
+
+
+
+Substantive changes to Chapters Three through Six and the appendices of the Faculty Handbook, require the approval of the Board of Trustees.  As a general practice, in keeping with principles of shared governance, the Board will approve changes or additions to the Faculty Handbook only after giving opportunity for advice and counsel from the Faculty.  Changes approved by the Board of Trustees are to be reprinted and distributed promptly. Unless otherwise directed by the Board, policies in effect for a given academic year are those published in the Faculty Handbook.
+
+A “Substantive Change” is defined as an addition, deletion, or revision of policy or procedure set forth in the Faculty Handbook.  When revisions to the Faculty Handbook involve simple editing for clarity, the Executive Committee of the faculty will incorporate the revisions in the Faculty Handbook and notify the Faculty and Academic Affairs.
+
+Substantive changes to Chapters Three through Six and the appendices of the Faculty Handbook may be initiated by either the faculty or the administration, via Academic Affairs.  A proposal from a member of the faculty or standing faculty committee to substantively change the Faculty Handbook will be referred to the Executive Committee.  Substantive changes to the Faculty Handbook approved by the vote of the Faculty will be approved in accordance with the procedures below.*
+
+Faculty Review and Vote
+
+The Executive Committee will publish all proposed substantive changes to the faculty in accordance with the Faculty Bylaws, which will then vote on the matter.  If the proposed substantive change was initiated by the administration, the Faculty must vote on the matter within 120 days of receiving the proposed change (excluding the period of time between the end of the traditional nine-month full-time faculty contract period and the beginning of the new nine-month full-time time faculty contract period), unless an extension is agreeable to both the President of the University and the Executive Committee of the faculty and is expressed in writing.  
+
+A proposed substantive change representing a substantive change that was initially referred by the administration and not voted upon by the faculty within the time prescribed or that was not approved by the faculty may, at the option of the President, move forward to the Board of Trustees.  In such a case, both the faculty and the President shall have the right to provide the Board of Trustees with memoranda setting forth their positions on the proposed substantive change. 
+
+Administration Review
+
+The President, upon receipt of a proposed substantive change approved by the faculty, will either accept or reject the proposed change within 120 days of receiving the matter (excluding the period between nine-month full-time faculty contracts). 
+
+If the administration agrees with the proposed substantive change approved by the faculty, it will be forwarded to the Board of Trustees for final approval.
+
+If, however, the President does not accept the proposed substantive change, the President or the President’s designee will state the reasons therefore in writing to the faculty.  If a resolution mutually acceptable to the parties cannot be reached and ultimately approved by the faculty, the President will submit the proposed amendment to the Board of Trustees for a final decision.  Both the faculty and the President shall have the right to provide the Board of Trustees with memoranda setting forth their positions on the proposed substantive change. 
+
+Board of Trustees Review
+
+Any proposed amendment causing a substantive change to Chapters Three through Six and the appendices of the Faculty Handbook will be submitted by the President to the Board of Trustees for review and approval, which shall have the ultimate authority to adopt the proposed amendment.  
+
+If the Board of Trustees either (a) does not approve a proposed amendment approved by the faculty; or (b) approves a proposed amendment the faculty has not voted affirmatively to approve, the Board of Trustees will provide the faculty with a memorandum detailing its rationale.
+
+In engaging in the procedural processes outlined above and in appreciation of the principles of shared governance and in the interest of the general well-being of the University, the administration and Board of Trustees will weigh heavily the faculty’s recommendations pertaining to the policies published in Chapters Three through Six and the appendices of the Faculty Handbook.  The faculty, administration, and Board of Trustees shall work meaningfully and sincerely with each other in addressing these matters of institutional importance.  
+
+Conflict with Federal, State or Local Law: If any provision of the Faculty Handbook is in conflict with federal, State, or local law, or is otherwise illegal, the remainder of the Faculty Handbook shall not be affected.  The Faculty shall make it a priority to meet and resolve the conflict in conjunction with the administration.
+
+*Note: These revision procedures do not apply to amendments to the Faculty Bylaws or descriptions of the faculty standing committees published in Chapter Two of the Faculty Handbook.  Amendments to the Faculty Bylaws or descriptions of the faculty standing committees are governed by the process published in Article V of the Faculty Bylaws.
+
+
+
+
+
+Academic Freedom
+
+																										As an institution “forever be conducted on the most liberal principles, accessible to all religious denominations and designed for the benefit of our citizens in general,” Ohio Wesleyan University is committed to the belief that the essential purpose of an academic community is to promote knowledge through the search for truth and to express truth without interference or harassment.  In order that this purpose be clearly understood in the context of academic freedom, the following policy shall apply:
+
+Members of the Ohio Wesleyan University faculty are entitled to academic freedom in the classroom, in research and publication, and in all educational activities.  
+
+In exercising academic freedom, the ideas of different members of the University community may conflict, but it is not the proper role of the University to shield individuals from ideas and opinions they do not agree with or find offensive. When exchanging ideas and opinions, faculty members share responsibility for showing due respect for others; however, concerns about mutual respect can never be used as a justification for limiting discussion of ideas. 
+
+The freedom to exchange ideas and engage in meaningful debate does not mean that individuals may say whatever they wish, whenever they wish. The University may restrict expression that is illegal, defamatory, harassing or threatening, or violative of substantial privacy or confidentiality interests. Such exceptions, however, may not be used in a manner that is inconsistent with the University’s commitment to academic freedom or the free expression of ideas. 
+
+As citizens engaged in a profession that depends upon freedom for its health and integrity, faculty have a particular obligation to promote conditions of free inquiry and expression. Although members of the University community are free to criticize and contest the views of others, they may not obstruct or otherwise interfere with the freedom of others to express views they reject. To this end, the University has a solemn responsibility not only to promote a lively and fearless freedom of debate and deliberation, but also to protect that freedom when others attempt to restrict it.
+
+Portions of this statement are reprinted from the University of Chicago Report of the Committee on Freedom of Expression.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Draft 3 TOC.txt [/INST] Ti
+
+tleFACULTY HANDBOOK
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+OHIO WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY
+
+
+
+Third Draft
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Table of Contents
+
+1	Chapter One: Code of Regulations of the Trustees of the Ohio Wesleyan University 	1
+
+2	Chapter Two: Faculty Governance	2
+
+2.1	Faculty Bylaws	2
+
+2.2	Descriptions of Faculty Committees	7
+
+3	Chapter Three: Full-time Faculty Personnel Policies	17
+
+3.1	Preamble and General Policy	17
+
+3.2	Faculty Classifications	17
+
+3.2.1	Full-Time Faculty	25
+
+3.2.2	Part-Time Faculty	27
+
+3.2.3	Administrators with Faculty Status	28
+
+3.2.4	Librarians	28
+
+3.2.5	Special Appointment Faculty	28
+
+3.2.6	Honorific Faculty	30
+
+3.3	Faculty Contracts	32
+
+3.3.1	Types of Faculty Contracts	32
+
+3.3.2	Annual Contract Period	33
+
+3.3.3	Contract Terms and Issuance of Contracts	33
+
+3.3.4	Area of Appointment	33
+
+3.3.5	Joint Appointments	33
+
+3.4	Faculty Recruitment, Initial Appointment, and Placement in Rank	35
+
+3.4.1	Position Authorization	35
+
+3.4.2	Search Procedures	35
+
+3.4.3	Rank and Salary of Initial Appointment	35
+
+3.4.4	Prior Service Credit	36
+
+3.4.5	Faculty Qualifications  	36
+
+3.4.6	Appointment of Foreign Nationals	38
+
+3.5	Faculty Rights and Standards of Professional Conduct	39
+
+3.5.1	Academic Freedom	39
+
+3.5.2	Professional Ethics	40
+
+3.5.3	Statement on Plagiarism	41
+
+3.5.4	Intellectual Property Rights	42
+
+3.5.5	Observance of University Mission and Policies	42
+
+3.5.6	Confidentiality	42
+
+3.5.7	Conflict of Interest – Faculty Specific Activities	42
+
+3.5.8	Outside Activities	43
+
+3.5.9	Faculty-Student Relationships	44
+
+3.5.10	Sexual and Other Unlawful Discrimination or Harassment	47
+
+3.6	Contractual Obligations and Duties of a Faculty Member	48
+
+3.6.1	Teaching	48
+
+3.6.2	Scholarly or Creative Work Contributions	56
+
+3.6.3	Service to the University and Community	56
+
+3.7	Faculty Personnel Records	58
+
+3.8	Academic Departments and Department Chairs	61
+
+3.8.1	Academic Departments	61
+
+3.8.2	Department Chairs	61
+
+3.9	Faculty Evaluation	62
+
+3.9.1	Evaluation Criteria for Personnel Decisions	62
+
+3.9.2	Evaluation of Full-time Faculty Members	70
+
+3.9.3	Evaluation for Reappointment	79
+
+3.9.4	Evaluation for Tenure	83
+
+3.9.5	Evaluation for Promotion	90
+
+3.9.6	Evaluation for Merit Salary Increments	94
+
+3.9.7	Confidentiality of the Evaluation System 	98
+
+3.10	Faculty Professional Development	99
+
+3.10.1	Sabbatical Leave	99
+
+3.10.2	Special Released Time for Scholarly Production	101
+
+3.10.3	Retraining Leaves	103
+
+3.10.4	Academic Leave Without Pay	103
+
+3.10.5	Individual Professional Development Accounts	105
+
+3.11	Faculty Awards	107
+
+3.11.1	The Welch Meritorious Teaching Award	107
+
+3.11.2	The Sherwood Dodge Shankland Award for Encouragement of Teachers	108
+
+3.11.3	The Welch Award for Scholarly or Artistic Achievement	108
+
+3.12	Faculty Compensation, Benefits, and Non-Professional Development Leaves	110
+
+3.12.1	Faculty Compensation	110
+
+3.12.2	Benefits	112
+
+3.12.3	Faculty Leaves	121
+
+3.13	Separation from Service	125
+
+3.13.1	Resignation	125
+
+3.13.2	Retirement	125
+
+3.13.3	Nonrenewal of Appointment	125
+
+3.13.4	Policies and Procedures Governing Dismissal for Cause	127
+
+3.13.5	Policies and Procedures Governing Imposition of Sanctions Other than Dismissal for Cause	133
+
+3.13.6	Termination	135
+
+3.14	Faculty Appeals and Grievances	144
+
+3.14.1	Appeals Procedure in Nonrenewal for Performance Reasons	144
+
+3.14.2	Appeals on Grounds of Academic Freedom in Cases of Termination of a Tenure Track Position or Conversion of a Tenure Track Position to Visiting 	150
+
+3.14.3	Other Faculty Grievances	151
+
+4	Chapter Four: Part-time Faculty Personnel Policies	154
+
+4.1	Academic Titles for Part-Time Faculty	154
+
+4.2	Recruitment and Initial Appointment of Part-Time Faculty	154
+
+4.2.1	Establishment of Need for Part-Time Faculty	154
+
+4.2.2	Recruitment of Part-time Faculty	154
+
+4.2.3	Part-time Faculty Rights and Privileges	154
+
+4.2.4	Part-time Faculty Contractual Duties and Responsibilities	155
+
+4.3	Terms of Part-Time Faculty Appointments	155
+
+4.3.1	Part-time Instructors	155
+
+4.3.2	Lecturers	157
+
+4.3.3	Senior Lecturers	160
+
+4.3.4	Appeal Procedures for Part-Time Faculty	162
+
+4.3.5	Approval of Appointments and Promotions	162
+
+4.3.6	Course Assignments Contingent upon Need	162
+
+5	Chapter Five: Allocation and Review of Faculty Positions	163
+
+5.1	Preamble and General Policy	163
+
+5.2	Authorization of Full-time Teaching Faculty Positions	163
+
+5.2.1	Initial Authorization of Positions	163
+
+5.2.2	Re-authorization of Vacant Positions	164
+
+5.2.3	Guidelines for Allocation and Review of Full-time Teaching Faculty Positions	164
+
+5.3	Review of Tenure Track Positions	165
+
+5.3.1	Scheduled Review	165
+
+5.3.2	Discretionary Review	166
+
+5.3.3	Appeals Related to Regular and Discretionary Reviews	167
+
+5.4	Faculty Selected for Administrative Positions	167
+
+5.5	External Candidate Appointed as Provost and Granted Tenure with That Appointment	168
+
+6	Chapter VI – Amendments to the Faculty Handbook and Sanction of the Board of Trustees	169
+
+6.1	Amendments to the Faculty Handbook	169
+
+6.2	Sanction of Board of Trustees	169
+
+Appendices	170
+
+Appendix A: Faculty Personnel Forms	170
+
+Appendix B: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Policy	170
+
+Appendix C. Policy Statement on Appointment of Librarians	170</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Draft Calendar (1st Draft) .txt [/INST] PROJECT CALENDAR
+
+	Description
+
+Proposed Date
+
+
+
+Completion Date
+
+SEGMENT ONE
+
+
+
+
+
+Consultants deliver preliminary draft of the Code of Regulations analysis report, including any suggested amendments to the Provost & President.
+
+April 29
+
+
+
+Virtual meeting with Provost & President to discuss report.
+
+May 2-3
+
+
+
+Consultants deliver final report.
+
+May 4
+
+
+
+Virtual meeting, if necessary, with the Board’s Faculty Handbook Task Force to discuss report and suggested amendments to the Articles in the Code of Regulations. 
+
+May 5-6
+
+[Specific Date TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultants submit final suggested amendments to the Articles in the Code of Regulations. 
+
+May 9
+
+
+
+SEGMENT TWO
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase I – Introduction, Identify Needs, and Document Collection
+
+
+
+
+
+Project Manager is appointed.
+
+
+
+April 15
+
+Members appointed to the Review Team.
+
+May 1
+
+
+
+University posts all applicable internal faculty status-related documents (i.e., promotion and tenure guidelines, academic unit guidelines, etc.) and forms (e.g., evaluation forms), as well as a listing of peer schools.
+
+May 1
+
+
+
+Consultant meets with Review Team (either virtually or on campus at University’s request) to provide overview of process, project goals, answer questions and gain an understanding of current handbook’s strengths and opportunities for development.
+
+June
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers proposed Table of Contents to Review Team and President for consideration and comment.
+
+
+
+
+
+Zoom meeting with Review Team and President to discuss Table of Contents.
+
+
+
+
+
+Final consensus reached for Table of Contents.  If consensus cannot be reached, the Board’s Faculty Handbook Task Force will be consulted.
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase II – Faculty Handbook Preparation
+
+		
+
+
+
+Consultants deliver first drafts of updated Faculty Handbook.  
+
+August 10 
+
+
+
+Review Team members review first drafts & prepare for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+
+
+
+
+Consultants visit campus to facilitate the Review Team’s review of the 1st draft.  Two full days will be required; however, these can be split up between two trips.  Many clients prefer to schedule two half-day sessions over the course of two days for each trip.  Some of these meetings can be held virtually if preferable.
+
+
+
+
+
+		Consultant implements Review Team’s requested revisions and deliver 2nd draft.
+
+
+
+
+
+		Review Team meets individually to review the 2nd drafts of their assigned manuals and prepare requested revisions for delivery to consultant.
+
+		
+
+
+
+		Review Team delivers their requested revisions and comments to consultant.
+
+
+
+
+
+Consultant implements Review Team’s requested revisions and delivers 3rd draft for final approval before distribution the Faculty Executive Committee, Faculty Personnel Committee, and President for comments.
+
+
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 4th draft, which is distributed to the Faculty Executive Committee, Faculty Personnel Committee, and President for comments. 
+
+
+
+
+
+		Faculty Executive Committee, Faculty Personnel Committee, and President delivers their respective comments to Review Team and consultant.
+
+
+
+
+
+		Virtual meetings are held with Review Team to review stakeholders’ comments.
+
+
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers 5th Draft for Review Team’s final approval.
+
+
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers executive summary of key changes and amendments proposed in 5th Draft to the Board of Trustees’ Faculty Handbook Task Force. 
+
+
+
+
+
+		Consultant and Review Team meet virtually to discuss/implement any revisions requested by the Board Faculty Handbook Task Force.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase III 
+
+		Date
+
+Completion Date
+
+Final draft of updated handbook is submitted to the Faculty for initial review.
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Forum.
+
+
+
+
+
+Review Team members meet individually to review the 3rd drafts of their assigned manual, address final open issues, and prepare requested revisions and comments for delivery to the Consultant.
+
+
+
+
+
+Review Teams deliver requested revisions and comments.
+
+
+
+
+
+Consultant implements Review Teams’ requested revisions and delivers 4th (final) drafts of the manuals to the Project Manager.
+
+Employee Policy Manual: The Project Manager will deliver the 4th draft to the President and Cabinet for review.  At this point, the development of the Employee Manual portion of the engagement is concluded.
+
+Faculty Policy Manual: The Project Manager will deliver the 4th draft of the Faculty Policy Manual to the President, VPAA, and Chair of the Faculty General Assembly. At this point, the development of the Faculty Policy Manual portion of the engagement is concluded. The Administration and Chair of the Faculty General Assembly will then work independently from Stevens Strategy towards obtaining a Faculty General Assembly recommendation and ultimately Board of Trustees approval in accordance with the College’s current Faculty Policy Manual approval procedure.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+			         Page 1
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Draft Merit Model.txt [/INST] Draft
+
+
+
+Merit salary increment evaluations for all full-time faculty and are conducted according to the following schedule:
+
+Tenure Track Faculty:  Tenure Track Faculty will be evaluated for merit increment in the fourth year of full-time service at Ohio Wesleyan and every three years thereafter.
+
+Tenured Faculty: Tenured Faculty will be evaluated for merit increment every three years.
+
+Non-Tenure Track Term Faculty: Non-Tenure Track Term Faculty will be evaluated for merit increment every three years.
+
+
+
+Procedures for Evaluating Full-time Faculty for Merit Increment
+
+1. Evaluation File
+
+On or before the published deadline, full-time faculty eligible for a salary merit increment shall upload to the online web portal the following materials for inclusion in their Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file:
+
+A completed Faculty Personnel Information Sheet (Self-Report)
+
+A current curriculum vitae
+
+Course syllabi 
+
+Any supporting materials the faculty member desires to include  
+
+Academic Affairs will then upload to the evaluation file the following materials:
+
+Student Course Evaluations
+
+Rating Sheets from Peer Colleagues and the Student Faculty Board of the Department
+
+Peer Teaching Observation Reviews
+
+
+
+2. The Faculty Personnel Committee Evaluation
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee evaluates the faculty member’s performance in each of the three categories of performance - teaching, scholarly or creative work, and University and community service, which are weighted on a basis of 60%, 30%, and 10%, respectively - on the basis of the information in the faculty member’s Faculty Personnel committee evaluation file and using the 5-point scale set forth below: 
+
+
+
+Points
+
+Does not meet minimum expectation for rank 
+
+0
+
+Needs Improvement
+
+1
+
+Meets Expectation for Rank 
+
+2
+
+Exceeds Expectation for Rank 
+
+3
+
+Exceptional Performance
+
+4
+
+
+
+The standard for determining merit shall be continued performance at a level appropriate for the rank held. The committee shall use the evaluation criteria in Section 3.9.1 and any applicable departmental criteria delineated in an approved memorandum of understanding to evaluate the faculty member’s performance since the last merit cycle (or initial appointment) in each of the three categories of performance to assign a rating using the scale above.
+
+Determining the Merit Category 
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee, by majority vote, will then assign the individual faculty a rating of 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4 in each of the three categories.  For each category, the rating is multiplied by the weight percentage of the category. The weighted scores are then summed to produce an overall total points score that ranges between 0.0 and 4.0. The faculty member’s final score determines the merit award category, as follows: 
+
+Total Points
+
+Merit Category
+
+0.00 – 1.99
+
+No Merit
+
+2.00 – 2.79
+
+Merit 1
+
+2.8 – 3.79
+
+Merit 2
+
+3.80 – 4.00
+
+Merit 3
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee then submits the merit score for each faculty member in the cohort to the Provost, along with a brief rational for the score. 
+
+3.  Provost Evaluation and Awarding of Merit Pay 
+
+Following receipt and review of the Faculty Personnel Committee’s merit scores, the Provost will independently evaluate the faculty member’s performance in each category of performance, utilizing the same criteria and standards as the committee.  Based on this evaluation, the Provost will make a final decision on each the faculty member’s score.  
+
+Academic Affairs will then tabulate the total merit scores in the cohort, order them from highest to lowest score, and then group them into three tiers of similar scores so as to indicate the three orders of merit pay.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Draft Recommendations (SL Edits)(Clean Copy).txt [/INST] Preliminary Recommendations
+
+
+
+The ART Task Force is pleased to share a draft of some of our preliminary recommendations for revising Cal Lutheran’s faculty evaluation policies. We wanted to share these in advance of the faculty forums, scheduled on Oct. 27th & Nov. 2nd. These recommendations have been drafted after receiving the insightful results from our faculty survey and the consultant led-interviews, as well as following our consultant-led meetings on our institution’s ART policies and procedures. In addition, the task force has studied the scholarly literature and reviewed the tenure and review procedures used at our peer and other institutions. 
+
+We look forward to discussing these items in more detail during the forums and there will be additional opportunities to provide feedback on how these potential recommendations may be implemented. The goal of the task force is to present a final proposal to FAC for Handbook changes by the end of February 2022.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #1: Develop a policy requiring each academic division (or schools) to develop supplemental guidelines for tenure and promotion to account for differences in the nature of teaching effectiveness, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service across academic divisions or schools.
+
+Supporting details: The policy text should require that the division guidelines (a) conform to the general University evaluation categories published in the Faculty Policies Handbook; (b) make clear what each discipline values in pedagogy, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service; and (c) be used by all evaluators in the annual, promotion, and tenure evaluation processes. Moreover, procedural guidance regarding the development and approval of the academic division guidelines should be also developed.
+
+
+
+Draft recommendation #2: Refine the “Teaching Effectiveness” category to more clearly define and provide examples of “teaching effectiveness” and develop a corresponding teaching evaluation rubric for publication in the ART Guidelines document.
+
+Supporting details:  For example, this would be comparable to the standards and rubric developed by the University of Kansas: https://cte.ku.edu/benchmarks-teaching-effectiveness-project.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #3 Modify the current ""Effectiveness as an Advisor"" category to include mentoring and a list of corresponding examples. 
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #4: Refine the University ""Scholarly Activity and Professional Service"" category to clearly define “scholarship” and “professional service” and augment with a list of additional examples of acceptable forms of corresponding activities.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #5 Refine the ""Service"" category by developing formal definitions of ""university service"" and “community service,” and providing examples of corresponding activities.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #6: Develop a policy to account for each candidate’s administrative workload assignments during promotion and tenure evaluations as may be applicable. 
+
+Supporting details: For example, if a candidate’s workload assignment requires more administrative service (such as serving as department chair/program director, director of a center, etc.) and less teaching and scholarly activities, the expectation for teaching effectiveness and scholarship or creative work shall not be compromised, but the expected volume of teaching and research may be reduced and taken into consideration by promotion and tenure evaluators.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #7: Develop a new “Contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI)” evaluation category. 
+
+ Supporting Details: Faculty should be required to submit personal statements in the Annual Activity Report and promotion and tenure dossiers detailing their specific individual and/or collaborative activities aimed at supporting diversity, equity, an inclusion, discussing the context, importance, and impact of their contributions in teaching, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service activities during the evaluation period. 
+
+Note: We recommend that the University adopt a staged roll-out of the DEI criteria and provide DEI training to both faculty and evaluators.
+
+
+
+Draft recommendation #8: Develop a new “collegiality” or “campus citizenship” evaluation category, which is consistent with the University’s values. 
+
+Supporting details: The text should emphasize that the evaluator’s focus with respect to this evaluation category solely relates to collaboration and constructive cooperation associated with a faculty member’s overall performance. The text should also note that an assessment of collegiality must not be confused with conformity, sociability, or likability and may not be interpreted in a way that violates the principles of academic freedom.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #9: Retain our current 2/4/6-year faculty evaluation system (as opposed to using an annual/mid-probationary system), but with a strengthened annual reflection component emphasizing formative feedback and goal setting.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #10: Develop a comprehensive peer and administrator teaching evaluation policy that clearly delineates the frequency of teaching observations and outlines in procedural detail how peer evaluators and courses to be observed are selected, and how the data will be shared.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #11: Develop a clause emphasizing that student evaluations, including both quantitative and qualitative student evaluation data, are to be used by evaluators in combination with other measures of teaching effectiveness during the faculty review process.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #12: Supplement the second- and fourth-year review evaluation procedures to provide more narrative detail explaining the current step-wise process and develop new text that highlights the formative aspect of these evaluations.
+
+Supporting Detail: For example, text should address in greater detail the department chair/program director evaluation and ART Committee deliberations and reporting requirements, etc. The ART Committee evaluation should discuss the faculty member’s strengths and weaknesses and identify areas that require development for continued progress toward tenure (if any).The Dean (or Provost) should discuss the written evaluation with the faculty member.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #13: Refine the “Criteria for Promotion to Rank” section by clearly articulating and defining the standards that must be met for each academic rank.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #14: Supplement the “Institutional Need Requirement and Tenure Quota” policy with detailed procedures addressing how such determinations are made and implemented.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #15: Develop a policy for inclusion in the “Eligibility for Tenure” section that addresses early tenure application.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #16: Develop a policy for inclusion in the “Eligibility for Tenure” section that addresses the pausing of the “tenure clock.”
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #17: For formative purposes, modify the content of the “Confidential File” to allow candidate access to teaching evaluations, student course evaluations, and course loads and grade distributions.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #18: Supplement the “Procedures for Promotion and Tenure Review” section to provide more narrative detail regarding the current stepwise evaluation process.
+
+Supporting Guidance: For example, develop procedural text which clearly explains how tenured faculty inside and outside the department conduct their evaluations, the role of external evaluators, how the department chair/program director and dean conduct their respective evaluations and document the results, outline the way the ART Committee arrives at and documents its Draft Recommendation, etc.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #19: Include a clause in the “Evaluation and Action” subsection indicating that all evaluators are expected to evaluate candidates based solely on the content of the evaluation file (dossier and confidential file) and the results of candidate interviews (as applicable).
+
+Supporting Guidance: If the ART Committee seeks additional content, the faculty member will be notified and be afforded an opportunity to respond.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #20: Supplement the “Post-tenure/Post-6th Year Review Policy and Procedures” to provide a mechanism for recognizing distinguished faculty performance, as well as a means of assisting faculty members who are experiencing difficulties in achieving their expectations.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #21: Develop a policy that addresses evaluator conflicts of interest.
+
+
+
+Lingering Issues:
+
+Should the Task Force recommend that the Faculty Senate review whether the Provost remain an ex-officio member of the ART Committee?
+
+
+
+
+
+Should external reviews be a mandatory requirement for promotion and tenure evaluations or remain optional at the discretion of the candidate?  
+
+
+
+Should the current department evaluation procedure (i.e., solicitation of evaluation letters from all tenured department faculty) be modified?  Specifically, 
+
+(a) Should the current process of soliciting letters from all full-time, tenured department faculty remain in place? Or should this process be opened to full-time, continuing faculty at a rank equal to and higher than the candidate?
+
+OR
+
+(b) Should departments, academic divisions or the schools/colleges be required to appoint a promotion and tenure committee to evaluate dossiers of division candidates for promotion and tenure and provide a written recommendation to the Dean, followed by the ART, Provost, President, and Board evaluations?  
+
+OR
+
+(c) Should the Chair/Program Director be charged with polling members of the department (or division), recording the vote numerically.  For example, for tenure candidates, the chair would poll all tenured full-time members of each candidate’s department, recording that vote numerically. For promotion candidates, the chair would poll all tenured full- time members of the candidate’s department with rank above that of the candidate, recording the vote numerically. Promotion to the rank of professor requires at the department level the vote of a least three (3) professors. The results of the polls, along with a narrative from the chair and/or department faculty setting forth a Draft Recommendation and summarizing the candidate’s accomplishments in teaching, scholarship, and service, and the candidate’s narrative and supporting documentation would then be forwarded to the next evaluator.
+
+Note: For departments with small numbers, faculty from outside the department may be brought in.
+
+
+
+Should a new “Promotion and Tenure Evaluation Appeals” process be developed in lieu of the use of the Faculty Grievance Procedure to address evaluation appeals?
+
+
+
+The following clause regarding appointment with tenure is published in the Faculty Policies document: “In rare cases, tenure may be granted on appointment of a faculty member who has been tenured or has held equivalent faculty status elsewhere.” 
+
+Should a more comprehensive policy appointment with tenure policy be developed which articulates how such decisions are made and approved?
+
+OR
+
+Should the above text be removed for removal from the handbook?</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Draft Recommendations (SL Edits).txt [/INST] Preliminary Recommendations
+
+
+
+The ART Task Force is pleased to share a draft of some of our preliminary recommendations for revising Cal Lutheran’s faculty evaluation policies. We wanted to share these in advance of the faculty forums, scheduled on Oct. 27th & Nov. 2nd. These recommendations have been drafted after receiving the insightful results from our faculty survey and the consultant led-interviews, as well as following our consultant-led meetings on our institution’s ART policies and procedures. In addition, the task force has studied the scholarly literature and reviewed the tenure and review procedures used at our peer and other institutions. 
+
+
+
+We look forward to discussing these items in more detail during the forums and there will be additional opportunities to provide feedback on how these potential recommendations may be implemented. The goal of the task force is to present a final proposal to FAC for Handbook changes by the end of February 2022.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #1: Develop a policy requiring each academic division (or schools) to develop supplemental guidelines for tenure and promotion to account for differences in the nature of teaching effectiveness, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service across academic divisions or schools.
+
+Supporting details: The policy text should require that the division guidelines (a) conform to the general University evaluation categories published in the Faculty Policies Handbook; (b) make clear what each discipline values in pedagogy, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service; and (c) be used by all evaluators in the annual, promotion, and tenure evaluation processes. Moreover, procedural guidance regarding the development and approval of the academic division guidelines should be also developed.
+
+
+
+Draft recommendation #2: Refine the “Teaching Effectiveness” category to more clearly define and provide examples of “teaching effectiveness” and develop a corresponding teaching evaluation rubric for publication in the ART Guidelines document.
+
+Supporting details:  For example, this would be comparable to the standards and rubric developed by the University of Kansas: https://cte.ku.edu/benchmarks-teaching-effectiveness-project.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #3 Modify the current ""Effectiveness as an Advisor"" category to include mentoring and a list of corresponding examples. 
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #4: Refine the University ""Scholarly Activity and Professional Service"" category to clearly define “scholarship” and “professional service” and augment with a list of additional examples of acceptable forms of corresponding activities.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #5 Refine the ""Service"" category by developing formal definitions of ""university service"" and “community service,” and providing examples of corresponding activities.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #6: Develop a policy to account for each candidate’s administrative workload assignments during promotion and tenure evaluations as may be applicable. 
+
+Supporting details: For example, if a candidate’s workload assignment requires more administrative service (such as serving as department chair/program director, director of a center, etc.) and less teaching and scholarly activities, the expectation for teaching effectiveness and scholarship or creative work shall not be compromised, but the expected volume of teaching and research may be reduced and taken into consideration by promotion and tenure evaluators.
+
+
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #7: Develop a new “Contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI)” evaluation category. 
+
+ Supporting Details:  Faculty should be required to submit personal statements in the Annual Activity Report and promotion and tenure dossiers detailing their specific individual and/or collaborative activities aimed at supporting diversity, equity, an inclusion, discussing the context, importance, and impact of their contributions in teaching, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service activities during the evaluation period. 
+
+Note: We recommend that the University adopt a staged roll-out of the DEI criteria and provide DEI training to both faculty and evaluators.
+
+
+
+Draft recommendation #8: Develop a new “collegiality” or “campus citizenship” evaluation category, which is consistent with the University’s values. 
+
+Supporting details: The text should emphasize that the evaluator’s focus with respect to this evaluation category solely relates to collaboration and constructive cooperation associated with a faculty member’s overall performance. The text should also note that an assessment of collegiality must not be confused with conformity, sociability, or likability and may not be interpreted in a way that violates the principles of academic freedom.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #9: Retain our current 2/4/6-year faculty evaluation system (as opposed to using an annual/mid-probationary system), but with a strengthened annual reflection component emphasizing formative feedback and goal setting.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #10: Develop a comprehensive peer and administrator teaching evaluation policy that clearly delineates the frequency of teaching observations and outlines in procedural detail how peer evaluators and courses to be observed are selected, and how the data will be shared.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #11: Develop a clause emphasizing that student evaluations, including both quantitative and qualitative student evaluation data, are to be used by evaluators in combination with other measures of teaching effectiveness during the faculty review process.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #12: Supplement the second- and fourth-year review evaluation procedures to provide more narrative detail explaining the current step-wise process and develop new text that highlights the formative aspect of these evaluations.
+
+Supporting Detail: For example, text should address in greater detail the department chair/program director evaluation and ART Committee deliberations and reporting requirements, etc. The ART Committee evaluation should discuss the faculty member’s strengths and weaknesses and identify areas that require development for continued progress toward tenure (if any).The Dean (or Provost) should discuss the written evaluation with the faculty member.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #13: Refine the “Criteria for Promotion to Rank” section by clearly articulating and defining the standards that must be met for each academic rank.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #14: Supplement the “Institutional Need Requirement and Tenure Quota” policy with detailed procedures addressing how such determinations are made and implemented.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #15: Develop a policy for inclusion in the “Eligibility for Tenure” section that addresses early tenure application.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #16: Develop a policy for inclusion in the “Eligibility for Tenure” section that addresses the pausing of “tenure clock.”
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #17: For formative purposes, modify the content of the “Confidential File” to allow candidate access to teaching evaluations, student course evaluations, and course loads and grade distributions.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #18: Supplement the “Procedures for Promotion and Tenure Review” section to provide more narrative detail regarding the current stepwise evaluation process.
+
+Supporting Guidance: For example, develop procedural text which clearly explains how tenured faculty inside and outside the department conduct their evaluations, the role of external evaluators, how the department chair/program director and dean conduct their respective evaluations and document the results, outline the way the ART Committee arrives at and documents its Draft Recommendation, etc.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #19: Include a clause in the “Evaluation and Action” subsection indicating that all evaluators are expected to evaluate candidates based solely on the content of the evaluation file (dossier and confidential file) and the results of candidate interviews (as applicable).
+
+Supporting Guidance: If the ART Committee seeks additional content, the faculty member will be notified and be afforded an opportunity to respond.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #20: Supplement the “Post-tenure/Post-6th Year Review Policy and Procedures” to provide a mechanism for recognizing distinguished faculty performance, as well as a means of assisting faculty members who are experiencing difficulties in achieving their expectations.
+
+
+
+Draft Recommendation #21: Develop a policy that addresses evaluator conflicts of interest.
+
+
+
+Lingering Issues:
+
+Should the Task Force recommend that the Faculty Senate review whether the Provost remain an ex-officio member of the ART Committee?
+
+
+
+
+
+Should external reviews be a mandatory requirement for promotion and tenure evaluations or remain optional at the discretion of the candidate?  
+
+
+
+Should the current department evaluation procedure (i.e., solicitation of evaluation letters from all tenured department faculty) be modified?  Specifically, 
+
+(a) Should the current process of soliciting letters from all full-time, tenured department faculty remain in place? Or should this process be opened to full-time, continuing faculty at a rank equal to and higher than the candidate?
+
+OR
+
+(b) Should departments, academic divisions or the schools/colleges be required to appoint a promotion and tenure committee to evaluate dossiers of division candidates for promotion and tenure and provide a written recommendation to the Dean, followed by the ART, Provost, President, and Board evaluations?  
+
+OR
+
+(c) Should the Chair/Program Director be charged with polling members of the department (or division), recording the vote numerically.  For example, for tenure candidates, the chair would poll all tenured full-time members of each candidate’s department, recording that vote numerically. For promotion candidates, the chair would poll all tenured full- time members of the candidate’s department with rank above that of the candidate, recording the vote numerically. Promotion to the rank of professor requires at the department level the vote of a least three (3) professors. The results of the polls, along with a narrative from the chair and/or department faculty setting forth a Draft Recommendation and summarizing the candidate’s accomplishments in teaching, scholarship, and service, and the candidate’s narrative and supporting documentation would then be forwarded to the next evaluator.
+
+Note: For departments with small numbers, faculty from outside the department may be brought in.
+
+
+
+Should a new “Promotion and Tenure Evaluation Appeals” process be developed in lieu of the use of the Faculty Grievance Procedure to address evaluation appeals?
+
+
+
+The following clause regarding appointment with tenure is published in the Faculty Policies document: “In rare cases, tenure may be granted on appointment of a faculty member who has been tenured or has held equivalent faculty status elsewhere.” 
+
+Should a more comprehensive policy appointment with tenure policy be developed which articulates how such decisions are made and approved?
+
+OR
+
+Should the above text be removed for removal from the handbook?</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Draft-Bylaws TOC.txt [/INST] TABLE OF CONTENTS
+
+Article I.	The College Faculty	4
+
+Section 1 Membership of the Faculty	4
+
+Section 2 Voting Members	4
+
+Section 3 Responsibilities of the Faculty	4
+
+Section 4 Academic Departments and Programs	5
+
+4.1. Academic Departments and Program Areas	5
+
+4.2. Department Chairs and Program Directors	5
+
+	4.2.1. Selection and Term of Office	5
+
+	4.2.2. Responsibilities and Authority	5
+
+Section 5 Faculty Affirmative Action Officer	6
+
+Section 6 Faculty Meetings	6
+
+6.1. Attendance	6
+
+6.2. Procedure at Meetings	7
+
+6.3. Time and Place of Meetings	7
+
+6.4. Special Meetings	7
+
+6.5. Notification of Proposed Legislation	7
+
+6.6. Necessary Number of Votes	7
+
+6.7. New Business	8
+
+6.8. Agenda	8
+
+6.9. Secretary to the Faculty	8
+
+6.10. Student Access to Minutes	8
+
+Section 7 Standing and Ad Hoc Committees of the Faculty	8
+
+Article II.	Faculty Status and Appointments	20
+
+Section 1 Faculty Status – Types of Faculty Appointments	20
+
+1.1. Full-Time Teaching Faculty	20
+
+	1.1.1. Tenure-Track Teaching Faculty	20
+
+	1.1.2. Tenured Teaching Faculty	20
+
+	1.1.3. Regular Term Teaching Faculty	20
+
+1.2. Adjunct Faculty 	23
+
+	1.2.1. Faculty in Residence	24
+
+	1.2.2. Visiting Faculty	24
+
+	1.2.3. Per-Course Faculty	25
+
+1.3. Faculty Emeritus, Faculty Emerita	25
+
+Section 2 Faculty Contracts and Terms of Appointment	28
+
+2.1. Tenure Track Contracts, Probationary Appointments	28
+
+2.2. Tenured Contracts	28
+
+2.3. Non-Tenure Track Continuing Contracts	29
+
+2.4. Term Contracts	29
+
+2.5. Terminal Contracts	29
+
+2.6. Primary Area of Appointment	29
+
+2.7. Joint Appointments 	29
+
+Section 3 Faculty Recruitment and Initial Appointment	30
+
+3.1. Recruitment and Initial Appointment of Tenure-Track Faculty	30
+
+3.2. Recruitment and Initial Appointment of Adjunct Faculty	32
+
+3.3. Duration of Appointment	32
+
+3.4. Determination of Initial Academic Rank	33
+
+	Article III.	Full-Time Teaching Faculty Personnel Policies	34
+
+Section 1 Faculty Rights and Standards of Professional Conduct	34
+
+1.1. Academic Freedom and Responsibility	34
+
+1.2. Professional Ethics	34
+
+1.3. Statement on Plagiarism	35
+
+1.4. Observance of College and Department Policies	36
+
+1.5. Outside Activities	36
+
+	1.5.1. Conditions of Outside Employment and Consulting During the College Year	36
+
+	1.5.2. Summer Employment	37
+
+Section 2 Duties and Responsibilities of the Teaching Faculty	37
+
+2.1. Teaching	37
+
+	2.1.1. Teaching Load	37
+
+2.2. Research and Creative Activity	37
+
+2.3. Service	37
+
+Section 3 Evaluation of Faculty Performance	37
+
+3.1. The Schedule of Faculty Evaluations	37
+
+3.2. Evaluation Criteria	37
+
+3.3. Student Course Evaluations	37
+
+3.4. Annual Self-Evaluation	37
+
+3.5. Reappointment: Factors Considered; Annual Evaluation; Procedures and Responsibility for Carrying Them Out 	37
+
+Section 4 Promotion in Academic Rank	39
+
+4.1. Promotion to Assistant Professor	39
+
+4.2. Promotion to Associate Professor	39
+
+4.3. Promotion to Professor	39
+
+	4.3.1. Criterion for Promotion to Professor	39
+
+	4.3.2. Review Procedures for Promotion to Professor	40
+
+Section 5 Tenure	42
+
+5.1. Eligibility for Tenure	42
+
+5.2. Accelerated Tenure Reviews	43
+
+5.3. Extending the Probationary Period	43
+
+5.4. Tenure Standards	45
+
+5.5. Structure of the Committee on Tenure	46
+
+5.6. Procedures of the Committee on Tenure	48
+
+Section 6 Professional Development	49
+
+6.1. Sabbatical Leave	49
+
+Section 7 Faculty Compensation and Benefits	52
+
+Section 8 Faculty Leaves of Absence	52
+
+Section 9 Administrative Disciplinary Actions	52
+
+9.1. The Provost’s Consultation with the Faculty Member	52
+
+9.2. Written Reprimand	52
+
+9.3. Minor Administrative Sanctions	53
+
+9.4. Major Administrative Sanctions	53
+
+9.5. Summary Suspension	53
+
+Section 10 Faculty Separation	54
+
+10.1. Resignation	54
+
+10.2. Termination of Appointments by the College	54
+
+	10.2.1. Dismissal for Adequate Cause	54
+
+	10.2.2. Termination of Appointment Due to Financial Exigency	60
+
+	10.2.3. Termination of Appointment Due to Program Discontinuation	64
+
+	Article IV.	Adjunct Faculty Personnel Policies	67
+
+Article V.	Amendment to Faculty Bylaws	67</s>"
+<s>[INST] DU Faculty HB (5th Revised Draft) (8.2018)(Clean Copy) Stephen Lazarus.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] DU Faculty HB (5th Revised Draft) (8.2018)(Clean Copy).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Eastern Mich annual_faculty_activity_report.txt [/INST] ANNUAL FACULTY ACTIVITY REPORT
+
+
+
+This report must be submitted to the Department Head by October 15 of each academic year.  The report should cover the faculty member’s activities from September 1 through August 31 of the preceding year.  Additional sheets may be attached to provide further detail, if necessary.
+
+
+
+I.	BIOGRAPHICAL DATA
+
+
+
+	Name:  							Date:  				
+
+
+
+	Rank:  								Years at EMU:  		
+
+									(including current year)
+
+
+
+	Department:  							College:  			
+
+
+
+II.	INSTRUCTIONAL ACTIVITIES
+
+
+
+	Courses Taught							New/Repeat
+
+	(Course Number and Title)
+
+
+
+													
+
+													
+
+													
+
+													
+
+													
+
+													
+
+													
+
+
+
+	Comments:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+	Number of Students Advised (if applicable):  	
+
+
+
+	Comments:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+	Description of curricular and/or pedagogical developments, innovations, experiments, 	etc:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+	Attendance at workshops, conferences, etc. (provide date, organization and 	location)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Original Scholarship Presented in the Classroom within the University (include 	subject, forum and date)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+III.	SCHOLARLY AND/OR CREATIVE ACTIVITY
+
+
+
+	Publications, Exhibitions, Concerts, etc. (include bibliographical data and place an * in 	front of those activities disseminated through a refereed or juried format).
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+	Presentations (include bibliographical data and place an * in front of refereed 	presentations).
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+	Professional Development Activities (include only those professional development 	activities that have been approved by the department and for which criteria are provided 	in the Department Evaluation Document).
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+	Other forms of disseminated Scholarly/Creative Activity
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+	Scholarly/Creative Activity in Progress (include subject/description, projected date of 	completion and anticipated method of dissemination)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+	Comments:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IV.	SERVICE
+
+
+
+	Department Level Activity (include reference to office(s) held on committees, etc.)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+	College/University Level Activity (include reference to office(s) held on committees, 	etc.)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+	Beyond the University (professionally related community activity)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+V.	ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES NOT COVERED ABOVE (e.g. release time 	activities/responsibilities, etc.)
+
+
+
+Rev:  09/12   EMU/EMU-AAUP Approved
+
+                      Page 1 of 4</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Edits for Faculty Handbook Policy Manual IV (10-07-2013).txt [/INST] Edits from Meetings between Faculty Council and Vice President for Academic Affairs
+
+
+
+Editing notes from review of Policy Manual:  Volume IV Faculty Handbook and Policies, third draft
+
+(Notes are organized according to page numbers and section numbers.)
+
+
+
+Page 1
+
+4.0 Introduction
+
+Paragraph 1:
+
+In line 5-6:  Correction: “pursuant to the version process in Section 4.14.”
+
+Paragraph 2:
+
+Line 4: Delete Vice President for Academic Affairs and insert Faculty Council
+
+Paragraph 3:  Delete
+
+Page 2
+
+4.1.2:  Line 2:  correct reference to subsection.  Make it 4.7.1.3: “(see Subsection 4.7.1.3,…”
+
+4.1.2.1.2.:  Paragraph 3.  Delete:  “Because of the advanced nature of the material they teach,”  Begin with: “Faculty who teach graduate courses…”
+
+
+
+4.1.2.3
+
+Remove stick through text
+
+
+
+Page 7:
+
+4.1.2.4.1.3:  Revise third point as follows-  All College facilities are accessible to a Professor  Emeritus, including access to college email.
+
+Page 8:
+
+4.1.2.4.4:  We read lines 8-12 as follows:  If a replacement faculty member is subsequently appointed to a full-time faculty position, time served under any replacement term appointment may does not count towards advancement in rank, but not towards tenure or sabbatical leave unless so indicated in the faculty member’s contract.
+
+Page 9:
+
+4.1.3.1:  Next to last line – Use “who do not possess”  not “that do not possess…”
+
+4.1.3.2
+
+Stevens or old HB text?
+
+
+
+4.1.3.3-
+
+Stevens or old HB text?
+
+
+
+4.1.3.4-
+
+Stevens or old HB text?
+
+
+
+4.2.1.2
+
+Paragraph 4 – remove strike through text?
+
+Page 16
+
+4.2.1.6:
+
+Paragraph 2, line 3, revised as follows:  Individuals who return to a tenured faculty position retain the rank previously held prior to the administrative assignment.
+
+Paragraph 3, 
+
+Delete word may in line 2 and insert will.  Delete with the approval of the President, based on the recommendation from the vice President for Academic Affairs.  If approval is granted, then the faculty member will continue progress toward multi-year contract or tenure evaluation as applicable
+
+Page 17:
+
+4.3.2.1.b,  revise lines 3-4 as follows:  The Dean may not be the chair of the search committee.
+
+Page 18:
+
+4.3.2.1.e:  retain text of current Handbook:  The search committee will recommend final candidate(s), ranked in order of preference,  to the Vice President for Academic affairs, who will confer with the President on the final decision. In the event the first choice candidate declines, the vice president for academic affairs will consult the search committee about a second acceptable candidate. 
+
+Page 19:
+
+4.4: paragraph 4, should read:  “Faculty files may be examined on a need-to-know basis by the President, Vice President for Academic Affairs, Deans of Schools, the Director of Human Resources, and College legal counsel…..”
+
+4.4: paragraph 5, should read:  “In addition to the above, the College may be required to permit access…”
+
+Page 21:
+
+4.5.1.2
+
+Opening Paragraph:  Should read:  “Guided by the mission and the College’s Criteria for…”
+
+Listed items:  Omit numbers; use bullets instead.  
+
+Under Service, insert advise students after to in line 2, (“energy to advise students and perform …”) and delete last sentence.
+
+Page 23 and 24: 
+
+4.5.1.4 Use Appendix 1 at the end of this document.
+
+Page 28:
+
+4.7.1:  Delete numbers in listed items; use bullets instead.  
+
+4.7.1.1:  Substitute “responsibility for “duty” in line 1.
+
+4.7.1.1.a: Delete “complete and”: in  first line.
+
+Page 29:
+
+4.7.1.1.b: Revise last sentence as follows:  The faculty member should be conscientious in responding to and returning written assignments and other assessments (e.g. tests) to the students.
+
+4.7.1.1.e:  retain work “Chairperson or” in line 2.
+
+
+
+Pages 29-34:  
+
+Place all lists in appropriate appendices.  Replace statements such as:  “Examples of excellence in teaching include but not limited to:  with statements like: 
+
+See Appendix A for examples of excellence in teaching.
+
+Page 30:
+
+4.7.1.2 Research and Publication:  Revise opening sentence of paragraph 3 as follows:  The College will offer every assistance to support scholarly research and/or to obtain a sponsor for any project already under way or any project carefully planned. Retain Chairperson/Dean 
+
+Page 31:
+
+4.7.1.3:  Insert “to advise students” after “energy” in line 1.  Delete sentence 2.
+
+Page 32:
+
+4.7.1.3.1 Service to the College:  Delete opening sentence.  Return to current Handbook, p.IV-4, and use C.  Opening paragraph under “Further responsibilities” through the opening paragraph of point 1.  Then use list from Vol. IV from faculty Meetings through standing committees.  Then the following sentence:  In addition to the activities listed above, a faculty member contributes further toward the operation of the college by participating in activities like those listed in Appendix?. Move bulleted list to appendix.
+
+4.7.1.3.2 Academic Advising:  Put list in appendix
+
+4.7.1.3.3 Service to the Profession:  Put list in appendix.
+
+4.7.1.3.4 Service to Community:  Put list in appendix.
+
+Page 35:
+
+4.7.3.1.A¨ Retain “Chairperson” in final sentence.
+
+Page 39:
+
+4.7.6.C.1.a:  Delete” because of”; insert “on.”
+
+4.7.6.C.1.c: Last sentence-delete ‘s recommendation, so sentence begins:  “The committee should include…”
+
+Page 42:
+
+B.3:  Change one’s to his/her.  Retain chairperson.
+
+B.5:  Change it to and doing so requires that the faculty member is qualified for the multi-year contract option.
+
+Page 43:
+
+C.5:  Move phrase beginning with “especially” to after word “publications” in first line.
+
+Page 44:
+
+Item c at top of page:  Delete  The committee’s recommendation and replace with It.  
+
+Items 3.e and 3.f:  do not strike as note suggests.
+
+Item 3.f To the end of the sentence add:  “…as described below in Section 4.7.7.D.5 (Appeal of Decision).
+
+Page 45:  
+
+Item b:  Delete “the Chair” in the middle of the first line and “Chair of the Faculty” in line 3.  Section should read:
+
+“If the Faculty Council determines that prima facie evidence exists, the Council, within ten (10) calendar days of receipt of the faculty member’s written letter of appeal, will appoint…”
+
+Page 46-48:  
+
+Retain current Handbook text (Sec IV-C.9;p.IV6) on Post Tenure Review.  See Appendix 2.
+
+Page 48:
+
+4.88.1.B.a:  Change “apply to receive another” to “receive one”
+
+Page 49:
+
+4.8.1.B.1:  Retain Division Chairperson, i.e. “to both the Division Chairperson and the Dean on…” and “If approved by the Division Chairperson and Dean,…”
+
+
+
+4.9.2 – REMOVE STRIKE THROUGH TEXT?
+
+
+
+4.11  -REMOVE STRIKE THROUGH TEXT?
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 79:
+
+4.12.1.1.a:  Retain Chairperson.  …the Division Chairperson and the Dean…
+
+Page 80:  
+
+Remove “and Constructive Improvement” from title of section 4.12.2.
+
+Page 81:
+
+Item 1.b:  Retain Handbook.
+
+Item 2 a. and b.:  Retain chair.  i.e., “chair and dean…”
+
+
+
+Page  87:
+
+Item A.1:  Retain Chairperson.  i.e., “complaint with the Chairperson or Dean.
+
+Item A.2:  Retain “Chairperson and Dean.”
+
+Also in sections B.2.b) and B.2.c)
+
+Page 88:
+
+4.14:  Change “ninety (90) regular academic days” to “sixty (60) regular academic days…”
+
+
+
+Page 89:
+
+Add to end of first sentence: “to respond appropriately.”  Delete the following sentence.
+
+Point 1:  Revise as follows:  Ideally, the vote occurs at a public meeting of the faculty.  A quorum of the faculty is to be present (viz, at least 50% of the full-time faculty who are eligible to vote), and the proposal shall be considered as passed if simple majority of the quorum is in favor.  Prior to such a public meeting of the faculty, Faculty Council shall distribute a text of the proposal to the faculty and announce that a vote is to be taken at the faculty meeting following the one at which the proposal is discussed.
+
+Point 2:  Revise as follows:  In the event a quorum is not present at a meeting of the faculty at which a vote is scheduled, the vote will occur by electronic or paper ballot.  The proposal will be considered passed if a simple majority of the returned ballots is in favor, provided the number of returned ballots constitutes a quorum of those faculty eligible to vote.
+
+Two general notes: (1) Council agreed to retain references to division chairs that have been consistently deleted in the vol. IV review.  I may have missed a few in the notes given there, but the intention is to restore all such deletions. (2)  since the by-laws for standing committees will be included in the handbook, we should probably propose a wholesale deletion of the statement added to all bylaws by the Stevens group Amendments:  Amendments to the By-laws become operational upon the approval of the Board of Trustees.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+							APPENDIX 1
+
+							
+
+							Suggested Overload and Outside Employment Policy
+
+							1.	Overloads
+
+							A full-time faculty member may teach overloads at Gwynedd-Mercy College.  Ordinarily, such additional work should not exceed the time required to teach one (1) overload course per semester.  Reimbursement for additional teaching responsibilities at Gwynedd-Mercy College will be according to the current adjunct salary scale.  Faculty members must report all course overloads to their Dean.  Permission to teach more than one (1) overload course per semester must be approved by the faculty member’s Dean and the Vice President for Academic Affairs in advance of the start of the semester.
+
+							2.	Outside Employment and Professional Consulting
+
+							Gwynedd-Mercy College permits and encourages faculty members to engage in professional and consultative activities in their areas of expertise and recognizes the value to the institution when a faculty member elects to be recognized as an employee of the College while participating in these activities.  The College also believes that a full-time faculty workload requires the primary attention of the faculty member and must not be compromised.   Accordingly, the College has established the following procedures to address those instances when a member of the full-time faculty desires to undertake limited outside employment and professional consulting activities. 
+
+							Gwynedd-Mercy College defines “outside employment” as work performed as a salaried or wage-earning employee of some employer other than Gwynedd-Mercy College that qualifies under IRS rules as work as an employee.  Professional consulting is understood as providing one’s expert advice on a fee for service basis or in exchange for compensation, including work that qualifies under IRS rules as work as an independent contractor rather than as an employee.  In general, income from outside work is reported on an IRS W-2 or 1099 tax form. 
+
+							Gwynedd Mercy University acknowledges that some disciplines require work outside the University in order for the faculty member to maintain professional certification  and strongly supports such activity as long as it conforms to the guidelines below and does not interfere with A faculty member's meeting his or her other responsibilities to the University.
+
+							Full-time faculty, whether serving pursuant to nine (9) or twelve (12) month contracts, are expected to devote themselves on a full-time basis to their teaching, academic advising, professional development, scholarship, and service activities during the term of the contract.  For this reason, all full-time faculty are restricted from engaging in any other employment activity if the activity interferes with the faculty member’s attending to the full range of his or her teaching, academic advising, professional development, scholarship, and service obligations or prevent the faculty member from participating in the intellectual and professional life of their division, School, and the College.   
+
+							It is the responsibility of faculty members engaging in outside employment to inform in writing their Dean and the Deans will inform the Vice President for Academic Affairs, before the beginning of each semester or in advance of undertaking such employment.  Such work will be restricted by the appropriate Dean, if one's performance of the University's contracted duties is being compromised or exceeds the time required to teach one (1) overload course per semester or the equivalent of one (1) workday per week.
+
+							Note: There is no limitation on outside employment and professional consulting activity during the summer months for faculty with nine (9) month contracts who do not have summer duties.
+
+Also, no faculty member should use Gwynedd-Mercy College offices, equipment, personnel or other resources for outside employment or professional consulting activities without special permission from the Vice President for Academic Affairs.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+APPENDIX 2
+
+
+
+						Triennial Post-tenure Assessment
+
+							1.	Frequency of Assessment and Exceptions
+
+							To promote the continued professional development and productivity of its tenured faculty, tenured faculty are assessed no later than the third academic year following the award of tenure at Gwynedd-Mercy College or the faculty member’s most recent post-tenure review.  In addition, tenured faculty members returning to full-time teaching status following administrative service of two years or more are assessed triennially.
+
+							Tenured faculty members serving as academic administrators whose primary responsibilities are not teaching are exempt from the assessment while they are serving in their administrative posts.  Upon returning to full-time faculty duties, they are subject to triennial assessment.  Additionally, tenured faculty members who are on leave during the prescribed year of the assessment will ordinarily be assessed the year after returning.  Exceptions to participating in the triennial assessment may also be granted at the discretion of the Vice President for Academic Affairs if the faculty member has submitted a letter of intent to retire, resign, or apply for early retirement to be effective within two years from the academic year of the review.  Finally, a faculty member may request postponement of a scheduled post-tenure assessment for extenuating circumstances, such as health problems.  The request must be in writing and approved by the Vice President for Academic Affairs.
+
+							2.	Post-tenure Assessment Process
+
+								A.	Initial Assessment
+
+							The triennial assessment of a tenured faculty member is conducted for the purposes of faculty development.  It is based upon the following documentation:
+
+									1.	The faculty member’s three Developmental Plans (see Appendix 1) for the triennium;
+
+									2.	Peer and administrative observations of teaching during the years of the triennial review;
+
+									3.	Student evaluations; and 
+
+									4.	The responsibilities listed in Subsection 4.5.1 of the volume.  
+
+																			The Dean evaluates the faculty member’s teaching and academic advising, scholarship, and service activities over the past triennium in the context of the College’s Assessment Criteria (see Subsection 4.7.1).  The Dean’s written evaluation must represent the good faith, deliberate exercise of professional judgment in assessing the faculty member’s performance. 
+
+																			After completing the assessment, the Dean will meet with the faculty member to discuss the evaluation.  The goals of the discussion are to provide peer support and feedback, in the spirit of collegiality, for the tenured faculty member’s ongoing professional development.  At the conclusion of the meeting, the assessment is signed by both the Dean and the faculty member and placed in the faculty member’s file in the office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs.
+
+							report identifies a serious matter bearing upon an item listed in Subsection 4.11.2 (Dismissal for Cause), then a plan, which has been mutually developed by the faculty member and the Dean, will be the basis of an assessment conducted the following year.
+
+								B.	Formulation of Plan
+
+							In mutually developing the plan, which should be completed within thirty (30) days following the issuance of the Dean’s assessment, the faculty member and the Dean should consider College, School and department objectives, as well as the faculty member’s individual circumstances.  In addition, the plan should include the following:
+
+									1.	Specific goals and objectives that will address the matter(s) identified by the Dean during the triennial assessment;
+
+										2.	Necessary activities that will achieve the goals identified;
+
+										3.	Timelines for accomplishment of such activities;
+
+									4.	College resources that will support the plan and identify how and when such resources will be made available to the faculty member; and
+
+									5.	A means of measuring progress in achieving the goals identified and a periodic monitoring of progress.
+
+							Upon completing the plan, the Dean will submit the plan to the Vice President for Academic Affairs.  
+
+							C.	Completion of the Plan and Subsequent Assessment
+
+							The final plan will be the basis of an assessment conducted the following year.  When reviewing the progress toward meeting the plan, the annual assessment by the Dean will determine if the faculty member has addressed the matter satisfactorily.  
+
+							If the matter has been addressed satisfactorily, the post-tenure assessment is complete and the faculty member returns to a new triennial assessment cycle the following academic year.  Copies of the plan and the assessment of the progress achieved by the end of the development period will be added to the faculty member’s personnel file. 
+
+							If, however, the annual assessment reflects that the matter(s) has not been addressed satisfactorily, then the College may initiate procedures for dismissal for cause in accordance with the College’s existing faculty procedures (see Section 4.12.2).
+
+							3.	Appeals
+
+							An unsatisfactory post-tenure review decision may be grieved in accordance with procedures set forth in the Faculty Grievance Policy in Section 4.13.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Emeritus Guidelines July 2019.txt [/INST] Emeritae and Emeriti Faculty
+
+of Wheaton College
+
+
+
+An Outline of Benefits and Expectations
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Emerita and Emeritus Status:
+
+
+
+Emerita or emeritus status honors a faculty member's service and contributions during a career at the College, as well as the faculty member’s interest in an ongoing and meaningful connection with Wheaton.  
+
+
+
+A retiring faculty member’s department/program may request emerita or emeritus status for that colleague via a letter from the Chair to the Provost. That letter should indicate that the full department or program supports the request, and outline the reasons why the department believes the faculty member’s contributions merit emeritus status.
+
+
+
+Following the recommendation of the Department, the Provost will request that the Board of Trustees grant emeritus status to the faculty member. 
+
+
+
+Faculty who retire at the Associate Professor level may, at the Provost’s discretion, be recommended for the status of Professor Emerita/Emeritus.  The Chairperson’s letter to the Provost may make such a request, along with any recommendations for title.
+
+
+
+Emeritae/emeriti are not considered employees of the college. They are considered members of the broader Wheaton community. However, emeriti faculty are expected to conduct themselves in accordance with the expectations for all Wheaton faculty. 
+
+
+
+Access to Resources:
+
+
+
+Emeriti faculty may maintain their Wheaton photo ID. TheWheaton ID can be used to access the Wallace Library, as well as recreational and dining facilities. With their Wheaton ID, emeriti faculty are eligible for any faculty discounts that the Wheaton bookstore offers.
+
+
+
+Emeritae/emeriti may keep their Wheaton email account, and have access to InsideWheaton and the Wheaton network, with the proviso that these services be used within the limits of Wheaton’s acceptable use policy, and for Wheaton-related business, academic, and professional purposes. The full acceptable use policy can be found here. 
+
+
+
+Emeriti faculty may have borrowing privileges from local Wheaton collections upon request, and may request interlibrary loan services via the Wallace Library. Emeriti faculty will also have off-campus access to online library resources. 
+
+
+
+Emeriti faculty will continue to have access to OnCourse. OnCourse provides online access for up to three academic years of courses
+
+
+
+
+
+Emeriti faculty, with the approval of their home department or program, may maintain a faculty profile on the departmental website.
+
+
+
+A campus mailbox will not be provided, though correspondence can be directed in care of the appropriate faculty assistant. 
+
+
+
+The College cannot fund special software or computing needs.
+
+
+
+Any human subjects research carried out is subject to IRB approval.
+
+
+
+Any animal research carried out is subject to IACUC approval.
+
+
+
+Office space:
+
+
+
+Emeriti faculty may request office space on campus. Office space will be granted at the discretion of the Office of the Provost, and may depend upon space availability, and the faculty member’s need for regular use of the space. Emeriti faculty who are granted office space will receive the following:
+
+
+
+a working phone, if requested;
+
+
+
+a standard Wheaton desktop or laptop, if requested. (Emeriti faculty may transfer an existing computer from the faculty member’s old office);
+
+
+
+Wheaton College Microsoft licenses for OS and Office;
+
+
+
+technical support services, as available.
+
+
+
+Amy emeriti faculty who are teaching as adjunct faculty members will have access to office space through the department’s regular processes for accommodation of adjuncts.
+
+
+
+For considerations of safety, the office should be used during business hours only. 
+
+
+
+The use of office space may be withdrawn at any time. 
+
+
+
+Should an emeritus/a faculty member be granted office space, the College cannot provide moving or packing services. 
+
+
+
+Please note that these benefits and services are subject to change, and may end at any time, at the college’s sole discretion. Questions about emeritus status can be directed to the Assistant Provost, Jim Mancall.
+
+
+
+
+
+				Emeritae/emeriti guidelines, page 1 of 2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Employee Code of Conduct Sec.III.txt [/INST] Employee Code of Conduct 
+
+
+
+The College Employee Code of Conduct is based on a foundation of shared values, which include: 
+
+Commitment to excellence and maintaining public trust; 
+
+Commitment and accountability to its students, colleagues, and the community; 
+
+Respect for the worth and dignity of all individuals; 
+
+Inclusiveness and respect for pluralism and diversity; and, 
+
+Responsible stewardship of resources. 
+
+All employees at Dominican College are expected to observe certain standards of conduct that value respect, honesty, fairness and integrity in all activities. 
+
+
+
+In furtherance of these values, Dominican College employees are expected to serve as role models for the students and conduct their personal and professional lives in accordance with Dominican College’s mission statement.  Moreover, Dominican College employees are expected to maintain professional relationships with parents, students, fellow employees, members of the wider community, and the general public.  Employees should cooperate with each other and avoid negative and destructive criticism.  Dominican College employees should maintain a positive attitude about the College within the community and with the general public. Confidentiality must be maintained with regard to College affairs.  Professional concerns about the College, your fellow employees and students, and your job should not be shared with parents, trustees, or members of the public, but should be discussed with your supervisor.  Any writing which involves the College, either directly or without identifying the College, whether published, self-published or posted on the Internet, must be approved by your immediate supervisor prior to publication.  For further information on publishing see Policy No. II -  2.1.8 - Ownership of Copyrightable Materials and Intellectual Property Volume X, Section 10.2 of the Dominican College Policy Manual.
+
+
+
+Types of behavior and conduct that Dominican College considers inappropriate include, but are NOT limited to, the following: 
+
+Breaching confidentiality; 
+
+Falsifying employment or other records, including time sheets; 
+
+Mutilating or altering documents or identifications;
+
+Violating Dominican College’s policies, including but not limited to nondiscrimination, workplace violence and/or sexual harassment policies; 
+
+Violating the federal or state civil, criminal or quasi-criminal laws;
+
+Engaging in inappropriate relationships, consensual or otherwise, with students or other employees; 
+
+Failure to cooperate in any investigation conducted by the school;
+
+Soliciting or accepting gratuities; 
+
+Establishing a pattern of excessive absenteeism or tardiness; 
+
+Engaging in excessive, unnecessary, or unauthorized use of Dominican College’s supplies, particularly for personal use; 
+
+Repeated abuse of telephone or other personal use of school property;
+
+Willful or neglectful destruction of school or another individual’s property
+
+Being under the influence of alcohol or illegal or controlled substances during work hours; 
+
+Leaving work without authorization;
+
+Illegally manufacturing, possessing, using, selling, distributing or transporting drugs;
+
+Bringing or using alcoholic beverages on Dominican College property or using alcoholic beverages while engaged in Dominican College business off premises, except where authorized;
+
+Fighting or using obscene, abusive, or threatening language or gestures;
+
+Disorderly conduct or conduct detrimental to the school’s reputation;
+
+Theft/Stealing property from co-workers, the College, students or others;
+
+Possession of weapons on school premises, including but not limited to having unauthorized firearms on College premises or while on College business;
+
+Disregarding safety or security policies, regulations, and laws;
+
+Insubordination;
+
+Dishonesty; 
+
+Conviction of a crime;
+
+Improper disclosure of confidential or sensitive information;
+
+Unauthorized use of College property, including vehicles;
+
+Inappropriate use of College PCs and Internet access, including downloading copyrighted material;
+
+Illegal gambling on the premises;
+
+Any behavior that adversely affects one or more students, or violation of any policy in this Handbook or the College Policy Manual.
+
+
+
+The foregoing list is not all-inclusive. The College reserves the right to decide when an employee’s conduct is detrimental to its business and the nature of the discipline imposed regarding such conduct, up to and including dismissal.  Dominican College may dismiss an employee without providing a performance improvement plan when, at the sole discretion of the President, the circumstances do not warrant the continued employment of the employee.  Nothing herein shall alter the at-will nature of the employment relationship.
+
+
+
+Dominican College Standard of Conduct for Coaches 
+
+
+
+Please refer to the College’s Coaches Handbook for information regarding the Standard of Conduct for Coaches. 
+
+
+
+In addition, all employees and other individuals representing the College are expected to inform themselves about and comply with College policies and regulations pertaining to them. Sources include:
+
+For Employees: Volumes II and VII of the Dominican College Policy Manual 
+
+For Faculty: Volumes II, IV, and VII of the Dominican College Policy Manual.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] EMPLOYEE COVID VACCINE POLICY JJH SL.txt [/INST] COVID-19 VACCINATION POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+
+
+Policy Number:
+
+III – 
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+PLEASE INSERT
+
+Applicability:
+
+All Canisius College employees.
+
+History:
+
+ 
+
+
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to provide and maintain a workplace that is free of recognized hazards associated with Covid-19 and outline procedures for employees to receive the COVID-19 vaccination, or to request an exemption.
+
+POLICY 
+
+All Canisius College employees and volunteers are required to have or obtain a COVID-19 vaccination as a term and condition of employment at the College, unless an exemption is approved.  See Procedures/Guidelines for requesting an exemption. 
+
+Current employees and volunteers must report their vaccine status and provide approved documentation as proof of vaccination to Human Resources not later than INSERT DATE. All new employees and volunteers will be required to provide proof of vaccination status prior to the start of their employment. All records of vaccinations and approved exemptions will be maintained by Human Resources. Violations of this policy may result in appropriate disciplinary measures, up to an including dismissal.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+Vaccine Administration 
+
+Employees and volunteers are responsible for scheduling and obtaining all recommended doses of an FDA- approved COVID-19 vaccine or a COVID-19 vaccine granted Emergency Use Authorization by the FDA. All employees will be paid one (1) hour for time taken to receive vaccinations. Employees are to work with their supervisor to schedule an appropriate time to comply with this policy. 
+
+Request for Exemptions 
+
+Disability Accommodation 
+
+The College provides reasonable accommodations, absent undue hardship, to qualified individuals with disabilities that enable them to perform their job duties. Employees who believe they need an accommodation regarding this policy because of a disability are responsible for requesting a reasonable accommodation with Human Resources. See the college’s Employee Accessibility Policy for additional information.
+
+Religious Accommodation 
+
+The college provides reasonable accommodations, absent undue hardship, to employees with sincerely held religious beliefs, observances, or practices that conflict with getting vaccinated. Employees who believe they need an accommodation regarding this policy because of a sincerely held religious belief are responsible for requesting a reasonable accommodation with Human Resources. Human Resources will engage in an interactive dialogue with the employee and the employee’s religious leader to determine whether an exemption is appropriate and may be granted without imposing an undue hardship on the college
+
+Exemption for Other Medical Reasons 
+
+Exemptions for other medical reasons may be available on a case-by-case basis for conditions such as a history of certain allergic reactions and any other medical condition that is a contraindication to the COVID-19 vaccine even if they do not qualify as a disability under federal, state, or local law. Human Resources will engage in an interactive dialogue with the employee and the employee’s healthcare provider to determine whether an exemption is appropriate and may be granted without imposing an undue hardship on the college.  See the college’s Employee Accessibility Policy for additional information regarding documentation requirements and the iterative process.
+
+Non-Retaliation 
+
+Any form of discipline, reprisal, intimidation, or retaliation for reporting a violation of this policy or any other health and safety concern is prohibited by the college. Employees also have the right to report work-related injuries and illnesses, and the college will not discharge or discriminate or otherwise retaliate against employees for reporting work-related injuries or illnesses or good faith health and safety concerns. 
+
+Policy Modification 
+
+Government and public health guidelines and restrictions and business and industry best practices regarding Covid-19 and Covid-19 vaccines are changing rapidly as new information becomes available, further research is conducted, and additional vaccines are approved and distributed. The college reserves the right to modify this policy at any time in its sole discretion to adapt to changing circumstances and business needs, consistent with its commitment to maintaining a safe and healthy workplace. 
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Employee Accessibility Policy</s>"
+"<s>[INST] EMPLOYEE COVID VACCINE POLICY.txt [/INST] COVID-19 VACCINATION POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+
+
+Policy Number:
+
+III – 
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+PLEASE INSERT
+
+Applicability:
+
+All Canisius College employees.
+
+History:
+
+ 
+
+
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to provide and maintain a workplace that is free of recognized hazards associated with Covid-19 and outline procedures for employees to receive the COVID-19 vaccination, or to request an exemption.
+
+POLICY 
+
+All Canisius College employees and volunteers are required to have or obtain a COVID-19 vaccination as a term and condition of employment at the College, unless an exemption is approved.  See Procedures/Guidelines for requesting an exemption. 
+
+Current employees and volunteers must report their vaccine status and provide approved documentation as proof of vaccination to Human Resources not later than INSERT DATE. All new employees and volunteers will be required to provide proof of vaccination status prior to the start of their employment. All records of vaccinations and approved exemptions will be maintained by Human Resources. Violations of this policy may result in appropriate disciplinary measures, up to an including dismissal.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+Vaccine Administration 
+
+Employees and volunteers are responsible for scheduling and obtaining all recommended doses of an FDA- approved COVID-19 vaccine or a COVID-19 vaccine granted Emergency Use Authorization by the FDA. All employees will be paid one (1) hour for time taken to receive vaccinations. Employees are to work with their supervisor to schedule an appropriate time to comply with this policy. 
+
+Request for Exemptions 
+
+Disability Accommodation 
+
+The College provides reasonable accommodations, absent undue hardship, to qualified individuals with disabilities that enable them to perform their job duties. Employees who believe they need an accommodation regarding this policy because of a disability are responsible for requesting a reasonable accommodation with Human Resources. See the college’s Employee Accessibility Policy for additional information.
+
+Religious Accommodation 
+
+The college provides reasonable accommodations, absent undue hardship, to employees with sincerely held religious beliefs, observances, or practices that conflict with getting vaccinated. Employees who believe they need an accommodation regarding this policy because of a sincerely held religious belief are responsible for requesting a reasonable accommodation with Human Resources. 
+
+Exemption for Other Medical Reasons 
+
+Exemptions for other medical reasons may be available on a case-by-case basis/for conditions such as pregnancy, breastfeeding, history of certain allergic reactions, and any other medical condition that is a contraindication to the COVID-19 vaccine even if they do not qualify as a disability under federal, state, or local law. Human Resources will engage in an interactive dialogue with an employee determine whether an exemption is appropriate and may be granted without imposing an undue hardship on the college. 
+
+Non-Retaliation 
+
+Any form of discipline, reprisal, intimidation, or retaliation for reporting a violation of this policy or any other health and safety concern is prohibited by the college. Employees also have the right to report work-related injuries and illnesses, and the college will not discharge or discriminate or otherwise retaliate against employees for reporting work-related injuries or illnesses or good faith health and safety concerns. 
+
+Policy Modification 
+
+Government and public health guidelines and restrictions and business and industry best practices regarding Covid-19 and Covid-19 vaccines are changing rapidly as new information becomes available, further research is conducted, and additional vaccines are approved and distributed. The college reserves the right to modify this policy at any time in its sole discretion to adapt to changing circumstances and business needs, consistent with its commitment to maintaining a safe and healthy workplace. 
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Employee Accessibility Policy</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Employee Housing Policy.txt [/INST] EMPLOYEE CAMPUS HOUSING POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+
+
+Policy Number:
+
+III – 3.5.8
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President, Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+All full-time faculty and staff.
+
+History:
+
+ 
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to establish the circumstance under which campus housing may be provided to eligible newly hired Canisius College employees. 
+
+POLICY
+
+Canisius College recognizes the importance of a housing program as a recruitment and retention tool. Accordingly, it is the policy of the college to make a limited number of employee campus housing units available for rent to newly hired full-time faculty, staff and administrators. 
+
+The college’s goals in offering the housing program are to:
+
+Aid in the recruitment of new faculty and staff;
+
+Optimize the use of available resources; and 
+
+Enhance the sense of college community by facilitating participation of faculty and staff in the student experience. 
+
+Any campus housing units where the employee will be paying a rent that will be less than the fair market value of the rents of the property must be cleared by Human Resources prior to any terms being conveyed to prospective or current, employees. 
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Campus Housingany college housing property being made available for eligible college employees for short-term rental purposes. 
+
+Fair Market Valuetypical value for which housing would otherwise be rented to a non-college employee, or an amount of annualized rent equal to at least 5% of the appraised lodging value of the property. 
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+I.	Eligibility/Duration
+
+New full-time members of the faculty, staff and administration are eligible to apply for campus housing. When the demand for housing exceeds availability, priority is given to newly recruited tenured and tenure-track faculty. 
+
+All lease arrangements are reviewed annually based upon the college fiscal year.
+
+Members of the faculty and staff who apply for and are accepted to lease campus housing are eligible to stay and rent campus housing up to a period of one academic year, assuming the employee remains in the employ of the college (see the Termination/Change of Employment Status section). Extensions beyond the one academic year period may be granted after consideration of housing demand and institutional priorities.
+
+It is the responsibility of all members of the Canisius College community, including faculty and staff tenants and their guests, to comply with the college’s policies, including but not limited to those that apply to drugs, alcohol, non-discrimination and sexual harassment. 
+
+The college reserves the right to terminate a lease agreement at its sole discretion, and to ask a resident to vacate the rental unit, if in the judgment of the college, the resident is in violation of the lease or policies, rules or regulations adopted by the college.
+
+II.	Establishing Rental Rates 
+
+College housing rents are based on a methodology outlined by the Internal Revenue Code Section 119(d).  The formula regulates the minimum rent that can be charged to an employee without imputed income being assessed as reportable income. Accordingly, the fair market value of each rental unit will be assessed by The Office of Student Life every year. Rental rate increases take effect at the beginning of each fiscal year and published annually by The Office of Student Life. 
+
+2019:
+
+1 bedroom apartment: $895 per month
+
+2 bedroom apartment with kitchen/bath: $995 per month
+
+3 bedroom or more apartment with kitchen/bath: $1,100 per month
+
+III.	Leases
+
+Leases are issued and signed annually based on the college fiscal year. Terms and conditions contained in the lease document further define the responsibilities of the lessee and the college. Tenants are responsible for initially disclosing all parties whom will reside in the leased location. The college reserves the authority to approve or deny parties. 
+
+As a landlord, the college reserves the right to CORI check all applicants for housing and adult household members.
+
+IV.	Sub-Leasing 
+
+Subleasing or lease/cost sharing is not permitted. Unauthorized sub-leasing will result in eviction (loss of housing without penalty or liability to the college). This includes Airbnb. 
+
+V.	Maintenance 
+
+The tenant is expected to maintain the property in a presentable condition at all times. The tenant is expected to leave the unit in the same condition as when they moved in. Tenants may not alter the unit, move furniture outside, use nails, screws or apply other fasteners into any of the walls, ceilings, floors or woodwork. All tenants should utilize the work order system in the Canisius College Portal to request any facility repairs. In the case of an urgent request, during off-hours, tenants should call Public Safety at 716-888-2330.
+
+The tenant agrees to allow authorized college representatives access to the property at all reasonable hours for the purpose of inspecting or making necessary repairs to the property, and in emergency situations. This includes granting access to service professionals who have been contracted to render specialized services.
+
+VI.	Application Procedure 
+
+Eligible employees interested in obtaining campus housing must complete an application form and submit it to the Office of Student Life. 
+
+The applications will be sent to the Housing Committee (Housing Coordinator, Senior Associate Dean of Students, Vice President for Student Affairs) for review and decision.
+
+ All decisions will be based on institutional priorities and available resources, with special consideration on applicant need and what the applicant may offer to the student experience.
+
+VII.	Payments
+
+Monthly rental payments must be made by personal check or credit card to The Office of Student Life by the 1st of each month. If a check is returned by the bank because of insufficient funds, a service charge shall be levied against the tenant. In the event that a second check is not honored by the bank, the tenant will be required to make future payments in cash.
+
+VIII.	Termination/Change of Employment Status 
+
+Employees who are leaving the college will, under normal circumstances, be permitted to extend the occupancy of their housing for up to 30 days following the commencement of ineligibility. 
+
+Employees who become only temporarily ineligible for housing, may, with the prior written consent of The Office of Student Life, remain in their housing during the agreed-upon specified temporary period. 
+
+Employees who are moving to a housing-ineligible position at the college may remain in their apartments for 60 days following their change to housing-ineligible status. 
+
+IX.	Separation from Spouses or Domestic Partners 
+
+In the event of separation or divorce between an employee tenant and his or her non-employee spouse or domestic partner, the non-employee spouse or domestic partner may not take over the lease agreement and must find housing off campus. 
+
+X.	Insurance
+
+The college’s insurance covers damage to the physical structure and property. The college’s insurance does not provide coverage for tenants’ personal belongings or vehicles, nor will the college be liable for any damage to or theft of tenants’ personal property or vehicles. Tenants are required to have renter’s insurance with minimum coverage of $10,000 property insurance and $200,000 liability insurance. Renters insurance must also cover flood and fire. Tenants must provide The Office of Student Life proof of insurance with the initial lease letter and annually thereafter with the lease renewal letter. 
+
+XI.	Reservation of College Rights 
+
+The college reserves the right from time to time to change its housing policies. This policy statement is not intended to be and should not be regarded as a contract between the college and any person. 
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Fiscal Year and Revenue Recognition Policy
+
+Rental Income (Lease) Policy</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Endowed or Named Chairs.txt [/INST] Endowed or Named Chairs
+
+The University reserves the right to make faculty appointments that carry the additional title of endowed or named chair. The holder of an endowed or named chair must satisfy the conditions associated with the chair. Holders of endowed or named chairs must be tenure track faculty and typically will be tenured. 
+
+Appointments to endowed chairs are made by the President with the advice of the Provost and Faculty Personnel Committee and expire at the conclusion of the specified term. Current members of the faculty may be appointed to the position of an endowed or named chair by the President through an internal selection process.  New faculty must be appointed via the established search process.
+
+The terms of the appointment to an endowed or named chair will be specified in the chair holder’s letter of initial appointment or at the time when the faculty member is appointed to the chair.  A tenure track faculty member currently employed by the University retains rank and tenure upon appointment to the chaired position.</s>"
+<s>[INST] ENS Recommendation Report (FInal Client Draft) .txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] EP (2nd Draft)(6.19).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] ES of Final Draft.txt [/INST] 22
+
+
+
+April 29, 2023
+
+
+
+TO:	Working Group
+
+FROM: 	Stephen Lazarus
+Sr. Consultant
+Stevens Strategy
+
+RE: 	Executive Summary of Final Draft
+
+Below is an executive summary of the final draft of the Faculty Bylaws.  The Working Group has organized the summary as follows:
+
+Summary of New Policies: In this section of the summary, the Working Group lists new policies that were not addressed in our current Legislation.
+
+Current Legislation Not Included in Bylaws: In this section of the summary, the Working Group identifies current Legislation that was not incorporated into the Faculty Bylaws.
+
+Substantive Revisions to Current Legislation: In this section of the summary, the Working Group what it considers to be substantive revisions to current Legislation.  The Working Group acknowledges that this listing is subjective and urges our colleagues to carefully read the entirety of the Bylaws so that independent judgements regarding substantive judgements may be made.
+
+Current Legislation “Migrated” to Other Articles/Sections of the Bylaws: In this section of the summary, the Working Group lists policies addressed in our current Legislation that have been moved to new locations within the Faculty Bylaws.
+
+
+
+
+
+Summary of New Policies
+
+
+
+Current Legislation Not Included in Bylaws
+
+Article I.O - Associate Faculty:  The Associate Faculty and Non-Tenure Track Continuing Faculty designations are being replaced going forward with the Professor of Practice-line and Visiting Faculty categories.  Text defining these new categories has been developed by the Working Group in accordance with the Full-time Faculty Contract Proposal and PoP Framework documents provided to the group by the Provost’s Office. Given the College’s anticipated adoption of the new Professor of Practice-line and Visiting Faculty categories, the Working Group has not reprinted the Associate and Non-Tenure Track Continuing Faculty legislation in the Faculty Bylaws.
+
+												Article I.P - Non-Tenure Track Continuing Faculty: see comment above.
+
+												Part Two - The Classroom: The Working Group recommends that the Faculty Bylaws be limited in scope to ‘faculty status’ matters, as well as other policies that address unique faculty rights or responsibilities.  As such, the Working Group recommends that the academic policies in Part Two of our current Legislation either be solely reprinted in the academic catalog or as a stand-alone Academic Policy Manual, which houses not only academic policy, but also policies addressing academic program administration and research related policies (i.e., approval/modification of academic programs, assigning of courses, academic program review, IRB and animal research, research misconduct, conflicts of interest in federal sponsored research, etc.). 
+
+												Part Three - Honor Code and Judicial Procedures: The Working Group recommends that the Part Three of current Legislation not be reprinted in the Faculty Bylaws under the same reasoning as not reprinting the academic policies (i.e., not faculty status policy and the Judicial Code is published in other College policy documents).
+
+
+
+Substantive Revisions to Current Legislation
+
+
+
+Current Legislation “Migrated” to Other Articles/Sections of the Bylaws
+
+Article IV, Section 4.3 - Description of the Structure of the Committee on Tenure:  Text outlining the structure of the Committee on Tenure has been moved to Article I, Section 5.2.1.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Evaluation Examples.txt [/INST] Occidental
+
+
+
+Annual Evaluations by Department Committee
+
+Pre-Tenure Reviews
+Faculty will be reviewed during their third year of appointment as a regular faculty member. Three Year review by Department Committee and Academic Council
+
+
+
+Tenure Review
+
+Faculty will normally be eligible for a tenure review during their sixth year of appointment as a regular faculty member. However, for faculty members having previous full-time teaching or professional experience who are initially appointed at the rank of associate or full professor, tenure shall normally be considered no later than the third year of regular appointment at the College. 
+
+The President, acting on the Dean of the College’s recommendation, or at his/her discretion, may also grant a one-time one year extension to the length of time before a candidate’s tenure review to candidates who have had children during this period, or other similar personal situations in which such action has the result of providing equitable treatment for the candidate in the review process. Such a request by the candidate must be made to the Dean of the College or the President by April 15 of the prior academic year. 
+
+
+
+Associate Professor Review 
+
+The Associate Professor Review normally takes place in the fifth academic year after promotion to Associate Professor. 
+
+
+
+
+
+PROMOTION TO FULL
+
+Promotion to Full Professor Reviews 
+
+An Associate Professor shall be eligible for promotion in their seventh year in rank. However, in cases of exceptional achievement in all areas of teaching, professional achievement, and service, the faculty member may apply for accelerated promotion in their sixth year in rank. The Dean of the College will communicate to the faculty member the Advisory Council’s recommendation for an accelerated promotion during the Associate Professor review process. 
+
+If a faculty member has not applied for promotion by their tenth year in rank, a review portfolio must be submitted in this tenth year. Promotion in the tenth year of an associate professorship requires evidence of effective teaching, which must be accompanied by additional evidence of professional achievement and service. If promotion does not result from this review, the faculty member will work with the Dean of the College and their department to develop a plan to work toward promotion. Subsequent reviews for promotion to Full Professor will occur at least every five years (see section 6 for guidelines) unless a candidate initiates his or her review as in a 1) below. 
+
+
+
+FULL PROFESSORS REVIEWED VERY FIVE YEARS
+
+ Option a – Evaluation by Co-Mentoring Group
+
+Option b – Evaluation by Academic Council
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Dickinson
+
+
+
+Review years are: 
+
+a. Non-tenured faculty are reviewed in Years Two, Four, and Six, utilizing procedures and standards described in what follows. Each review is designed to be more thorough and more exacting than the previous one, with Year Six being a review for tenure. 
+
+b. Tenured faculty are typically reviewed once in each six year sabbatical cycle. Year One of the cycle begins upon return from a sabbatical leave. The review typically occurs in Year Three. An exception is the first review following the granting of tenure. This review will typically take place in the fourth year after the tenure review if the pre-tenure sabbatical was counted on the tenure clock, and in the third year if it was not. This review thus occurs in the year preceding sabbatical eligibility and will include a sabbatical proposal, should the faculty member be applying for one. After the sabbatical, reviews will take place as normal in Year Three of the sabbatical cycle. A delay in sabbaticals does not necessarily delay the following review. 
+
+c. Department chairs typically provide salary recommendations for the two years subsequent to a review, sabbatical proposal, or sabbatical report. 
+
+
+
+RHODES
+
+
+
+PRE-TENURE
+
+Department-Level Reviews
+
+Overview: In the spring semester of years one, three, and five, tenure-track faculty will undergo reviews at the departmental/program level. These reviews are designed to ensure that, when a faculty member is not undergoing a second- or fourth-year review, or a tenure review, ongoing attention is given to the trajectory toward tenure. In the third and fifth years, it will be important to focus on any areas where suggestions for improvement were made to the faculty member in the preceding year’s review.
+
+First-Year Review
+
+The Process: The first-year review is conducted by the department/program Chair early in the spring semester (January) of the tenure-track faculty member’s first year of service to the College. The first-year review is formative in nature as it occurs after only one semester. The candidate will submit a portfolio according to instructions provided by the Office of Academic Affairs that includes materials on teaching, scholarship, and service. The department/program Chair (or, with the approval of the Vice President for Academic Affairs, a designated senior colleague in the department/program) will observe the candidate’s teaching during the fall semester and meet with the candidate to provide appropriate feedback. The purpose of these visits is to support and guide the candidate toward effective teaching at Rhodes. The Chair and the candidate should work together to determine the timing of class visits to help promote the candidate’s development. Additionally, the department/program Chair will review the candidate’s college-wide student evaluations and grade distributions for all classes taught during the first semester. The department/program Chair and a representative for Academic Affairs will meet with the candidate to discuss his or her progress, plans for future work, and the College’s expectations in all three areas of assessment.
+
+Third-Year and Fifth-Year Reviews
+
+The Process: The third-year and fifth-year reviews are conducted by the department/program Chair early in the spring semester (January) of the tenure track faculty member’s third or fifth year of service to the College, respectively. The department/program Chair reviews materials on teaching, scholarship, and service included in the candidate’s updated portfolio. The department/program Chair (or, with the approval of the Vice President for Academic Affairs, a designated senior colleague in the department/program) will observe the candidate’s teaching during the fall semester and meet with the candidate to provide appropriate feedback. The purpose of these visits is to support and guide the candidate toward effective teaching at Rhodes. The chair and the candidate should work together to determine the timing of class visits to help promote the candidate’s development. The department/program Chair will also review college-wide student evaluations and grade distributions for all classes taught during the review period. The department/program Chair determines whether progress in each category of evaluation is satisfactory or if there are areas of concern. In the third-year, the department/program Chair will also consider feedback provided to the faculty member during the second-year review and assess whether progress is being made by the candidate in any areas identified as needing improvement. In the fifth-year, feedback provided during the fourth-year review will be considered in a similar fashion. The department/program Chair then meets with the candidate to discuss the Chair’s assessment as well as the candidate’s plans for future work. If no concerns are noted, this concludes the review process.
+
+If there are any areas of concern, the department/program Chair also schedules a meeting with the Vice President for Academic Affairs to discuss the outcome of the review. In the event of such a meeting, the department/program Chair conveys in writing the results of the evaluation (including feedback from the Vice President for Academic Affairs) to the candidate. The department/program Chair will also send a copy of this letter to the Vice President for Academic Affairs that will be maintained in the Office of Academic Affairs throughout the candidate’s tenure-track period of service to the College, and it is available to the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion upon request during a sixth-year review.
+
+The Second-Year Review
+
+Overview: A tenure-track member of the faculty undergoes a second-year review in the spring semester of the second year of the first six years of his or her appointment. As both formative and summative, this review provides feedback on progress towards a successful tenure review and identifies areas that require attention prior to a tenure review.
+
+The Process: The second-year review is conducted very early in the spring semester (January) by the tenure-track faculty member’s department/program Chair. The candidate prepares an updated portfolio for this review. The department/program Chair reviews materials on teaching, scholarship and service included in the candidate’s portfolio. The department/program Chair (or, with the approval of the Vice President for Academic Affairs, a designated senior colleague in the department/program) will also observe three of the candidate’s classes in the fall semester prior to the review. Additionally, the department/program Chair will review the candidate’s college-wide student evaluations and grade distributions for all classes taught during the review period.
+
+The department Chair will receive input from at least two senior members of the department. The program Chair will receive input from at least two senior faculty members in the program or faculty designated by the Vice President for Academic Affairs. Faculty housed in departments but engaged in significant interdisciplinary scholarship or significant and regular teaching in interdisciplinary programs will be evaluated by the department Chair and two other senior faculty, normally the program Chair and a senior faculty member designated by the Vice President for Academic Affairs in consultation with the Chairs. These senior members of the department and/or program will be identified in the fall of the candidate’s first year of service at the College and designated in the PRS. When possible, the senior faculty who participate in the second-year review will remain in place through the tenure review in order to ensure continuity of observation and feedback.
+
+Input from these senior department/program members will be informed by observations from class visits during the previous two semesters (at least one class session during the first year and one class session in the fall semester of the second year) and a review of the candidate’s portfolio. These senior members of the department/program will meet as a group with the department/program Chair to discuss their observations and findings.
+
+The department/program Chair then makes a determination regarding the candidate’s progress in each category of evaluation using the description of performance described in the previous section (Section VIII). The department/program Chair then meets with the candidate to discuss the Chair’s assessment as well as the candidate’s plans for future work.
+
+The department/program Chair’s written assessment of the candidate’s progress in each category of evaluation (including the reasons for the assessments) and the candidate’s portfolio are sent to the Vice President for Academic Affairs, usually late in January. The Vice President for Academic Affairs will have an initial meeting with the department/program Chair to discuss the Chair’s assessment and the Vice President’s assessment of the candidate’s progress. This is followed by a meeting with the Vice President for Academic Affairs, the department/program Chair, and the candidate to discuss his or her progress. The Vice President for Academic Affairs will provide a written summary of the outcome of the review focusing on the candidate’s progress in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service with recommendations for improvement when necessary. If progress is deemed to be insufficient, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will communicate this in the letter as well. This letter will become part of the official record examined during the fourth-year review. After the meeting with the Vice President for Academic Affairs, the department/program Chair will have a follow-up meeting with the candidate to discuss the feedback from the review process and to assist the candidate in identifying strategies to foster an ongoing positive trajectory in each category of evaluation.
+
+In the case of departments/programs with fewer than three senior faculty members, an ad hoc department/program committee for a tenure-track faculty member will be constituted in the first year and specified in the PRS. One or two ad hoc department/program committee members will be designated by the Vice President for Academic Affairs in consultation with the senior members of the candidate’s department/program and the candidate. Ad hoc department/program committee members will be expected to engage in regular classroom visitations, as well as have a conversation with the candidate concerning teaching and scholarship expectations. Normally, the ad hoc department/program committee will continue to evaluate the candidate through the tenure review, even if the department/program grows to more than three senior members between the candidate’s first and sixth year. This will help to ensure continuity of observation and feedback throughout the probationary period.
+
+ The Fourth-Year Review
+
+Overview: The fourth-year review is both formative and summative. It considers the same three areas of faculty performance as the second-year review, but is broader in scope in that all tenured faculty participating in the review provide a written assessment of a candidate. The fourth-year review is particularly crucial for determining the likelihood of success during the tenure review for a faculty member at the College. The fourth-year review is also done with attention given to the College’s needs for the position in the faculty member’s discipline.
+
+Faculty housed in academic departments are evaluated at the fourth year by all tenured departmental faculty members. 
+
+Faculty housed in interdisciplinary programs are evaluated by a committee of senior faculty constituted in the first year by the Vice President for Academic Affairs in consultation with the program Chair and specified in the PRS. Normally, this committee will include the program Chair and two senior faculty involved in the candidate’s second-year review, and possibly other senior faculty with appropriate expertise. When possible, this review committee will stay in place through the candidate’s sixth-year in order to ensure continuity of observation and feedback.
+
+Faculty housed in departments but engaged in significant interdisciplinary scholarship or have significant and regular teaching commitments to interdisciplinary programs will be evaluated by all tenured departmental faculty members, but in these cases the review will normally include the Chair of the relevant interdisciplinary program and/or other tenured program faculty with relevant scholarship and/or teaching expertise. The decision to expand the review beyond the department will be made by the Vice President for Academic Affairs in consultation with the department Chair, the program Chair, and the candidate and will be specified in the PRS. Normally this decision will be made in the first year, and when possible, the department and program faculty for the fourth-year review will remain in place through the tenure review in order to ensure continuity of observation and feedback.
+
+The fourth-year review takes place in the fall semester of the candidate’s fourth year of service to the College. The review process is initiated in August, with data collection early in the fall semester. It concludes in December with a meeting attended by the candidate, department/program Chair, and Vice President for Academic Affairs.
+
+The Process: By the first day of the fall semester, the candidate will submit an updated portfolio according to instructions provided by the Office of Academic Affairs. During the fall semester, the Office of Academic Affairs will distribute questionnaires to be completed by all students who have completed a class (or classes) with the candidate and earned grades of A through D- during his or her first six semesters of teaching at the College. If the Vice President for Academic Affairs believes more information on teaching performance is needed, a representative for Academic Affairs and the department/program Chair will co-conduct interviews with selected students. The Office of Academic Affairs will also send questionnaires to all of the candidate’s advisees, and will collect copies of all of the candidate’s college-generated course evaluations.
+
+Senior departmental/program faculty members will review the candidate’s portfolio and visit at least one class. Faculty who are members of the Teaching Evaluation Committee will visit a minimum of three classes during the first semester of the candidate’s fourth year. Senior faculty members will meet as a group with the department/program Chair to discuss the candidate’s performance in teaching, scholarship, and service over the four years, his or her suitability for renewal, and suggestions for possible improvement, where necessary. Each senior member writes a letter of his or her assessment of the candidate; this letter is submitted according to instructions provided by the Office of Academic Affairs. In addition to his or her independent assessment, the department/program Chair’s letter to the Vice President for Academic Affairs addresses any problems raised by the senior faculty members taking part in the review.
+
+The candidate has the option of soliciting additional letters from faculty and staff members that focus on the candidate’s service performance and campus citizenship. These letters should be submitted according to instructions provided by the Office of Academic Affairs. The remainder of the review, which culminates in December, is carried out by the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the department/program Chair. A final assessment of performance in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service is given in writing by the Vice President for Academic Affairs to the candidate at the review’s conclusion.
+
+A faculty member not meeting the College’s standards and/or not making adequate progress toward tenure in any area of evaluation (teaching, scholarship, or service) following the fourth-year review will not have his or her contract renewed after the fifth year of appointment. This candidate does not undergo a sixth-year review. The fifth year constitutes the twelve months’ notice of non-reappointment.
+
+The materials compiled during the fourth-year review will be maintained by the Office of Academic Affairs and will be available to the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion upon request during a tenure review.
+
+Book traversal links for C. The Fourth-Year Review
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+POST_TENUREOverview: Faculty members who achieve tenure at Rhodes College continue to develop as effective teachers and active scholars and as members who support in their service work the educational mission of the College. Tenured associate professors have a post-tenure review every six years, with a mid-period update at the third year. Tenured full professors have a post-promotion review every six years. The objective of these reviews is to provide opportunities for reflection and feedback on the tenured faculty member’s continued growth in teaching, scholarship, and service, and to provide a framework for discussions of long-term career planning, including, in the case of associate professors, promotion to professor.
+
+Excellence as defined in Section VIII of the College Handbook remains the benchmark for tenured faculty. Excellence in the post-tenure period entails:
+
+A level of teaching effectiveness that maintains or exceeds the excellence required for tenure;
+
+Continued scholarly achievement, demonstrated by activities and outcomes appropriate for a recognized scholar in the field;
+
+Sustained and effective academic citizenship commensurate with level of experience.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Evaluation of Provost Model Policy.Rock's Edits.txt [/INST] Evaluation of Provost
+
+To assist the President’s evaluation of the Provost, the faculty shall be called upon to periodically provide feedback on the administrative performance of the Provost.  
+
+Schedule
+
+Faculty participate in the periodic evaluation of the Provost’s administrative performance during the third year of initial appointment, and every fourth year thereafter. The President may request a review more frequently, if desired. The initial appointment means the date the Provost begins to serve in a position, whether in an interim or permanent appointment. When a Provost who has served as in an interim capactiy is selected for the permanent position as the result of a search, the time for the review shall be counted from the date of permanent appointment. If appointment to the Provost position is made later than the start of the academic year, the first review shall take place in the first academic year that begins after the second anniversary date of the appointment.
+
+Procedure
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee, in consultation with the President, is responsible for creating the survey instrument used for including faculty in the evaluation process for the Provost and oversees the administration of the instrument. The President shall identify for Faculty Personnel Committee those aspects of the following areas that are most relevant to the Provost’s performance assessment: the mission of the office, the Provost’s administrative responsibilities as delineated in the job description, and the Provost’s impact on the faculty, students, and the University.
+
+All full-time faculty members are invited to complete the evaluation survey prepared and distributed by the Faculty Personnel Committee, with the understanding that each faculty member will undertake evaluation in a responsible and professional manner, responding only to questions about which the individual faculty member has personal knowledge.  Moreover, survey responses should be fair and directed at improving performance and serving the mission of the University.  Improper personal attacks will not be tolerated and expunged by the Faculty Personnel Committee.
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee is responsible for compiling the results of the evaluations and submitting a summary report to the President at the end of the academic year. The report shall summarize both things the Provost is perceived as doing well and areas in which the Provost is perceived as needing to improve. Every effort will be made by the Faculty Personnel Committee to prepare a report that is supportive and developmentally useful to the Provost. As with documents relating to faculty evaluation, the report and the results of the survey are confidential and are not shared outside of the committee and its correspondence with the President.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Evaluation of Provost Model Policy.txt [/INST] Evaluation of Provost
+
+To assist the President’s evaluation of the Provost, the faculty shall be called upon to periodically provide feedback on the administrative performance of the Provost.  
+
+Schedule
+
+Faculty participate in the periodic evaluation of the Provost’s administrative performance during the third year of initial appointment, and every fourth year thereafter. The President may request a review more frequently, if desired. The initial appointment means the date the Provost begins to serve in a position, whether in an interim or permanent appointment. When a Provost who has served as in an interim capacity is selected for the permanent position as the result of a search, the time for the review shall be counted from the date of permanent appointment. If appointment to the Provost position is made later than the start of the academic year, the first review shall take place in the first academic year that begins after the second anniversary date of the appointment.
+
+Procedures
+
+Materials Submitted
+
+The Provost will upload to the online web portal the following materials: 
+
+The Provost’s job description
+
+The Academic Affairs Office’s strategic plan
+
+A current curriculum vitae
+
+A brief self-report listing the accomplishments of the Academic Affairs Office since the last evaluation cycle.
+
+Creation and Distribution of Survey Instrument
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee, in consultation with the President, is responsible for creating the survey instrument used for including faculty in the evaluation process for the Provost and oversees the administration of the instrument. The President shall identify for Faculty Personnel Committee those aspects of the following areas that are most relevant to the Provost’s performance assessment: the mission of the office, the Provost’s administrative responsibilities as delineated in the job description, and the Provost’s impact on the faculty, students, and the University.
+
+All full-time faculty members are invited to complete the evaluation survey prepared and distributed by the Faculty Personnel Committee, with the understanding that each faculty member will undertake evaluation in a responsible and professional manner, responding only to questions about which the individual faculty member has personal knowledge.  Moreover, survey responses should be fair and directed at improving performance and serving the mission of the University.  Improper personal attacks will not be tolerated and expunged by the Faculty Personnel Committee.
+
+Faculty Personnel Committee Report to President 
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee is responsible for compiling the results of the survey responses and submitting a report to the President at the end of the academic year. The report shall summarize the survey results, as well as address both things the Provost is perceived as doing well and areas in which the Provost is perceived as needing to improve. Every effort will be made by the Faculty Personnel Committee to prepare a report that is developmentally useful to the Provost. As with documents relating to faculty evaluation, the report and the results of the survey are confidential and are not shared outside of the committee and its correspondence with the President.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Evaluation of the Department Chairs.txt [/INST] Evaluation of the Department Chairs
+
+Model 1 – Modeled After Thomas More University
+
+The administrative performances of Department Chairs are evaluated annually.  The evaluation includes a survey of the departmental faculty regarding the administrative effectiveness of the department and an evaluation by the Provost.  
+
+Departmental Faculty Evaluation of Department Chairs
+
+The department faculty evaluate Department Chairs on an annual basis by completing a survey developed by Academic Affairs in collaboration with the Faculty Personnel Committee.  The survey focuses upon the Department Chair’s administrative performance of the duties and responsibilities set forth in the Department Chairperson Job Description.  The anonymized composite results are provided to the Provost.
+
+Provost Evaluation of Department Chair
+
+The Provost’s evaluation of the Department Chair focuses upon the chair’s performance in areas outlined in the Department Chairperson Job Description.  
+
+Items Reviewed:
+
+The Department Chair’s written Self-Report; and
+
+The anonymized composite results of the department faculty evaluations.
+
+After completing the review of the items above and taking into account the Provost’s observations of the Department Chair’s administrative performance, the Provost will document a preliminary evaluation of the Department Chair’s administrative performance during the evaluation period and submit it electronically to the Department Chair.
+
+The Provost and Department Chair will then discuss the draft evaluation and establish goals to help strengthen the department or improve its administration.
+
+Following the discussion, the Provost will finalize the evaluation and submit electronically to the Department Chair, who will then be requested to sign the final version of the form, signifying that the form has been read.  If the Department Chair disagrees with the evaluation, the chair may submit a written response to the evaluation, which will be appended to the Provost’s evaluation letter.  The Department Chair’s response must be filed with the Provost within five business days of electronic receipt of final version of the form.  Evidence of the Department Chair’s opportunity to review the final version of the evaluation, together with any written comment the Department Chair might choose to file, will be attached by the Provost’s evaluation letter.
+
+
+
+Model 2 – Modeled After Lake Forest College
+
+The Provost is responsible for gathering information relevant to the third-year review of Department Chairs and for making appointment, reappointment, or replacement recommendations to the President. 
+
+Review of approximately one third of the Department Chairs will be made each year. 
+
+By [February 15] of the third year of a Department Chair's service, the Provost will solicit letters from and, if the Provost wishes, also interview each member of the department with the purpose of assessing the performance of the Department Chair in fulfilling various responsibilities listed in the Department Chairperson Job Description. On the basis of these letters and interviews and in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee, the Provost shall recommend to the President to appoint a person to serve as Department Chair for the subsequent three years. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Evaluation of Academic Affairs Office/Provost Models
+
+
+
+Model 1 – Evaluation of Academic Affairs Office (Modeled After Thomas More University)
+
+The Provost and Associate Provost is evaluated every two years by the faculty and Department Chairs. The evaluation includes: (1) a formal survey of the faculty regarding the administrative effectiveness of the Office of Academic Affairs; and (2) a formal survey of the Department Chairs regarding the administrative effectiveness of the Office of Academic Affairs.  The results of these survey are anonymized and distributed to the President, Academic Affairs, and the Faculty Personnel Committee.
+
+1.	Faculty Evaluation of the Office of Academic Affairs
+
+The faculty evaluation of the Office of Academic Affairs focuses upon the administrative performance of the Provost and Associate Provost.  Each faculty member, excluding Department Chairs, is requested to complete the evaluation survey distributed by the Faculty Personnel Committee by the published deadline.  The anonymized composite results are provided by the committee to the President, Academic Affairs, and the Faculty Personnel Committee. 
+
+2.	Department Chair Evaluation of the Office of Academic Affairs
+
+The Department Chairs evaluate the Office of Academic Affairs every two years, focusing upon the administrative performance of the Provost and Associate Provost. Each Department Chair is requested to complete the evaluation survey distributed by the Faculty Personnel Committee by the published deadline.  The anonymized composite results are provided to the President, Academic Affairs, and the Faculty Personnel Committee. 
+
+In addition to the above, at any time, individuals with faculty status at the University are encouraged to provide feedback to the Office of Academic Affairs.  One way is to e-mail concerns to the Provost or Associate Provost.  An additional way is to contact Department Chairs with any concerns.
+
+
+
+
+Model 2 – Evaluation of the Provost (Modeled After Forest Lake College)
+
+The President will initiate the review of the Provost, seeking the widest possible input from the campus community. All faculty shall be invited to evaluate the Provost. 
+
+The Provost will be reviewed in the fourth year of service and subsequently every four years after that. The evaluation process will consist of the following steps: 
+
+The President will solicit evaluation letters from all department chairs, chairs of the [Academic Resources and Review Committee], the [Curricular Policies Committee], and the Faculty Personnel Committee, and such other persons as the President shall designate. These letters will assess the performance of the Provost in discharging their responsibilities. 
+
+The President may also wish to invite an external evaluator to assist in the review process. 
+
+The President, after providing a summary of the evaluation letters, will consult with the Faculty Personnel Committee. 
+
+The President will then meet with the Provost to review all the evaluations.
+
+The President will then determine whether to reappoint the Provost. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Other Examples
+
+
+
+Miami University: https://miamioh.edu/policy-library/employees/faculty/academic-administrators/faculty-committee-evaluation-administrators.html.
+
+
+
+
+
+Washington and Lee: https://my.wlu.edu/document/fgc-report-on-dean-and-provost-evaluations
+
+
+
+Francis Marion: https://www.fmarion.edu/sacscoc/compliancereport/3-2-10-administrative-staff-evaluations/
+
+
+
+The accreditation report narrative below explains Francis Marion’s process.
+
+
+
+Evaluation of Academic Administrators by Faculty
+
+Academic administrators are evaluated by the faculty annually. The evaluation form is distributed to the faculty by the Faculty Executive Committee in the spring semester of each academic year with the following letter [11]. The committee appoints a person(s) to conduct and present the statistical analyses for each administrator. Each administrator then receives a table summarizing their respective results. These summaries are also stored in the Provost’s office for viewing by those eligible to rate a given administrator [12-scroll down to p. 50]. Additionally, the academic administrators may discuss these data summaries with the appropriate supervisor (Provost, President, or Chair of the Board of Trustees).
+
+The survey [13] allows chairs/deans to be evaluated by faculty on the following:
+
+Leadership Style
+
+Recognizes and rewards faculty fairly.
+
+Holds effective and timely department/school meetings.
+
+Includes faculty in the decision-making process.
+
+Exercises fairness in making course assignments during fall, spring, and summer sessions.
+
+Performance of Duties
+
+Develops the departmental/school budget with appropriate faculty input.
+
+Handles the budget fairly and wisely.
+
+Supports curriculum changes when needed.
+
+Evaluates faculty fairly (including annual merit ratings).
+
+Encourages and supports faculty research and scholarship.
+
+Assesses department/school needs and set goals.
+
+Provides encouragement to the faculty members of the department.
+
+Facilitates obtaining grants and contracts.
+
+Interpersonal Skills
+
+Fosters positive faculty morale as a priority.
+
+Uses discretion in handling confidential matters.
+
+Communicates readily and easily with individuals.
+
+Keeps abreast of ideas and new developments in the discipline and the profession that affect the department/school.
+
+Acknowledges his or her own mistakes.
+
+Leads the department/school with input from the faculty and staff.
+
+Status and Progress of the Department/School
+
+Possesses the skills and knowledge necessary to evaluate teaching.
+
+Represents departmental/school needs to the University effectively.
+
+Supports faculty community involvement.
+
+Exercises leadership in the development of a long-term plan for program enhancement.
+
+See also Provost survey:  https://www.fmarion.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/3.2.10-4-Evaluation-of-the-Provost-and-Dean-of-CLA-by-Faculty.pdf.</s>"
+<s>[INST] Evaluation Process and Standards Draft 2 FAC.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Executive Summary (Faculty Forum)(3.17).txt [/INST] Executive Summary
+
+
+
+Full-Time Faculty Evaluation Process, Criteria, and Standards
+
+New introductory has been developed that identifies the purposes and principles associated with the university’s faculty evaluation system.  The text also references some of the new policy changes that are recommended by the Task Force later in the document (e.g., goal setting, academic unit guidelines, etc.). 
+
+
+
+Faculty Evaluation Instruments and Typical Evaluation Calendar
+
+The university’s current text summarizing the various types of faculty evaluations has been updated to reflect some of the new policy changes that have been recommended by the Task Force (e.g., annual evaluation of probationary faculty by the immediate administrative supervisor, goal setting as part of the Annual Faculty Report Form submission).
+
+New text has been introduced outlining how 1-3 years of prior service credit granted at the time of initial appointment will impact a faculty member’s evaluation schedule.
+
+
+
+Faculty Evaluation Criteria and Documentation
+
+The Task Force is recommending that Advising/Mentoring be removed as a 4th category of evaluation; instead, the team has developed a new clause (see below) indicating that required advising/mentoring activities are to be evaluated and recognized as part of a faculty member’s teaching, and/or scholarly or creative productivity, and/or service activities as applicable.  Thus, the Task Force is recommending faculty evaluations cover three main areas: teaching effectiveness, scholarly/creative productivity, and service.
+
+To respond to Task Force Recommendation #6, the Task Force developed a new clause under this section which permits evaluators to consider a faculty member’s administrative workload assignment when evaluating whether the candidate has met applicable performance standards for promotion and/or tenure.  
+
+Per the newly recommended text, expectations regarding the quality of teaching effectiveness, student mentoring/advising effectiveness, and scholarly or creative work productivity may not be compromised, but the expected volume of teaching, student mentoring/advising, or scholarly or creative work productivity may be reduced by evaluators to account for extraordinary administrative service responsibilities associated with a workload assignment.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Contributions that Support the University Mission
+
+This clause, which has undergone several revisions, was originally developed at the request of the President.  Per the new text, faculty responsibilities in the areas of teaching, student mentoring/advising, scholarly or creative work productivity, and service should be understood within the context of the University’s mission statement.  
+
+Serving the mission is accomplished by meeting the expectations set out in the University’s evaluation criteria and standards, by making contributions that enhance diversity, equity, and inclusion, and by being a responsible campus citizen.
+
+
+
+Contributions to Mentoring/Academic Advising 
+
+This is a new clause recommended by the Task Force in lieu of a stand-alone evaluation category devoted to advising/mentoring.  Per the new text, mentoring and academic advising (if applicable to their graduate academic program) are recognized as important faculty responsibilities of the faculty.
+
+However, such activities will now be evaluated and recognized as part of a faculty member’s teaching, and/or scholarly or creative productivity, and/or service activities as applicable.
+
+Academic units are responsible for assigning students to faculty mentors and, if applicable, graduate faculty advisors, as well as delineating specific student mentoring/academic advising responsibilities.
+
+Where a mentoring or advising activity falls within more than one of the three evaluation categories, the University will credit the activity towards each applicable category for purposes of promotion and tenure.  
+
+
+
+Contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
+
+This clause was developed to address Task Force Recommendation #7.  Per the recommended text, faculty are responsible for demonstrating DEI contributions in at least one of the four university-wide evaluation categories.
+
+
+
+Campus Citizenship
+
+This is a new clause that was developed to address Task Force Recommendation #8.  Per the recommended text, consideration of campus citizenship will be considered as part of the established evaluation areas of teaching, scholarly/creative productivity, and service.  It is not a separate evaluation criterion.
+
+The new policy defines what constitutes campus citizenship and clarifies that such considerations must not be confused with conformity, sociability, or likeability and may not be interpreted in a manner that violates the principles of academic freedom. 
+
+
+
+Teaching Effectiveness
+
+This section has been rewritten to address Task Force Recommendation #2.  The new text more clearly defines what constitutes “teaching effectiveness” and provides additional examples of such activities.  
+
+The drafting of the text was informed in part by the University of Kansas’ Teaching Effectiveness Benchmarking rubric: https://cte.ku.edu/benchmarks-teaching-effectiveness-project  
+
+
+
+Effectiveness as a Student Advisor
+
+This section has been stricken given the Task Force’s prior recommendation that student mentoring/advising no longer be considered a stand-alone evaluation category.
+
+
+
+Scholarly or Creative Productivity
+
+This section has been updated to address Task Force Recommendation #4.  The additions to this section more clearly define what constitutes “scholarly and creative productivity.”  
+
+New text has been added to clarify that faculty are expected to provide evidence that a significant portion of their scholarly or creative work activities are both documented (results in a written, oral, or performance product) and peer reviewed or critiqued by individuals qualified to judge the product (i.e., communicated to and validated by peers beyond the University).
+
+Text has also been added indicating that it is the duty of the academic unit, via the establishment of academic unit guidelines, to specify what constitutes meaningful peer review or critique in the academic discipline.
+
+In addition, Professional Development has been stricken from this evaluation category and moved to the Service category.
+
+
+
+Service
+
+In response to Task Force Recommendation #5, the Task Force has supplemented the University’s ""Service"" category with text designed to clearly define what constitutes university and community service.  Professional Service has been moved to this category.  
+
+The revised Community Service definition requires the use of disciplinary expertise to contribute to the community.
+
+It is important to note that faculty are expected to engage in all three service activities: service to the university, community, and profession.
+
+
+
+Academic Unit Evaluation Guidelines
+
+This is a new section drafted to address Task Force Recommendation #1.  The policy requires each academic unit to develop supplemental guidelines for tenure and promotion to account for differences in the nature of teaching effectiveness, scholarly productivity creative works, and service across academic units.
+
+Academic Unit guidelines must be compatible with the University-level evaluation criteria and delineate what the Academic Unit values in teaching, scholarship/creative endeavor (i.e., the number and/or type of publications, presentations, exhibitions, shows, or performances that are expected of candidates seeking tenure and/or promotion; listing of discipline-specific peer-reviewed journals, presses, or creative venues; etc.), and service.
+
+Approved Academic Unit guidelines will be used by the Department Chair/Program Director, Dean, ART Committee, Provost, President, and Board of Regents in their respective evaluations of a faculty member’s performance.
+
+Academic Unit guidelines are developed by the Faculty and Dean of each Academic Unit and approved by the FAC and Provost.  
+
+The guidelines, once adopted and approved, must be reviewed at a minimum of every five years and updated as necessary.
+
+It is anticipated that the adoption of academic unit guidelines will not completed and put into practice until Fall 2023.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Evaluations
+
+
+
+Student Course and Instruction Evaluations
+
+This is a new policy addressing Student Course evaluations.  The text is limited to how such evaluations are utilized as part of the faculty evaluation system and stresses that student evaluations of teaching alone are not to be used in isolation as a means of recommending promotion and tenure.
+
+
+
+Student Mentoring/Advising Evaluations
+
+This is a new policy addressing student mentoring/advising evaluations.  Of note, the Task Force has developed text indicating that the results of the surveys will be shared with faculty members.  In addition, text was developed to codify current university practice that such evaluations are considered as a point of reference by evaluators during annual (following a probationary faculty member’s second-year of service), fourth-year, promotion, tenure, and post-tenure/post-sixth-year evaluations.
+
+It is anticipated that revisions to the current advising evaluation form will not completed and put into practice until Fall 2023.
+
+
+
+Annual Faculty Report
+
+This is a new policy which, in part, describes the University’s current practice of having all full-time faculty annually assess their professional performance via the submission of the Annual Faculty Report Form.
+
+Per Task Force Recommendation #9, the Task Force has incorporated a goal setting component to the process.  
+
+Faculty members are responsible for clearly articulating specific goals in the Annual Faculty Report Form which are related to the faculty member’s professional development and responsibilities (i.e., teaching, scholarly or creative productivity, and service).  
+
+Goals are reviewed by the immediate administrative supervisor.
+
+For probationary faculty, the immediate administrative supervisor, as part of the annual evaluation process, assesses how the faculty member’s proposed goals relate to the faculty member’s professional development and responsibilities and align with University, College/School, and department goals, the faculty member’s academic rank, and Academic Unit evaluation guidelines.
+
+For tenured faculty and senior lecturers, the immediate administrative supervisor reviews the Annual Faculty Report Form and proposed goals and, if any concerns arise, will provide the faculty member with written feedback.  At the faculty member’s request, a meeting with the immediate administrative supervisor may be scheduled.
+
+
+
+Annual Evaluation of Probationary Faculty
+
+This is a new policy which replaces the University’s current practice of having department chairs/program directors annually interview probationary faculty.  
+
+Per the new policy, all probationary faculty will be evaluated annually by their immediate administrative supervisor on the performance of their faculty assignments and the progress they have made in their professional development.  
+
+Academic Unit policy determines which immediate administrative supervisor (i.e., department chair, program director, assistant dean, or dean) conducts the annual evaluation.
+
+The immediate administrative supervisor reviews the faculty member’s Annual Faculty Report Form, drafts a preliminary evaluation, and then meets either in person or via videoconference with the faculty member to discuss the draft evaluation and, if necessary, amend the faculty member’s proposed goals for the following academic year.
+
+Following the meeting, the immediate administrative supervisor finalizes the evaluation and submits it electronically to the faculty member.
+
+If the faculty member disagrees with any aspect of the evaluation, the faculty member may submit a written response, which is appended to the evaluation.
+
+The results of annual evaluation and the Annual Faculty Report Form are transmitted to the Dean (if the Dean did not conduct the evaluation) and then to the Provost for placement in the appropriate files.
+
+
+
+Peer Evaluations
+
+This is a new policy drafted to address Task Force Recommendation #10.
+
+The policy delineates the frequency of classroom observations and outlines in procedural detail how peer evaluators are selected and courses are to be observed.  
+
+To provide formative feedback and the opportunity for continued growth, faculty undergoing second and fourth-year reviews are provided a copy of the completed Classroom Visitation Report Form.  If the faculty member desires, a written response to the report may be submitted to the Office of Academic Affairs.  Moreover, if both parties agree, a mutually agreed on time may be scheduled to review the report.
+
+Given the summative nature of promotion and tenure evaluations, the Task Force decided to maintain the confidentiality of peer evaluations conducted as part of these evaluations.  However, should both the evaluator and faculty member mutually agree, the policy does allow for the parties to review the report.
+
+General Peer Evaluations
+
+This is a new policy which codifies the University’s current General Peer Evaluation process.  
+
+
+
+Departmental Faculty Evaluations
+
+This is a new policy which codifies the University’s current Departmental Faculty Evaluation process.  
+
+
+
+Committee Chair Evaluations
+
+This is a new policy which codifies the University’s current Committee Chair Evaluation process. 
+
+
+
+Second and Fourth-Year Reviews
+
+Per Task Force Recommendation #11, the Task Force has supplemented the second- and fourth-year review evaluation procedures to provide more narrative detail explaining the University’s current step-wise process.
+
+In addition, in effort to make the second and fourth-year evaluation more formative in nature, the Task Force has developed new text requiring that the Dean’s written evaluation be shared electronically with the faculty member.  If the faculty member disagrees with any aspect of the evaluation, the faculty member is afforded the opportunity to submit a written response, which is appended to the Dean’s evaluation.  
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Promotion Policies, Eligibility, and Standards
+
+For both the promotion and tenure sections, the Task Force recommends that the term “criteria” be replaced with “standards” in the header of this section to draw a distinction between University evaluation criteria and the standards that must be met to attain promotion to an applicable rank or tenure.  Of note, the term “standards” is used in the title of the overall evaluation section (i.e., “Faculty Evaluation Process and Standards).
+
+
+
+Eligibility for Promotion
+
+For both the Promotion to Associate Professor and Promotion to Professor clauses, the Task Force has developed new text that requires the last two (2) years of the candidate’s full-time teaching experience be completed at California Lutheran University.  By adopting this clause, the ART will have a sufficient body of evidence to evaluate the candidate’s teaching, and service effectiveness.
+
+The Task Force has also added a new clause to the subsection addressing eligibility standards for advancement to Senior Lecturer.  The current handbook is silent in this regard.
+
+
+
+Standards for Promotion
+
+In response to Recommendation # 12, the Task Force has supplemented the various rank standards with clarifying text that should assist faculty to better understand the expectations for each rank.  
+
+For Advancement to Assistant Professor: 
+
+The Task Force has stricken the University’s current text and replaced it with new text indicating that approval of advancement to the Assistant Professor rank is automatic and immediate upon the candidate presenting evidence of the completion of the earned doctorate or appropriate terminal degree/certification to the Provost.
+
+For Advancement to Associate Professor: 
+
+For ease of reference, please see the Task Force’s proposed changes below:
+
+Possession of an appropriate earned doctorate or an appropriate terminal professional degree/certification (an MFA for studio art and drama; a CPA or CMA and an appropriate master’s degree for accounting) from a graduate institution of recognized standing or accomplishments that are considered equivalent, such as outstanding performance in the creative arts or in the business or medical community; 
+
+Evidence of sustained teaching effectiveness across the range of assigned courses or labs, with convincing evidence that the person has moved beyond the “apprentice” stage of teaching represented by the rank of Assistant Professor.  To merit promotion to Associate Professor, candidates must show that they effectively perform their share of departmental or programmatic teaching (either alone or in collaboration with others) without the need for substantial assistance or intervention by other faculty members.  Candidates will also display the promise of continued development as teachers;
+
+Evidence of advising and/or mentoring effectiveness; 
+
+Evidence of scholarly or creative work which has been peer reviewed or critiqued by individuals qualified to judge the product (i.e., communicated to and validated by peers beyond the University).  To merit promotion to Associate Professor, candidates must also display the promise of continued scholarly or creative engagement with their field(s); and 
+
+A record of continued effective service to the University, the profession, and the community.  To merit promotion to Associate Professor, the candidate must demonstrate contributions in service that have made a positive difference at the level of the department, the College/School, or the University, as well as engagement in professional and community service activities.  Additionally, a candidate’s overall record of service must indicate promise of continued contributions that over time would position the candidate to meet the standards for Professor. 
+
+Candidates for advancement to the rank of Associate Professor are evaluated on their teaching, advising and/or mentoring, scholarly or creative work, and service activities performed since the time of their initial faculty appointment as an Assistant Professor.  In most cases, a recommendation for advancement to the rank of Associate Professor occurs at the same time tenure is recommended.  To save time for both faculty member and committees, the necessary materials for both will go forward simultaneously under such circumstances. 
+
+
+
+For Advancement to Professor: 
+
+For ease of reference, please see the Task Force’s proposed changes below:
+
+Possession of an appropriate earned doctorate or appropriate terminal professional degree/certification (an MFA for studio art and drama; a CPA or CMA and an appropriate master’s degree for accounting) from a graduate institution of recognized standing or widely acclaimed accomplishments in the field, such as outstanding performance in the creative arts or the business or medical community; 
+
+Evidence of outstanding teaching across the range of assigned courses since having successfully applied to the rank of Associate Professor.  As accomplished teachers, Professors are expected to display outstanding performance in their own classes and should also be able to serve as resources for other faculty members in their own teaching.  Moreover, Professors are expected to remain committed to their own continuing development as teachers; 
+
+Evidence of sustained advising and/or mentoring effectiveness; 
+
+Evidence of a sustained program of scholarly or creative work that indicates continued development as a scholar or artist since having successfully applied for the rank of Associate Professor.*  Such evidence will involve products or performances which have been peer reviewed or critiqued by individuals qualified to judge the product (i.e., communicated to and validated by peers beyond the University).  Evidence of continued development as a scholar or artist may comprise more products/performances, better products/performances, or products/performances indicating success in moving into a new area of scholarly inquiry or creative work; and 
+
+A record of sustained, significant, and effective service to California Lutheran University (especially in a leadership role), profession, and community.  
+
+*Scholarly or creative works produced after the submission of a dossier resulting in advancement to Associate Professor will be considered during the advancement to Professor evaluation.
+
+For Advancement to Senior Lecturer:
+
+The Task Force has also added a new clause to the subsection addressing standards for advancement to Senior Lecturer.  The current handbook is silent in this regard.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Tenure Policy, Eligibility, and Standards
+
+The Task Force has developed new introductory that defines tenure and its purpose.
+
+
+
+Extending the Probationary Period
+
+In response to Recommendation #14, the Task Force has developed a new policy addressing the pausing of the “tenure clock.”
+
+
+
+Standards for Tenure
+
+University Need Requirement and Tenure Quota 
+
+In response to Recommendation #13, the Task Force has supplemented the University’s “Institutional Need Requirement and Tenure Quota” policy with procedural text addressing how such determinations are made and implemented.
+
+Individual Requirements
+
+The Task Force has slightly modified the listing of individual tenure requirements to more closely align with the supplemented university-wide evaluation criteria.  For ease of reference, the revised text is reprinted below:
+
+Candidates for tenure will be expected to have: 
+
+Consistently fulfilled the faculty responsibilities outlined in the “Faculty Responsibilities” section of this handbook 
+
+Earned an appropriate doctorate in the field or an appropriate terminal professional degree/certification (an MFA for studio art and drama; a CPA or CMA and an appropriate master’s degree for accounting) from a graduate institution of recognized standing; or completed accomplishments that are considered equivalent, such as outstanding performance in the creative arts or in the business or medical community. Although the University reserves the right to waive this requirement in unusual cases, faculty members who fail to meet this requirement should not expect to be granted tenure 
+
+Demonstrated over the duration of the probationary period through a satisfactory review:
+
+their effectiveness in teaching, student mentoring/advising, scholarship, and service through a satisfactory review;
+
+evidence of scholarly or creative productivity which has been peer reviewed or critiqued by individuals qualified to judge the product; and 
+
+proven their potential for achieving and sustaining long-term excellence in these areas.
+
+The Task Force has also added the following text to this subsection: “In rare circumstances, the ART Committee may recommend the waiver of particular standards if an individual faculty member’s performance in other areas is so outstanding as to warrant such action.”
+
+
+
+Procedures for Promotion and Tenure Review
+
+
+
+Promotion and Tenure Review Files
+
+In response to Recommendation #17, the Task Force has developed a clause under this subsection indicating that all evaluators are expected to evaluate candidates based solely on the content of the evaluation file (dossier and confidential file) and the results of candidate interviews (as applicable).
+
+
+
+Promotion and Tenure Dossier
+
+This subsection has been updated to identify those items that are placed in the dossier by the candidate (i.e., personal statement, CV, evidence demonstrating the candidate meets applicable standards, and optional reference letters) and those that are added by Academic Affairs (course evaluations, course loads/grade distributions, student advisee/mentee evaluations, academic unit evaluation guidelines, annual evaluations from the probationary period, Annual Faculty Report Forms).
+
+
+
+Confidential File
+
+This subsection has been edited by striking optional letters, course evaluations, course loads/grade distributions, and student advisee/mentee evaluations from the listing.  The Task Force recommends that these items be included in the dossier and not classified as confidential. 
+
+A new clause has also been added to this subsection by the Task Force that codifies the University’s current practice of prohibiting the sharing of confidential materials with the candidate to maintain the collegial working relationships of small departments and academic units.  This clause would preclude, for example, the Dean’s sharing their promotion or tenure evaluation with a candidate. 
+
+
+
+Special Considerations
+
+This is a new subsection that includes several new policies addressing the confidentiality of the P&T process, evaluator conflicts of interest (see Recommendation #19), and allegations of misconduct that may arise during the tenure evaluation process.
+
+
+
+Evaluation and Action
+
+In response to Recommendation #16, the Task Force has supplemented the University’s current text by providing more narrative detail regarding the University’s current stepwise evaluation process.
+
+A new clause has been developed indicating: (a) that Department Chairs/Program Directors applying for tenure will be evaluated by the Associate Dean (where applicable) or a tenured faculty member appointed by the Dean from either the Department Chairs/Program Director’s department, program, or School/College to conduct the evaluation; and (b) in those departments or programs where the Department Chair/Program Director is not tenured, the Associate Dean (where applicable) or a tenured faculty member appointed by the Dean will evaluate tenure candidates, as well as tenured faculty members of the department seeking promotion to the rank of Professor.
+
+
+
+Appeals
+
+The Appeals section has been updated to provide formal definitions of the terms “prejudicial error” and “inadequate consideration.”
+
+
+
+Post-tenure/Post-6th Year Review Policy and Procedures 
+
+In response to Recommendation #18, the Task Force has supplemented the Post-Tenure/Post-6th Review policy to provide a mechanism for recognizing distinguished faculty performance, as well as a means of assisting faculty members who are experiencing difficulties in achieving their expectations via the introduction of professional development plan with the Dean and a follow up ART review.
+
+In addition, the Task Force has rewritten the Appeals section of the Post-Tenure/Post-6th Review policy to align it with the promotion and tenure appellate process.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Executive Summary (Faculty Forum).txt [/INST] Executive Summary
+
+
+
+Full-Time Faculty Evaluation Process, Criteria, and Standards
+
+New introductory has been developed that identifies the purposes and principles associated with the university’s faculty evaluation system.  The text also references some of the new policy changes that are recommended by the Task Force later in the document (e.g., goal setting, academic unit guidelines, etc.). 
+
+
+
+Faculty Evaluation Instruments and Typical Evaluation Calendar
+
+The university’s current text summarizing the various types of faculty evaluations has been updated to reflect some of the new policy changes that have been recommended by the Task Force (e.g., annual evaluation of probationary faculty by the immediate administrative supervisor, goal setting as part of the Annual Faculty Report Form submission).
+
+New text has been introduced outlining how 1-3 years of prior service credit granted at the time of initial appointment will impact a faculty member’s evaluation schedule.
+
+
+
+Faculty Evaluation Criteria and Documentation
+
+To respond to Task Force Recommendation #6, the Task Force developed a new clause under this section which permits evaluators to consider a faculty member’s administrative workload assignment when evaluating whether the candidate has met applicable performance standards for promotion and/or tenure.  
+
+Per the newly recommended text, expectations regarding the quality of teaching effectiveness, student mentoring/advising effectiveness, and scholarly or creative work productivity may not be compromised, but the expected volume of teaching, student mentoring/advising, or scholarly or creative work productivity may be reduced by evaluators to account for extraordinary administrative service responsibilities associated with a workload assignment.
+
+
+
+Contributions that Support the University Mission
+
+This clause, which has undergone several revisions, was originally developed at the request of the President.  Per the new text, faculty responsibilities in the areas of teaching, student mentoring/advising, scholarly or creative work productivity, and service should be understood within the context of the University’s mission statement.  
+
+Serving the mission is accomplished by meeting the expectations set out in the University’s evaluation criteria and standards, by making contributions that enhance diversity, equity, and inclusion, and by being a responsible campus citizen.
+
+
+
+Contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
+
+This clause was developed to address Task Force Recommendation #7. Per the recommended text, faculty are responsible for demonstrating DEI contributions in at least one of the four university-wide evaluation categories.
+
+
+
+Campus Citizenship
+
+This is a new clause that was developed to address Task Force Recommendation #8.  Per the recommended text, consideration of campus citizenship will be considered as part of the established evaluation areas of teaching, student mentoring/advising, scholarly/creative productivity, and service.  It is not a separate evaluation criterion.
+
+The new policy defines what constitutes campus citizenship and clarifies that such considerations must not be confused with conformity, sociability, or likeability and may not be interpreted in a manner that violates the principles of academic freedom. 
+
+
+
+Teaching Effectiveness
+
+This section has been rewritten to address Task Force Recommendation #2.  The new text more clearly defines what constitutes “teaching effectiveness” and provides additional examples of such activities.  
+
+The drafting of the text was informed by the University of Kansas’ Teaching Effectiveness Benchmarking rubric: https://cte.ku.edu/benchmarks-teaching-effectiveness-project  
+
+
+
+Effectiveness as a Student Mentor / Advisor
+
+This section has been supplemented to address Task Force Recommendation #3.  The text addressing mentoring has undergone revision based on feedback from the FSEC and FAC.  The text reflects that student mentees are assigned by the academic unit.  Moreover, the Task Force added text indicating that faculty members may demonstrate effectiveness as a mentor by participating in mentoring activities applicable to their academic program.
+
+
+
+Scholarly or Creative Productivity
+
+This section has been updated to address Task Force Recommendation #4.  The additions to this section more clearly define what constitutes “scholarly and creative productivity.”  
+
+New text has been added to clarify that faculty are expected to provide evidence that a significant portion of their scholarly or creative work activities are both documented (results in a written, oral, or performance product) and peer reviewed or critiqued by individuals qualified to judge the product (i.e., communicated to and validated by peers beyond the University).
+
+Text has also been added indicating that it is the duty of the academic unit, via the establishment of academic unit guidelines, to specify what constitutes meaningful peer review or critique in the academic discipline.
+
+In addition, Professional Development has been stricken from this evaluation category and moved to the Service category.
+
+
+
+Service
+
+In response to Task Force Recommendation #5, the Task Force has supplemented the University’s ""Service"" category with text designed to clearly define what constitutes university and community service.  In addition, Professional Service has been added to this category.  
+
+The revised Community Service definition requires the use of disciplinary expertise to contribute to the community.
+
+It is important to note that faculty are expected to engage in all three service activities: service to the university, community, and profession.
+
+
+
+Academic Unit Evaluation Guidelines
+
+This is a new section drafted to address Task Force Recommendation #1.  The policy requires each academic unit to develop supplemental guidelines for tenure and promotion to account for differences in the nature of teaching effectiveness, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service across academic units.
+
+Academic Unit guidelines must be compatible with the University-level evaluation criteria and delineate what the Academic Unit values in teaching, mentoring/advising, scholarship/creative endeavor (i.e., the number and/or type of publications, presentations, exhibitions, shows, or performances that are expected of candidates seeking tenure and/or promotion; listing of discipline-specific peer-reviewed journals, presses, or creative venues; etc.), and service.
+
+Approved Academic Unit guidelines will be used by the Department Chair/Program Director, Dean, ART Committee, Provost, President, and Board of Regents in their respective evaluations of a faculty member’s performance.
+
+Academic Unit guidelines are developed by the Faculty and Dean of each Academic Unit and approved by the FAC and Provost.  
+
+The guidelines, once adopted and approved, must be reviewed at a minimum of every five years and updated as necessary.
+
+
+
+Faculty Evaluations
+
+
+
+Student Course and Instruction Evaluations
+
+This is a new policy addressing Student Course evaluations.  The text is limited to how such evaluations are utilized as part of the faculty evaluation system and stresses that student evaluations of teaching alone are not to be used in isolation as a means of recommending promotion and tenure.
+
+
+
+Student Mentoring/Advising Evaluations
+
+This is a new policy addressing student mentoring/advising evaluations.  Of note, the Task Force has developed text indicating that the results of the surveys will be shared with faculty members.  In addition, text was develop to codify current university practice that such evaluations are considered as a point of reference by evaluators during annual (following a probationary faculty member’s second-year of service), fourth-year, promotion, tenure, and post-tenure/post-sixth-year evaluations.
+
+
+
+Annual Faculty Report
+
+This is a new policy which, in part, describes the University’s current practice of having all full-time faculty annually assess their professional performance via the submission of the Annual Faculty Report Form.
+
+Per Task Force Recommendation #9, the Task Force has incorporated a goal setting component to the process.  
+
+Faculty members are responsible for clearly articulating specific goals in the Annual Faculty Report Form which are related to the faculty member’s professional development and responsibilities (i.e., teaching, mentoring/advising, scholarly or creative productivity, and service).  
+
+Goals are reviewed by the immediate administrative supervisor.
+
+For probationary faculty, the immediate administrative supervisor, as part of the annual evaluation process, assesses how the faculty member’s proposed goals relate to the faculty member’s professional development and responsibilities and align with University, College/School, and department goals, the faculty member’s academic rank, and Academic Unit evaluation guidelines.
+
+For tenured faculty and senior lecturers, the immediate administrative supervisor reviews the Annual Faculty Report Form and proposed goals and, if any concerns arise, will provide the faculty member with written feedback.  At the faculty member’s request, a meeting with the immediate administrative supervisor may be scheduled.
+
+
+
+Annual Evaluation of Probationary Faculty
+
+This is a new policy which replaces the University’s current practice of having department chairs/program directors annually interview probationary faculty.  
+
+Per the new policy, all probationary faculty will be evaluated annually by their immediate administrative supervisor on the performance of their faculty assignments and the progress they have made in their professional development.  
+
+Academic Unit policy determines which immediate administrative supervisor (i.e., department chair, program director, assistant dean, or dean) conducts the annual evaluation.
+
+The immediate administrative supervisor reviews the faculty member’s Annual Faculty Report Form, drafts a preliminary evaluation, and then meets either in person or via videoconference with the faculty member to discuss the draft evaluation and, if necessary, amend the faculty member’s proposed goals for the following academic year.
+
+Following the meeting, the immediate administrative supervisor finalizes the evaluation and submits it electronically to the faculty member.
+
+If the faculty member disagrees with any aspect of the evaluation, the faculty member may submit a written response, which is appended to the evaluation.
+
+The results of annual evaluation and the Annual Faculty Report Form are transmitted to the Dean (if the Dean did not conduct the evaluation) and then to the Provost for placement in the appropriate files.
+
+
+
+Peer Evaluations
+
+This is a new policy drafted to address Task Force Recommendation #10.
+
+The policy delineates the frequency of classroom observations and outlines in procedural detail how peer evaluators are selected and courses are to be observed.  
+
+To provide formative feedback and the opportunity for continued growth, faculty undergoing second and fourth-year reviews are provided a copy of the completed Classroom Visitation Report Form.  If the faculty member desires, a written response to the report may be submitted to the Office of Academic Affairs.  Moreover, if both parties agree, a mutually agreed on time may be scheduled to review the report.
+
+Given the summative nature of promotion and tenure evaluations, the Task Force decided to maintain the confidentiality of peer evaluations conducted as part of these evaluations.  However, should both the evaluator and faculty member mutually agree, the policy does allow for the parties to review the report.
+
+
+
+General Peer Evaluations
+
+This is a new policy which codifies the University’s current General Peer Evaluation process.  
+
+
+
+Departmental Faculty Evaluations
+
+This is a new policy which codifies the University’s current Departmental Faculty Evaluation process.  
+
+
+
+Committee Chair Evaluations
+
+This is a new policy which codifies the University’s current Committee Chair Evaluation process. 
+
+
+
+Second and Fourth-Year Reviews
+
+Per Task Force Recommendation #11, the Task Force has supplemented the second- and fourth-year review evaluation procedures to provide more narrative detail explaining the University’s current step-wise process.
+
+In addition, in effort to make the second and fourth-year evaluation more formative in nature, the Task Force has developed new text requiring that the Dean’s written evaluation be shared electronically with the faculty member.  If the faculty member disagrees with any aspect of the evaluation, the faculty member is afforded the opportunity to submit a written response, which is appended to the Dean’s evaluation.  
+
+
+
+Promotion Policies, Eligibility, and Standards
+
+For both the promotion and tenure sections, the Task Force recommends that the term “criteria” be replaced with “standards” in the header of this section to draw a distinction between University evaluation criteria and the standards that must be met to attain promotion to an applicable rank or tenure.  Of note, the term “standards” is used in the title of the overall evaluation section (i.e., “Faculty Evaluation Process and Standards).
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Eligibility for Promotion
+
+For both the Promotion to Associate Professor and Promotion to Professor clauses, the Task Force has developed new text that requires the last two (2) years of the candidate’s full-time teaching experience be completed at California Lutheran University.  By adopting this clause, the ART will have a sufficient body of evidence to evaluate the candidate’s teaching, mentoring/advising, and service effectiveness.
+
+The Task Force has also added a new clause to the subsection addressing eligibility standards for advancement to Senior Lecturer.  The current handbook is silent in this regard.
+
+
+
+Standards for Promotion
+
+In response to Recommendation # 12, the Task Force has supplemented the various rank standards with clarifying text that should assist faculty to better understand the expectations for each rank.  
+
+For Advancement to Assistant Professor: 
+
+The Task Force has stricken the University’s current text and replaced it with new text indicating that approval of advancement to the Assistant Professor rank is automatic and immediate upon the candidate presenting evidence of the completion of the earned doctorate or appropriate terminal degree/certification to the Provost.
+
+For Advancement to Associate Professor: 
+
+For ease of reference, please see the Task Force’s proposed changes below:
+
+Possession of an appropriate earned doctorate or an appropriate terminal professional degree/certification (an MFA for studio art and drama; a CPA or CMA and an appropriate master’s degree for accounting) from a graduate institution of recognized standing or accomplishments that are considered equivalent, such as outstanding performance in the creative arts or in the business or medical community; 
+
+Evidence of sustained teaching effectiveness across the range of assigned courses or labs, with convincing evidence that the person has moved beyond the “apprentice” stage of teaching represented by the rank of Assistant Professor.  To merit promotion to Associate Professor, candidates must show that they effectively perform their share of departmental or programmatic teaching (either alone or in collaboration with others) without the need for substantial assistance or intervention by other faculty members.  Candidates will also display the promise of continued development as teachers;
+
+Evidence of advising and/or mentoring effectiveness; 
+
+Evidence of scholarly or creative work which has been peer reviewed or critiqued by individuals qualified to judge the product (i.e., communicated to and validated by peers beyond the University).  To merit promotion to Associate Professor, candidates must also display the promise of continued scholarly or creative engagement with their field(s); and 
+
+A record of continued effective service to the University, the profession, and the community.  To merit promotion to Associate Professor, the candidate must demonstrate contributions in service that have made a positive difference at the level of the department, the College/School, or the University, as well as engagement in professional and community service activities.  Additionally, a candidate’s overall record of service must indicate promise of continued contributions that over time would position the candidate to meet the standards for Professor. 
+
+Candidates for advancement to the rank of Associate Professor are evaluated on their teaching, advising and/or mentoring, scholarly or creative work, and service activities performed since the time of their initial faculty appointment as an Assistant Professor.  In most cases, a recommendation for advancement to the rank of Associate Professor occurs at the same time tenure is recommended.  To save time for both faculty member and committees, the necessary materials for both will go forward simultaneously under such circumstances. 
+
+
+
+For Advancement to Professor: 
+
+For ease of reference, please see the Task Force’s proposed changes below:
+
+Possession of an appropriate earned doctorate or appropriate terminal professional degree/certification (an MFA for studio art and drama; a CPA or CMA and an appropriate master’s degree for accounting) from a graduate institution of recognized standing or widely acclaimed accomplishments in the field, such as outstanding performance in the creative arts or the business or medical community; 
+
+Evidence of outstanding teaching across the range of assigned courses since having successfully applied to the rank of Associate Professor.  As accomplished teachers, Professors are expected to display outstanding performance in their own classes and should also be able to serve as resources for other faculty members in their own teaching.  Moreover, Professors are expected to remain committed to their own continuing development as teachers; 
+
+Evidence of sustained advising and/or mentoring effectiveness; 
+
+Evidence of a sustained program of scholarly or creative work that indicates continued development as a scholar or artist since having successfully applied for the rank of Associate Professor.*  Such evidence will involve products or performances which have been peer reviewed or critiqued by individuals qualified to judge the product (i.e., communicated to and validated by peers beyond the University).  Evidence of continued development as a scholar or artist may comprise more products/performances, better products/performances, or products/performances indicating success in moving into a new area of scholarly inquiry or creative work; and 
+
+A record of sustained, significant, and effective service to California Lutheran University (especially in a leadership role), profession, and community.  
+
+*Scholarly or creative works produced after the submission of a dossier resulting in advancement to Associate Professor will be considered during the advancement to Professor evaluation.
+
+For Advancement to Senior Lecturer:
+
+The Task Force has also added a new clause to the subsection addressing standards for advancement to Senior Lecturer.  The current handbook is silent in this regard.
+
+
+
+Tenure Policy, Eligibility, and Standards
+
+The Task Force has developed new introductory that defines tenure and its purpose.
+
+
+
+Extending the Probationary Period
+
+In response to Recommendation #14, the Task Force has developed a new policy addressing the pausing of the “tenure clock.”
+
+Standards for Tenure
+
+University Need Requirement and Tenure Quota 
+
+In response to Recommendation #13, the Task Force has supplemented the University’s “Institutional Need Requirement and Tenure Quota” policy with procedural text addressing how such determinations are made and implemented.
+
+Individual Requirements
+
+The Task Force has slightly modified the listing of individual tenure requirements to more closely align with the supplemented university-wide evaluation criteria.  For ease of reference, the revised text is reprinted below:
+
+Candidates for tenure will be expected to have: 
+
+Consistently fulfilled the faculty responsibilities outlined in the “Faculty Responsibilities” section of this handbook 
+
+Earned an appropriate doctorate in the field or an appropriate terminal professional degree/certification (an MFA for studio art and drama; a CPA or CMA and an appropriate master’s degree for accounting) from a graduate institution of recognized standing; or completed accomplishments that are considered equivalent, such as outstanding performance in the creative arts or in the business or medical community. Although the University reserves the right to waive this requirement in unusual cases, faculty members who fail to meet this requirement should not expect to be granted tenure 
+
+Demonstrated over the duration of the probationary period through a satisfactory review:
+
+their effectiveness in teaching, student mentoring/advising, scholarship, and service through a satisfactory review;
+
+evidence of scholarly or creative productivity which has been peer reviewed or critiqued by individuals qualified to judge the product; and 
+
+proven their potential for achieving and sustaining long-term excellence in these areas.
+
+The Task Force has also added the following text to this subsection: “In rare circumstances, the ART Committee may recommend the waiver of particular standards if an individual faculty member’s performance in other areas is so outstanding as to warrant such action.”
+
+
+
+Procedures for Promotion and Tenure Review
+
+
+
+Promotion and Tenure Review Files
+
+In response to Recommendation #17, the Task Force has developed a clause under this subsection indicating that all evaluators are expected to evaluate candidates based solely on the content of the evaluation file (dossier and confidential file) and the results of candidate interviews (as applicable).
+
+
+
+Promotion and Tenure Dossier
+
+This subsection has been updated to identify those items that are placed in the dossier by the candidate (i.e., personal statement, CV, evidence demonstrating the candidate meets applicable standards, and optional reference letters) and those that are added by Academic Affairs (course evaluations, course loads/grade distributions, student advisee/mentee evaluations, academic unit evaluation guidelines, annual evaluations from the probationary period, Annual Faculty Report Forms).
+
+
+
+Confidential File
+
+This subsection has been edited by striking optional letters, course evaluations, course loads/grade distributions, and student advisee/mentee evaluations from the listing.  The Task Force recommends that these items be included in the dossier and not classified as confidential. 
+
+A new clause has also been added to this subsection by the Task Force that codifies the University’s current practice of prohibiting the sharing of confidential materials with the candidate to maintain the collegial working relationships of small departments and academic units.  This clause would preclude, for example, the Dean’s sharing their promotion or tenure evaluation with a candidate. 
+
+
+
+Special Considerations
+
+This is a new subsection that includes several new policies addressing the confidentiality of the P&T process, evaluator conflicts of interest (see Recommendation #19), and allegations of misconduct that may arise during the tenure evaluation process.
+
+
+
+Evaluation and Action
+
+In response to Recommendation #16, the Task Force has supplemented the University’s current text by providing more narrative detail regarding the University’s current stepwise evaluation process.
+
+A new clause has been developed indicating: (a) that Department Chairs/Program Directors applying for tenure will be evaluated by the Associate Dean (where applicable) or a tenured faculty member appointed by the Dean from either the Department Chairs/Program Director’s department, program, or School/College to conduct the evaluation; and (b) in those departments or programs where the Department Chair/Program Director is not tenured, the Associate Dean (where applicable) or a tenured faculty member appointed by the Dean will evaluate tenure candidates, as well as tenured faculty members of the department seeking promotion to the rank of Professor.
+
+
+
+Appeals
+
+The Appeals section has been updated to provide formal definitions of the terms “prejudicial error” and “inadequate consideration.”
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Post-tenure/Post-6th Year Review Policy and Procedures 
+
+In response to Recommendation #18, the Task Force has supplemented the Post-Tenure/Post-6th Review policy to provide a mechanism for recognizing distinguished faculty performance, as well as a means of assisting faculty members who are experiencing difficulties in achieving their expectations via the introduction of professional development plan with the Dean and a follow up ART review.
+
+In addition, the Task Force has rewritten the Appeals section of the Post-Tenure/Post-6th Review policy to align it with the promotion and tenure appellate process.</s>"
+<s>[INST] Executive Summary - Draft 5 Memo.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Executive Summary Memo (Final Draft).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Executive Summary.txt [/INST] Faculty Forum Executive Summary
+
+
+
+Full-Time Faculty Evaluation Process, Criteria, and Standards
+
+New introductory has been developed that identifies the purposes and principles associated with the university’s faculty evaluation system.  The text also references some of the new policy changes that are recommended by the Task Force later in the document (e.g., goal setting, academic unit guidelines, etc.). 
+
+
+
+Faculty Evaluation Instruments and Typical Evaluation Calendar
+
+The university’s current text summarizing the various types of faculty evaluations has been updated to reflect some of the new policy changes that have been recommended by the Task Force (e.g., annual evaluation of probationary faculty by department chairs/program directors, goal setting as part of the Annual Faculty Report Form submission).
+
+New text has been introduced outlining how 1-3 years of prior service credit granted at the time of initial appointment will impact a faculty member’s evaluation schedule.
+
+
+
+Faculty Evaluation Criteria and Documentation
+
+To respond to Task Force Recommendation #6, the Task Force developed a new clause under this section which permits evaluators to consider a faculty member’s administrative workload assignment when evaluating whether the candidate has met applicable performance standards for promotion and/or tenure.  
+
+Per the newly recommended text, expectations regarding the quality of teaching effectiveness, student mentoring effectiveness, and scholarly or creative work productivity may not be compromised, but the expected volume of teaching, student advising/mentoring, or scholarly or creative work productivity may be reduced by evaluators to account for extraordinary administrative service responsibilities associated with a workload assignment.
+
+
+
+Contributions that Support the University Mission
+
+This clause was developed at the request of the President.  Per the new text, faculty are responsible for being sympathetic with the mission of the University.  
+
+Supporting the University’s mission is accomplished by meeting the expectations set out in the University’s evaluation criteria and standards, by making contributions that enhance diversity, equity, and inclusion, and by being a responsible campus citizen.
+
+
+
+
+
+Contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
+
+This clause was developed to address Task Force Recommendation #7. Per the recommended text, faculty are responsible for demonstrating DEI contributions in at least one of the four university-wide evaluation categories.
+
+
+
+Campus Citizenship
+
+This is a new clause that was developed to address Task Force Recommendation #8.  Per the recommended text, consideration of campus citizenship is undertaken as part of the established evaluation areas of teaching, student mentoring, scholarly/creative productivity, and service.  Campus citizenship is not a stand-alone evaluation criteria.
+
+The new policy defines what constitutes campus citizenship and clarifies that such considerations must not be confused with conformity, sociability, or likeability and may not be interpreted in a manner that violates the principles of academic freedom.  Moreover, an absence of campus citizenship, by itself, will not constitute a basis for denial of tenure or dismissal.
+
+
+
+Teaching Effectiveness
+
+This section has been rewritten to address Task Force Recommendation #2.  The new text more clearly defines what constitutes “teaching effectiveness” and provides additional examples of such activities.  
+
+The drafting of the text was informed by the University of Kansas’ Teaching Effectiveness Benchmarking rubric: https://cte.ku.edu/benchmarks-teaching-effectiveness-project  
+
+
+
+Effectiveness as a Mentor
+
+This is a new section drafted in part to address Task Force Recommendation #3.  Specifically, we our recommending the de-coupling of student advising and mentoring.  
+
+Per this new section, all faculty are expected to be effective student mentors.  
+
+Effective student advising of graduate program students is now addressed in the Service Category.
+
+Each academic unit is responsible for assigning students to faculty mentors.  
+
+Faculty members may demonstrate effectiveness as a mentor by participating in mentoring activities applicable to their academic program, as well as participating in some or all of the mentoring activities listed in the section.
+
+
+
+
+
+Scholarly or Creative Productivity
+
+This section has been updated to address Task Force Recommendation #4.  The additions to this section more clearly define what constitutes “scholarly and creative productivity.”  
+
+New text has been added to clarify that faculty are expected to provide evidence that a significant portion of their scholarly or creative work activities are both documented (results in a written, oral, or performance product) and peer reviewed or critiqued by individuals qualified to judge the product (i.e., communicated to and validated by peers beyond the University).
+
+Text has also been added indicating that it is the duty of the academic unit, via the establishment of academic unit guidelines, to specify what constitutes meaningful peer review or critique in the academic discipline.
+
+In addition, Professional Development has been stricken from this evaluation category and moved to the Service category.
+
+
+
+Service
+
+In response to Task Force Recommendation #5, the Task Force has supplemented the University’s ""Service"" category with text designed to clearly define what constitutes university/academic unit, professional, and community service.  
+
+Advising of graduate program students has been decoupled from student mentoring and is now evaluated as part of the University/Academic Unit Service category (as applicable). 
+
+Professional Service has been removed from Scholarly/Creative Productivity and now evaluated as a Service activity. 
+
+The Community Service definition has been revised to reflect that such activities must be related to the faculty member’s disciplinary expertise.
+
+It is important to note that faculty are expected to engage in all three service activities: service to the university/academic unit, community, and profession.
+
+
+
+Academic Unit Evaluation Guidelines
+
+This is a new section drafted to address Task Force Recommendation #1.  The policy requires each academic unit to develop supplemental guidelines for tenure and promotion to account for differences in the nature of teaching effectiveness, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service across academic units.
+
+Academic Unit guidelines must be compatible with the University-level evaluation criteria and delineate what the Academic Unit values in teaching, mentoring, scholarship/creative endeavor (i.e., the number and/or type of publications, presentations, exhibitions, shows, or performances that are expected of candidates seeking tenure and/or promotion; listing of discipline-specific peer-reviewed journals, presses, or creative venues; etc.), and service.
+
+Approved Academic Unit guidelines will be used by evaluators as part of their respective evaluations of a faculty member’s performance.
+
+Academic Unit guidelines are developed by the Faculty and Dean of each Academic Unit and approved by the FAC and Provost.  In the rare event the FAC and Provost do not agree to approve the guidelines, final approval of the guidelines will rest with the Provost.
+
+The guidelines, once adopted and approved, will be reviewed at a minimum of every five years and updated as necessary.
+
+
+
+Faculty Evaluations
+
+
+
+Student Course and Instruction Evaluations
+
+This is a new policy addressing Student Course evaluations.  The text is limited to how such evaluations are utilized as part of the faculty evaluation system and stresses that student evaluations of teaching alone are not to be used in isolation as a means of recommending promotion and tenure.
+
+
+
+Student Advising Evaluations
+
+This is a new policy addressing graduate student advising evaluations.  Such evaluations are considered as a point of reference by evaluators during annual (following a probationary faculty member’s second-year of service), fourth-year, promotion, tenure, and post-tenure/post-sixth-year evaluations of graduate program faculty.
+
+
+
+Annual Faculty Report
+
+This is a new policy which formally codifies the University’s current practice of having all full-time faculty annually assess their professional performance via the submission of the Annual Faculty Report Form.
+
+Per Task Force Recommendation #9, the Task Force has incorporated a goal setting component to the process.  
+
+Faculty members are responsible for clearly articulating specific goals in the Annual Faculty Report Form which are related to the faculty member’s professional development and responsibilities (i.e., teaching, mentoring, scholarly or creative productivity, and service).  
+
+Goals are reviewed by the immediate administrative supervisor.
+
+For probationary faculty, the immediate administrative supervisor, as part of the annual evaluation process, assesses how the faculty member’s proposed goals relate to the faculty member’s professional development and responsibilities and align with University, College/School, and department goals, the faculty member’s academic rank, and Academic Unit evaluation guidelines.
+
+For tenured faculty and senior lecturers, the immediate administrative supervisor reviews the Annual Faculty Report Form and proposed goals and, if any concerns arise, will provide the faculty member with written feedback.  At the faculty member’s request, a meeting with the immediate administrative supervisor may be scheduled.
+
+
+
+Annual Evaluation of Probationary Faculty
+
+This is a new policy which replaces the University’s current practice of having department chairs/program directors annually interview probationary faculty.  
+
+Per the new policy, all probationary faculty will be evaluated annually by their immediate administrative supervisor on the performance of their faculty assignments and the progress they have made in their professional development.  
+
+Academic Unit policy determines which immediate administrative supervisor (i.e., department chair, program director, assistant dean, or dean) conducts the annual evaluation.
+
+The immediate administrative supervisor reviews the faculty member’s Annual Faculty Report Form, drafts a preliminary evaluation, and then meets either in person or via videoconference with the faculty member to discuss the draft evaluation and, if necessary, amend the faculty member’s proposed goals for the following academic year.
+
+Following the meeting, the immediate administrative supervisor finalizes the evaluation and submits it electronically to the faculty member.
+
+If the faculty member disagrees with any aspect of the evaluation, the faculty member may submit a written response, which is appended to the evaluation.
+
+The results of annual evaluation and the Annual Faculty Report Form are transmitted to the Dean (if the Dean did not conduct the evaluation) and then to the Provost for placement in the appropriate files.
+
+
+
+Peer Evaluations
+
+This is a new policy drafted to address Task Force Recommendation #10.
+
+The policy delineates the frequency of classroom observations and outlines in procedural detail how peer evaluators are selected and courses are to be observed.  
+
+To provide formative feedback and the opportunity for continued growth, faculty undergoing second and fourth-year reviews are provided a copy of the completed Classroom Visitation Report Form.  If the faculty member desires, a written response to the report may be submitted to the Office of Academic Affairs.  Moreover, if both parties agree, a mutually agreed on time may be scheduled to review the report.
+
+Given the summative nature of promotion and tenure evaluations, the Task Force decided to maintain the confidentiality of peer evaluations conducted as part of these evaluations.  However, should both the evaluator and faculty member mutually agree, the policy does allow for the parties to review the report.
+
+
+
+General Peer Evaluations
+
+This is a new policy which codifies the University’s current General Peer Evaluation process.  
+
+
+
+Departmental Faculty Evaluations
+
+This is a new policy which codifies the University’s current Departmental Faculty Evaluation process.  
+
+
+
+Committee Chair Evaluations
+
+This is a new policy which codifies the University’s current Committee Chair Evaluation process. 
+
+
+
+Second and Fourth-Year Reviews
+
+Per Task Force Recommendation #11, the Task Force has supplemented the second- and fourth-year review evaluation procedures to provide more narrative detail explaining the University’s current step-wise process.
+
+In addition, in effort to make the second and fourth-year evaluation more formative in nature, the Task Force has developed new text requiring that the Dean’s written evaluation be shared electronically with the faculty member.  If the faculty member disagrees with any aspect of the evaluation, the faculty member is afforded the opportunity to submit a written response, which is appended to the Dean’s evaluation.  
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Promotion Policies, Eligibility, and Standards
+
+For both the promotion and tenure sections, the Task Force recommends that the term “criteria” be replaced with “standards” in the header of this section to draw a distinction between University evaluation criteria and the standards that must be met to attain promotion to an applicable rank or tenure.  Of note, the term “standards” is used in the title of the overall evaluation section (i.e., “Faculty Evaluation Process and Standards).
+
+
+
+Eligibility for Promotion
+
+For both the Promotion to Associate Professor and Promotion to Professor clauses, the Task Force has developed new text that requires the last two (2) years of the candidate’s full-time teaching experience be completed at California Lutheran University.  By adopting this clause, the ART will have a sufficient body of evidence to evaluate the candidate’s teaching, advising/mentoring, and service effectiveness.
+
+The Task Force has also added a new clause to the subsection addressing eligibility standards for advancement to Senior Lecturer.  The current handbook is silent in this regard.
+
+
+
+Standards for Promotion
+
+In response to Recommendation # 12, the Task Force has supplemented the various rank standards with clarifying text that should assist faculty to better understand the expectations for each rank.  
+
+For Advancement to Assistant Professor: 
+
+The Task Force has stricken the University’s current text and replaced it with new text indicating that approval of advancement to the Assistant Professor rank is automatic and immediate upon the candidate presenting evidence of the completion of the earned doctorate or appropriate terminal degree/certification to the Provost.
+
+For Advancement to Associate Professor: 
+
+For ease of reference, please see the Task Force’s proposed changes below:
+
+Possession of an appropriate earned doctorate or an appropriate terminal professional degree/certification (an MFA for studio art and drama; a CPA or CMA and an appropriate master’s degree for accounting) from a graduate institution of recognized standing or accomplishments that are considered equivalent, such as outstanding performance in the creative arts or in the business or medical community; 
+
+Evidence of sustained teaching effectiveness across the range of assigned courses or labs, with convincing evidence that the person has moved beyond the “apprentice” stage of teaching represented by the rank of Assistant Professor.  To merit promotion to Associate Professor, candidates must show that they effectively perform their share of departmental or programmatic teaching (either alone or in collaboration with others) without the need for substantial assistance or intervention by other faculty members.  Candidates will also display the promise of continued development as teachers;
+
+Evidence of advising/mentoring effectiveness; 
+
+Evidence of scholarly or creative work which has been peer reviewed or critiqued by individuals qualified to judge the product (i.e., communicated to and validated by peers beyond the University).  To merit promotion to Associate Professor, candidates must also display the promise of continued scholarly or creative engagement with their field(s); and 
+
+A record of continued effective service to the University, the profession, and the community.  To merit promotion to Associate Professor, the candidate must demonstrate contributions in service that have made a positive difference at the level of the department, the College/School, or the University, as well as engagement in professional and community service activities.  Additionally, a candidate’s overall record of service must indicate promise of continued contributions that over time would position the candidate to meet the standards for Professor. 
+
+Candidates for advancement to the rank of Associate Professor are evaluated on their teaching, mentoring, scholarly or creative work, and service activities performed since the time of their initial faculty appointment as an Assistant Professor.  In most cases, a recommendation for advancement to the rank of Associate Professor occurs at the same time tenure is recommended.  To save time for both faculty member and committees, the necessary materials for both will go forward simultaneously under such circumstances. 
+
+
+
+For Advancement to Professor: 
+
+For ease of reference, please see the Task Force’s proposed changes below:
+
+Possession of an appropriate earned doctorate or appropriate terminal professional degree/certification (an MFA for studio art and drama; a CPA or CMA and an appropriate master’s degree for accounting) from a graduate institution of recognized standing or widely acclaimed accomplishments in the field, such as outstanding performance in the creative arts or the business or medical community; 
+
+Evidence of outstanding teaching across the range of assigned courses since having successfully applied to the rank of Associate Professor.  As accomplished teachers, Professors are expected to display outstanding performance in their own classes and should also be able to serve as resources for other faculty members in their own teaching.  Moreover, Professors are expected to remain committed to their own continuing development as teachers; 
+
+Evidence of sustained advising/mentoring effectiveness; 
+
+Evidence of a sustained program of scholarly or creative work that indicates continued development as a scholar or artist since having successfully applied for the rank of Associate Professor.*  Such evidence will involve products or performances which have been peer reviewed or critiqued by individuals qualified to judge the product (i.e., communicated to and validated by peers beyond the University).  Evidence of continued development as a scholar or artist may comprise more products/performances, better products/performances, or products/performances indicating success in moving into a new area of scholarly inquiry or creative work; and 
+
+A record of sustained, significant, and effective service to California Lutheran University (especially in a leadership role), profession, and community.  
+
+*Scholarly or creative works produced after the submission of a dossier resulting in advancement to Associate Professor will be considered during the advancement to Professor evaluation.
+
+For Advancement to Senior Lecturer:
+
+The Task Force has also added a new clause to the subsection addressing standards for advancement to Senior Lecturer.  The current handbook is silent in this regard.
+
+
+
+Tenure Policy, Eligibility, and Standards
+
+The Task Force has developed new introductory that defines tenure and its purpose.
+
+
+
+Extending the Probationary Period
+
+In response to Recommendation #14, the Task Force has developed a new policy addressing the pausing of the “tenure clock.”
+
+
+
+Standards for Tenure
+
+University Need Requirement and Tenure Quota 
+
+In response to Recommendation #13, the Task Force has supplemented the University’s “Institutional Need Requirement and Tenure Quota” policy with procedural text addressing how such determinations are made and implemented.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Individual Requirements
+
+The Task Force has slightly modified the listing of individual tenure requirements to more closely align with the supplemented university-wide evaluation criteria.  For ease of reference, the revised text is reprinted below:
+
+Candidates for tenure will be expected to have: 
+
+Consistently fulfilled the faculty responsibilities outlined in the “Faculty Responsibilities” section of this handbook 
+
+Earned an appropriate doctorate in the field or an appropriate terminal professional degree/certification (an MFA for studio art and drama; a CPA or CMA and an appropriate master’s degree for accounting) from a graduate institution of recognized standing; or completed accomplishments that are considered equivalent, such as outstanding performance in the creative arts or in the business or medical community. Although the University reserves the right to waive this requirement in unusual cases, faculty members who fail to meet this requirement should not expect to be granted tenure 
+
+Demonstrated over the duration of the probationary period through a satisfactory review:
+
+their effectiveness in teaching, student advising/mentoring, scholarship, and service through a satisfactory review;
+
+evidence of scholarly or creative productivity which has been peer reviewed or critiqued by individuals qualified to judge the product; and 
+
+proven their potential for achieving and sustaining long-term excellence in these areas.
+
+The Task Force has also added the following text to this subsection: “In rare circumstances, the ART Committee may recommend the waiver of particular standards if an individual faculty member’s performance in other areas is so outstanding as to warrant such action.”
+
+
+
+Procedures for Promotion and Tenure Review
+
+Confirmation of Candidacy
+
+A new clause addressing issues related to foreign nationals applying for tenure has been developed.  The clause still requires legal review.
+
+
+
+Promotion and Tenure Review Files
+
+In response to Recommendation #17, the Task Force has developed a clause under this subsection indicating that all evaluators are expected to evaluate candidates based solely on the content of the evaluation file (dossier and confidential file) and the results of candidate interviews (as applicable).
+
+
+
+Promotion and Tenure Dossier
+
+This subsection has been updated to identify those items that are placed in the dossier by the candidate (i.e., personal statement, CV, evidence demonstrating the candidate meets applicable standards, and optional reference letters) and those that are added by Academic Affairs (course evaluations, course loads/grade distributions, student advisee evaluations, academic unit evaluation guidelines, annual evaluations from the probationary period, Annual Faculty Report Forms).
+
+
+
+Confidential File
+
+This subsection has been edited by striking optional letters, course evaluations, course loads/grade distributions, and student advisee/mentee evaluations from the listing.  The Task Force recommends that these items be included in the dossier and not classified as confidential. 
+
+A new clause has also been added to this subsection by the Task Force that codifies the University’s current practice of prohibiting the sharing of confidential materials with the candidate to maintain the collegial working relationships of small departments and academic units.  This clause would preclude, for example, the Dean’s sharing their promotion or tenure evaluation with a candidate. 
+
+
+
+Special Considerations
+
+This is a new subsection that includes several new policies addressing the confidentiality of the P&T process, evaluator conflicts of interest (see Recommendation #19), and allegations of misconduct that may arise during the tenure evaluation process.
+
+
+
+Evaluation and Action
+
+In response to Recommendation #16, the Task Force has supplemented the University’s current text by providing more narrative detail regarding the University’s current stepwise evaluation process.
+
+A new clause has been developed indicating: (a) that Department Chairs/Program Directors applying for tenure will be evaluated by the Associate Dean (where applicable) or a tenured faculty member appointed by the Dean from either the Department Chairs/Program Director’s department, program, or School/College to conduct the evaluation; and (b) in those departments or programs where the Department Chair/Program Director is not tenured, the Associate Dean (where applicable) or a tenured faculty member appointed by the Dean will evaluate tenure candidates, as well as tenured faculty members of the department seeking promotion to the rank of Professor.
+
+
+
+Appeals
+
+The Appeals section has been updated to provide formal definitions of the terms “prejudicial error” and “inadequate consideration.”
+
+
+
+Post-tenure/Post-6th Year Review Policy and Procedures 
+
+In response to Recommendation #18, the Task Force has supplemented the Post-Tenure/Post-6th Review policy to provide a mechanism for recognizing distinguished faculty performance, as well as a means of assisting faculty members who are experiencing difficulties in achieving their expectations via the introduction of professional development plan with the Dean and a follow up ART review.
+
+In addition, the Task Force has rewritten the Appeals section of the Post-Tenure/Post-6th Review policy to more closely align it with the promotion and tenure appellate process.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Exigency.txt [/INST] The AAUP research report, Policies on Academic Freedom, Dismissal for Cause, Financial Exigency, and Program Discontinuance, examines the prevalence of AAUP-supported policies in faculty handbooks and collective bargaining agreements at four-year institutions that have a tenure system. The analysis replicates a study conducted in 2000 and tracks changes that have occurred since that time. It finds that many AAUP-supported procedural standards are widely prevalent, but it also reflects that not every institution, especially with respect to termination policies due to financial exigency and program discontinuation, adopts some or all of the AAUP supported standards.  In the end, the faculty, administration, and board will need to work meaningfully together to adopt policies in these two areas that best serves the mission of the University.  As a consultant, I have made suggested changes to the Task Force’s recommended policies 
+
+
+
+Financial Exigency
+
+Overall, the study found that 95 percent of four-year institutions with a tenure system have financial exigency policies that allow for the termination of appointments. A central question is if and how the conditions that allow such terminations to occur are defined. The study found that 55 percent of institutions do not define those conditions and simply state that appointments can be terminated for “financial exigency,” “fiscal emergency,” or similar conditions. That percentage has decreased since 2000, when it was 69 percent. The AAUP provides a definition of “financial exigency” in its Recommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure. That definition can be found in 13 percent of handbooks and contracts, up from 8 percent in 2000. Other definitions that often provide less protection than the definition provided by the AAUP can be found at 33 percent of institutions, which represents an increase of 10 percentage points since 2000.
+
+Policies on terminations of appointments because of financial exigency also need to include procedural safeguards, such as requirements that the administration seek another suitable position for affected faculty members and, failing that, that affected faculty members receive timely notice of the termination or severance pay. Other safeguards include the requirement that the faculty, through an appropriate faculty body, such as a senate or union, participate in the decision to declare a financial exigency and identify faculty appointments to terminate. The prevalence of such procedural safeguards has increased since 2000, with specific provisions concerning the role of the faculty increasing the most, from 50 percent to 66 percent. The prevalence of each of these procedural elements at institutions at which the faculty engage in collective bargaining is higher than at institutions without faculty unions.
+
+
+
+
+
+It is critical to distinguish formal discontinuance of a program for educational considerations from reducing its size through curtailment, modification or redirection. The potential to target individual faculty or politically disfavored lines of scholarly activity through termination is too great when academic programs may be reduced rather than discontinued. Therefore, except in case of a bona fide financial exigency, AAUP standards “do not permit the termination of faculty appointments in order to reduce a program” [AAUP, Responding to Financial Crisis, emphasis added]. Hence, curtailment, modification or redirection should not be permitted to result in termination for budget or program decisions.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Extended Unpaid Personal Leave of Absence.txt [/INST] Extended Unpaid Personal Leave of Absence 
+
+Full-time faculty members may be granted an extended leave of absence personal leaves of absence of up to one year, which will be without pay from the University, based on their merits and in consultation with the Department Chair and Provost. 
+
+The University recognizes that there may be limited occasions when a faculty member needs time off beyond what is available under the University’s paid and unpaid leave policies. For example, a faculty member may be unable to return to work after exhausting FMLA leave or may not be qualified for FMLA leave. In such instances, the faculty member may request an unpaid extended leave of absence from the University. A faculty member requesting an extended leave of absence must submit a written request stating the purpose of the leave to the Department Chair and Provost at least 30 days prior to the requested starting date of the leave, or, if it is not possible to provide 30 days’ notice, as soon as the individual becomes aware of the need for an extended leave of absence.  Any unpaid leave approved under this policy will run concurrently with FMLA leave and parental leave, if applicable. In no case will an indefinite leave of absence be granted. Leaves of absence are unpaid.
+
+Prior to recommending a leave for a faculty member, the Provost will consult with the faculty member’s department and Human Resources.  The conditions of the leave—including its duration, whether the time spent on leave will count towards the next review or sabbatical, and the date by which the faculty member must notify the University that they will be returning to service—will be specified when the leave is granted by the President, in consultation with the Provost. 
+
+Eligibility to continue participation in and election of group benefit plans while on an extended leave of absence is governed by the plan or policy. Therefore, a faculty member contemplating a leave of absence under this policy should consult in advance with Human Resources regarding the implications of the leave for University benefits.  Payment of premiums for such plans is the faculty member’s responsibility during the leave. The employee will not lose any benefits accrued before the leave. Dependent tuition remission privileges normally will be continued during a leave that does not exceed ninety (90) calendar days. Any exception to this policy requires the approval of the President or an administrator designated by the President. 
+
+Faculty members who intend to return to service following a leave must notify the Provost by the agreed upon date. If such notification is not received, the faculty member will be considered to have resigned from employment at the end of the specified period of leave. Failure to return to service upon the scheduled expiration of an administrative leave or extension of a leave will result in separation from the University at the end of the leave or extension by deemed resignation.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] External REview Mandatory Text Model.txt [/INST] Pre-Tenure External Review
+
+The decision whether or not to request an outside evaluation during a pre-tenure review rests solely with the faculty member, and no implications shall be drawn from the presence or absence of such a request. Pre-tenure faculty considering external reviews should consult with the Associate Dean of the Faculty no later than August 1 of the review year. When a faculty member makes a request for an outside evaluation, the faculty member generates a list of five potential outside evaluators. The faculty member also provides a packet of relevant professional work from his or her professional file. The Associate Dean selects a name(s) from the list and forwards the packet of professional materials to the selected evaluator(s). The evaluator(s) will provide a written report in a timely manner to the Dean of the Faculty, who forwards the report to the Faculty Status and Review Committee and the department and/or program chair. After deleting the name(s) of the evaluator(s), the Dean will also forward the report to the faculty member under review. Thisprocedureforobtainingoutsideevaluationscanbemodifieduponmutual agreement of the faculty member and the Dean of the Faculty. 
+
+Tenure External Review and Promotion to Professor External Review (Remark on Due Dates: If any of the specified dates fall on a weekend or holiday, the date of the first business day following applies.)
+
+External review is required for all candidates going up for tenure and promotion from Assistant to Associate Professor and for all candidates going up for promotion from Associate Professor to Professor. 
+
+Candidates under review for either tenure or promotion to the rank of Professor will submit to the Associate Dean of the Faculty a list of at least 5 potential external reviewers by March 15 of the preceding academic year. The candidate’s chair, in collaboration with other tenured members of the Department or Program, will also generate a list of 3 potential external reviewers. No rule prohibits the candidate and the chair from producing lists that overlap by identifying one or more reviewer(s) in common. The candidate may provide to the Office of the Dean of the Faculty a list of names to be excluded from the Department/Program’s list. The candidate should not have access to the list submitted by the chair. The Associate Dean of the Faculty will request 2 letters from the candidate's list and 1 letter from the Department/Program's list. The Associate Dean will use the external review request template as a guide. (See Appendix E for template.) 
+
+By April 1, each faculty member under consideration will submit to the Associate Dean of the Faculty a packet of information to be sent to the outside reviewers. A curriculum vitae is a necessary part of the packet of material sent to reviewers. Faculty will determine what specific work, published and/or in-progress, is forwarded to reviewers. Faculty may include professional statements of their research focus or anything else they deem relevant to the external reviewer. The Associate Dean of the Faculty forwards the packet of professional materials to the selected reviewers. In addition to these professional materials, external reviewers will be sent a brief description of the University and the resources available to faculty (this section will vary by department and be produced by the Associate Dean and Department Chair), and the typical teaching load and service responsibilities of the faculty member. The letter to the reviewer will indicate that we are not looking for the reviewer’s opinion as to whether or not the candidate should receive tenure or promotion at Southwestern, or whether the level of professional activity and achievement would make a favorable case for tenure or promotion at the reviewer’s institution. Instead, reviewers will be asked to provide their assessment of (1) the quality and rigor of the work submitted by the candidate that has not been peer reviewed, (2) the standards, rigor, and quality, and regional or national standing of the venues in which the candidate has presented, displayed, performed, or published work, and (3) whether those venues are appropriate to her/his field. In addition, reviewers will be asked to offer guidance to untenured faculty by commenting on the potential this work has and how it might be expanded and developed further. The reviews will be addressed to, and sent to, the Dean of the Faculty. The external reviewers will be informed that their identity will not be disclosed to the faculty member under review, although their evaluation will be forwarded to the faculty member. 
+
+Reviewers will be asked to submit their reviews by July 15. Once received, the Dean of Faculty will remove the reviewers’ identifying information and forward the reviews to the faculty member. The reviews will also be made available to those involved in the review process as described in the section on Electronic Professional Files below. Faculty members may add a response to reviewer comments to their professional files. This procedure for obtaining outside evaluations can be modified upon mutual agreement of the faculty member and the Dean of the Faculty.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] External Reviews.txt [/INST] External Reviews
+
+
+
+Lewis and Clark
+
+
+
+Colorado College
+
+
+
+Lake Forest</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Faculty Areas of Concern.txt [/INST] Faculty Areas of Concern
+
+
+
+Below is a high-level overview of those section of the current draft of the handbook where faculty have raised concerns:
+
+Chapter Two – Faculty Governance
+
+2.1	Faculty Bylaws
+
+	Article I: Organization of the Faculty - Section 1
+
+Some faculty have voiced opposition to the Vice Presidents being included as members of the Faculty.  Of note, the Vice Presidents are listed in the Code of Regulations as members of the Faculty.  Faculty have been advised by the FHRT that removal of the Vice Presidents from the Bylaws will require an amendment to the Code of Regulations.
+
+Article IV – Nominations and Election Procedures
+
+A new Section 4 was added per the request of the Executive Committee of the Faculty that addresses the election of faculty members to University-wide (as opposed to faculty standing) committees, task forces, work groups, etc. The newly added text requires that faculty to be elected to any University-wide committee, task force, etc. charged with addressing matters that “fall within an area of primary faculty responsibility as defined in the Article VIII, Section 2 of the Code of Regulations.”
+
+Of note, the President has raised concerns and is opposed to this new section.
+
+3.2.6.1: Professor Emeriti
+
+Per this suggested new policy, emeriti status is awarded by the Board to those who are in good standing, have met stipulated time in rank requirements and “received a positive recommendation for such appointment from the appropriate department, the Faculty Personnel Committee, the Provost, and the University President.” 
+
+The FPC, as well as another anonymous commenter, has questioned why emeriti status is not provided to all retired faculty.  Concerns were also raised regarding adding to the FPC workload.  Some have also raised concerns regarding the extent of library services afforded to retired faculty, including emeriti, in general.
+
+3.5.8: Outside Activities
+
+												This policy is reprinted text from Chapter III.N of the current handbook.  It mirrors Article XII, Section 5 of the OWU Code of Regulations.  The FPC and CWG have commented that the policy is too restrictive and vague in that it requires Provost approval of all outside employment for compensation other that for “addresses and casual consultation.”  There is also concern that such approval is required for summer employment.  It is the team’s recommendation that the Board amend the Code of Regulations so that an alternative outside activities policy may be developed for inclusion in the Faculty Handbook.  
+
+3.6.1.1: Standard Full-time Teaching Load
+
+Some faculty have raised concerns about new text requiring Department Chairs to provide semester teaching load distributions to Academic Affairs, viewing the requirement as administrative overreach. Per the new text, if Academic Affairs has equity concerns regarding the distribution of teaching loads within the department, it will work in consultation with the applicable Department Chair to resolve such concerns.  In the prior handbook, course distributions were at the discretion of the department.    
+
+Limitations on Course Enrollment
+
+This newly suggested policy permits Academic Affairs, in consultation with the University Governance Committee and the Committee on Academic Programs, to establish and publish maximum enrollment limits (course caps) for all courses and sections.  Some faculty have expressed concern that the policy affords Academic Affairs final decision-making authority to establish course caps.  
+
+Course Cancellations
+
+This newly suggested policy permits Academic Affairs, in consultation with the University Governance Committee and the Committee on Academic Programs, to establishe minimum enrollment (exclusive of auditors) numbers for each full-unit or full-unit equivalent sections taught by the full-time faculty during the Fall and Spring semesters. When the minimum course enrollment (exclusive of auditors) falls below the published minimum number, Academic Affairs, in consultation with the applicable Department Chair and faculty member, may cancel the class.  Some faculty have expressed concern that Academic Affairs has been given final decision-making authority to establish these course caps.
+
+3.6.1.2: Changes in Full-time Status
+
+Issue1
+
+In effort to comply with best practice, the FHRT modified the University’s current policy to require Provost approval, after consultation with the FPC, for reductions in full-time standard teaching loads.  In the current Handbook, the FPC made the approval.  Some faculty have expressed concern that this may result in administrative overreach.
+
+Issue 2 
+
+The University current policy states that a reduced teaching load, at reduced pay, may be approved for a period not to exceed one academic year. Per current policy, salary will be proportionate to teaching load, i.e., 3/6ths, 4/6ths, or 5/6ths.  Some faculty expressed concern that the ratios listed in the current policy do not reflect faculty work in other areas (i.e., scholarship/creative activity and service) and should be modified to 1/10th, etc.
+
+In response, the FHRT amended another clause to reflect that when there is a reduced teaching load, there will be a corresponding reduction in committee, advising, and other responsibilities in proportion to the teaching load reduction based on dialogue between the faculty member, the Department Chair, and Academic Affairs.
+
+3.6.1.5: Scheduled Class Meeting and Faculty Absences 
+
+Some faculty have cited the policies in this section (Absences from Class, Days Preceding Breaks) and others (e.g.., Availability to Students and Colleagues) as evidence of administrative “micro-managing” and written from a place of “fundamental distrust, micro-managing, and power-hungriness.”  Arguments have been made that policy as a whole should not be written to address one bad individual; if senior leadership feels that faculty are skirting their responsibilities to the university, it should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, not written into broad policy to be enforced upon the whole of the faculty body at will.
+
+3.6.1.6: Availability to Students and Colleagues
+
+See comment above.  Some faculty have also stated that text referencing regular office hours is antiquated and does not take into account the myriad of ways faculty engage with students today.  It is important to note that this text is reprinted from the FPC Policy document and the FHRT has requested that they take this issue up over the next academic year.
+
+3.8:2.2: Evaluation of Department Chairs
+
+One commenter noted that “no one wants to be chair” and by introducing an annual evaluation process, the university will be making the position less desirable and waste senior leadership time.
+
+3.9.3: Evaluation for Reappointment
+
+Some faculty have voiced opposition to the revised evaluation schedule proposed by the FHRT whereby tenure track faculty are evaluated in years 2, 4 and then 6 for tenure as opposed to annually.  The majority of the FPC membership, however, recently indicated that they are in favor of the new model.
+
+3.10.1: Sabbatical Leave
+
+Several faculty have expressed opposition to the revised policy, which requires the submission of an abstract to Academic Affairs and was added by the FHRT to ensure that sabbatical leaves are being undertaken for professional development purposes., as well as to facilitate course scheduling and planning.  
+
+The FPC and other faculty have voiced that the requirement to submit a post-sabbatical report serves as a sufficient check to ensure that the professional development purpose of the leave is being met and therefore an advance submission of an abstract is not necessary.  Others have indicated that adding text requiring advance notice “to facilitate course scheduling and planning and verification of eligibility” opens the door to such leaves being unilaterally denied by Academic Affairs.  In short, the faculty fear that the revised policy will be used by Academic Affairs to deny sabbaticals going forward.
+
+3.12.1.3: Salary Ranges for Initial Appointment
+
+												This newly proposed policy lifts current constraints on the University’s ability to hire the best faculty at market rate salaries by discipline and rank.  Many faculty, including some members of the FHRT, have raised equity concerns regarding this revised practice.  
+
+3.13.6: Termination
+
+2.b(1): Termination due to Financially Contingent Situations and Resource Allocation
+
+Criteria
+
+Several faculty members have raised concerns regarding the addition of Marketability to the criteria to be employed in financially contingent situations in allocating resources to University programs and services.  They claim that this criterion was never fully analyzed after the last program review process.
+
+Definition of Financial Contingent Situation
+
+Several faculty have requested a formal definition of the term financial contingent situation.  The University’s attorney has drafted the following definition:
+
+A “financially contingent situation” is a serious financial condition that is likely in the future to threaten the fiscal soundness of the university’s programs or services. It is not required that the university invade or deplete capital prior to determining that there is a financially contingent situation. It is also not required that the viability of the institution as a whole is threatened prior to determining that there is a financially contingent situation.
+
+This definition will be shared with the faculty in the next draft of the handbook.   One member of the FHRT noted in yesterday’s meeting that the definition will probably not appease the faculty. 
+
+2.b(2): Program or Department Discontinuance Due to Educational Considerations 
+
+This is the most polarizing policy in the handbook.  Faculty are almost all universally opposed to the policy.  
+
+												
+
+												Chapter Four – Part-time Faculty
+
+												4.3.3.2: Compensation (Sr. Lecturers)
+
+												Some faculty have expressed opposition to removing eligibility for a paid sabbatical leave, particularly if current Sr. Lecturers are not grandfathered.  
+
+												Another faculty member raised concerns about eligibility for Sr. Lecturers to receive pro-rated tuition remission benefits.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Faculty Bylaws and Committee Descriptions.txt [/INST] Faculty Bylaws
+
+	Article I: Organization of the Faculty
+
+	Section 1.	Members of the Faculty shall be (a) the President, the Provost, the Vice Presidents; (b) all persons appointed with the ranks of professor, associate professor, assistant professor, or instructor; (c) professional University librarians; and (d) others admitted to membership by vote of the Faculty.  Voting members shall be those of the above who hold full-time University appointments. When voting takes place at meetings of the Faculty, voting members  must be present if they wish to vote. However, in the event a person is unable to attend a faculty meeting due to illness or a family or medical emergency, that person may either vote by absentee ballot or electronic ballot for elections to faculty committees only. The person must arrange with the Office of the Provost both to pick up and deliver any absentee ballot. If the person is to vote in the election by electronic ballot, the Office of the Provost will email the electronic ballot to the eligible faculty member’s official University email address.
+
+	Section 2.	The permanent officers of the Faculty shall be the President of the University, the Provost, and the Secretary of the Faculty. The Secretary shall be elected by the Faculty at the regular April meeting for a term of two years, commencing on the June first following such election. 
+
+	Section 3.	The Provost shall be the presiding officer over all faculty meetings except when the President of the University chooses to preside. In the event neither the President of the University nor the Provost can preside at a regular meeting of the Faculty, the senior full professor, in terms of service, on the Executive Committee shall be the presiding officer of the meeting.  
+
+	Section 4.	The Secretary of the Faculty shall prepare and keep full and complete minutes of all faculty meetings. If, for any reason, the Secretary is unable to perform  the secretarial duties, the Provost shall appoint a secretary pro tempore who shall perform the functions of the Secretary.
+
+	Section 5	The Faculty may elect a Parliamentarian of the Faculty, who shall give interpretations of procedure when requested to do so by the presiding officer, or on the Parliamentarian’s own volition. Any interpretation by the Parliamentarian shall hold unless it is overruled by a two-thirds majority of those Faculty members present and voting.  The Parliamentarian shall be elected by the Faculty at the regular April meeting, commencing on the June first following such election.  There are no term limitations.
+
+	Section 6	The Secretary and Parliamentarian may be removed for cause by a two-thirds majority vote of the faculty at any meeting whenever, in the judgment of the faculty, the best interests of the faculty would thereby be served, provided, however, that the proposal for removal is presented at one meeting and acted upon at the next meeting.
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+	Article II: Committees of the Faculty
+
+	Section 1.	Standing Committees of the Faculty shall be designated, elected and directed by the Faculty and shall have as ex officio members the President of the University and the Provost. Ad hoc committees of the Faculty are to be established by the Faculty only when the subject matter is outside the area of responsibility of a standing committee.
+
+	Section 2.	Except as may otherwise be provided in these Faculty Bylaws, the term of office for committee members shall be six semesters and shall commence on July 1 and end on June 30 of the sixth semester thereafter, or when successors have been elected or appointed. Leave time of up to one year is included as part of a faculty member's term. In the event that a faculty member takes leave time in excess of one year, the faculty member is required to relinquish committee assignments. No member of the Faculty shall serve more than 14 consecutive semesters on the same standing committee of the Faculty. Any faculty member that has completed 14 consecutive semesters of service on the same standing committee may not serve on that committee during the next two consecutive semesters.  If a faculty member vacates  a term of office on any standing committee because of election to another standing committee, the faculty member may not resume service on the first committee when the term on the second committee expires.
+
+	Section 3.	Normally, a faculty member shall serve on no more than one standing committee. Exceptions to this rule may be adopted as provisions in the official descriptions of particular committees.
+
+	Section 4.	Except as otherwise provided, it shall be the duty of each committee of the Faculty: 1. To keep the Faculty informed of agenda items on which the committee is working that may affect the long-term future of the institution, its faculty or students.  The committee shall provide opportunity for Faculty response and questions where feasible and appropriate, whether at the time of an oral report to the Faculty, at an open meeting, in surveys or by other means.  2. To act for the Faculty when and as directed by the Faculty. 3. To make recommendations to the Faculty on matters of policy relevant to its area of responsibility.
+
+	Section 5.	Except as otherwise provided, each committee of the Faculty shall elect its chair and vice chair and be responsible to the Faculty for its own organization and procedures.
+
+	Section 6.	A committee of the Faculty can, upon a majority vote of its members, invite other persons to participate in its deliberations, but only members of the committee shall be permitted to vote.  
+
+	Section 7.	With the exception of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee and the Academic Conduct Review Board, each committee of the Faculty shall make a full and complete report of its activities during the academic year at the regularly scheduled meeting in April.
+
+	Section 8.	In the event an elected member of a standing or ad hoc committee of the Faculty is unable to complete the faculty member’s full term of office, the Executive Committee of the Faculty shall seek a replacement at the earliest opportunity, applying the methods outlined in Chapter II, Article II, Section 2 above and Article IV, Section 3, below.  A faculty member elected to fill a vacancy shall serve the unexpired committee term of the individual whom the newly elected faculty member succeeds. If a faculty member is unable to complete a period of the term of office due to a semester leave, the Executive Committee of the Faculty will appoint a temporary replacement for the length of the semester leave. The faculty member will resume service upon return from the leave. 
+
+	Section 9.	Whenever provision is made for faculty representation on Trustee, Administration, University, Divisional, or Departmental Councils, Boards, or Committees, it shall be the responsibility of such faculty representatives to keep the Faculty informed of the activities of these bodies and act as liaison between them and the Faculty.
+
+	Section 10.	In consultation with the President and the Provost, the Executive Committee will set the initial meeting time for new faculty committees prior to the election of faculty committee members. For all existing faculty committees except the Wesleyan Council on Student Affairs (“WCSA”), the initial meeting time may be changed, beginning the following academic year, by 1) a unanimous vote of all faculty and administrators with a continuing term of office and 2) a majority vote of the Faculty. Faculty committee meeting dates and times for the remainder of the academic year are scheduled by the unanimous vote of the members of the respective committees, reported to the Executive Committee, and shared with the Faculty.  
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+	Article III: Meetings
+
+	Section 1.	Regular monthly meetings of the University Faculty shall be held during the academic year. No regular monthly meeting shall last longer than ninety minutes unless it is extended by a majority vote of those present. At the last regular meeting of each academic year, a schedule of meeting dates for the coming year shall be adopted by the Executive Committee, provided that the time or place of meetings may be changed or the meeting may be canceled by the presiding officer or the Executive Committee, when it is deemed in the interest of the Faculty to do so.  If ten members of the Faculty request by written petition that a cancelled meeting be reinstated, the presiding officer of the Faculty shall call the meeting.
+
+	Section 2.	Special meetings of the Faculty shall be held at the call of the presiding officer or the Executive Committee or upon the request of 10 members of the Faculty transmitted in writing to the Secretary of the Faculty.
+
+	Section 3.	In-person meetings are the usual method for conducting Faculty meetings, with electronic meetings held when circumstances make it advisable that the Faculty not gather as a whole in person.  Determinations of whether the meeting shall be held electronically are made by the presiding officer in consultation with the Chair of the Executive Committee.  When meetings of the Faculty are to be conducted electronically, voting shall be through use of an electronic ballot designated by the Executive Committee.  When a meeting is held electronically, that meeting will function as a regular meeting of the Faculty and all actions and deliberations within such a meeting will have the same standing as an in-person meeting.  A vote conducted through the designated electronic balloting system shall be deemed a valid vote, fulfilling any requirement in these Bylaws that a vote be conducted by ballot.
+
+	Section 4	Consistent with our shared governance system, attendance at Faculty meetings of all members of the Faculty with voting privileges is encouraged. 
+
+	Section 5	Except for executive sessions, faculty meetings shall be open to all members of the Ohio Wesleyan University staff and guests invited by a majority vote of the Faculty.  Reporters, whether affiliated with the University or not, shall not be admitted as guests to the monthly meetings of the Ohio Wesleyan University faculty.  Minutes of the meeting shall be documented by the Secretary and distributed to the Faculty within seven business days of the meeting.
+
+	Section 6.	After the completion of the regular order of business, the Faculty shall go into executive session at the request of any member of the Faculty; it may vote to do so at any other time on motion to that effect.
+
+	Section 7.	The agenda of each faculty meeting shall include the following items in the order specified: 1. Call to order. 2. Introduction of guests. 3. Approval of minutes. 4. Old business. 5. New business. 6. Reports of Faculty committees. 7. Report of University officers. 8. Announcements. 9. Adjournment. The agenda of each faculty meeting shall be emailed 96 hours in advance of the meeting.  On any subject requiring a vote, a detailed report should accompany the agenda, such report should include the proposal to be voted on and substantiating statements. On a subject not requiring a vote, advance materials for the Faculty are desirable but optional. The Faculty shall have the right to waive the 96 hour rule by majority vote. The motion to waive must be accompanied by a rationale for suspending the rule. The motion to waive is debatable.
+
+	Section 8.	A majority of the voting members of the Faculty who are not on approved leave shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.  Unless otherwise provided in these Bylaws, when a vote is taken on any matter at a meeting of the Faculty, a quorum being present, a majority of the votes of the members present shall determine the outcome.  While voting for motions must be in person if the meeting is not held electronically, voting members of the faculty are eligible to vote for elections to faculty standing committees through electronic ballots.  If voting is by electronic ballot, a majority of votes cast shall determine the outcome for committee elections; in the case of motions, a majority of those present at the meeting shall determine the outcome.  
+
+	Section 9.	The proceedings and deliberations of the Faculty shall be governed by Robert's Rules of Order, except that upon the request of a voting member of the meeting the body will vote by secret or electronic ballot.
+
+	Section 10.	Faculty action within an area of primary responsibility as defined in the Article VIII, Section 2 of the Code of Regulations shall be transmitted to the Board of Trustees by the President, along with any administrative recommendations.
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+	Article IV: Nominations and Election Procedures
+
+	Section 1.	The Executive Committee of the Faculty shall act as a Nominating Committee of the Faculty. The agenda of the February faculty meeting shall include a slate of nominees for those faculty committees the members of which do not, under the provisions of Bylaws Article II, Section 3, normally serve on more than one standing committee of the Faculty. The elections for these committees will occur in the March faculty meeting. For all other committees or other responsibilities to which faculty members are elected, the Executive Committee will prepare a slate of nominees for the March faculty meeting; the elections for these positions shall be in the April faculty meeting. In preparing all ballots, the slate will consist of, insofar as possible, at least fifty percent more nominees than positions to be filled. After the Executive Committee's slate has been presented, there shall be a call for nominations from the floor.  
+
+	Section 2.	At all elections, each member of the Faculty shall have as many votes as there are positions to be filled for each office. Depending upon the number of offices to be filled, the candidate, or candidates, receiving the greatest number of votes shall be certified as elected by the Chair of the Executive Committee of the Faculty or the Chair’s designate. In the event of ties, a runoff election will be held by electronic ballot. The official announcement of the election results shall be made by the presiding officer as soon as possible after each of the March and April elections.
+
+	Section 3.	The Executive Committee shall fill, or cause to be filled by election, vacancies on committees created when members cannot serve some or all of their terms of service. A vacancy for an unexpired term of one or more full academic years shall be filled by election in the spring or at the earliest possible fall meeting of the Faculty, depending on when the vacancy becomes known to the Executive Committee. Vacancies of less than a full academic year on all committees other than Faculty Personnel Committee shall be filled by appointment by the Executive Committee, unless such partial year vacancies can be summed to one or more full academic years, in which case each summed vacancy shall be filled by election. When such summed vacancies are known in time, the election(s) shall be held in the spring. Otherwise, summed vacancies shall be filled by special election at the first possible faculty meeting in the fall.  Pending the election, the Executive Committee may temporarily appoint a replacement faculty member so as to not delay the work of the committee.
+
+	Section 4.	Unless otherwise stipulated by appointment provisions in the Faculty Handbook (e.g., appointment to dismissal for cause Hearing Panel), the Executive Committee shall cause to be filled by election, or appointment if an election is unsuccessful, members of the Faculty to administrative committees, ad hoc committees, task forces, and working groups that are charged with addressing matters that fall within an area of primary faculty responsibility as defined in the Article VIII, Section 2 of the Code of Regulations. 
+
+On occasion, the President may appoint faculty to University-wide ad hoc committees, work groups, or task forces that are formed to address issues of institutional strategic importance and are not intended to become standing committees of the University. On those occasions when a University-wide administrative committee, ad hoc committee, task force, or working group addresses an issue that falls within the purview of the faculty as outlined in Article VIII, Section 2 of the Code of Regulations, the recommendations of the University-wide administrative committee, ad hoc committee, task force, or working group will be forwarded to the Executive Committee of the faculty for referral to the appropriate faculty standing committee for consideration before any final action by the faculty.
+
+	Section 5	The President or Provost may appoint, in consultation with the Executive Committee, members of the Faculty to University administrative committees, ad hoc committees, task forces, and working groups charged with addressing matters outside of an area of primary faculty responsibility as defined in the Article VIII, Section 2 of the Code of Regulations. A written statement of the purpose, scope, and expected timetable of University administrative committees, ad hoc committees, task forces, or working groups will be presented to the Executive Committee, and reports will be distributed to the Executive Committee and to any appropriate Faculty committees at the conclusion of the work of the ad hoc committee, task force, or working group.
+
+	
+
+	Article V: Amendments
+
+Upon the motion of any members of the Faculty at any one of its regularly scheduled meetings, a motion to amend, alter, or abolish any bylaw of the Faculty or description of faculty committee may be entertained. No vote shall be taken on any such motion, however, until it has been submitted in written form to the Secretary of the Faculty and, by the Secretary, circulated among the Faculty at least 12 full class days before the vote at the next regularly scheduled Faculty meeting or at a meeting called especially for that purpose. If approved by a three-fifths majority of the members present and voting where a quorum is present, the amendment shall have carried.
+
+
+
+
+Descriptions of Faculty Committees
+
+For the purpose of determining eligibility for membership on Faculty Committees, the word ""faculty"" appearing under Membership or Membership Qualifications shall be understood to include all persons appointed with the ranks of professor, associate professor, assistant professor, instructor, or professional librarian and to not include all persons that serve half-time or more in the administration.
+
+The committees described below are considered non-overlap committees.  Faculty may not serve on two non-overlap committees at the same time:
+
+Committee on University Governance
+
+Duties
+
+It shall be the responsibility of the Chair and Vice Chair to meet with the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees and for the total committee to meet with the full Board and to cooperate with the officers of the University in fiscal planning and budgeting. Such responsibility shall include consideration of the size of the administration and of the number of faculty in relation to the number of students, seen from the overall institutional perspective. On matters affecting academic programs, the committee shall work together with the Committee on Academic Programs and the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee. The Committee on University Governance shall also act as liaison between faculty and administration on such matters of faculty welfare as pensions, insurance programs, sick leaves, group health, retirement, tuition benefits, and faculty aid.
+
+Membership
+
+Four faculty members.
+
+Membership Qualification
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+
+
+Faculty Personnel Committee
+
+Duties
+
+	To develop for faculty consideration recommendations on policies related to the employment and reappointment of faculty members, their promotions, tenure, merit increases, and leaves of absence.
+
+	To evaluate faculty members for retention, promotion, tenure, merit increases, and leaves of absences, and to recommend on individual cases to the administration; 
+
+	To recommend to the administration appointments to vacant endowed or named chairs.
+
+	To evaluate the performance of the Provost and to report these evaluations to the President of the University. An evaluation will be performed in the 3rd year of service and every four years thereafter, unless more frequent evaluations is deemed necessary by the President. 
+
+	As a full committee, to interview candidates for the senior ranks (full and associate professors) and to make recommendations in regard to their appointment.
+
+	To provide a member of the committee to work with two faculty members appointed by the Provost to interview all candidates in other than senior ranks for each particular position or vacancy.
+
+	To recommend to the President of the University the recipients of the Welch Award for Scholarly or Artistic Achievement and for the Sherwood Dodge Shankland Award for Encouragement of Teachers.
+
+	To contribute to the annual performance evaluation of the people who report directly to the Provost by collecting evaluative comments from selected faculty and reporting a summary to the Provost. Comments will be collected beginning in the second year of service and every three years thereafter unless a greater frequency is deemed necessary by the Committee.
+
+Membership
+
+Seven faculty members, with inclusive and diverse representation. Administrative members are not considered voting member when the issue on the floor of the committee concerns a recommendation to the administration.  If a member cannot serve in either semester in any year of an unexpired term (due to a leave or for other reasons), that member must be replaced for the entire year.  The one-year vacancy will be filled by election as described in Article IV, Section 3.  Pending the election, the Executive Committee may temporarily appoint a replacement faculty member so as to not delay the work of the committee.
+
+Membership Qualification
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.  
+
+
+
+Executive Committee of the Faculty
+
+Duties
+
+	To review the structure, and function of all existing faculty committees when deemed necessary by the committee, but at least once every ten years; to review the structure and function of all proposed faculty committees; to review the annual reports of all existing faculty committees once per year; to recommend such changes as seem desirable.
+
+	To work with the Provost on updating the Faculty Handbook as necessary.  
+
+	To nominate members of standing and ad hoc committees and to fill committee vacancies of less than one year's duration.
+
+	To conduct the necessary elections of members to all faculty committees.
+
+	To make available and count secret ballots at faculty meetings.
+
+	To be responsible for assigning to the appropriate standing committee, or committees, any problem or issue not already allocated as a regular function of any existing committee, when consideration of such problem or issue has been requested by appropriate faculty action or deemed advisable by the Executive Committee.
+
+	To provide the election process for faculty members to serve on administrative committees, task forces or working groups outside the Faculty Standing Committee structure of Ohio Wesleyan University that require elected faculty members pursuant to the charge of the committee, task force or working group.  Administrative committees, task forces, or working groups whose charge call for the appointment of faculty members shall be appointed by the President or Provost after consultation with the Executive Committee.
+
+	To consider a grievance, brought by any member of the Faculty, for which no regular committee channel or University policy is available, providing attempts have been made to resolve the matter through the offices of the Chairperson, or Provost (as appropriate), or President (in that order). In such matters, the Executive Committee will operate in an advisory capacity to the President.
+
+	To act as liaison between faculty and administration on matters not specifically assigned to other regular standing committees.
+
+	To act for the Faculty during extended vacation periods or in an emergency of such urgency as to make impractical the timely assembly of the Faculty.
+
+Membership
+
+Five faculty members.
+
+Membership Qualification
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+
+
+Committee on Academic Programs
+
+An academic program is any set of courses that leads to a degree granted by the institution.
+
+Duties
+
+	To review the functioning of academic programs as needed, taking into consideration the academic plan of the institution; and to bring recommendations to the Faculty regarding:
+
+	changes in course offerings; including temporary, permanent, summer, and online courses;
+
+	changes to a major or minor;
+
+	University wide requirements and policies including competency and distribution requirements;
+
+	changes in the academic program structure of the University, including the creation or termination of academic programs.
+
+	To collect program reviews from all academic programs and to work with the Provost’s office to ensure that all program reviews are stored securely and accessible to the Faculty.
+
+Membership
+
+Seven faculty members, one member of the administration, and one student.  At least one of the seven faculty members shall be engaged in high-level University assessment, especially as related to accreditation.  Administrative members are not considered voting members when the issue on the floor of the committee concerns a recommendation to the administration.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration: By virtue of the office or appointment by the President.
+
+Students: As selected by WCSA.
+
+
+
+Academic Planning and Allocation Committee
+
+The total academic program is the aggregate of all academic programs.
+
+Duties
+
+To review the functioning of the total academic program across the previous two academic years; to provide a report on the review to the Faculty.
+
+To review the academic plan of the institution reported by the administration in the previous academic year; to provide a report on the review of the Faculty.
+
+To develop short- and long-term policy goals for advancing the total academic program, taking into consideration the functioning of the total academic program and the academic plan of the institution; to provide a report on the goals the Faculty.
+
+To convene an academic planning meeting twice each year with all APAC members and the faculty chairs of all non-overlap committees for the purposes of sharing information and providing feedback:
+
+In September, the committee chairs shall provide an update on planned committee actions that affect the academic programs;
+
+In March, the administration shall provide an update on the academic plan of the institution.
+
+To keep under continuing review the resources required for the total academic program and for proposed or adopted changes in academic programs as follows:
+
+To consult with the Committee on University Governance during the preparation of the University budget, especially concerning those portions which may affect the academic programs. Such responsibility shall include consideration of the number of Faculty om relation to the number of students, seen from a program perspective.
+
+To recommend for faculty consideration and appropriate action policies and procedures regarding changes in faculty positions, after the necessary review, consultation, and analysis of relevant data.
+
+To recommend to the administration on the allocation of faculty positions among teaching areas, taking into account the potential effects of such allocations on the total academic program.
+
+To report to the Faculty on the work of the committee regarding faculty position changes, as fully as is compatible with the confidentiality of personnel information.
+
+Membership
+
+Five faculty members.  Administrative members are not considered voting members when the issue on the floor of the committee concerns a recommendation to the administration.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+	
+
+Teaching and Assessment Committee
+
+Duties
+
+Taking into consideration the learning assessment report collected from each academic program every two years, analyze the educational environment at Ohio Wesleyan University and encourage and assist Faculty in reaching the education goals of the University. This is accomplished by supporting and assessing the educational efforts of the Faculty and academic programs in the following ways:
+
+Promote faculty development, support the teaching and learning goals of academic programs, support efforts to create and maintain inclusive learning environments.
+
+Develop and promote on-campus programs and workshops; advocate for resources to support these initiatives.
+
+Review the recommendations made by the Director of International and Off Campus Programs on the awarding of Theory to Practice Grants, and make changes deemed necessary by the committee to these recommendations.
+
+Review the policies and adequacy of academic facilities including the library, information services and bookstore, and recommend priorities regarding University pedagogical resources.
+
+Review the policies and procedures for international, domestic, and summer off-campus programs in consultation with the Director of International and Off Campus Programs.
+
+Encourage faculty involvement in international off-campus education and faculty development in international issues through the faculty’s own international study and research.
+
+Assessment of student learning within and across academic programs; assessment of the educational goals of the University.  
+
+To collect and evaluate a learning assessment report from each academic program once every two years.
+
+To offer assistance to academic programs and administrative units in the construction and implementation of assessment plans and assessment instruments.
+
+To develop and implement, in consultation with academic departments and others, an assessment plan for our general education program.
+
+To respond to the Higher Learning Commission’s initiatives regarding assessment.
+
+To communicate in a timely manner with the Chair of the Committee on Academic Programs regarding assessment issues that are pertinent to the work of the Committee on Academic Programs.
+
+Membership
+
+Five faculty members, at least one from each academic division (Social Sciences, Humanities, Fine and Performing Arts, Natural Sciences/Mathematics), the Academic Administrator who oversees assessment, the Director of Libraries, the Director of International and Off-Campus Programs, and two students.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty:  A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration:  By virtue of the office.
+
+Students:  As selected by WCSA.
+
+	
+
+Academic Status Committee
+
+Duties
+
+To serve in an advisory capacity for policies and procedures related to academic counseling, academic advising and new student registration and orientation.
+
+To formulate and recommend for faculty consideration and to implement all policies governing academic warning, academic standing, dismissal of students for academic reasons, and re-admittance of students following academic dismissal.
+
+To review student petitions for exceptions to university academic policies and procedures.  These include, but are not limited to, course registration and graduation requirements.
+
+To review appeals of academic dismissals and applications for re-admittance following dismissal.
+
+Membership
+
+Four faculty members, the Registrar, one administrator involved in advising from the office of Academic Affairs, one administrator from the Division of Student Affairs, and two students.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration: By virtue of the office or appointment by the Provost or Vice President of Student Affairs.
+
+Students: As selected by WCSA.
+
+	
+
+Committee on Gender and Equity
+
+Duties
+
+To review all policies and procedures insofar as they affect faculty, staff, administration, or students on the basis of their sex, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, disability or immigration status. 
+
+To recommend to the Faculty and appropriate committees such changes as seem desirable. 
+
+To act as liaison between the faculty, administration, the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Council and all other interested groups on issues related to sex, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, disability or immigration status. 
+
+To collect and communicate data and other information related to sex, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, disability or immigration status to the university community. 
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+Membership
+
+Four faculty members and the Chief Diversity Office, one staff member, and two students. 
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+	Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+	Administration: Chief Diversity Officer.
+
+	Staff: As selected by appropriate staff action.
+
+	Students: As selected by appropriate student action.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+The committees described below are considered overlap committees. Faculty may serve on both an overlap committee and other faculty committees at the same time:
+
+
+
+Faculty Admissions Liaison Committee 
+
+Duties
+
+Serve as a liaison between the faculty and the admissions office.
+
+Develop recommendations in collaboration with the admissions office to enhance the admission process and events.
+
+Provide input on how admissions standards may be enhanced or revised to reflect the needs of the institution and the students.
+
+	Promote the admission process to faculty and encourage their participation in admission-related events and activities.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ 
+
+Membership
+
+Three faculty members, the Vice President for Enrollment and Communications, and two students. The administrative members is not considered a voting member when the issue on the floor of the committee concerns a recommendation to the administration.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration: By virtue of the office.
+
+Students: As selected by WCSA.
+
+
+
+Committee on Intercollegiate Athletics
+
+Duties
+
+	To recommend to the administration and faculty policies under which the intercollegiate athletics program of the University shall be maintained.
+
+	To participate in and approve of the scheduling of all intercollegiate athletic events and post-season competition. To formulate policy guidelines for the scheduling of intercollegiate athletic events.
+
+	To formulate policies for the review and approval of athletic awards to student participants in the intercollegiate athletic program.
+
+	To establish procedures by which groups or clubs apply for varsity sport status, and to make recommendations to the administration and faculty regarding approval of a sport for varsity status.
+
+	To establish and review policies and procedures regarding the use of university recreational and athletic facilities.
+
+Membership
+
+The chair of the Department of Health and Human Kinetics.
+
+Three faculty members not in the Department of Health and Human Kinetics, one of whom shall serve as chair.
+
+The Men's and Women's Faculty Athletic Representatives (FARs) to the North Coast Athletic Conference.
+
+Two University administrators.
+
+The University’s Title IX Representative for Athletics.
+
+Two Athletic administrators.
+
+Two students, one representing women’s sports and one representing men’s sports.
+
+Two alumni, on representing women’s sports and one representing men’s sports, shall be non-voting members.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+	Department of Health and Human Kinetics chair: By virtue of the office.
+
+	Other Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty, but not a member of the Department of Health and Human Kinetics. Faculty may simultaneously be members of other standing committees of the Faculty, Article II, Section 3 of the Faculty Bylaws notwithstanding.
+
+	Faculty Representatives to the North Coast Conference: By virtue of the office.
+
+	University Administration: By appointment of the President.
+
+	The University’s Title IX Representative for Athletics: By virtue of the position.
+
+	Athletic Administration:
+
+	Director of Athletics
+
+	Ranking male athletic administrator if Director of Athletics is a woman; or Senior Women’s Administrator if Director of Athletics is a man.
+
+	Students: As selected by WCSA; one representing women’s sports and one representing men’s sports.
+
+	Alumni: A member of the “W” Association appointed by the Director of Alumni Relations.  Term limit of 3 years (renewable).  
+
+	
+
+Reappointment Appeals Committee
+
+Duties
+
+To entertain appeals from faculty members who have been denied reappointment (including denials of tenure) according to procedures and policies developed by the Faculty, approved by the Board of Trustees, and described in the Faculty Handbook.
+
+Membership
+
+Five faculty members and three faculty alternates elected for overlapping three-year terms. The alternates shall replace faculty members who disqualify themselves for consideration of specific individual appeal cases.
+
+Membership Qualification
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan Faculty. Members and alternates may simultaneously be members of other standing committees of the Faculty (except current members and members elect of the Faculty Personnel Committee), Article II, Section 3 of the Faculty Bylaws notwithstanding.
+
+
+
+Trustee-Faculty Committee
+
+Duties
+
+To fulfill the responsibilities designated in the Code of Regulations to the Trustee-Faculty Liaison Committee and the Committee on Honorary Degrees.
+
+Membership
+
+Six faculty members.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+
+
+Ohio Wesleyan Council on Student Affairs
+
+Duties
+
+To formulate basic policies on all matters related to student life outside the classroom.
+
+To make regular written reports to the President, to the Faculty at its regular meeting, and to the Board of Trustees through the President.
+
+To prepare an annual report to be made available to all constituencies prior to the end of the academic year.
+
+Membership
+
+Thirty-two students.
+
+One faculty member, non-voting.
+
+Two members of the administration, non-voting.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty:  A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration:  By appointment of the President.
+
+Students:  As selected by appropriate student action.
+
+
+
+Academic Conduct Review Board
+
+Duties
+
+To hear and rule on alleged cases of academic dishonesty according to procedures and policies in the Academic Honesty Policy.
+
+Membership
+
+Three faculty members and one faculty alternate, the Dean of Academic Affairs, and two students.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+	Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.  Faculty may simultaneously be members of other standing committees of the Faculty, Article II, Section 3 of the Faculty Bylaws notwithstanding.
+
+	Administration:  By appointment of the President.
+
+	Students:  As selected by WCSA.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Faculty Committees (Current Text w- Faculty December Additions).txt [/INST] Faculty Committees
+
+		Service on both standing and ad-hoc committees is regarded as a regular and expected part of the professional obligations of a faculty member in the area of community service.
+
+		In addition to the committee workload of individual faculty members, the Committee on Committees and Agenda will consider the following issues in formulating slates of candidates or making appointments to committees:
+
+		Academic field
+
+		Gender and racial/ethnic representation
+
+		Faculty rank
+
+
+
+		General Principles and Practices Governing Committees
+
+		The standing committees are established by the faculty to serve its needs; hence they are at all times responsible to the faculty, should keep the faculty informed of their activities, and should be attentive to faculty opinion. Their duties are in general threefold: (a) to serve as channels of communication among the various parts of the College; (b) to carry out policies established by the faculty and tasks assigned to it; and (c) to observe the operation of established policies, formulate new policies when change seems advisable, and present new policies to the faculty for deliberation and decision. They may establish policies only when specifically empowered to do so.
+
+		The normal term of service for faculty members on all major standing committees shall be three years. The normal term of service on minor standing committees, shall be two years. After serving on a committee for a full term, a faculty member shall be ineligible for election or appointment to another full term on the same committee until four years have elapsed. During this four year period the former committee member shall be considered part of a Reserve Members Group of that same committee. Regular membership on committees shall begin on the first of July.
+
+		Whenever a faculty member is unable to serve on a committee for a portion of her/his elected or appointed term due to sabbatical leave, leave of absence, illness, or other extraordinary circumstance, the position shall be filled by the Committee on Committees from among the faculty currently constituting the Reserve Members Group of that committee.
+
+		Officers of administration serving on the various committees may occasionally be invited to bring to committee meetings, in an advisory capacity and without vote, any of their colleagues who may contribute to the discussion or who require knowledge of the matters being considered.
+
+		The sequence of elections to elected committees shall be as follows:
+
+	The Committee on Tenure;
+
+	The Advisory Committee;
+
+	The Educational Policy Committee;
+
+	The Curriculum Committee;
+
+	The Committee on Committees and Agenda;
+
+	The Provost Advisory Committee;
+
+	The Appeals and Hearing Committee;
+
+	The Committee on Academic Standing;
+
+	Global Advisory Committee;
+
+	The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions;
+
+	The Committee on Faculty Workload and Economic Status;
+
+	The Committee on Library, Technology, and Learning.
+
+[May 6, 1994, p. 4003; April 6, 2007, p. 4631, May 1, 2009, pp. 4791-92; October 7, 2011, p. 4940; May 4, 2012, p. 4973-74; December 5, 2015; February 2, 2018, April 10, 2019]
+
+		The Chair of each committee shall provide for the preparation of an agenda which shall include all items suggested for discussion by committee members. He or she shall provide for the keeping of minutes and for the presentation of them to the committee for examination and approval. The Chair shall make available to all members of the committee all correspondence addressed to the committee. He or she shall report orally to the faculty whenever the committee wishes to inform the faculty of committee business. The Chair shall provide for the circulation to the faculty of a written annual report of the committee's work at least one week before the final meeting of the academic year.
+
+		To document clearly the faculty's administration of its own activities, each committee shall maintain a record of its proceedings, which may include such materials as minutes, correspondence, memoranda, tape recordings, and reports. Records of the last three years shall be maintained in the committee's files; all others shall be transferred to the Archives for appropriate disposition. All committee records on deposit in the Archives shall be open for public use, except as otherwise provided in Faculty Legislation.
+
+		The minutes of all committees shall be regarded as public and shall be made available to any member of the college who wishes to see them. All committees shall regularly distribute their current minutes to any faculty member requesting them to do so. Current minutes of the Advisory Committee, the Committee on Educational Policy and the Committee on Academic Standing shall be filed in the Provost's Office for consultation.
+
+		Any committee may create subcommittees. If a subcommittee is composed entirely of members of the parent committee, it may be constituted without consulting the Committee on Committees and Agenda. Appointment of faculty members who are not members of the parent committee must be done through the Committee on Committees and Agenda. At least one member of any subcommittee shall be a member of the parent committee.
+
+		No independent ad hoc or other committee shall be created until after the need for such a committee has been reviewed by the Committee on Committees and Agenda in consultation with the proposer of the Committee. Faculty committees that wish to create subcommittees not composed entirely of their own members must also consult with the Committee on Committees and Agenda. The Committee on Committees and Agenda shall maintain a current list of all committee appointments and make it available to all faculty members upon request.
+
+
+
+
+		Standing Committees of the Faculty
+
+
+
+		Committee on Tenure
+
+The Committee on Tenure shall be composed of four teaching faculty members who are tenured, the Provost and the President of the College. The four teaching faculty members shall be elected by the faculty, three to serve staggered three-year terms and one to serve a two-year term. The three members serving three-year terms will normally be elected from each of the academic divisions (i.e., sciences and mathematics; social sciences; humanities). The member serving a two year term will normally be elected from either of the academic divisions other than the one from which a member is to be elected to a three-year term beginning at the same time. Normally an elected member with the longest service on the Committee shall serve as chair. Newly tenured faculty members are not eligible for service on the committee until after their first sabbatical leave. In addition to these six regular members, when a faculty member is presented as a candidate for tenure, The Committee on Tenure shall be joined by a seventh member. Unless another person is preferred by a majority of the tenured members of the department, the seventh member shall be the Department Chair, if tenured, or else the tenured member of the candidate's department with the longest service to the College. If there is no tenured member in the department, the Provost and the Chair of the Tenure Committee shall, after discussion with the candidate, select a tenured member of the faculty who shall, insofar as possible, perform those functions that would otherwise be performed by the departmental representative. (See Article III, D for duties and procedures.) [February 2, 2001, p. 4288.]
+
+			Provost’s Advisory Committee
+
+The Provost’s Advisory Committee shall consist of four tenured faculty, at least one from each academic division, and two untenured faculty, representing two different divisions. Three of the four tenured faculty serve staggered 3-year terms and one serves a 2-year term. The three tenured members serving three-year terms will be elected from each of the academic divisions; the tenured faculty member serving a two-year term will be elected from either of the academic divisions other than the one from which a member is to be elected to a three-year term beginning at the same time. The two untenured faculty serve two-year terms. If an untenured faculty member receives tenure during her/his term on the Committee, s/he remains on the Committee in the untenured slot.
+
+It shall be the duty of the Committee to meet with the Provost to give advice, when asked, and counsel, when needed, to the Provost on academic matters the Provost wishes to discuss or needs to know or consider.
+
+During the academic year 2009-2010 and every third year thereafter, the Committee on Committees and Agenda in consultation with the Provost and the Provost’s Advisory Committee, shall conduct a review of the usefulness and efficacy of the Provost’s Advisory Committee, and shall report its findings to the faculty no later than the regularly scheduled April faculty meeting. [March 2, 2007, pp. 4623-24]
+
+
+
+			Committee on Committees and Agenda
+
+	The Committee on Committees and Agenda shall consist of three members of the faculty, at least two of whom are on tenure. The Committee shall elect a tenured member as its chair. One member will normally be elected from each of the academic divisions (i.e., sciences and mathematics; social sciences; humanities).
+
+	It shall be the duty of the Committee on Committees and Agenda:
+
+·· To determine the manner of nomination by the faculty of at least two candidates for each regular vacancy on the Committee on Tenure, The Provost’s Advisory Committee, The Budget Advisory Committee (a college administrative affairs committee), and the Committee on Committees and Agenda, and to conduct the necessary nomination and election procedures. [April 1, 1994, p. 4000; April 6, 2007, p.4631]
+
+·· To make nominations (two for each regular vacancy) to the Advisory Committee, the Committee on Educational Policy, the Appeals and Hearing Committee, the Committee on Admissions and Academic Standing, the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions, and the Committee on Faculty Workload and Economic Status; and to conduct the necessary election procedures. [May 6, 1994, p. 4003]
+
+·· To present for approval at the May meeting of the faculty a slate to fill the regular vacancies for faculty members on all remaining Standing Committees of the Faculty, College Administrative Affairs Committees, and College Government boards.
+
+·· To review and act upon proposals, which must be submitted in writing, for faculty service on all new or ad hoc committees, or on sub-committees not composed entirely of members of an existing committee, or as additional members of existing committees; and to decide the criteria for and method of selection as appropriate.
+
+·· To appoint faculty members from the Reserve Members Group of a specific Committee to fill vacancies in unexpired terms on that Committee.
+
+·· To recommend to the faculty or to concerned administrative officers any change in the organization, terms of service, and functions of standing or other committees.
+
+·· Regularly to review, or initiate self-review of, the structure and function of faculty committees.
+
+·· To review and recommend to the faculty any changes in the organization or membership of the faculty, or changes in the rules and procedures of faculty meetings.
+
+·· To consider all proposals to terminate or alter the charge of a standing committee of the faculty; and, after consideration, to bring the proposal to the Faculty for a vote with the recommendation of the Committee on Committees and Agenda.
+
+·· To act as Agenda Committee, and to summarize the text of Faculty Legislation, Part One, Article I, J. to the Faculty at the first faculty meeting of each academic year.
+
+·· To consult with and advise the Secretary to the Faculty regarding problems arising from her/his duties as Secretary.
+
+
+
+			Advisory Committee
+
+		The Advisory Committee shall consist of three tenured and two non-tenured members of the teaching faculty. The three tenured members, representing the three academic divisions, will serve staggered three-year terms. The two non-tenured members, each representing a different division, will serve two-year terms. An untenured faculty member who receives tenure while serving on the Committee shall nevertheless serve out his or her term in the untenured slot. The Committee shall designate a tenured member as it's chair-elect at the end of each academic year.
+
+		The duties of the members of the Advisory Committee shall include the following:
+
+·· initiating discussion within the Committee and with the faculty, the President and other administrative officers, the Board of Trustees, and student groups on any matters pertaining to the welfare of the College;
+
+·· considering suggestions from members of the faculty, the President and other administrative officers, the Board of Trustees, and student groups concerning changes in College policy or practice; and representing the faculty in consulting with and making recommendations to the President and other administrative officers, the Board of Trustees, and student groups on matters pertaining to the welfare of the College;
+
+·· acting, in effect, as a grand jury in cases involving certain faculty grievances (PART ONE, VI. B., C., D., F.) and in cases involving the fitness of a faculty. (PART ONE, VII. A.3., 4.).
+
+In consultation with the Chair of the Advisory Committee, untenured Committee members will have the option of recusing themselves from such matters; joining the Educational Policy Committee to create the Joint Committee whose charge is to consider the financial exigencies of the institution, should the need arise. (PART ONE, III.E.2.).
+
+		In order to avoid unnecessary harm to individuals and to encourage full and frank expression of opinion, matters regarding individuals may be designated as confidential by vote of the Committee. Non-current confidential records shall be sealed and made inaccessible for a period of 30 years, except to members of the Committee who considered the matter, and any others provided for by the College's then current ""Review and Appeals Procedures for Certain Faculty Grievances,"" After 30 years and in the light of the sensitivity of the records, the Provost shall review them and decide whether they may be opened at that time or should be resealed or otherwise restricted for a further period not to exceed 20 years. Once no longer restricted, the records shall be opened for the use of researchers. [May 15, 2008, pp. 4718-19]
+
+
+
+			Committee on Educational Policy
+
+		The Committee on Educational Policy shall consist of the President, the Provost, three tenured and two non-tenured members of the teaching faculty, and two representatives of the Educational Council of the Student Government chosen for the year. The three tenured members, representing the three academic divisions, will serve staggered three-year terms. The two non-tenured members, each representing a different division, will serve two-year terms. A non-tenured faculty member who receives tenure while serving on the Committee shall nevertheless serve out his or her term in the non-tenured slot. The Committee shall designate its chair-elect from among the tenured teaching faculty members at the end of each academic year.
+
+		The duties of the Committee on Educational Policy shall include the following:
+
+		considering and approving new proposals for LEAPS, Scholars programs, Honors programs, FYE, ½ credit courses;
+
+		ensuring regular communication between the Educational Policy, Global Advisory, and Curriculum Committees.[April 10, 2019]
+
+·· observing the operation of established educational policy, formulating new policy when change seems desirable, and presenting new policies to the faculty for deliberation and decision;
+
+·· examining proposed changes in course offerings and in existing major and minor requirements, and approving such changes when they are consistent with established educational programs;
+
+·· proposals for the addition or elimination of a major will be considered by the Committee and its recommendations will be brought to the faculty for a vote;
+
+·· other changes that may alter the educational program as a whole shall likewise be referred to the faculty
+
+with the Committee’s recommendations. [October 6, 1995, p. 4086];
+
+·· conferring on educational policy with other committees, officers of administration and trustees;
+
+·· assessing the effects of any proposed change in the size or structure of an academic department on the department's course offerings and major program.
+
+[April 4, 2008, pp. 4703-04]
+
+
+
+
+
+			Appeals and Hearing Committee
+
+The Appeals and Hearing Committee shall consist of three tenured members of the faculty, none of whom shall currently be, or during the previous year have been, an administrative officer, a member of the Committee on Tenure, a member of the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions, or a member of the Advisory Committee. One member shall normally be chosen from each of the three academic divisions established by the Committee on Committees and Agenda (i.e. sciences and mathematics; social sciences; humanities), and, at all times, at least one woman and at least one man shall be members. All members of the Committee shall receive training in order to hear cases alleging Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct. [May 16, 1996, p. 4115]
+
+
+
+			Committee on Academic Standing
+
+		The Committee on Academic Standing shall consist of the Dean of Academic Advising and Co- Curricular Learning, an Associate Dean of Studies, the Dean of Students, the Registrar, three members of the teaching faculty, and two students (non-voting) selected from nominations submitted by the Educational Council. The Committee shall be chaired by a dean from the Academic Advising Center. [May 5, 1995, p. 4062; February 3, 2006, p. 4557, May 15, 2008, pp. 4719-20]
+
+		The duties of the Committee on Academic Standing shall include the following:
+
+·· acting on student petitions requesting exceptions to official requirements. If additional information bearing on a petition subsequently becomes available, the student may submit a revised petition for review by the Committee. A final appeal of a Committee action may be made to the Provost. [May15, 2008, pp.4719-20]
+
+·· deciding whether or not students who are not in good academic standing should remain enrolled at the College. [May 15, 2008, pp. 4719-20]
+
+·· in consultation with administrative officers, considering issues bearing on student advising, programs for advanced degrees, class and examination schedules, the college calendar, extracurricular activities to the extent that they affect the academic program, and other appropriate matters that may be submitted to it by members of the faculty or administrative officers; and, when in its judgment changes are needed, recommending such changes to the faculty for action.
+
+·· recommending to the faculty any needed revisions in (1) the standards for Dean’s List and graduation with honors; (2) college policies regarding credit for work at other institutions; and (3) policies regarding low grades.
+
+·· awarding January, summer-school, post-graduate, and other special scholarships or fellowships to Wheaton students or alumnae/i.
+
+·· consulting with the Vice President for enrollment and Marketing regarding general policies and procedures governing the admission of first-year and transfer students, and the readmission of students who officially withdrew from the College; and bringing such matters as may involve substantive changes in educational policy to the Faculty for approval.
+
+
+
+			Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions
+
+		The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions shall consist of three teaching members of the faculty holding the rank of full professor.
+
+On matters dealing with faculty scholarship (see 2a) they shall be joined by the Provost (or the Associate Provost as her/his designee).
+
+On matters relating to promotions (see 2b), they shall be joined by the Provost and the President of the College. Any member of the Committee who is a teaching member of the department of the candidate being considered for promotion, who is a member of the candidate's immediate family, or who is disqualified from serving for any other reason shall be replaced by a qualified person selected by the Committee on Committees and Agenda from the Faculty Scholarship and Promotions Committee Reserve Members Group. In their consideration of the case of a particular candidate, the higher-ranking member of the department with the longest total service to the College shall serve.
+
+Another tenured teaching member of the faculty with higher rank may serve instead if there is no department member of higher rank than the candidate, or if, in exceptional circumstances, the candidate of the department requests it. (See Article III, C, 3, b).
+
+	It shall be the duty of the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions:
+
+·· To award grants to faculty members in aid of research, study and travel; to assist the Provost in making institutional nominations for various faculty scholarship or fellowship programs.
+
+··To review applications for and award honorary endowed chairs [May 6, 2022, p _____]
+
+·· To review and make recommendations to the Board of Trustees regarding all candidates for promotion to the ranks of associate or full professor, except in those cases where promotion is granted as the immediate result of a favorable tenure review. (See Article III, C for a full statement of duties and procedures.)
+
+
+
+			Committee on Faculty Workload and Economic Status
+
+		The Committee on Faculty Workload and Economic Status shall consist of four teaching faculty members elected by the faculty, normally representing each of the three academic divisions of the College.
+
+		The function of the Committee on Faculty Workload and Economic Status shall be:
+
+	·· To thoroughly assess each year the status of Wheaton Faculty salaries and fringe benefits, and general workload, especially in relation to those colleges with whom we usually compare ourselves.
+
+	·· To ascertain, by open meeting and/or comprehensive survey, the range of Wheaton faculty opinion on matters regarding general workload and the distribution of salary and benefits.
+
+	·· To report to faculty at least one week before the faculty meeting which precedes the annual spring meeting of the Board of Trustees. This report shall include the results of 2a. and 2b. as well as the recommendations which the committee will make to the President and the appropriate committee of  the Board of Trustees.
+
+	·· To bring its findings and recommendations, based on faculty consultations and the results of the comparative assessment, to the President and the appropriate committee of the Board of Trustees.
+
+	·· To work to insure that such recommendations are adequately presented in the budget. [December 10, 1993, pp. 3985-6; May 6, 1994, p. 4003]
+
+	··To meet with the staff periodically throughout the year. [December 3, 2021, p. _____]
+
+	
+
+		Committee on Library, Technology, and Learning
+
+		The Committee on Library, Technology, and Learning shall be composed of three members of the teaching faculty the Dean of Library Services, and the Director of Research and Instruction. The chair shall be selected by the Committee from among the three teaching faculty members. The faculty members shall be elected by the faculty so that each of the three academic divisions is represented and at least one faculty member is untenured and at least one faculty member is tenured.
+
+		The duties of the Committee on Library, Technology, and Learning shall be:
+
+·· To develop, and support the implementation of initiatives that advance curricular and pedagogical uses of library resources and technology.
+
+·· To review and develop services and policies which promote and enhance the academic use of library resources and technology that advance appropriate uses of library resources.
+
+·· To facilitate the ongoing collaboration between LIS and the Provost’s Division.
+
+·· To help implement a continuing plan for technology and library services as essential components of Wheaton’s teaching and learning experience.
+
+·· To demonstrate and foreground library resources and technology as essential elements within Wheaton’s learning environment.
+
+·· To ensure that library resources and academic technology remain current, viable, and dynamic in response to developments within the academy.
+
+·· To advocate for the primacy of teaching and learning when prioritizing library resources and academic technology.
+
+In collaboration with the Educational Policy Committee, to facilitate the work of faculty members, librarians, and technology specialists in ongoing planning, goal setting, implementation, and assessment of the role of information fluency and technological proficiency within the Wheaton Curriculum. [October 4, 1996, pp. 4133-35; November 2, 2007, pp. 4674-75]
+
+
+
+		Faculty Planning and Priorities Committee (An ad hoc faculty committee)
+
+The Faculty Planning and Priorities Committee shall consist of four members of the full-time teaching faculty, at least three of whom are tenured, and the Provost and Vice President for Finance and Operations as ex-officio members. The Provost and the VP for Finance and Operations shall be sources of communication between the committee and the administration and vice versa, and sources of information and expertise to the committee; however, representing faculty opinion on matters rests with the regularly appointed faculty members. The faculty members shall be appointed by the Committee on Committees and Agenda in consultation with the committee chairpersons from the following standing committees whose charges represent shared governance in planning and setting priorities for the College, particularly when those plans might have bearing on (i) the academic program, (ii) faculty workload and salaries, and benefits, (iii) faculty promotions and reappointments, and (iv) the welfare of the college in perpetuity: the Advisory Committee, the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions, the Committee on Economic Status and Workload, and the Educational Policy Committee. The committee structure ensures greater efficiency and transparency, and it recognizes the legitimacy of the standing committees whose members were elected by the faculty to serve its needs (Faculty Legislation VIII.A.1). The tenured members, representing the three academic divisions whenever possible, normally will serve staggered two-year terms. Untenured faculty members, also serving two years, who receive tenure while serving shall nevertheless serve out the remainder of their terms in the untenured slot. A tenured faculty member will chair the committee.
+
+The committee shall set its calendar and agenda in consultation with the President and with a view to the budgetary and strategic milestones established by the Board of Trustees. The committee may also initiate discussion within the committee and with the faculty, the President, the Vice-President for Finance and Operations, and other administrative officers.
+
+The Faculty Planning and Priorities Committee shall represent the faculty in evaluating proposals and making recommendations to the President and to the trustees on issues relating to changes in the college’s integrated strategic and financial plan, or whatever plan might replace it. These duties shall include the following:
+
+Assess the effects of short-term and long-term responses to economic conditions, including strategies for the reorganization and restructuring of the College, on (a) the academic program of the college, (b) faculty workload, salaries, and benefits, and (c) faculty promotions and reappointments.
+
+Refer matters to the appropriate standing committee or committees when necessary.
+
+Communicate regularly and transparently across campus constituencies.
+
+To this end, the committee shall:
+
+·· meet with the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees and/or the Board of Trustees at least once annually;
+
+·· establish regular and reliable means for receiving information (queries, suggestions, complaints, etc.) from the faculty and respond to these in a responsible, transparent, and timely manner;
+
+·· communicate with the faculty using established methods such as through the standing committees and regular reports at Faculty Meeting as well as the Committee of the Whole, “town meetings,” and sending a representative to meetings of Department Chairs, the Untenured Faculty Organization, and the AAUP;
+
+·· the faculty PPC will meet with the proposed Staff PPC periodically throughout the year.
+
+In accordance with the power vested in it by Faculty Legislation (VIII.B.III.2.f,g,i), the Committee on Committees and Agenda shall review the necessity of the Faculty Planning and Priorities Committee and make recommendations to the faculty for an extension of service or the dissolution of the Faculty Priorities and Planning Committee normally every two or three years.
+
+To this end, the committee shall:
+
+Request yearly reports regarding the faculty members’ recommendations as to revising the charge of the Planning and Priorities Committee;
+
+Review recommendations from the faculty membership of the committee concerning the revision of relevant legislation;
+
+Consider the effects of the ad hoc committee on the structure of the standing committees. [October 7, 2011, pp.4940-42]
+
+
+
+		The Curriculum Committee
+
+The Curriculum Committee (effective academic year 2020-21) shall consist of three tenured and two non-tenured members of the teaching faculty. The three tenured members, representing the three academic divisions, will serve staggered three-year terms. The two non-tenured members, each representing a different division, will serve two-year terms. An untenured faculty member who receives tenure while serving on the Committee shall nevertheless serve out his or her term in the untenured slot. The faculty members should be elected with a nominating and then a final ballot. The Provost, the Dean of Library Services, and the Executive Dean of Student Success, or their designees, shall also serve as voting members of the committee. A student representative selected by the committee in consultation with the Ed-Council of the Student Government Association will serve as a non-voting member.
+
+This committee shall be charged with:
+
+Assessing the curriculum with regard to student learning and success, faculty participation and workload, resources, and impact on admissions and retention. Each element of the curriculum should be assessed every 4 years on a staggered basis. Based on those assessments, the Curriculum Committee should suggest revisions and propose solutions to the Office of the Provost and the faculty. The Committee will also report its findings to the faculty, including best practices, on an ongoing basis (at least once a year), independent of the Committee’s annual report;
+
+Developing and maintaining detailed guidelines for elements of the curriculum approved in 2019. However, guidelines for the Global Honors program will be developed and maintained by the Global Advisory Committee;
+
+Encouraging and helping faculty to develop new proposals for LEAPS, Scholar programs, Honors programs, FYE, ½ credit courses. The Committee on Educational Policy will be responsible for formally approving any new proposals or program changes. The Educational Policy Committee will bring any proposals for substantive changes to the curriculum to the full faculty for a vote. [April 10, 2019]
+
+
+
+		Global Advisory Committee
+
+The Global Advisory Committee shall consist of three tenured and two non-tenured members of the teaching faculty. The three tenured members, representing the three academic divisions, will serve staggered three-year terms. The two non-tenured members, each representing a different division, will serve two-year terms. An untenured faculty member who receives tenure while serving on the Committee shall nevertheless serve out his or her term in the untenured slot. At least 1 faculty member should normally be from a foreign language, literature and culture department. The faculty members should be elected with a CoCA nominated ballot. The Provost, the Dean of the Center for Global Education, and the Dean of the Marshall Center for Intercultural Learning, or their designees, shall also serve as voting members of the committee. The Associate Director, Study Abroad, and a student representative selected by the committee in consultation with the Educational Council of the Student Government Association will serve as non-voting members.
+
+The committee shall be charged with:
+
+Reviewing, discussing, and advising new initiatives sponsored by the Center for Global Education;
+
+Reviewing new faculty-led study abroad programs, and recommending those programs for approval by the Educational Policy Committee;
+
+Advising the Dean of Center for Global Education on policies and procedures that impact study  abroad;
+
+Presenting and discussing concerns regarding global education matters;
+
+Reviewing and approving student petitions for non-Wheaton approved study abroad programs;
+
+Developing guidelines for the Global Honors program;
+
+Approving global projects for completion of Global Honors;
+
+Determining advanced proficiency in languages that are not offered by departments;
+
+Working with faculty to facilitate the designation of courses that fulfill the standards of the Global Honors program. [April 10, 2019]
+
+
+
+
+
+59
+
+59</s>"
+<s>[INST] Faculty Constitution (1st Draft)(3.19.2018).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Faculty Constitution (1st Draft).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Faculty Constitution (3rd Draft)(7.2018).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Faculty Credential Research.txt [/INST] Lake Forest
+
+Faculty Credentials 
+
+All full- and part-time faculty must satisfy one of the following criteria: 
+
+  Have a terminal degree 
+
+  Possess an academic degree one level above the level at which they will teach 
+
+  Have licensures or other credentials that document educational attainment one level above the level at which they will teach. 
+
+Exceptions 
+
+  Have completed all requirements for the terminal degree with the exception of the dissertation (ABD). 
+
+  Have equivalent experience that demonstrates mastery at least one degree level above the level at which the instructor will teach. A minimum of five years of relevant professional/industry experience beyond the bachelor’s degree is typically required. The qualifications and experience must be documented and approved by the Department Chair and Provost. 
+
+Documentation
+
+Any offer of employment to a prospective faculty member is contingent upon verification of the required academic credentials. The candidate is responsible for submitting an official transcript to confirm that they hold an appropriate degree and/or have completed all requirements for the terminal degree with the exception of the dissertation (ABD). The candidate may be required to verify other licensures or certifications. A faculty member who completes a degree after beginning employment at the College must provide an official transcript to verify the awarding of the degree. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Nebraska Wesleyan and Illinois Wesleyan
+
+The University adheres to Higher Learning Commission (“HLC”) requirements for faculty qualifications.  The University determines faculty qualifications primarily by academic credentials, although it may consider other factors, such as tested experience, as qualification for teaching.  In accordance with HLC Assumed Practice B.2, candidates appointed to the University’s teaching faculty must “possess an academic degree relevant to what they are teaching and at least one level above the level at which they teach, except in programs for terminal degrees or when equivalent experience is established. In terminal degree programs, faculty members possess the same level of degree. When faculty members are employed based on equivalent experience, the institution defines a minimum threshold of experience and an evaluation process that is used in the appointment process” (page 3, https://www.hlcommission.org/Publications/determining-qualified-faculty…) 
+
+Documentation of teaching qualifications is part of each faculty member personnel’s file. In cases where equivalent experience and/or credentials are a consideration for employment, the file provides information regarding the particular experiences and/or credentials, and their relevance to the discipline or courses taught by the faculty member.
+
+Qualifications based on Academic Credentials:
+
+When determining acceptable academic credentials of its faculty and course instructors, the University will require the following as evidence of acceptable academic qualifications in accordance with the Higher Learning Commissions academic credentials guidelines (Assumed Practice B.2):
+
+Faculty members recommended for tenure track or term positions must have completed at minimum one of the following:
+
+A master’s degree in the discipline; or
+
+A master’s degree in a related field, plus at least 18 graduate credits in the discipline
+
+Qualifications Based on a Combination of Academic Credentials and Tested Experience
+
+The Higher Learning Commission recognizes that tested experience may substitute for an earned credential or portions thereof and therefore permits the University to determine that a faculty member is qualified based on experience it determines is equivalent to the degree it would otherwise require for the faculty position. Such experience should be tested experience that includes a breadth and depth of experience outside of the classroom in real-world situations relevant to the discipline in which the faculty member would be teaching.  Specific disciplines and programs may establish what constitutes tested experience, including the skill sets, experiences, and professional credentials that qualify candidates to teach in those programs.
+
+
+
+
+
+Candidates whose eligibility is based on a combination of credentials and tested experience must hold at least the lesser degree (i.e., a degree one level lower than those indicated above) plus appropriate experience. In these cases, department chairs must submit a request explaining how the individual meets qualification requirements. Requests must be approved by the appropriate academic dean in the case of part-time faculty, or by the provost in the case of full-time faculty.
+
+The following guidelines may be used in the approval process:
+
+Professional experience – Minimum of 5 years of professional experience as evidenced by job title, or minimum of 3 years of supervisory experience over professionals in the field
+
+Professional accomplishment – Additional evidence of exemplary work and accomplishment as a practitioner
+
+Clinical and Student Teaching Credentials – Appropriate licensure, registration, and/or certification for the discipline and nature of the assignment
+
+Third-party credential – High-level industry certification resulting from rigorous training and at least five years of experience working in the field
+
+Artistic talent – Validation of expertise, ability, and talent through publications or wide and public acclaim
+
+Proficiency in a foreign language – Demonstration of qualifications as native or superior proficiency in a foreign language (for lower-level courses only)
+
+Pedagogical training – Evidence of training specifically related to the course or discipline
+
+
+
+
+
+Northern Illinois - https://provost.uni.edu/sites/default/files/hlc_guidelines_and_procedures_for_qualifying_faculty_2019.pdf
+
+Undergraduate Courses 
+
+For purposes of this document, “tested experience” includes the following: 
+
+A minimum of 5 years as a successful practitioner in a related field, as defined by the hiring department, are required. 
+
+Holder of certification or licensure if required or relevant to the field being taught as determined by the hiring department. 
+
+“Tested experience” cannot refer merely to teaching at UNI or any other institution of higher education. 
+
+4)  The applicant must submit three letters of reference attesting to the person being a “successful practitioner.” 
+
+5)  The person may be a graduate teaching assistant supervised by a qualified faculty member who is the instructor of record. 
+
+If a department head and dean wish to hire a faculty member who does not hold the appropriate degree, the department head must gather appropriate documentation (evidence of tested experience, documentation of reference calls, copies of licensure, etc.) to attach to a written letter of justification (which the department head writes). The letter of justification will be submitted for approval along with any draft letter of offer to the faculty member to the dean of the college. For approval. If the dean approves, the justification materials (potential faculty member’s CV and letter of application detailing how HLC qualifications are met) should be sent to the office of the Provost and Executive Vice President or designee for final approval before an offer is made. Once the Provost or designee has signed the approval, the approval form must be attached to the Personnel Action Form. 
+
+A copy of the letter justification will be filed along with any other transcripts as evidence of meeting criteria for qualified faculty. 
+
+Washburn
+
+
+
+II.  Faculty Qualifications
+
+Faculty must possess an academic degree relevant to the discipline/field they are teaching and must be at least one level of education above the level of education they teach, except in programs for terminal degrees or when equivalent experience is established. Additional qualifications may be required and will be determined as appropriate by academic discipline or unit. 
+
+If a faculty member holds a master’s degree or higher in a related discipline or subfield other than that in which he or she is teaching, that faculty member should have completed a minimum of 18 graduate credit hours in the discipline or subfield in which they teach.
+
+Qualified faculty members are identified primarily by credentials, but other factors, including but not limited to equivalent experience, may be considered in determining whether a faculty member is qualified.  For accredited programs, when faculty members are employed based on equivalent tested experience, professional experience (work/clinical experience) is defined by the specialized accreditation organization.  For programs without specialized accreditation, professional experience is defined by the individual college or school but can be no less than a minimum of three years full-time work or employment in the field directly related to the area of instruction.  In some specialized courses, a specialty license may be substituted for the experience requirement. 
+
+Justification submitted for professional experience equivalence must include how the course instructor meets or exceeds the academic requirements for the course(s) to be taught. Exceptions to the academic credential must always be approved in writing by the academic dean and the Vice President for Academic Affairs before the individual will be allowed to teach at Washburn University.
+
+Mount Union
+
+All full-time, part-time, and adjunct faculty members must meet the criteria for accreditation and assumed practices of the Higher Learning Commission (HLC), the State of Ohio, and any pertinent disciplinary accrediting body. To be qualified on the HLC basis of equivalent experience, a faculty member must have at least five years of pertinent advanced experience in the field in which they are teaching, as determined by the department chair, the dean of the prospective faculty member’s college, and the VPAA. Documentation of equivalent experience will be kept in the faculty member’s personnel file. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty members may be jointly appointed to multiple departments. Typically, these appointments are made at three points: (1) at the time of hire; (2) at the time of the granting of tenure; and (3) post tenure. In order to be appointed to multiple departments/programs, the faculty member must be academically qualified to teach in each of the disciplines, as per the standards of the Higher Learning Commission. In addition, a continuing need for the faculty member’s work in the departments/programs must be demonstrated. Faculty members who desire to move from an appointment in a single department/program to a joint appointment after tenure must discuss this with the chairs/directors and appropriate college dean(s) and submit to the VPAA (1) a letter proposing the approximate balance of teaching in the departments/programs and (2) letters from the appropriate department chairs/program directors and college dean(s) indicating support for the joint appointment. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Note: Any material omissions or misrepresentations on a letter of application, curriculum vitae, or supplementary materials submitted for consideration of employment (or, later, for consideration of reappointment, promotion, or tenure), whether made or omitted knowingly or unknowingly, will be cause for immediate dismissal from the University at any time during the period of employment, regardless of the time elapsed before discovery.</s>"
+<s>[INST] Faculty Evaluation Process and Standards (POST FACULTY FORUM FINAL DRAFT)(3.16).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Faculty Forum Questions (1st Draft).txt [/INST] Faculty Forum Questions – 1st Draft
+
+
+
+2, 4, 6 Evaluation System vs. Annual/Mid-Probationary System:  
+
+Should the current 2/4/6-year evaluation system remain (as opposed to an annual/mid-probationary system), but with a strengthened annual review component that emphasizes formative evaluation and goal setting?
+
+Annual Administrative Evaluation(s): 
+
+Should CLU refine the current Faculty Policies Handbook section addressing annual evaluations by including text requiring the submission of a written self-evaluation report by all faculty to include goal setting, followed by a written evaluation by the Chair/Program Director and an in-person meeting with the faculty member?
+
+Faculty Self-Evaluation Report: The Self-Evaluation report should include evidence from the then-current academic year of faculty member’s work in the areas of each evaluative criteria as defined by the University (and each respective academic division), noting strengths and weaknesses and the degree to which stated performance goals have been met by the faculty member.  
+
+Chair/Program Director Written Evaluation: The Chair/Program Director’s written evaluation should evaluate the faculty member’s performance, including an assessment of progress towards achieving the goals identified by the faculty member in the prior year’s evaluation.  Specifically, the chair/program director’s annual written evaluation should provide feedback so that the faculty member may maintain or improve subsequent performance and be based in part on identifying with the faculty member individual goals that are in alignment with and consistent with the faculty member’s current or aspirational rank, as well as University and division missions, goals, and long-range plans.  It should also establish a realistic program for obtaining these goals and evaluating them.  The results of the evaluation should then serve as a basis for reappointment and promotion and tenure decisions and provide formative feedback regarding the quality of the faculty member’s professional performance.
+
+Conference with Chair/Program Director: The Chair/Program Director should meet with the faculty member to share the results of the written evaluation and discuss and formulate next year’s goals.
+
+Faculty Member Comment: The faculty member should have the right to submit a written response to the chair/program director’s evaluation.
+
+Note: The Chair/Program Director evaluation should be considered mandatory.  If not conducted, this should be highlighted by the Dean or Provost in the annual evaluation of the chair/program director’s administrative evaluation.
+
+Teaching Observation Process
+
+Should CLU develop a comprehensive policy addressing the teaching observation process? 
+
+If so, we recommend that the policy clearly delineate the frequency of teaching observations (including peer and administrator classroom evaluations) and outline in procedural detail how peer evaluators and courses to be observed are selected. To provide more formative feedback, we also recommend that after the peer has conducted the classroom observation, the policy allow for a meeting to be scheduled to share the results of the observation with the faculty member.
+
+Student Course and Instruction Evaluations
+
+Should CLU revise the current Student Course and Instruction Evaluations policy in the Faculty Policies Handbook to: 
+
+(a) Modify the timing of when the evaluations are conducted to account for undergraduate/graduate students; 
+
+(b) Remove the student comments from the promotion and tenure process;
+
+(c) Amend the questionnaire to include course evaluation questions for statistical analysis; 
+
+(d) Include text noting that student evaluations are used in combination with other measures of teaching effectiveness.  
+
+Evaluation Criteria
+
+Adoption of Academic Discipline Evaluation Guidelines
+
+Because the nature of teaching effectiveness, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service differs in some respects across academic disciplines, should CLU adopt a policy that requires academic units to develop discipline-specific guidelines for tenure and promotion? 
+
+If so, the policy text should require that the division guidelines (a) conform to the general University standards published in the Faculty Policies Handbook; (b) make clear what each discipline values in pedagogy, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service; and (c) be used by all evaluators in the annual, promotion, and tenure evaluation processes.  Moreover, the procedural guidance regarding the development and approval of the academic division guidelines should be developed. 
+
+Teaching Effectiveness
+
+Should CLU adopt formal university-wide benchmarks for teaching effectiveness and a corresponding teaching evaluation rubric comparable to those developed by the University of Kansas (see e.g., https://cte.ku.edu/benchmarks-teaching-effectiveness-project)?
+
+Advising/Mentoring
+
+Given the recent CLU policy shift away from advising and towards mentoring responsibilities, the current advising clause in the Faculty Policies Handbook will need to be removed and replaced with a formal definition of mentoring, including a listing of corresponding examples of mentoring activities.  Should mentoring be considered a “stand-alone” evaluation criterion or a component of service responsibilities?
+
+Scholarly Activity and Professional Development
+
+Should CLU refine the University Scholarly Activity and Professional Development section to more clearly define “scholarship” and “professional development”* and provide a listing of examples of acceptable “peer review” activities?
+
+Additionally,
+
+(a) Should the Boyer text, which is currently published in the “Guidelines for Candidates” document, be reprinted in the Scholarly Activity and Professional Development section of the Faculty Policies Handbook?
+
+(b) Should specific examples of activities be listed for each Boyer category?
+
+(c) Should attendance at professional conferences be listed as a mandatory professional development requirement?
+
+(d) Should applied, public scholarship, and community-engaged scholarship be included as additional evidence of Scholarly Activity and Professional Development activities?
+
+* There has been some discussion regarding whether professional development should be moved to the service category.
+
+
+
+
+
+Service
+
+Should CLU refine the University Service and Community Service section by developing a formal definition of “community service” and providing additional examples of corresponding activities?
+
+Administrative Service Recognition
+
+Should CLU adopt a clause indicating that promotion and tenure evaluations shall be conducted relative to each candidate’s administrative workload assignments as may be applicable? For example, if a candidate’s workload assignment requires more administrative service (such as serving as department chair/program director, director of a center, etc.) and less teaching and scholarly activities, the expectation for teaching effectiveness and scholarship or creative work shall not be compromised, but the expected volume of teaching and research may be reduced and taken into consideration by promotion and tenure evaluators. 
+
+If so, faculty asked to fill significant administrative roles should negotiate their performance evaluation criteria and workloads with their Dean and the Provost before taking on such roles; these workload assignments should be documented and considered in evaluating these faculty members’ achievements in teaching and scholarship/creative works. Moreover, external reviewers (if utilized) should be informed of the candidate’s workload assignment and provided with additional data as needed to ensure proper evaluation of the accomplishments of the candidate.
+
+Addition of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusivity Standard
+
+Should CLU include contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion as a faculty evaluation standard under the Faculty Evaluation Criteria and Documentation section of the Faculty Policies Handbook?
+
+If so, faculty should be required to submit personal statements in the Annual Activity Report and promotion and tenure dossiers detailing their specific individual and/or collaborative activities aimed at supporting diversity, equity, an inclusion, discussing the context, importance, and impact of their contributions in teaching, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service activities during the evaluation period.
+
+Note: We recommend that the University adopt a staged roll-out of the DEI criteria and provide DEI training to both faculty and evaluators.
+
+
+
+
+
+Addition of Collegiality or Campus Citizenship Clause
+
+Consistent with the University’s values, should CLU include “collegiality” or “campus citizenship” as a component of faculty promotion and tenure evaluations?  
+
+If so, the text should emphasize that the evaluator’s focus solely relates to collaboration and constructive cooperation associated with a faculty member’s overall performance.  The text should also note that an assessment of collegiality must not be confused with conformity, sociability, or likability and may not be interpreted in a way that violates the principles of academic freedom. 
+
+Second- and Fourth-Year Reviews
+
+Should the evaluation procedures for second- and fourth-year reviews be amended to provide more narrative detail regarding the current stepwise evaluation process?  For example, should text be added addressing in greater detail the department chair/program director evaluation, ART Committee deliberations and reporting requirements, etc.?   
+
+Should the evaluation procedures for second- and fourth-year reviews include text indicating that the review culminates in a recommendation for reappointment or non-reappointment and include a written explanation outlining the reasons for the recommendation?
+
+If so, where reappointment is recommended, the ART Committee evaluation should discuss the faculty member’s strengths and weaknesses and identify areas that require development for continued progress toward tenure (if any).  The Dean (or Provost) should discuss the written evaluation with the faculty member.
+
+Promotion Policies, Eligibility, and Criteria
+
+Should the criteria for each academic rank be refined to more clearly articulate and define the standards that must be met for the applicable rank?  
+
+For example, for the Assistant Professor rank, should narrative text describing what constitutes “good teaching” be developed?  For the Associate Professor rank, should text be developed further outlining expectations regarding scholarship or creative work expectations? 
+
+For each rank, should a clause be added indicating that the candidate must also successfully provide evidence of congruence with the university’s mission and exhibit conduct in accordance with the standards of ethical professional conduct? 
+
+Note: For the latter, a clarifying sentence should be included noting that unless evidence to contrary is presented in the evaluation file, it will be assumed that the candidate has exhibited conduct in accordance with ethical standards.
+
+
+
+Criteria for Tenure
+
+Should the individual requirements subsection be refined to better articulate and define the standards that must be met for tenure? 
+
+Should a clause be added indicating that the candidate must also successfully provide evidence of congruence with the university’s mission and exhibit conduct in accordance with the standards of ethical professional conduct?  
+
+Should the Institutional Need clause be refined to include detailed procedures regarding how such determinations are made and implemented?
+
+Procedures for Promotion and Tenure Review 
+
+For formative purposes, should some (or all) of the content in the confidential file be reclassified to allow candidate access (i.e., teaching evaluations, copies of student course evaluations, and course loads and grade distributions)?
+
+Should candidates be afforded an opportunity to respond in writing to recommendation letters that are not included in the confidential file?
+
+Should the evaluation procedures for promotion and tenure review be amended to provide more narrative detail regarding the current stepwise evaluation process?  For example, should text be developed which clearly explains how tenured faculty inside and outside the department conduct their evaluations, how the department chair/program director and dean conduct their respective evaluations and document the results, the manner in which the ART Committee deliberates and arrives at a recommendation and how it documents the results, etc.?
+
+Should external reviews be a mandatory requirement for promotion and tenure evaluations or remain optional at the discretion of the candidate?  
+
+Regardless of whether external reviews are optional or mandatory, should detailed procedures regarding the external evaluation process be developed to address how and when external evaluators are contacted, receive materials, etc.?
+
+Should the current department evaluation procedure (i.e., submission of letters) be amended?  Specifically, 
+
+(a) Should the current process of soliciting letters from all full-time, tenured department faculty remain in place? Or should this process be opened to full-time, continuing faculty at a rank equal to and higher than the candidate?
+
+OR
+
+(b) Should departments, academic divisions or the schools/colleges be required to appoint a promotion and tenure committee to evaluate dossiers of division candidates for promotion and tenure and provide a written recommendation?  
+
+OR
+
+(c) Should the Chair/Program Director be charged with polling members of the department (or division), recording the vote numerically.  For example, for tenure candidates, the chair would poll all tenured full-time members of each candidate’s department, recording that vote numerically. For promotion candidates, the chair would poll all tenured full- time members of the candidate’s department with rank above that of the candidate, recording the vote numerically. Promotion to the rank of professor requires at the department level the vote of a least three (3) professors. The results of the polls, along with a narrative from the chair and/or department faculty setting forth a recommendation and summarizing the candidate’s accomplishments in teaching, scholarship, and service, and the candidate’s narrative and supporting documentation would then be forwarded to the next evaluator.
+
+Note: For departments with small numbers, faculty from outside the department may be brought in.
+
+A minority of CLU peer institutions have the Dean’s evaluation occur after the ART Committee evaluation (see e.g., Redlands and Valparaiso).  Others, such as Loyola Marymount, Chapman, St. Mary’s of California, University of the Pacific, and Santa Clara, have an approach like CLU where the Dean evaluates the candidate before the ART Committee. Should CLU keep its current approach?
+
+Should a clause be developed indicating that evaluations will be based solely on the content of the evaluation file (dossier and confidential file) and the results of the ART Committee’s interview with the candidate, which are considered in light of the applicable criteria and standards?  
+
+Note: If the ART Committee seeks additional content, the faculty member will be notified and be afforded an opportunity to respond.
+
+Should a policy addressing an evaluator’s conflict of interest be developed?
+
+Should a Promotion and Tenure Evaluation Appeals process be developed in lieu of the current use of the Faculty Grievance Policy?
+
+Post-tenure/Post-6th Year Review Policy and Procedures 
+
+Should CLU revise Section B – Evaluation and Action of the Post-tenure/Post-6th Year Review Policy and Procedures to include possible outcomes of the evaluation – positive, improvement necessary, and a commendation for distinguished performance? 
+
+For example, the the following definitions and detailed procedures may be introduced:
+
+Positive Review: If the ART Committee determines that the faculty member’s performance during the period of review meets or exceeds applicable standards for the rank currently held by the faculty member, then the faculty member receives a positive review and the evaluation is concluded.
+
+Improvement Necessary: If the ART Committee determines that the faculty member’s performance during the period of review falls below applicable standards in one or more evaluation criteria for the rank currently held by the faculty member, then the faculty member will design, in consultation with the chair of the ART Committee and Dean, a two-year development plan to address the area(s) in need of improvement.  
+
+Commendation for Distinguished Performance: If the ART Committee determines that the faculty member’s performance during the period of review is outstanding in all evaluation criteria categories, then the faculty member will receive a commendation for distinguished performance. 
+
+Miscellaneous
+
+Should the Provost continue to be a member of the ART? 
+
+Some interviewees questioned whether the Provost should remain an ex-officio member of the ART.  This is a matter of institutional preference.  A sampling of peer institution reflects no uniformity.  For example, the provost is not a member of the applicable promotion and tenure committees at University of the Redlands, Chapman, Loyola Marymount, and Santa Clara University.  At Pacific Lutheran and St. Mary’s, however, the provost is an ex-officio, non-voting advisory member of their respective rank and tenure committees.
+
+The following clause regarding appointment with tenure is published in the Faculty Policies document:
+
+“In rare cases, tenure may be granted on appointment of a faculty member who has been tenured or has held equivalent faculty status elsewhere.” 
+
+Should CLU adopt a more comprehensive policy permitting initial appointment with tenure which articulates how such decisions are made and approved?
+
+OR
+
+Should the above text be removed from the handbook?
+
+Should CLU adopt a policy permitting allowance for the submission of an application for tenure prior to the expiration of the probationary period?
+
+Should CLU refine its policy address the pausing of “tenure clock” to more clearly articulate circumstances that warrant the extension of the probationary period and how such applications are approved?
+
+
+
+Note re: Training: While not a policy issue, it should be noted that several faculty members during the interview process expressed a desire for additional university training. For example, some interviewees expressed a need for chairs to be trained on evaluation best practices.  Moreover, junior faculty indicated that there is a need for dossier writing training, as well as the need for mentoring to help in navigating the process.  If DEI is incorporated into the evaluative process, there is a recognition that training will be needed.  Finally, some expressed the need for new ART members to be trained when they come onboard, particularly given the introduction of the ART subcommittees.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Faculty Governance.txt [/INST] The faculty has primary responsibility for such fundamental areas as curriculum, subject matter and methods of instruction, research, faculty status, and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process. On these matters the power of review or final decision lodged in the governing board or delegated by it to the president should be exercised adversely only in exceptional circumstances, and for reasons communicated to the faculty. It is desirable that the faculty should, following such communication, have opportunity for further consideration and further transmittal of its views to the president or board. Budgets, personnel limitations, the time element, and the policies of other groups, bodies, and agencies having jurisdiction over the institution may set limits to realization of faculty advice.
+
+Determinations in these matters should first be by faculty action through established procedures, reviewed by the chief academic officers with the concurrence of the board. The governing board and president should, on questions of faculty status, as in other matters where the faculty has primary responsibility, concur with the faculty judgment except in rare instances and for compelling reasons which should be stated in detail.
+
+
+
+Faculty governance at Gwynedd-Mercy College is one of several integral parts in the College’s shared governance structure. The primary focus of faculty governance is to promote, support, and uphold the academic mission of the College.  As such, the Faculty has responsibilities in the areas of admissions, matriculation, residency and graduation, curriculum and instruction, academic freedom, faculty status and personnel policy, research policy, faculty rights and responsibilities, and areas of student affairs related to the educational process.  Decisions and recommendations made by the Faculty concerning these areas of responsibility are the product of careful consideration and debate.  Coupled with the Faculty’s recommendations, feasible and productive solutions should also be offered to ensure joint decision-making and a cooperative partnership between the Faculty, administration and Board of Trustees.  In circumstance where the needs of the administration or judgment of the Board of Trustees conflict with Faculty recommendations, clear and open communication will ensure that a reasonable outcome will be achieved.
+
+Because a primary concern of the Faculty relates to the educational needs of the College, the Faculty has a leadership role in all decisions and College policies that concern the curriculum, academic standards, standards of admissions, personnel policies involving faculty, tenure and promotion, academic freedom, and scope of research in all academic areas, and the general educational process.  Because the academic mission and policy implementation are responsibilities shared by the administration, faculty and students, shared governance requires a joint effort.  Adequate and open communication, participation, and suggestions for practical solutions are a vital part of a productive shared governance where concerns are voiced and policies are reflective of the general academic health of the institution.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+The Faculty of Gwynedd-Mercy College has the responsibility for the recommendation of general policies to the Vice President for Academic Affairs, President, and Board of Trustees pertaining to college-wide requirements for admissions, matriculation, residency and graduation, curriculum and instruction. In addition, the Faculty establishment or modification of any department or program.  The Educational Policy and Planning Committee represents the faculty in the exercise of its responsibility.  The Faculty may be advisory in other matters.
+
+3.	To review proposals for new curriculum delivery systems: The committee will make recommendations to the faculty and the Vice President for Academic Affairs regarding adoption or implementation of any new delivery system and develop guidelines to be met by any courses or programs using the approved delivery system. 
+
+4.	To provide input to the Vice President for Academic Affairs regarding curriculum and instructional issues, especially during the College’s strategic planning process.
+
+5.	To provide a forum for faculty input on facets of the teaching/learning environment including physical facilities, classroom space and technology.
+
+
+
+
+
+Section 2. The faculty, subject to the powers vested in the Board of Trustees of Flagler College, also has the responsibility for the legislation of general policies concerning faculty matters such as the curriculum, faculty qualification, faculty duties and promotion, and other matters addressed in Volume IV of the Flagler College Policy Manual.  The Faculty Senate represents the teaching faculty in the exercise of these responsibilities.
+
+Section 3: The faculty also has the responsibility to consider and make recommendations concerning any other matter referred to it by the President, the Board of Trustees, or the Vice President of Academic Affairs and Dean of the College.</s>"
+<s>[INST] Faculty HB Alignment w Bylaws Report (5.4.22).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Faculty HB Alignment w Bylaws Report.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Faculty HB Task Force ADRI Chart Memo.txt [/INST] Page | 2
+
+
+
+
+
+May 9, 2022
+
+
+
+TO:	Faculty Handbook Task Force
+
+FROM: 	Stephen Lazarus
+Sr. Consultant
+Stevens Strategy
+
+RE: 	Bylaws and ADRI Chart
+
+Pursuant to Dr. Fiore Urizar’s May 5, 2022, email, Stevens Strategy has been requested to review and offer input regarding the comments set forth in the Bylaw/ADRI Chart comparison PDF document created by the Task Force.  
+
+I.	Bylaw Requirement - President Approval for All Committees
+
+I do not read the requirement in the Bylaws as precluding the Faculty Senate from creating committees.  Rather, the Board Bylaws requires standing faculty committees to be developed in collaboration with the Provost and then subsequently be approved by the President.  The clause is ostensibly in place to align with Article VI, Section 7 of the Amended and Restated Bylaws, which delegates to the President the responsibility for the governance of the faculty, staff, and students, including the approval of organizational structures, procedures, policies, and protocols associated with that governance “to ensure consistency with these Bylaws and shared governance.”  Thus, it appears that the requirement is in place as a check and balance that the faculty is not self-delegating to a faculty standing committee a charge that is inconsistent with the University’s Amended and Restated Bylaws or other established shared governance responsibilities at the University.  
+
+It is important to note that many Faculty Assembly and Faculty Senate constitutions and/or bylaws in place at institutions across the nation commonly require either Board or President ratification of faculty-approved amendments to these documents.  Invariably, either the constitution or bylaws at such institutions include a listing and description of current standing faculty committees.  Hence, either the President or Board approves the introduction of new faculty standing committees or amendments to current committees whenever such changes are introduced into the constitution or bylaws at these institutions.  By way of peer example, the University of Redlands requires Board of Trustee approval of amendments to the Faculty Constitution and Bylaws (see Appendix 1-B), which includes Faculty Senate standing committee descriptions.  Similarly, Valparaiso University’s Faculty Senate Bylaws, which includes a listing and descriptions of standing senate committees, requires bylaw amendments to be approved by the President of the University.  Other examples may be provided upon request.  
+
+
+
+
+
+II.	Policies of Instruction
+
+I agree that there are no direct conflicts between the current handbooks and the Amended and Restated Bylaw’s Policies of Instruction clauses.  However, as I noted in the May 4th Board Bylaws Alignment Report, I recommend that Paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Faculty Constitution specifically reference Article VIII (Faculty) of the Amended and Restated Bylaws of the University, followed by a listing or paraphrasing of the policies of instruction responsibilities the Board has delegated to the faculty pursuant to the article.  In so doing, there will be complete alignment between the two documents.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Faculty HB Task Force Memo - ADRI Chart.txt [/INST] Page | 2
+
+
+
+
+
+May 9, 2022
+
+
+
+TO:	Faculty Handbook Task Force
+
+FROM: 	Stephen Lazarus
+Sr. Consultant
+Stevens Strategy
+
+RE: 	Bylaws and ADRI Chart Inquiry
+
+Pursuant to Dr. Fiore Urizar’s May 5, 2022, email, Stevens Strategy has been requested to review and offer input regarding the comments set forth in the Bylaw/ADRI Chart comparison PDF document created by the Task Force.  
+
+I.	Bylaw Requirement - President Approval for Faculty Committees
+
+I do not read the requirement in the Bylaws as precluding the Faculty Senate from creating committees.  Rather, the Board Bylaws requires standing faculty committees to be developed in collaboration with the Provost and then subsequently be approved by the President.  The clause is ostensibly in place to align with Article VI, Section 7 of the Amended and Restated Bylaws, which delegates to the President the responsibility for the governance of the faculty, staff, and students, including the approval of organizational structures, procedures, policies, and protocols associated with that governance “to ensure consistency with these Bylaws and shared governance.”  Thus, it appears that the president approval of committees requirement was put in place as a check that the faculty is not self-delegating to a faculty standing committee or body a charge that is inconsistent with the University’s Amended and Restated Bylaws or established shared governance responsibility at the University.  
+
+It is important to note that many Faculty Assembly and Faculty Senate constitutions and/or bylaws commonly require either Board or President ratification of faculty-approved amendments to these documents.  Invariably, either the constitution or bylaws at such institutions include a listing and description of current standing faculty committees.  Hence, either the President or Board at these institutions approve the introduction of new faculty standing committees or amendments to current committees whenever such changes are introduced into the constitution or bylaws.  By way of peer example, the University of Redlands requires Board of Trustee approval of amendments to the Faculty Constitution and Bylaws (see Appendix 1-B), which includes Faculty Senate standing committee descriptions.  Similarly, Valparaiso University’s Faculty Senate Bylaws, which includes a listing and descriptions of standing senate committees, requires bylaw amendments to be approved by the President of the University.  Other examples may be provided upon request.  
+
+
+
+
+
+Still other schools affirmatively require Board or President approval to amendments to faculty standing committee bylaws.  For example, Gwynedd Mercy University outside of Philadelphia (a former client) requires all standing committees at the university to adopt formal bylaws.  The bylaw template includes articles addressing committee functions, membership, officers, meetings, and amendments.  Regarding the latter, all amendments are required to be approved by the Board.  
+
+Of course, there are also examples of institutions that permit the Faculty Assembly or Senate to establish committees without such ratifications.  But please bear in mind that many of these institutions include the President and/or Provost as ex-officio members of the Faculty Assembly and/or Faculty Senate and, as such, either would be party to discussions regarding for the formation of or amendments to faculty standing committees.  See, for example, Pacific Lutheran University and the University of the Pacific.
+
+
+
+II.	Policies of Instruction
+
+I do not discern any direct conflicts between the Faculty Governance and Faculty Policies handbooks and the “Policies of Instruction” clauses in Article VIII of the Amended and Restated Bylaws.  However, as I noted in the May 4th Board Bylaws Alignment Report, I recommend that Paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Faculty Constitution specifically reference Article VIII (Faculty) of the Amended and Restated Bylaws of the University, followed by a listing or paraphrasing of the policies of instruction responsibilities the Board has delegated to the faculty pursuant to the article.  Adopting this suggested practice will allow the Faculty Constitution and Board Bylaws to be fully aligned and work more synergistically with one another.
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Faculty HB Task Force Memo - HR Policies.txt [/INST] Page | 2
+
+
+
+
+
+April 26, 2022
+
+
+
+TO:	Faculty Handbook Task Force
+
+FROM: 	Stephen Lazarus
+Sr. Consultant
+Stevens Strategy
+
+RE: 	Inclusion of Human Resource and Campus Community Policies in Faculty Policies Handbook
+
+Pursuant to Dr. Heresco’s March 7, 2022, email, Stevens Strategy has been requested to review the following policies and offer recommendations as to whether they should remain in the Faculty Policies Handbook, as is, or edited.  
+
+Consensual Relations
+
+Compensation
+
+Fringe Benefits
+
+Conflicts of Interest
+
+Political Activity and Public Statements
+
+External Relations Policies
+
+In the sections that follow, I outline our firm’s general position on the inclusion of human resource and campus community policies of general applicability in faculty handbooks.  Thereafter, I review each of the policies referenced above, offering my professional judgment (see bold text) regarding whether they should remain in the Faculty Policies Handbook, as is, or in an edited form.  Finally, at the end of the document, I provide policy and content recommendations the Task Force may want to consider as it continues its work to update the Faculty Policies Handbook.
+
+I.	Inclusion of Human Resource and Campus Community Policies
+
+While many universities and colleges publish select employment and campus-community policies in their faculty handbooks, they do so at the risk of publishing contradictory policies by addressing a topic in more than one policy publication.  Indeed, oftentimes a revision to a general human resources or campus community policy will not find its way into the Faculty Handbook.  This is a risk management issue that could possibly expose an institution to legal liability.  Moreover, the tradition of publishing select general human resource and campus community policies in faculty handbooks emanates from a time when policies were not published online and therefore were often included for ease of reference.  With today’s technology, this is no longer a concern.  Also, faculty handbooks typically only include a small portion of the institutional policies applicable to the faculty.  This may give rise to the misimpression that only the policies published in the faculty handbook are applicable to the faculty.  A faculty handbook should not be intended to state all institutional employment and campus community policies.
+
+Another key question for purposes of determining which policies should be published in a faculty handbook is whether the policy addresses a faculty personnel matter that falls within an area of primary faculty responsibility, a unique faculty right, or a policy that only applies to the faculty.  If the policy does not fall within one of these areas, I believe the better practice is either not to publish it in the faculty handbook or link to such policies and adopt text comparable to the following clause from the University of Redlands Faculty Handbook’s “Changes to this Handbook” policy:
+
+Other University policies included in this Handbook by reference (e.g., the Policy Prohibiting Illegal Discrimination and Harassment), some of which are provided as Appendices, may be subject to change by procedures other than those required to change the policies and procedures of this Handbook proper. 
+
+See Section 1.4 of the University of Redlands’ Faculty Handbook.
+
+Note: If the above model is utilized, it should be tailored to California Lutheran University by referencing the ADRI Chart.
+
+Adopting either approach provides greater clarity regarding which policies must be approved by the faculty via the handbook amendment policy.  The determination regarding whether a policy falls within an area of faculty responsibility or unique faculty right is guided by the institution’s overarching governance documents.   At California Lutheran, these include the Amended and Restated Bylaws of the University, Faculty Constitution, and ADRI Charts.  
+
+Based on the above, I recommend that faculty handbooks generally be limited in scope to matters designated as a primary faculty responsibility (i.e., faculty status matters) as delineated in the University’s governance documents and other personnel matters applicable to a faculty right (e.g., sabbatical leave, faculty grievances, professional development leaves applicable only to faculty, etc.).  Policies that do not fall within the above areas should either be removed or linked to the primary policy source.  
+
+Adopting this approach lessens the legal risk of the institution adopting contradictory policy statements and provide greater clarity regarding which policies must be decided or approved by the faculty.  Of course, such a practice does not diminish the faculty’s ability to provide consultative recommendations or input on policy matters outside of the above in accordance with the ADRI Charts.   Such consultative input is typically provided via Faculty Senate resolutions, faculty membership on standing university committees and task forces, and constructive dialogue with university administrators.  In addition, the Senate may consider matters of professional interest and faculty welfare, make recommendations to the president and other administrative officers as reflected in the Faculty Senate section of the Faculty Policies Handbook. 
+
+
+
+II.	Specific Policies Requested to be Reviewed
+
+Consensual Relations
+
+Schools are split on whether they publish a Consensual Relations Policy in the faculty handbook.  The decision is primarily based on whether the institution’s policy in this area applies only to faculty or all university employees.  Since consensual relations is not addressed in the Employee Handbook or any other University policy publication that I am aware of, I believe the current policy should remain in the Faculty Policies Handbook.  However, it is my recommendation that the University consider adopting a consensual relations policy that applies to all employees for publication in the Employee Handbook.  There is no reason the same principles set forth in the Faculty Policies Handbook Consensual Relations Policy should not apply to administrators, staff, and coaches.
+
+In terms of other revisions, I suggest that the Task Force supplement the “Consensual Relationships in the Instructional Context” clause to also prohibit a faculty member from exercising academic responsibility over a student with whom the faculty member has had a consensual relationship in the past.   The same conflicts of interest concerns that pertain to current students also apply to situations where the instructor and student had a former relationship.  For example, if the relationship did not end well, the instructor’s objectivity may be clouded, giving rise to a potential conflict of interest.
+
+In addition, the Task Force may want to add a cross-reference to HR Policy-006, which prohibits employees from engaging in “sexual harassment” of students.  The policy defines sexual harassment as:
+
+“unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal, visual, or physical conduct of a sexual nature, made by someone from or in the work or educational setting, under any of the following conditions: (a) submission to the conduct is explicitly or implicitly made a term or a condition of a student’s employment, academic status, or progress; (b) submission to, or rejection of, the conduct by a student is used as the basis of academic decisions affecting the individual; (c) the conduct has the purpose or effect of having a negative impact upon the student’s academic performance, or of creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive educational environment; (d) submission to, or rejection of, the conduct by a student is used as the basis for any decision affecting a student regarding benefits and services, honors, programs, or activities available at or through the educational institution.”
+
+Compensation
+
+It is common to have a brief section in a stand-alone section of the faculty handbook proper (i.e., not in the Appendix) that addresses faculty-specific compensation matters only.   References to salary targets and/or compensation rates are usually stated in general terms given they are subject to revision due to market realities and are traditionally a legally reserved authority of the board (or delegated by the Board to the president, who may in turn delegate to the provost) to establish and approve.  Pursuant to shared governance principles, however, such ranges are developed in consultation with the Provost and a faculty standing committee or task force; or via faculty membership on an appropriate university standing committee.  See Chapman University’s Faculty Manual (Section VII) and Loyola Marymount University’s Handbook for examples of model text in this regard.  
+
+Based on the above, I recommend that the Task Force include a brief compensation section in the main body of the Faculty Policies Handbook that (1) includes a clause that refers and links to Section V of the Employee Handbook; (2) addresses the salary schedule and compensation rates in general terms as outlined above; (3) delineates the manner in which the Provost solicits input from the appropriate faculty committee on salary schedule and compensation rates; and (4) includes a clause stating that matters of faculty and staff grade levels, starting salary, and salary adjustments are delegated by the Board to the President, who, in turn, may delegate them to the appropriate vice president (see the ADRI Chart). 
+
+Fringe Benefits
+
+Some schools opt not to reprint Fringe Benefits in the handbook (see e.g., University of Redlands, Chapman University, Pacific Lutheran University) given these are within the board delegated purview of the administration, while other elect to include a benefit section.  For those that do include a benefit section, it is common for many to link to those benefits that are not unique to the faculty (see e.g., University of Santa Clara) rather than reprint the policy in totality.  Some institutions will reprint the benefit policies, but add a clause indicating the benefits, unless otherwise noted, are approved by the administration after appropriate notice and advisory consultation with the faculty.  See the University of Pacific Faculty Handbook for an example of this latter approach.  Of course, there are also representative examples where the benefit policies are reprinted without such a caveat.  
+
+Consistent with the Section I comments, I recommend that the fringe benefit policies currently reprinted in the Faculty Policies Handbook that apply to all eligible university employees be linked to the Employee Handbook or removed altogether.  My suggestion in this regard is based primarily on the ADRI Chart, which reflects that the faculty does not provide input on university benefits.
+
+Conflicts of Interest
+
+The Conflicts of Interest Policy published in the Faculty Policies Handbook applies to all university employees.  It essentially mirrors the version of the policy in the Employee Handbook; however, the two policies are not identical.  Thus, this is an example where publishing two policies in more than one publication can result in disparate policy statements.  Based on the above, I recommend the policy be removed from the Faculty Policies Handbook and replaced with a link to the Conflicts of Interest Policy published in the Employee Handbook.  
+
+Of note, the Task Force may also want to add a clause referring the reader to conflicts of interest in the sponsored research setting.  If the University does not have a policy in this regard, I advocate that such a policy be developed.  See the following examples of such policies: 
+
+https://www.fordham.edu/info/23841/financial_conflict_of_interest_in_research/5128/university_policy
+
+https://www.stmarytx.edu/policies/academic-affairs/conflicts-of-interest-policy-for-sponsored-research/
+
+https://www.ithaca.edu/sponsored-research/conflict-interest-and-disclosure
+
+Traditionally, the above policy is published either in a research manual, academic policy manual, or on the Office of Sponsored Research’s webpage.
+
+Political Activity and Public Statements
+
+Political activity is addressed in a subsection of the Outside Employment and Professional Activity Policy in the current Faculty Policies Handbook.  It is not unusual for some schools to include a political activities clause in the faculty handbook that is based on the AAUP Statement on Professors and Political Activity.  For those universities that do opt to include an outside activities policy in the faculty handbook, many will commonly reprint the policy under the Faculty Responsibility heading.  Since political activities is not addressed in the Employee Policies Handbook, I recommend that the clause remain in the current Faculty Policies Handbook.  I further advocate that text be developed indicating that if a leave of absence is required to accommodate the faculty member’s political activity, such leave should be formally approved pursuant to the Employee Handbook’s Personal Leave without Pay Policy.  Moreover, I advise that a sentence be added specifying that the terms of any approved leave (i.e., impact on probationary period, years in rank requirements for promotion, etc.) are documented and approved by either the Dean or Provost.
+
+External Relations Policy 
+
+There are three policies reprinted under the External Relations Policy: Controversial Issues or Speakers; Solicitations, Recognitions and Honors, and Access to Donor Lists.  Each of these policies are either campus community or employee policies and I therefore recommend that they be removed from the Faculty Policies Handbook or linked to the appropriate policy source.  Of note, there is a Workplace Solicitation/Distribution policy in the current Employee Handbook that does not mirror the text in the Faculty Policies Handbook.  
+
+I could not locate where the University publishes the Controversial Issues or Speakers Policy.  However, this is a policy that applies (or should apply) to the entire campus community, including student organizations.   I recommend that the administration consider adopting a campus community webpage or campus community manual that publishes policies such as this, as well as other broad ranging policies that impact everyone on campus (i.e., security, IT, Environmental Health and Safety, etc.).
+
+III.	Other Recommendations
+
+Although outside of the scope of the policies Dr. Heresco requested I review and comment upon, below I provide policy and content recommendations the Task Force may want to consider developing as it continues its work to update the Faculty Policies Handbook.
+
+Adherence to University Policies 
+
+Under the Faculty Responsibilities section of the handbook, paragraph 6 states that faculty members are responsible for “knowing and abiding by the policies and procedures published in the current version of the Faculty Governance Handbook, this Faculty Policies Handbook, and the undergraduate and graduate catalogs.”  I believe adding the Employee Handbook to the listing is appropriate since there are policies in that document that apply to faculty.  Also, there are other University policies that apply to faculty, including but not limited to the Policy on Sexual Harassment and Title IX, HR Policy 006, the Alcohol & Drug Free Policy, etc.  As such, I advise that consideration be given to amending paragraph 6 as follows:
+
+6. knowing and abiding by University policies that apply to them, including but not limited to the policies and procedures published in the current version of the Faculty Governance Handbook, this Faculty Policies Handbook, and the undergraduate and graduate catalogs, and the Employee Handbook.
+
+Freedom from Harassment Policy
+
+I recommend that this policy be removed and replaced with a link to the Freedom from Harassment policy published in the Employee Handbook.  Also, links to the Policy on Sexual Harassment Prohibited by Title IX and HR Policy 006 - Harassment, Discrimination, Biased Conduct and Retaliation Prohibition should be added. In this regard, I advise that the Task Force collaborate with Human Resources to develop appropriate text under the Freedom from Harassment (and Discrimination) heading that affirms the University’s commitment to a workplace environment free from unlawful harassment and discrimination and references and links to the policies referenced above.
+
+Working Conditions, Library and Computer Use, Expense Reimbursement, Chapel and Convocation
+
+I recommend that these policies be removed from the Handbook for the reasons set forth in Section I of this memorandum.  If, however, the Task Force elects to keep the policies in the handbook for ease of reference, I recommend that the policies be replaced with links to the extent they are published in other university policy publications.  
+
+Research and Publication 
+
+I recommend that the University consider developing an academic policy manual that houses relevant policies addressing issues such as program reviews and approvals, academic research misconduct, IRB, Animal Research, Sponsored Research Conflict of Interests, and the like.  
+
+Academic Honesty Policy
+
+I recommend that this policy be removed from the Handbook for the reasons set forth in Section I of this memorandum.  If, however, the Task Force elects to keep the policy in the handbook for ease of reference, I recommend that it be replaced with a link to the version of the policy in the Undergraduate Catalog.  
+
+Additional Policy Statements and Recommendations
+
+Develop an Introduction Statement
+
+I recommend that the Task Force develop an introductory clause at the beginning of the handbook.   Below is a sample from a prior client’s handbook for consideration; however, the Task Force should develop a tailored statement unique to California Lutheran University:
+
+The purpose of the Faculty Policies Handbook is to provide members of the Faculty as defined herein with information regarding the policies, procedures and regulations of the College as they pertain to matters of faculty status and rights.  It supersedes all previous faculty personnel policies and procedures published in prior Faculty Policies Handbooks.
+
+Official publications of the University are considered to be supplemental to the Faculty Policies Handbook.  These publications include but are not limited to the Amended and Restated Bylaws of California Lutheran University, the Employee Handbook, the Catalog, the Student Handbook, and other campus community and employee policies published by the administration.  Faculty members are responsible for being familiar with the contents of these and other University policy statements that have significance for their professional performance.
+
+Revisions to the Faculty Policies Handbook will be made in accordance with the Faculty Constitution, subject to the final approval of the Board of Regents.
+
+Develop a Faculty Policies Handbook Amendment Policy 
+
+The Task Force may want to consider supplementing the Faculty Constitution’s Amendments to the Bylaws of the Faculty Constitution with a policy addressing procedurally how the Faculty Policies Handbook is amended.  I recommend such a policy be included at the end of the Faculty Policies Handbook (before the Appendix if it remains).
+
+Faculty Handbook amendment policies typically identify who may submit or recommend proposed amendments (i.e., individual faculty member, Faculty Senate, faculty committee/task force, Deans, Provost, President, etc.) and the steps that must be followed to develop, vet, and revise the proposed amendment.  Further, such policies commonly outline the approval steps that must be followed.  If the Deans, Provost, or President, proposes an amendment or recommends that a policy be developed by the faculty, I also recommend that the following Association of Governing Boards of Colleges and Universities best practice be implemented: 
+
+Boards and presidents should plan reasonable time for consultative and decision-making processes and establish deadlines for their conclusion with the clear understanding that failure to act in accordance with these deadlines will mean that the next highest level in the governance process will have to proceed with decision making.  Even in the context of academic governance, a single individual or group should not be allowed to impede decisions through inaction.
+
+Association of Governing Boards of Colleges and Universities Statement on Board Responsibility for Institutional Governance, January 2010.  Model text can be provided upon request.
+
+Develop a Policy Addressing Administrators with Faculty Rank
+
+The Faculty Policies Handbook does not address administrators with faculty rank.  Such a policy is typically published in the Definition of Faculty section of a faculty handbook and includes a clause addressing retreat rights to join the faculty following the successful completion of the administrative assignment.  I recommended that a clause addressing this issue be developed by the Task Force.
+
+Develop a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Faculty Responsibility Policy
+
+I recommend that a clause be adopted for publication under the Faculty Responsibilities section of the handbook codifying that all faculty members are responsible for engaging in activities that enhance diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) at the University.  The text should align with the Contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion clause developed by the ART Task Force (assuming the ART Task Force clause is adopted by the faculty and approved by the Board of Regents).
+
+Reference Background Screens, Credential Verification in the Appointment of Faculty Section
+
+Some schools will include clauses in the Appointment Policies section of a faculty handbook indicating that candidates must successfully complete a background screen and have their academic credentials verified before final appointment.  The Department of Education also requires the University to provide a notice of the availability of the annual security report to those individuals it interviews if it solicits applications for a faculty position through an external advertisement.  
+
+
+
+
+
+Develop a Terminal Contract Clause
+
+I advocate that the Task Force develop a policy statement addressing Terminal Contracts under the Types of Contract section.  Terminal contracts are issued to probationary faculty who are not awarded tenure.
+
+Organizational Suggestions
+
+Finally, I believe the Task Force should consider moving the Appointment of Faculty section to a different location in the handbook.  Faculty appointment policies are normally published earlier in a faculty handbook, following the definition of faculty and faculty contract sections.  The Faculty Grievance Policy might also be better placed either under the Faculty Rights section or following the Faculty Separation section. Finally, to help better navigate the document and more easily reference policies, I propose that an automated numbering system be introduced to the handbook.
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com</s>"
+<s>[INST] Faculty Legislation_January 21 - 2020-21.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Faculty Personnel Records (2nd Draft).txt [/INST] Faculty Personnel Records
+
+The University maintains the following faculty employment and personnel files under secure conditions to protect both the confidentiality and integrity of these records.  Access to the files is restricted according to the policies described below. 
+
+Human Resources Employment Files 
+
+Human Resources maintains the University’s official permanent employment records for each employee, including faculty. These files contain routine human resource related documents that are accumulated over the course of the faculty member’s employment at the University (e.g., direct deposit information, information concerning participation in the University retirement and health insurance plans, etc.). 
+
+A faculty member’s employment records are maintained in Human Resources and are accessible only to the Director of Human Resources, other designated personnel in Human Resources, appropriate University administrators, and the faculty member. With reasonable notice, faculty members may review their employee personnel files during business hours on any working day. At the request of the faculty member, materials may be copied from the human resources personnel file by designated personnel in Human Resources. 
+
+															The University may permit access to and copying from the faculty member’s employment records as soon as a subpoena is received pursuant to lawful orders of federal or state agencies relevant to investigations, hearings, or other proceedings pending before such agencies or the courts. Human Resources will notify in writing any faculty member(s) whose employment records has/have been lawfully subpoenaed.
+
+Faculty Personnel Files 
+
+															Because the maintenance of an excellent Faculty is essential to the vitality of the University, there must be collected and preserved documentation as to the appointment and performance of each faculty member. Documentation may be collected in any format (on paper, electronic, etc.) and subsequently reproduced in any format necessary or convenient for review. 
+
+Academic Affairs maintain an official personnel file for each faculty member.  The personnel file includes records in both physical and electronic format documenting the appointment and performance of a member of the faculty.  Such records may subsequently be reproduced in any format necessary or convenient for review.
+
+															The official personnel file for each faculty member contains but need not be limited to the following: (a) the permanent file, containing confidential pre-employment materials such as the confidential dossier and/or letters of reference; and (b) the Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file, containing confidential materials collected in the completion of usual University performance reviews.
+
+Permanent File
+
+The permanent file contains, but is not limited to: 
+
+original signed copies of the letter of initial appointment and all subsequent contractual correspondence and contracts, 
+
+copies of official transcripts and other such formal records pertaining to credentials, 
+
+confidential pre-employment materials such as the confidential dossier and/or letters of reference,
+
+a current curriculum vitae (updated at the time of evaluation or more frequently at the initiative of the faculty member), 
+
+Letters and memoranda related to reappointment, promotion, or tenure application, final judgments, and feedback letters resulting from reappointment evaluations, promotion, tenure, and merit increment decisions, 
+
+correspondence relating to sabbaticals or other professional leaves of absence, 
+
+correspondence relating to awards (internal or external) or research grants (internal or external), 
+
+official letters of commendation or reprimand, 
+
+other correspondence pertinent to the faculty member’s academic employment at the University.
+
+															Faculty Personnel Committee Evaluation File
+
+															The following items are considered part of the Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file: 
+
+															self-report,
+
+															the tenure narrative,
+
+															the promotion narrative,
+
+															reviews by peers,
+
+															a curricula vitae
+
+															course syllabi;
+
+															student course evaluations,
+
+															reports of peer teaching observation reviews and responses to the reports, and 
+
+															copies of or links to products of scholarly or creative work (journal articles, books, performances, etc.), and
+
+															sabbatical or faculty scholarly leave reports. 
+
+															The Faculty Personnel Committee may add other relevant materials. The curriculum vitae (item e) and course syllabi (item f) are not confidential and may be provided to others at the Provost’s discretion. Items (a), (b), (c), (e), (f), (g), (i), and (j) will be made available to peer evaluators. Student boards will be provided with the first section of item (a).
+
+															Access, Inspection, and Retention of Faculty Personnel Files
+
+															It is the responsibility of the Provost to maintain the official faculty personnel files and to ensure their confidentiality. They may be inspected, in strictest confidence, only by the Provost, Faculty Personnel Committee, and President.  Portions of the file will be provided to reviewers, who will treat all information from the personnel file as confidential.The official personnel file for each faculty member shall contain but need not be limited to the following: (a) the permanent file, containing confidential pre-employment materials such as the confidential dossier and/or letters of reference; (b) the Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file, containing confidential materials collected in the completion of usual University performance reviews.  Access to the file, in the strictest confidence in accordance with the University’s Confidentially Policy, may also be granted to designated University personnel or agents with a legitimate business need to process or manage the material (i.e., Academic Affairs and IT staff).  For a valid reason, a faculty member may also authorize in writing access to the file for a person not indicated above.
+
+With reasonable notice to Academic Affairs, faculty members may review their personnel file during business hours on any working day.  Faculty may also request copies, at their own cost, of any material contained in the file.  However, faculty may not remove items from the file or the file itself from the Office of Academic Affairs.  Individual faculty members enjoy the option of forwarding to the Provost for inclusion in their official personnel files any additional material. When this is done, such materials must contain a notation as to their inclusion at the request of the faculty member, and such materials are thereafter incorporated into the files. 
+
+															The University may permit access to and copying from official faculty personnel files as soon as a subpoena is received pursuant to lawful orders of federal or state agencies relevant to investigations, hearings, or other proceedings pending before such agencies or the courts. The Provost or an agent of the Provost must notify in writing any faculty member(s) whose official personnel file(s) has/have been lawfully subpoenaed.
+
+															Each faculty member's personnel file, including but not limited to materials collected for the Faculty Personnel Committee's yearly evaluation process, will be retained in accordance with the University’s record retention schedule.  for ten years, available only to the Provost, the President, and the Faculty Personnel Committee. After ten years these materials will be destroyed. On the other hand, each faculty member's permanent personnel file will be kept by the Provost until three years after the faculty member has separated from service at Ohio Wesleyan University, at which time it will be transferred to permanent secure storage, available only to the Provost, the President, and the Faculty Personnel Committee.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Faculty Policy Manual Adjustments.txt [/INST] Faculty Policy Manual Citations
+
+
+
+Section
+
+Subsection
+
+New Location
+
+Comment
+
+100
+
+
+
+Introduction to FPM
+
+Added suggested supplemental text.
+
+200
+
+
+
+Section 1.1
+
+Recommend removal from FPM.  See comment notes to 1st draft.
+
+300
+
+
+
+Section 1.2
+
+Added new Mission statement; however, recommend removal from FPM.  See comment notes to 1st draft.
+
+
+
+301
+
+Section 1.2.1
+
+Added new Shared Values statement; however, recommend removal from FPM.  See comment notes to 1st draft.
+
+400
+
+
+
+Section 1.3
+
+Recommend statement be published on either an FGA or Office of the Provost website or moved to the Faculty Rights and Professional Conduct Responsibilities section in Chapter Three.
+
+500
+
+
+
+Section 3.1.1
+
+Recommend Academic Freedom Statement be moved to the Faculty Rights and Professional Conduct Responsibilities section in Chapter Three.
+
+600
+
+
+
+1.4
+
+Recommend statement be published on either an FGA or Office of the Provost website
+
+700
+
+
+
+1.5
+
+Recommend statement be published on either an FGA or Office of the Provost website
+
+800
+
+
+
+1.6
+
+Recommend removal from FPM since information is addressed in the Faculty Constitution.  See comment notes to 1st draft.
+
+
+
+801
+
+1.6.1
+
+Same as above.
+
+
+
+802
+
+1.6.2
+
+Same as above.
+
+
+
+803
+
+1.6.3
+
+Same as above.
+
+
+
+804
+
+1.6.3.1
+
+Same as above.
+
+
+
+805
+
+1.6.3.2
+
+Retitled section; however, recommend removal from FPM due to same issues cited above.
+
+
+
+805.1
+
+1.6.3.3
+
+Recommend removal from FPM due to same issues cited above.
+
+
+
+805.2
+
+1.6.3.4
+
+Recommend removal from FPM due to same issues cited above.
+
+
+
+805.3
+
+1.6.3.5
+
+Recommend removal from FPM due to same issues cited above.
+
+
+
+805.4
+
+1.6.3.6
+
+Recommend removal from FPM due to same issues cited above.
+
+
+
+805.5
+
+1.6.3.7
+
+Recommend removal from FPM due to same issues cited above.
+
+
+
+805.6
+
+1.6.3.8
+
+Recommend removal from FPM due to same issues cited above.
+
+
+
+806-819
+
+§§ 1.6.4 - 1.6.14
+
+Recommend removal from FPM due to same issues cited above.
+
+900
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+901
+
+3.3
+
+
+
+
+
+901.1-901.5
+
+§§ 3.3.1 – 3.3.5
+
+
+
+
+
+902
+
+3.4
+
+
+
+
+
+902.1-902.3
+
+§§ 3.4.1 – 3.4.3
+
+
+
+1000
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+1001
+
+Not included
+
+
+
+
+
+1001.1
+
+Not included
+
+Topic addressed in the Pay Period Policy in Section 1.7.2 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+1001.2
+
+Not included
+
+Topic addressed in the Federal and State Law Mandated Benefits Policy in Section 1.6.1 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+1001.3
+
+Not included
+
+Topic addressed in the Equal Employment Opportunity Policy in Section 1.2.1 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+1001.4
+
+Not included
+
+Federal regulations are addressed in the Equal Employment Opportunity Policy in Section 1.2.1, as well as the Harassment in the Workplace Policy in Section 1.3.12 of the Employee Policies document
+
+
+
+1002
+
+Not included
+
+It is presumed that Emergency Procedures will be addressed in the University’s Policy Data Bank (once developed by the University) under the Security section.  
+
+
+
+1002.1-1002.3
+
+Not included
+
+See comment above.
+
+1100
+
+
+
+2.3
+
+
+
+
+
+1101
+
+2.3.1
+
+
+
+
+
+1102
+
+2.3.3
+
+
+
+
+
+1103
+
+2.3.5
+
+
+
+
+
+1104
+
+2.3.6
+
+
+
+
+
+1105
+
+2.3.7
+
+
+
+
+
+1106
+
+2.3.2
+
+
+
+
+
+1106.1
+
+2.3.2.1
+
+
+
+
+
+1106.2
+
+2.3.2.2
+
+
+
+
+
+1106.3
+
+2.3.2.3
+
+I provided new text for consideration in Section 2.3.2.3.
+
+
+
+1106.4
+
+2.3.2.3
+
+I provided new text for consideration in Section 2.3.2.3.
+
+
+
+1106.5
+
+2.3.2.4
+
+
+
+
+
+1106.6
+
+2.3.2.5
+
+
+
+
+
+1106.7
+
+Mistakenly not included
+
+Needs to be added to next draft of FPM.
+
+
+
+1107
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+1107.1
+
+Not Included.
+
+Topic addressed in the Employee Identification Card Policy in Section 1.3.10 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+1107.2
+
+Not Included
+
+Topic addressed in the Pay Period Policy in Section 1.7.2 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+1107.3
+
+Not Included
+
+Topic addressed in the Personnel Files Policy in Section 1.3.19 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+1107.4
+
+Not Included
+
+Topic addressed in the Personnel Files Policy in Section 1.3.19 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+1150
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+1150.1
+
+Not Included.
+
+Topic addressed in the Campus Closing Policy in Section 1.3.3 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+1150.2
+
+Not Included.
+
+Topic addressed in the Professional Image Policy in Section 1.3.21 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+1150.3
+
+Not Included.
+
+Topic addressed in the Key Policy in Section 1.3.16 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+1150.4
+
+Not Included.
+
+It is presumed that the issue of personnel property will be addressed in the University’s Policy Data Bank (once developed by the University) under the Security section.  
+
+
+
+1150.5
+
+Not Included.
+
+Topic addressed generally in the Use of University Assets Policy in Section 1.3.29 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+1150.6
+
+Not Included.
+
+Topic addressed generally in the Solicitations and Distribution of Literature Policy in Section 1.3.28 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+1150.7
+
+Not Included.
+
+It is presumed that travel expenses/insurance will be addressed in the University’s Policy Data Bank (once developed by the University) under the Finance and Accounting policies section.  
+
+1200
+
+
+
+2.1
+
+
+
+
+
+1201
+
+2.1.1
+
+
+
+
+
+1201.1
+
+2.1.1
+
+
+
+
+
+1201.2
+
+2.1.3.4
+
+
+
+
+
+1201.3
+
+2.1.5.1
+
+
+
+
+
+1201.4
+
+2.1.4
+
+
+
+
+
+1202
+
+2.2 
+
+
+
+1300
+
+
+
+3.6
+
+
+
+
+
+1301
+
+3.6.1
+
+
+
+
+
+1302
+
+3.6.2
+
+
+
+
+
+1303
+
+3.6.3
+
+
+
+1400
+
+
+
+3.7 & 3.7.1
+
+
+
+
+
+1401
+
+3.7.1.1
+
+
+
+
+
+1402
+
+3.7.1.2
+
+
+
+
+
+1403
+
+3.7.1.3
+
+
+
+
+
+1404
+
+3.7.1.4
+
+
+
+
+
+1450
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+1451
+
+3.1.3
+
+
+
+
+
+1452
+
+3.1.4
+
+
+
+
+
+1453
+
+3.8.3
+
+
+
+1500
+
+
+
+3.2
+
+
+
+
+
+1501
+
+3.2.1.1
+
+
+
+
+
+1502
+
+3.2.1.2
+
+
+
+
+
+1503
+
+3.2.1.3
+
+
+
+
+
+1504
+
+3.1.7.
+
+
+
+
+
+1503
+
+3.1.8
+
+
+
+
+
+1506
+
+3.8
+
+
+
+
+
+1507
+
+Not Included.
+
+Topic addressed in the Tuition Remission Policy in Section 1.6.4 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+1508
+
+3.2.1.4
+
+
+
+1600
+
+
+
+3.11
+
+
+
+
+
+1601
+
+3.11.1
+
+
+
+
+
+1602
+
+3.11.2
+
+
+
+
+
+1603
+
+3.11.3
+
+
+
+
+
+1604
+
+See 3.11.3; 3.11.4; 3.11.5; 3.11.7
+
+
+
+
+
+1605
+
+See 3.11.5 and 3.11.6
+
+
+
+
+
+1606
+
+3.11.4
+
+
+
+
+
+1607
+
+3.11.7
+
+
+
+
+
+1608
+
+3.11.8
+
+
+
+
+
+1650 & Subparts
+
+3.11.5
+
+
+
+1700
+
+
+
+3.5
+
+
+
+
+
+1701 
+
+3.5.1
+
+
+
+
+
+1701.1
+
+3.5.1.1
+
+
+
+
+
+1701.2
+
+3.5.1.2
+
+
+
+
+
+1701.3
+
+3.5.1.3
+
+
+
+
+
+1701.4
+
+3.5.1.4
+
+
+
+
+
+1702
+
+3.5.2
+
+
+
+
+
+1702.1
+
+3.5.2.1
+
+
+
+
+
+1702.2
+
+3.5.2.2
+
+
+
+
+
+1750 & Subparts
+
+Not Included.
+
+Topic addressed in the Compensation Policies Section (see Section 1.7) of the Employee Policies document.
+
+1800
+
+
+
+3.12
+
+
+
+
+
+1801
+
+See 3.12
+
+
+
+
+
+1802
+
+See 3.12
+
+
+
+1900
+
+
+
+3.10
+
+
+
+
+
+1901
+
+Not Included.
+
+See the Family and Medical Leave Policy in Section 1.5.2 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+1902
+
+Not Included.
+
+See the Military Leave Policy in Section 1.5.6 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+1903
+
+Not Included.
+
+See the Jury Duty and Witness Leave Policy in Section 1.5.4 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+1904
+
+Not Included.
+
+See the Jury Duty and Witness Leave Policy in Section 1.5.4 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+1905
+
+Not Included.
+
+See the Bereavement Leave Policy in Section 1.5.2 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+1906
+
+3.8.5
+
+
+
+
+
+1907
+
+See 3.10 and 3.8
+
+
+
+
+
+1907.1
+
+3.10.1
+
+
+
+
+
+1907.2
+
+3.10.1.1
+
+
+
+
+
+1907.3
+
+3.8.1.1
+
+
+
+
+
+1907.4
+
+3.10.1.2
+
+
+
+
+
+1908
+
+3.10.2.
+
+
+
+
+
+1909
+
+Not Included.
+
+See the Holiday Policy in Section 1.5.3 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+2000
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+2001
+
+Not Included.
+
+See the University Facilities and Service Benefits Policy in Section 1.6.5 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2002
+
+Not Included.
+
+See the University Facilities and Service Benefits Policy in Section 1.6.5 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2003
+
+Not Included.
+
+See the University Facilities and Service Benefits Policy in Section 1.6.5 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2004
+
+Not Included.
+
+See the University Facilities and Service Benefits Policy in Section 1.6.5 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2005
+
+Not Included.
+
+See the University Facilities and Service Benefits Policy in Section 1.6.5 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2006 & Subparts
+
+Not Included.
+
+See the Employee Parking Policy in Section 1.3.11 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2007
+
+Not Included.
+
+See the University Facilities and Service Benefits Policy in Section 1.6.5 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2008
+
+Not Included.
+
+See the University Facilities and Service Benefits Policy in Section 1.6.5 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2009
+
+Not Included.
+
+See the University Facilities and Service Benefits Policy in Section 1.6.5 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2010
+
+Not Included.
+
+It is presumed that travel expenses/insurance will be addressed in the University’s Policy Data Bank (once developed by the University) under the Finance and Accounting policies section.  
+
+
+
+2011
+
+Not Included.
+
+See the University Facilities and Service Benefits Policy in Section 1.6.5 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2012
+
+Not Included.
+
+See the Workplace Safety Policy in Section 1.3.31 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+2100
+
+
+
+3.9
+
+
+
+
+
+2101 & Subparts
+
+Not Included.
+
+Topic addressed in the Tuition Remission Policy in Section 1.6.4 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2102
+
+Not Included.
+
+Topic addressed in the Insurance Benefits Policy in Section 1.6.2 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2103
+
+Not Included.
+
+Topic addressed in the Federal and State Law Mandated Benefits Policy in Section 1.6.1 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2104
+
+Not Included.
+
+Topic addressed in the Retirement Benefits Policy in Section 1.6.3 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2105
+
+Not Included.
+
+Topic addressed in the Insurance Benefits Policy in Section 1.6.2 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2106
+
+Not Included.
+
+Topic addressed in the Federal and State Law Mandated Benefits Policy in Section 1.6.1 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2107
+
+Not Included.
+
+Topic addressed in the Federal and State Law Mandated Benefits Policy in Section 1.6.1 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2108
+
+3.8.4
+
+
+
+
+
+2109
+
+3.8.2
+
+
+
+2200
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+2201 & Subparts
+
+Not Included.
+
+It is presumed that alcohol use at non-sponsored events will be addressed in the University’s Policy Data Bank (once developed by the University).  
+
+
+
+2202
+
+Not Included
+
+Topic addressed in the Drug and Alcohol-Free Workplace Policy in Section 1.3.9 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2203
+
+Not Included.
+
+It is presumed that alcohol use at non-sponsored events will be addressed in the University’s Policy Data Bank (once developed by the University).  
+
+
+
+2204
+
+Not Included.
+
+Topic addressed in the Confidentiality Policy in Section 1.3.5 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2205
+
+Not Included.
+
+Topic addressed in the Garnishment Policy in Section 1.7.3 of the Employee Policies document
+
+
+
+2206
+
+See 3.1.3
+
+Also, this topic is addressed in the Business and Ethics Conduct Policy in Section 1.3.2 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2207 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+2207.1
+
+Not Included.
+
+This topic is addressed in part if the Workplace Safety Policy in Section 1.3.31 of the Employee Policies document.  
+
+
+
+2207.2
+
+Not Included.
+
+Sexual Harassment is addressed in Harassment in the Workplace Policy in Section 1.3.12 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2207.3
+
+Not Included.
+
+Issue is addressed in the University’s Sexual Misconduct Policy, which will be included in the University’s Policy Data Bank (once developed by the University).
+
+
+
+2208
+
+Not Included.
+
+Topic addressed generally in the Use of University Assets Policy in Section 1.3.29 of the Employee Policies document.
+
+
+
+2209
+
+Not Included.
+
+Issue is addressed in the University’s Acceptable Use Policy, which will be included in the University’s Policy Data Bank (once developed by the University).
+
+
+
+2210
+
+3.11.6
+
+
+
+2300
+
+
+
+Not Included.
+
+These policies are published in the University’s Catalogue.
+
+2400
+
+
+
+5.0</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Faculty Rank and Retreat Rights or Tenure for Administrators.txt [/INST] Faculty Rank and Retreat Rights or Tenure for Administrators 
+
+The University does not ordinarily appoint members of the Administration with faculty rank. Nor does an administrator receive faculty rank by virtue of teaching part-time for the University. However, in accordance with §3.2.10.1, administrators possessing the requisite qualifications and meeting applicable standards (§§3.9.2, 3.9.5, 3.9.8, 3.9.9) are eligible for appointment with faculty rank, and in addition they may also be given retreat rights to join the faculty following the successful completion of their administrative assignment, including tenure or the possibility of standing for tenure after a designated interval. 
+
+3 . 2 . 10 . 1 Assignment of Faculty Rank to Administrators 
+
+The President, in consultation with the appropriate Dean and the Provost, has the authority to assign to an administrator a faculty rank that was earned through a faculty review at a comparable regionally accredited four-year college or university. At its discretion, the Board of Trustees may assign to the President an appropriate faculty rank, either at the time of hire or subsequently. 
+
+To retain an academic rank, an administrator must teach at least one course at the University every three years; administrators lose their academic rank at the beginning of the fourth academic year in which they have not satisfied this requirement. Administrators holding academic rank are ineligible for promotion in academic rank during their terms of administrative service. 
+
+3 . 2 . 10 . 2 Retreat Rights or Tenure for Administrators 
+
+Administrators who are not already tenured faculty members at the University do not ordinarily receive tenure either at the time of their initial administrative appointments or during their terms as administrators. However, the President has the authority to assign retreat rights or tenure to an administrator, either at the time of initial appointment or subsequently. 
+
+An administrator hired with retreat rights is eligible to assume a faculty position and, in some cases, subsequently stand for tenure (after the usual four-year probationary period, §3.2.1). 
+
+Prior to such an action, the President, the Provost, or the appropriate Dean will consult with the relevant department or School (as early in the hiring process as possible if the decision is made at the time of hire) to enable the department or School to review the candidate’s academic credentials, to meet with the candidate (if possible), and to make a recommendation on the case. 
+
+When an administrator is granted retreat rights, the appropriate Dean, the Provost, or the President will state in a letter of understanding the conditions under which the administrator may join the faculty at the conclusion of the administrative appointment. The terms of any such arrangement must be approved by the President. 
+
+An administrator hired with tenure is eligible to assume a tenured faculty position upon completing her or his administrative assignment. Prior to making a decision to award tenure at time of hire, the President or Provost, in addition to consulting with the relevant department or School, will submit the candidate’s credentials to the Faculty Review Committee for its evaluation and recommendation. If the department or School, the Faculty Review Committee, the P r o v o s t , and the President concur,an initial appointment with tenure can be made. Subsequently, the President or Provost will review the case with the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Faculty Responsibilities w DEI & Campus Citizenship Additions.txt [/INST] Faculty Responsibilities 
+
+The responsibilities identified in this section are expected of all faculty. The performance of these responsibilities serves as a base-level criterion for the granting of tenure and rolling contracts and for post-tenure review. 
+
+Adherence to University Policies 
+
+Faculty members are responsible for: 
+
+maintaining respect for the relationship of the University with the ELCA and the tradition of Lutheran higher education 
+
+fulfilling conscientiously all contractual obligations and giving the institution reasonable notice when resigning to accept another position 
+
+using conscientiously the funds that the institution entrusts to their care, such as those allocated to budgets of academic departments or special research projects 
+
+making every effort to avoid public statements and actions that are detrimental to the welfare of the University 
+
+avoiding use, without specific permission, of University resources, equipment, or labor for their own personal gain 
+
+contributing to the University’s commitment to maintain a diverse and inclusive community that strives for equity and equal opportunity by engaging in professional activity or activities (i.e., teaching, advising/mentoring, scholarly/creative productivity, or service) that enhance diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)
+
+being good campus citizens by constructively cooperating with one’s faculty and staff colleagues in sharing the common burdens related to discharging their professional responsibilities of teaching, advising/mentoring, scholarly/creative productivity, and service, and doing so in a respectful, conscientious, and professional manner
+
+knowing and abiding by the policies and procedures published in the current version of the Faculty Governance Handbook, this Faculty Policies Handbook, and the undergraduate and graduate catalogs.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Faculty Responsibilities.txt [/INST] In the spirit of shared governance, just as the Administration should notify the Faculty Senate of substantive policy changes that may impact, for example, academic freedom issues, the Senate should similarly alert the Administration of 
+
+
+
+
+
+Article II – Authority and Function of the Faculty
+
+A. As authorized by the Monmouth University Board of Trustees, the Faculty shall legislate policies in the following areas:
+
+
+
+Standards for admission, registration, and retention of students
+
+Programs, curricula, and outcomes
+
+Requirements for earned degrees
+
+Standards for instruction
+
+Standards for college-funded research and professional development
+
+Professional responsibility
+
+Standards for academic freedom
+
+Qualifications for Faculty rank and tenure
+
+B. The legislation of the Faculty shall be officially submitted by the Secretary of the Faculty to the President of the University, who shall have up to thirty days to review it. The President may approve, request modification of, or veto the legislation in a message to the Faculty.
+
+
+
+Approval. If the President approves the entire legislation as presented, the President may elect to inform the Faculty in writing prior to the expiration of the review period. Failure to communicate with Faculty within the thirty-day period shall constitute approval of the legislation. Approved legislation shall become University policy and shall be implemented by the appropriate administrative office or department.
+
+Request for Modification. If the President desires modification that does not substantially alter the intent of the original legislation, the President shall request in writing, within the thirty-day review period and through the Secretary of the Faculty, that the appropriate Faculty committee consider the adoption of such modification. The President’s written request for modification shall remove the legislation from the thirty-day review period. The appropriate committee shall review the request and shall make recommendation to the Faculty for action. If the action of the Faculty is to support the original legislation in its entirety, then the legislation is transmitted to the President for either approval or veto. Otherwise, the legislation is transmitted to the President as new legislation.
+
+Veto. If the President vetoes the entire legislation, the President shall send, within thirty days, a message to the Faculty stating reasons for the veto.
+In case of veto, the legislation may be reconsidered by the Faculty. Upon a two-thirds vote of the entire voting Faculty reaffirming the legislation, the Secretary of the Faculty shall direct a communication to the President requesting permission for two Faculty representatives to meet with the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees. At that time, the Faculty representatives shall present arguments for the legislation, and the President shall present arguments against it. The Board shall transmit its decision, with rationale, to the Secretary of the Faculty, within four months. If the Board approves the legislation, it shall become University policy.
+
+C. The Faculty shall have the authority to create committees to investigate and to recommend action on problems in both the academic and non-academic areas that concern the integrity and reputation of Monmouth University.
+
+D. The Faculty may function in an advisory capacity on matters concerning the budget, non-curricular student affairs, publications, public relations, and community service.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE.txt [/INST] FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE (FMLA) POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+May 8, 2017
+
+Policy Number:
+
+III – 3.4.2
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President, Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+All regular Canisius College employees.
+
+History:
+
+ 
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to define the college’s policy, procedures, and guidelines for administering family and medical leave in compliance with the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”).
+
+POLICY
+
+It is the policy of Canisius College to provide eligible employees with unpaid family/medical leave (FMLA) for up to 12 weeks within any 12-month period for specified family and medical reasons; or up to 26 workweeks of unpaid leave in a 12-month period to care for a covered service member with a serious injury or illness.  
+
+To be eligible, employees must have worked for the college for at least 12 months, and for at least 1,250 hours during the last 12 months.  The college maintains current health benefits during an approved family/medical leave, with the employees continuing to pay their portion of the premium.  Accrued vacation may be used for any portion of the 12 weeks.  Additional vacation and sick leave will not accrue during any unpaid portion of FMLA.  Absences due to Workers’ Compensation, NYS Disability, paid medical leave or unpaid personal leave for family care will count toward one’s annual 12-week FMLA allotment. 
+
+The administration of leave under this policy shall be done in accordance with the procedure and guidelines set forth below, as well as FMLA and related regulations.  Detailed information and application forms are available in Human Resources.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Eligible Employee - one who has worked for Canisius College for at least twelve (12) months and has worked at least 1,250 hours during the twelve (12) months immediately preceding the requested leave.
+
+Serious Health Condition - an illness, injury, impairment, physical or mental condition that results in (a) any period of incapacity or treatment related to inpatient care in a hospital, hospice, or residential care facility, (b) any period of incapacity requiring absence from work, school, or other regular activity for more than three (3) calendar days that also involves continuing care [treatment two or more times by a health care provider or pursuant to a regimen of supervised care], or (c) that requires continuing care by a health care provider for a chronic, serious health condition or which results in a period of incapacity, or (d) prenatal care.
+
+Medical Necessity - certification by a health care provider that a medical need can best be accommodated by an intermittent or reduced leave and outlining the expected duration and schedule of the intermittent or reduced leave.
+
+Key Employee - an FMLA-eligible employee who is among the highest paid ten (10) percent of the employees employed within seventy-five (75) miles of the employee’s worksite.
+
+Qualifying Exigency - qualifying exigencies are situations arising from the military deployment of an employee’s spouse, son, daughter, or parent to a foreign country.  Qualifying exigencies include the following: Short-notice deployment; Military events and related activities; Childcare and school activities of the service member’s child; Financial and legal arrangements for the service member; Counseling; Rest and recuperation of the service member; Attending to certain post-deployment activities, including attending arrival ceremonies, reintegration briefings and events, and other official ceremonies or programs sponsored by the military for a period of 90 days following the termination of the covered military member’s active duty status, and addressing issues arising from the death of a covered military member; or Additional activities that the employer and employee shall agree qualify as an exigency and agree to both the timing and duration of such leave.
+
+Covered Service Member - a member of the armed forces, including a member of the national guard or reserves, who is undergoing medical treatment, recuperation, or therapy, is otherwise in outpatient status, or is otherwise on the temporary disability retired list, for a serious injury or illness.  A ""covered service member” also includes a veteran who is undergoing medical treatment, recuperation, or therapy for a serious injury or illness if the veteran was a member of the Armed Forces at any time during the period of 5 years preceding the date on which the veteran undergoes that medical treatment, recuperation, or therapy.
+
+Where a term is defined in the FMLA and/or accompanying regulations, that definition will be incorporated into policy.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+Family and medical leave will be provided to eligible employees in conformity with the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). Eligible employees are entitled to:
+
+A maximum of twelve (12) weeks of leave during a twelve-month period for any of the following reasons:
+
+The birth of a child and to care for the newborn child within one year of birth;
+
+The placement with the employee of a child for adoption or foster care and to care for the newly placed child within one year of placement;
+
+Care of a child, spouse, or parent with a serious health condition;
+
+A serious health condition that results in the employee’s inability to perform the essential functions of the employee’s job;
+
+Any qualifying exigency arising out of the fact that the employee’s spouse, son, daughter, or parent is a covered military member on “covered active duty;” or
+
+A maximum of twenty-six workweeks of leave during a single twelve-month period to care for a covered service member with a serious injury or illness if the eligible employee is the service member’s spouse, son, daughter, parent, or next of kin (military caregiver leave).
+
+Leave Entitlement
+
+An eligible employee may take up to twelve (12) weeks unpaid leave for the reasons set forth in paragraph 1 (a-e) above in a twelve (12) month period. The twelve (12) month period is a rolling twelve (12) month period measured backward starting on the date an employee first uses any FMLA leave (i.e., no more than twelve (12) weeks FMLA may be taken in any twelve (12) month period). Any FMLA leave taken by an employee during the preceding twelve (12) month period will be used to determine the amount of available leave pursuant to the FMLA. Once the employee’s leave exceeds the requirements of the FMLA, the college may have to fill the employee’s position, as business circumstances may not allow the college to keep the position open.
+
+Leave shall normally be continuous, except that leave for the care of a child, spouse or parent with a serious health condition or due to the employee’s own serious health condition may be taken intermittently or on a reduced basis when medically necessary. See the Reduced or Intermitted Leave clause of the Administrative Requirements section below for additional information.
+
+Leave for a newborn child or adoption or foster care placement of a child must be completed within twelve (12) months of the birth, adoption, or placement, and the leave must be taken all at one time. Spouses employed by Canisius College are jointly entitled to a combined total of twelve (12) weeks of family leave for the birth or placement of a child, or to care for a parent who has a serious health condition. However, for other qualifying reasons under FMLA (other than military caregiver leave), each eligible spouse is entitled to twelve (12) workweeks. If the employee and his or her spouse are employed by the college, they are limited to a combined total of twenty-six (26) workweeks of FMLA leave during a single twelve (12) month period for the care of a service member or veteran with a serious injury or illness (military caregiver leave).
+
+Substance Abuse
+
+FMLA leave is available for treatment for substance abuse or for the care of an immediate family member who is undergoing treatment for substance abuse. The patient must be undergoing treatment by a health care provider, and must not be using the substance in issue.
+
+Military Caregiver Leave
+
+Eligible employees are entitled to up to twenty-six (26) work weeks of unpaid FMLA leave in a single twelve (12) month period to care for a current member of the armed forces, the national guard or reserves who has a serious injury or illness incurred or aggravated in the line of duty on active duty for which he/she is undergoing medical treatment, recuperation, or therapy; is otherwise in outpatient status; or is otherwise on the temporary disability retired list, or to care for a veteran who is undergoing medical treatment, recuperation, or therapy for a serious injury or illness (as that term is defined by the Secretary of Labor) incurred or aggravated in the line of duty on active duty, provided the veteran was a member of the U.S. armed forces (including the national guard or reserves) during the five-year period preceding that medical treatment, recuperation, or therapy.
+
+Administrative Requirements
+
+Use of Paid Leave: Employees will be required to utilize their paid leave prior to receipt of unpaid FMLA leave.
+
+While on FMLA leave related to an employee's own medical condition, the employee must use concurrently and will be paid accumulated sick leave benefits and then any accumulated vacation and personal leave day pay (if applicable) for the duration of the leave (or until the benefits are exhausted, whichever comes first), if applicable. Any remaining time on FMLA leave will be unpaid.
+
+For leaves not related to an employee's medical condition, an employee must use concurrently and will be paid accumulated personal leave, and New York paid family leave, and vacation pay for the duration of the leave (or until the benefits are exhausted, whichever comes first), and any remaining time on leave will be unpaid. Employees must comply with the college’s normal paid leave policies.
+
+
+
+Application for Leave: Employees must give thirty (30) days advance notice of the need to take FMLA leave to Human Resources. When it is not possible to give thirty (30) days advance notice, notice must be given as soon as practicable, ordinarily within one or two days of when the need for the leave becomes known to the employee.
+
+Failure to give adequate notice as outlined above may result in a delay of up to thirty (30) days before FMLA leave will be granted.
+
+When requesting intermittent leave for medical treatments, employees must make reasonable efforts to schedule the leave so as not to unduly disrupt college operations.
+
+After receiving a request for FMLA leave, the associate vice president for human resources and compliance or a designee will inform the employee whether he or she is eligible under the FMLA.  If eligible, the associate vice president for human resources and compliance or designee will inform the employee about any additional information the employee must provide to qualify for FMLA leave as well as detail the employee’s rights and responsibilities concerning FMLA leave.  If the employee is not eligible for FMLA leave, the associate vice president for human resources and compliance will inform the employee why he or she is not eligible.
+
+Medical Certification: Employees must provide medical certification from an appropriate health care provider to support a FMLA request related to a serious health condition on a form which will be provided to the employee.  This certification must be returned within fifteen (15) days under normal circumstances.
+
+If an employee provides medical certification that is questionable or inadequate, (s)he will be referred to a second provider at Canisius College’s expense.
+
+If the first and second opinions differ, a third opinion will be obtained, again at Canisius College’s expense.  The third health care provider will be selected by mutual agreement of the employee and Canisius College, and that opinion will be final and binding.
+
+Note: The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA) prohibits employers and other entities covered by GINA Title II from requesting or requiring genetic information of employees or their family members.  In order to comply with this law, the college requests that employees do not provide any genetic information when replying to this request for medical information.  ‘Genetic information,’ as defined by GINA, includes an individual’s family medical history, the results of an individual’s or family members genetic tests, the fact that an individual or an individual’s family member sought or received genetic services, and genetic information of a fetus carried by an individual of an individual’s family member or an embryo lawfully held by an individual or family member receiving reproductive services.
+
+Medical Re-Certification: Employees on FMLA leave for pregnancy, chronic or long-term conditions under the continuing supervision of a health care provider will be required to submit monthly re-certifications or updated reports regarding the family member or employee’s current medical status.  Employees must give advance notice of their intent to return to work, either as part of a monthly re-certification, or, when less leave is required than was anticipated, at least two days.  Failure to meet the certification requirements may result in counting the employee’s days off against his or her attendance record; disciplinary action, up to and including termination; or denial of reinstatement following the leave.
+
+Prohibition on Working During FMLA Leave: Except where express authorization is given, employees on FMLA leave are prohibited from performing any work, paid or unpaid, for any other person or entity, including the employee’s own business.  Violations of this prohibition may result in FMLA leave being revoked and the employee’s prior days off being counted against his or her attendance record; disciplinary action, up to and including termination; or denial of reinstatement following the leave.
+
+Returning from FMLA Leave: An employee taking a FMLA leave due to a serious health condition must present certification that (s)he is fit for duty prior to reinstatement.  Failure to provide the requisite certification will result in denial of restoration to employment.  In most cases, an employee returning from FMLA leave will be restored to the position previously held prior to FMLA leave, provided that position remains available.  If that position is unavailable, the employee will be reinstated to an equivalent position with equivalent pay, benefits and other terms and conditions of employment.  An employee taking FMLA leave is not entitled to any greater right to reinstatement or other benefits than if continuously employed during the leave period.  Key employees may be denied job restoration if such denial is necessary to prevent substantial and grievous economic harm to the operation of the college.
+
+Reduced or Intermitted Leave: If FMLA leave is taken on a reduced or intermittent basis, the employee may be transferred temporarily to an available alternative position for which the employee is qualified and which better accommodates the recurring periods of leave.
+
+Request for an Extension of a FMLA Leave: In order for a FMLA leave of absence to be extended for longer than what was originally approved, the request must be accompanied by an appropriate health care provider certification indicating the condition or disability and circumstances for the extension before the request will be considered.
+
+Failure to Return from a FMLA Leave: Any employee who fails to return to work as scheduled after FMLA leave may be subject to dismissal from employment. Employees who exceed their FMLA entitlement without extension(s) of their leave approved under other appropriate leave provisions, may be subject to dismissal from employment.
+
+Benefits During Family or Medical Leave of Absence
+
+Health insurance coverage will continue throughout the duration of a FMLA leave.  The conditions under which such coverage is provided will be the same as if the employee were actively working.  Moreover, employees will not lose any employment benefits earned and accumulated before their FMLA leave begins.  Employees on FMLA leave, however, are not eligible for jury duty, funeral leave, or sabbatical leave during such leave.
+
+The employee share of any health plan premiums must continue to be paid by the employee while on FMLA leave, and payments are due at the same time as if made by payroll deduction.  Similarly, employees contributing to their family’s health care coverage are required to make the appropriate contributions during the approved family or medical leave of absence.  Monthly payment by cash or check must be received by Human Resources by the fifteenth of each month.  Failure to make any required payment will cause such health care coverage to lapse.
+
+If an employee’s share of any health insurance premium is delinquent for more than thirty (30) days, the employee’s health coverage may be terminated.  If coverage is not terminated and Canisius College elects to pay the entire premium, the amount of the employee’s delinquency will be recovered from the employee after (s)he returns to work.
+
+If an employee fails to return to work after FMLA leave has expired, Canisius College may recover the cost of any premiums it paid during the employee’s unpaid FMLA leave unless the employee’s failure to return to work is the result of: (a) The continuation, recurrence or onset of a serious health condition that would entitle the employee to FMLA leave; or (b) Other circumstances beyond the control of the employee.
+
+A key employee is a salaried employee whose salary is among the highest paid 10 percent (10%) of all employees of the college.  Key employees may not be entitled to return to their position should the college determine that substantial and grievous economic injury will result from his or her absence.  If a key employee is notified of Canisius College’s intent to deny restoration of employment, the key employee will continue to be entitled to maintenance of health benefits until such time as the key employee gives notice that (s)he no longer wishes to return to work, FMLA leave entitlement is exhausted, or restoration is actually denied at the end of the leave period.  Premium costs paid on behalf of key employees in such circumstances are not recoverable.
+
+Factual Misrepresentations
+
+Factual misrepresentations made by employees in order to obtain FMLA leave shall result in disciplinary action, up to and including termination.  Additionally, disciplinary action may also be taken against employees who are engaged in employment activities unrelated to the college while on an approved FMLA leave.
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Family Care Days Policy
+
+Part-time Paid Days Policy
+
+Sick Leave (Staff) Policy</s>"
+"<s>[INST] FHB Substantive Changes Memo.txt [/INST] 10
+
+
+
+September 7, 2018 
+
+
+
+TO:	Faculty Senate

+
+FROM: 	Stevens Strategy
+
+RE: 	Substantive Changes to Dillard University Faculty Handbook 
+
+
+
+Stevens Strategy was engaged by Dillard University to work with the Faculty Senate and administration to update the University’s Faculty Handbook.  This memorandum summarizes the substantive changes to the Faculty Handbook that have been introduced as part of this collaborative process.  
+
+In developing the updated Faculty Handbook, several basic assumptions guided our drafting efforts.  First and foremost was the recognition that any suggested adjustments to current University faculty status policy must be consistent with relevant SACS-COC Accreditation Standards and/or relevant United States higher education best practices as followed by Dillard University peer institutions.  Second, the completed Faculty Handbook must be a well-organized, easy to use document, which clearly describes the rights and responsibilities of both faculty members and the University so that important faculty status policies and procedures are transparent and documented.  In doing so, current faculty will be better served, and the University will be able to continue to attract talented new faculty members, as well as easily document faculty status policy for SACS-COC visiting teams.
+
+All University policies reprinted in this draft of the Faculty Handbook were reprinted from University’s May 23, 2012 Faculty Handbook, as well as other relevant University documents provided to us during Phase I of the project.  Two versions of the Faculty Handbook have been provided: a track changes version and a clean version.  In the track changes version, University source documents have been footnoted accordingly.  Similarly, the track changes version documents all of the newly introduced and supplemented policies and procedures.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Summary of Substantive Changes to the Faculty Handbook
+
+Chapter One – The University
+
+Faculty Constitution
+
+The Faculty Constitution has been moved from beginning of the document to the Faculty Governance section.
+
+1.1.5 – Revisions 
+
+New text has been introduced indicating that policy amendment proposals submitted by the administration must be addressed by the Faculty General Assembly within a prescribed time-period (not less than 120 days of the referral) unless an alternative deadline is agreed upon by the parties.  The text is designed to address the rare situation where the administration submits a proposal to the Faculty and the Faculty refuses to provide a recommendation.  The text is intended to strike a balance between the Faculty’s right and responsibility to participate in shared governance and the administration and Board’s need to have policies addressed in a timely manner.  A prior client requested the development of this text when it was faced with a mandate from its accreditor to adopt a more comprehensive faculty evaluation policy and the institution’s faculty senate refused to act on the matter.  Such a practice is also consistent with AGB recommended policy.  The model text also covers how the University will address situations where the administration and Faculty cannot agree on a proposed amendment to the Faculty Handbook.
+
+Also, please note that there was a discussion regarding whether a simple majority or 2/3rds vote should be required to amend the Faculty Handbook.  In the end, a recommendation was not made by the Senate to modify the current 2/3rds requirement and no change was introduced.
+
+University Mission, History & Core Values (Former Section 1.2 of the May 2012 Faculty Handbook)
+
+During the facilitation meeting, the Senate recommended that this section be removed from the handbook since changes to this text do not require General Assembly approval.  In other words, the Senate agreed that the Faculty Handbook should only include “faculty status” policies, which are subject to the amendment process outlined in Section 1.1.5.
+
+Organization (Former Section 1.3.3.2 of the May 2012 Faculty Handbook)
+
+The descriptions of the IRB, Animal Care and Use, and Laboratory Waste and Safety committees have been removed since these are University standing committees as opposed to Faculty standing committees.  The Senate recommends that these descriptions be reprinted in another University policy document.
+
+1.3.3 - Faculty (Former Section 1.3.3 of the May 2012 Faculty Handbook)
+
+1.3.3.1 -Faculty Responsibilities
+
+Ideally, the Constitution should be the sole source document outlining the rights and responsibilities of the Faculty.  Otherwise, there is a risk of adopting conflicting statements in the Faculty Handbook and Constitution respectively that could create confusion, misunderstanding, and perhaps risk management issues.  During the facilitation meeting, the Senate agreed with this observation and, as such, Stevens Strategy has removed text from this section that repeats information already addressed in the Constitution.
+
+1.3.3.2 – Provisions
+
+The University’s current text implied that the administration can only override the actions of the Faculty if the Faculty takes an “action that the administration believes is beyond the central responsibility for academic affairs.” Hypothetically, there may be instances where the Faculty provides a recommendation within its area of responsibility that is not adopted by the administration or the Board.  While these instances should be rare and only for compelling reasons, one can envision such an eventuality may occur.  For example, the Faculty may recommend the adoption of a new academic program and the administration or Board may elect to override the recommendation based on financial reasons or because the program in its view is at odds with the University’s mission.  Given the above, one can possibly construe the text referenced above to usurp the Board’s full legal and organizational authority to govern the functioning of the University (and any delegated power to the administration).  New model text has been added to address those rare instances when the administration or Board may override the action of the Faculty.
+
+Faculty Governance (Former Section 1.4 of the May 2012 Faculty Handbook)
+
+During the facilitation meeting, the Senate and I discussed whether this section (and all of its subsections) should be removed and replaced with the Faculty Constitution, which is the governing document that sets forth the Faculty’s governance jurisdiction, authority, and responsibilities.  Having text addressing Faculty Governance in two separate and distinct areas subjects the University to the risk of adopting conflicting text.  Indeed, this is the case at present.  For example, compare the duties of the Faculty Senate described in this section of the May 2012 Faculty Handbook versus the description in the Faculty Constitution.  Based on our discussions, the Senate ultimately decided that this section and its subparts should be removed and replaced with references to the Faculty Constitution.  As such, the original section and its subparts have been stricken and replaced with the Faculty Constitution.  Of note, where applicable, some of the text from the original subsection of the May 2012 Faculty Handbook has been moved to the Constitution.
+
+Section 1.4.1 - The Faculty Constitution
+
+The Constitution has been moved to this section of the Handbook and edited with suggested best practices.  Below is a summary of some of the substantive suggested revisions to the Constitution.
+
+Article III, Section 1 – Membership
+
+The faculty classifications introduced and formally defined in Chapter 2, Section 2.1 of the Faculty Handbook have been integrated into this section of the Constitution.  The title “Full-time Faculty” includes Tenure-Track, Non-Tenure Track and Tenured faculty members.  
+
+In addition, text has been added to clarify the voting rights of select Administrative/Academic Management Faculty.
+
+Article III, Section 3 – Meetings
+
+Text has been added to this section addressing the following issues:
+
+Special Meetings may be called by the President, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, the Faculty Senate, or by petition signed by one-fourth of the members of the General Assembly and presented to the Secretary of the Faculty Senate;
+
+Meetings of the General Assembly are open to attendance by all members of the University community; however, the General Assembly may move into executive session by a majority vote of the General Assembly members present.
+
+If a quorum is present at the beginning of the meeting, a quorum shall be assumed to be present throughout the meeting, unless a point of order is made concerning the quorum.  In the absence of a quorum, those present may receive reports, may discuss matters without voting on them, and may set the date and time for an adjourned meeting, but shall transact no other business.
+
+Except as otherwise provided in the Constitution, a simple majority vote of those members present at a meeting where a quorum has been established shall be sufficient for any General Assembly action.
+
+
+
+Article III, Section 4. Jurisdiction, Authority, and Duties
+
+The following text from Section 1.3.4.1 of the May 2012 Faculty Handbook has been moved to this section of the Constitution:
+
+The Faculty, via the General Assembly, has primary responsibility for the content, quality, and assessment of the curriculum or the core (General Education requirements) and the educational programs (majors/disciplines) based upon:
+
+Current and relevant theories and practices in the field/discipline;
+
+Intellectual rigor appropriate to the level of the degree program; and
+
+Connectivity among the components of the curriculum (Illustration, mapping of the courses/instructional modules relative to learning outcomes).
+
+In addition, the Faculty establishes learning outcomes of the curriculum and assesses the extent to which these outcomes are met.
+
+Model text informed by Section 5 of the Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities, which was jointly formulated by the American Association of University Professors, the American Council on Education (ACE), and the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges (AGB), has also been added to the section.  The first paragraph of Section 5 of the statement states: “The faculty has primary responsibility for such fundamental areas as curriculum, subject matter and methods of instruction, research, faculty status, and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process. On these matters the power of review or final decision lodged in the governing board or delegated by it to the president should be exercised adversely only in exceptional circumstances, and for reasons communicated to the faculty. It is desirable that the faculty should, following such communication, have opportunity for further consideration and further transmittal of its views to the president or board. Budgets, personnel limitations, the time element, and the policies of other groups, bodies, and agencies having jurisdiction over the institution may set limits to realization of faculty advice.”
+
+In addition to minor miscellaneous edits, the section has been further augmented with text addressing the procedural process that occurs once the General Assembly approves a formal recommendation to the administration.
+
+Section 5: Faculty Veto
+
+During our discussions, the Senate confirmed that the Faculty Senate is not empowered to act unilaterally on behalf of the Faculty and therefore there technically are no actions that can be vetoed.  As such, it was determined that this section was not applicable to the University and should be removed since the official actions of the Faculty require an affirmative vote of the General Assembly.  
+
+Article IV – Faculty Senate, Section 1. Senate Jurisdiction, Authority, and Duties 
+
+This is a new heading section that outlines the jurisdiction, authority, and duties of the Senate.  Per the Senate’s request, text from Section 1.4.2.2.1 of the May 2012 Faculty Handbook has been integrated into the section.
+
+Article IV, Section 2. Membership 
+
+This section was edited to more accurately reflect the Senate’s current membership (i.e., the Faculty Senate is comprised of elected members from the Full-time Faculty who possess at least one year of service at Dillard University, as well as the VPAA).  Per the Senate’s request, the following text was stricken from the section: Only faculty members with 50% of instructional responsibility are eligible for Faculty Senate membership
+
+
+
+
+
+Article IV, Section 2, Paragraph 7. Recall
+
+Per the May 15th Senate Minutes, the Senate prefers that a majority of vote of the General Assembly at a meeting in which a quorum is present (as opposed to the current 2/3rds vote threshold) for recalls.  Based on this direction, the section has been edited to reflect that a majority vote of the General Assembly is required to recall a Senator.  
+
+Article IV, Section 4. Paragraph 8. Minutes
+
+The procedure for filing of Senate meeting minutes was updated.  The new text reflects that Senate minutes are filed in the VPAA’s office.
+
+Article V – University Standing Committees
+
+This Article and its subsections have been updated to list and describe the current Faculty Senate standing committees.
+
+Article V, Section 3. Duties and Responsibilities
+
+This is a new section, reprinted from reprinted from Section 1.4.2.2.1 of the May 2012 Faculty Handbook.  
+
+
+
+Chapter Two – The Faculty
+
+To improve the organizational structure of the handbook, this Chapter, which defines the Faculty, has been reorganized.  Specifically, Section 2.4 (Terms of Service, Duties and Responsibilities), Section 2.5 (Evaluation of Faculty Performance); Section 2.6 (Tenure and Promotion Policies, Procedures and Criteria); and 2.8* (Academic Plan) have been moved to “Chapter Three: Faculty Policies of the University” of the document.  
+
+*Should be 2.7.
+
+2.1 – Faculty Appointments
+
+This is a new section which formally defines four types of faculty appointments that are/will be recognized at Dillard University: 
+
+Full-time Faculty: includes Tenured, Tenure-Track, and Non-Tenure Track Faculty appointments.  Please see Section 2.1.1 for more detailed information.
+
+Administrative and Academic Management Faculty: a new category that includes much of the information set forth in Section 2.4.1 of the May 2012 Faculty Handbook.  Please see Section 2.1.2 for more detailed information.
+
+Auxiliary Faculty:
+
+Honorific Faculty: a new category that includes Emeritus Faculty and Endowed Chairs.  Please see Section 2.1.4 for additional information
+
+2.1.1 – Full-time Faculty Appointments
+
+This new section defines the University’s Full-time Faculty, which are those members of the faculty that are members of the General Assembly.  
+
+2.1.1.1 – Tenured Faculty Appointments
+
+A formal tenured faculty definition has been developed.
+
+2.1.2 – Auxiliary Faculty Appointments
+
+A formal definition for Auxiliary Faculty and its subcategories has been developed.
+
+2.1.2.1 – Adjunct Faculty
+
+Text indicating that adjunct faculty are at-will employees has been added.  In addition, text addressing Affordable Care Act issues has been developed.
+
+2.1.2.3 – Clinical and Laboratory Faculty
+
+This section has been augmented to also reference laboratory faculty.
+
+2.1.2.5 – Faculty Researcher
+
+The title “Faculty Researcher” is used to describe a stand-alone, non-tenure-track appointment whereby an individual is appointed to develop the research programs of their department and/or their school or college. These positions are typically dependent upon external funding and therefore may be terminated when external funding ceases.  Dillard’s current definition, however, described a current full-time faculty member who receives a reduced teaching load.  After further discussion with Dr. Page and the Senate, it was agreed that a new definition should be adopted that is more consistent with the standard industry definition.  Accordingly, a new definition for this sub-classification of auxiliary faculty was developed.
+
+2.1.3.1 - Emeritus Faculty
+
+I have stricken the Emeritus policy from the May 2012 Faculty Handbook and replaced it with the University’s new Emeritus policy, which was provided by Dr. Page on April 30th.
+
+2.1.4.1 – Instructional Assistant
+
+Instructional Assistants have been reclassified as instructional staff (as opposed to Auxiliary Faculty).  
+
+2.2.3 - Administrative and Academic Management Faculty Recruitment Procedures
+
+The recruitment/appointment text pertaining to the various administrative and academic management faculty have been moved to this section of the handbook since recruitment matters for all faculty members are addressed in this section of the document. 
+
+2.2.4 - Auxiliary Faculty Recruitment Procedures
+
+This new text addresses how the University recruits Auxiliary Faculty members.  Text addressing staff members teaching classes has also been added to this section.
+
+2.3.1 – Faculty Rank
+
+Text addressing SACS-COC credentialing requirements, including exceptional qualification exceptions, has been added to each rank definition.
+
+2.3.1.2 – Assistant Professor
+
+The University’s definition has been edited to reflect that Non-Tenure Track faculty may seek appointment or promotion to the rank of Assistant Professor or higher if eligibility criteria are met.
+
+2.3.1.3 – Associate Professor
+
+The University’s definition has been edited to reflect that Non-Tenure Track faculty may seek appointment or promotion to the rank of Assistant Professor if eligibility criteria are met. 
+
+Text was also added to reflect that a one-year residency requirement at Dillard must be met prior to seeking promotion to this rank.
+
+Per the Senate’s request, the first author publication requirement has been omitted as per the Senate’s direction.
+
+Text referencing service to the University and profession has been added as the University’s May 2012 Faculty Handbook’s definition was silent with respect to this common requirement to achieve this rank.
+
+2.3.1.4 – Professor
+
+The University’s definition has been edited to reflect that Non-Tenure Track faculty may seek appointment or promotion to the rank of Professor if eligibility criteria are met. 
+
+Text was also added to reflect that a five-year residency requirement at Dillard must be met prior to seeking promotion to this rank.
+
+Per the Senate’s request, the first author publication requirement has been omitted as per the Senate’s direction.
+
+2.3.2 – Faculty Credentials
+
+This is a new policy that specifically addresses the SACS-COC Guidelines for Faculty Credentials, which require institutions to demonstrate that all instructors are appropriately prepared and qualified to teach each course they are assigned.  The policy includes procedures to verify all DU instructors are properly credentialed.  For new hires, the verification process is undertaken as part of the recruitment and selection process.  For current instructors assigned to teach new courses they have not yet been credentialed for, the verification takes place prior to the assignment of the new class.  If the academic credentials are not met, then the individual must be alternatively credentialed by the University.
+
+2.4.1 – Faculty Appointment Letters
+
+The title of this section has been changed from “Contractual Appointments” to “Faculty Appointment Letters” since the University no longer issues “contracts”; rather, it issues appointment letters.
+
+Text has also been added placing foreign national appointees on notice that their appointments are contingent upon maintaining immigration status.
+
+2.4.1.2 - Terminal Annual Appointment Letters
+
+The terminal appointment letter definition codifies the University’s current practice of issuing a terminal year contract to a full-time non-tenured faculty member who, after serving two or more years of academic service in the University, will not be reappointed.  
+
+2.4.1.3 - Term Appointment Letters
+
+The term appointment letter definition codifies the University’s current practice of issuing term appointment letters to Auxiliary faculty, who have no expectation of renewal and whose appointments terminate automatically at the expiration of the appointment period.
+
+2.4.2 – Primary Faculty Appointment 
+
+This new policy establishes the academic unit through which a faculty member has a primary academic affiliation.  This is important in times of reduction in force when a faculty member might seek to be reassigned to another department or school but does not possess the requisite qualifications to teach in the discipline.  
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Chapter Three: Faculty Policies of the University
+
+3.1.2 – Statement on Professional Ethics
+
+The title of this section has been changed from “Employee Code of Conduct” to “Statement on Professional Ethics” to more accurately describe the content of the policy statement.  Of note, confusion may arise given the fact that the University has adopted a general employee policy titled “Prohibited Conduct” in the new Employee Handbook. 
+
+3.1.3 – Statement on Plagiarism
+
+The AAUP Plagiarism Statement has been added.
+
+3.1.4 – Judgment, Decorum, and Collegiality
+
+This section has been limited to a simple statement addressing collegiality and professionalism.  Prior references to dismissal/discipline have been stricken since these matters are addressed in Section 3.6.4 of the handbook.
+
+3.1.5 - Adherence to University Policies
+
+While it is not uncommon higher education practice for select employment policies to be summarized in a Faculty Handbook, institutions that choose to do so run the risk of publishing contradictory policies by addressing a topic in more than one policy publication.  The better practice is to adopt a general policy statement indicating that faculty are responsible for adhering to University’s policies.  Section 3.1.5 is an example of such a policy statement.  In adopting such a policy statement and removing general employment policies and/or references thereto, the institution lessens the risk of publishing contradictory policy statements.  In addition, the policies listed in the May 2012 Faculty Handbook are only a small portion of the employee and community policies applicable to the faculty.  This begs the question as to whether all the various employee/community policies should be reprinted here and, if they are not, will this give rise to an argument that if the policies do not appear in the Faculty Handbook, they are not applicable to the faculty.  Another reason not to publish employee/community policies of general applicability in the Faculty Handbook centers upon whether these policies must be approved via the Faculty Handbook revision process. Confusion often arises over this issue.  
+
+Based on the above, and after discussion with the Senate, it was decided to strike all the general employment and/or community policies published in the May 2012 Faculty Handbook since these are now published in the newly developed Employee Handbook and other applicable University policy documents.  
+
+3.1.6 – Conflicts of Interest
+
+This a new policy that lists common examples of conflicts of interest specific to faculty.
+
+3.1.8 - Faculty Consulting and Other External Activities
+
+The University’s original text has been moved from the Academic Rights and Privileges section to this section of the Faculty Handbook.  
+
+Please note that suggested introductory text has been added to provide guidance to the reader.  Also, per the Senate’s request, the 8-hour limitation text has been stricken. 
+
+3.2.2.1 – Teaching Load
+
+Text addressing teaching loads for instructors granted joint teaching assignments has been developed.
+
+3.2.2.2 - Determination of Teaching Equivalencies
+
+Procedures codifying how the University assigns credit hours have been developed.
+
+
+
+3.2.2.5 – Office Hours
+
+Text addressing office hours for instructors assigned to teach online courses has been developed.
+
+3.2.4.1 – Academic Advising
+
+Per the Senate’s request, academic advising is now considered an element of Service as opposed to Teaching.  As such, the text has been moved to this section of the Handbook.
+
+3.3.1 – Evaluation Criteria
+
+3.3.1.1 – Teaching
+
+The University’s original text has been supplemented with specific examples of observable qualities that may be cited as evidence of teaching effectiveness.
+
+3.3.1.2 – Scholarship
+
+New text addressing Scholarship based on Boyer’s research has been developed.
+
+3.3.1.3 – University and Public Service
+
+The University’s original text has been supplemented with specific examples of observable qualities that may be cited as evidence of effective service.
+
+3.3.2 – Evaluation Procedures and Instruments
+
+The title of this section has been modified as per the Senate’s request.
+
+3.3.2.1 – Student Assessment of Instruction
+
+This section has been supplemented with procedural text outlining how the forms are distributed and tabulated.  In addition, text has been added outlining the formative and summative nature of student assessments and the need for Chairs to try to distinguish “popularity” from “quality” of the instruction when referencing student evaluation scores during the teaching performance evaluation process.
+
+3.3.2.2 - Student Assessment of Academic Advisor 
+
+Text addressing the annual student evaluation of academic advising has been added.
+
+3.3.2.3 - Annual Evaluations by School Chairs and Academic College Deans
+
+This section has been updated in collaboration with the Senate and Dr. Page in an effort to provide greater procedural clarity regarding the University’s annual evaluation process.  Highlights include references to the role the academic plan and setting of annual goals play in the annual evaluation.  Also, the Program Level Coordinator’s role has been addressed.  Text addressing a classroom observation by the Chair, as well as a faculty member’s right to file a written response to the Chair and Dean’s respective evaluations has also been added.  
+
+3.3.2.5 – Faculty Peer Review
+
+This section has been updated in collaboration with the Senate in an effort to provide greater procedural clarity regarding the faculty peer review process.  New text has been added addressing the role of the peer evaluator and how the class/lab to be observed is chosen.  Additionally, guidelines for conducting the instructional observation have been outlined.
+
+3.3.2.6 – Academic Plan
+
+This section has been augmented with procedures to guide the drafting and approval of Academic Plans, as well as guidelines designed to assist a faculty member in establishing the annual goals documented on the Academic Plan.
+
+3.3.3 – Annual Evaluation of Auxiliary Faculty
+
+This is a new section that addresses how auxiliary faculty are evaluated on an annual basis.  
+
+3.4 – Tenure and Promotion
+
+3.4.1 – Tenure at Dillard University
+
+The University’s policy has been supplemented with text stating affirmatively that de facto tenure is not recognized at Dillard; rather, tenure is only awarded upon the affirmative action of the Board of Trustees.  
+
+In addition, introductory text outlining the mutual commitment between the University and faculty member when tenure is awarded has been added.
+
+3.4.3 – Probationary Period
+
+The University’s policy has been edited to reflect that all Tenure-Track faculty must apply for tenure during the last year of their probationary period.  The University’s current text was rigid, stating that the application for tenure must be made “during the first semester of the sixth year of continuous employment at the University.”  This is not always the case, as the University may appoint a faculty member to a tenure-track appointment and award years of prior of service at another institution.  The new text is intended to address such a situation. 
+
+In addition, text has been added addressing foreign nationals (those holding non-immigrant status) appointed to a Tenure-Track contract.  Per the new text, such a faculty member may not be awarded tenure unless they have acquired permanent resident status.  Alternatively, an extension of the probationary period may be sought if a tenure decision is required before permanent resident status is obtained.
+
+3.4.3.1 – Reducing the Probationary Period
+
+Paragraph 3 of this policy has been edited.  The University’s current text states that a faculty member initially appointed to Dillard University at the level of Associate Professor without tenure must apply for tenure or tenure and promotion at the end of the fourth year and certainly at the beginning of the sixth year in academia at the University if prior service credit is awarded.  This has been changed to state that such a faculty member must apply for tenure during the last year of the faculty member’s probationary period.  This allows the University flexibility to set a probationary period for an incoming experiences faculty member on a case-by-case basis.
+
+3.4.3.2 - Extending the Probationary Period
+
+The University’s policy has been supplemented with text outlining those circumstances that traditionally warrant the extension of the probationary period.  In addition, text has been added stating that the extension of the probationary period shall not lead to claims of de facto tenure.  We also added text indicating that a faculty member who has been granted an extension may request that the extension be removed if circumstances leading to the extension have changed.  Finally, text addressing the impact of a Military Leave on the probationary period has been included.  
+
+3.4.4 - Promotion and Tenure Procedures/Guidelines
+
+	At the request of the Senate, text was added indicating that a faculty member will be informed in writing of each recommendation made during the promotion or tenure evaluation process.  Moreover, with the exception of Tenure-Track Faculty concurrently seeking promotion to the Associate Professor rank and tenure, a faculty member may withdraw a promotion application at any point during the promotion in rank process.  Unless the application is withdrawn or final action on the application is discontinued for any reason by agreement between the candidate and the VPAA, the faculty member’s dossier/portfolio will be passed on, in turn, to each level of review.  Additionally, text was added indicating that a Tenure-Track Faculty member who withdraws the tenure application will receive a termination letter of his/her service at the University.
+
+3.4.4.3 - Responsibility of the Academic College Dean
+
+The Senate requested that a responsibility statement for the dean be added.  
+
+3.4.5 – Tenure and Promotion Criteria
+
+3.4.5.1 – Tenure Criteria
+
+This is a new section developed so that tenure criteria is separate and distinct from the promotion in rank criteria.
+
+3.4.5.1.2 - Scholarship
+
+Per the Senate’s request, the first author publication requirement has been omitted as per the Senate’s direction.
+
+3.4.5.2 – Promotion in Rank Criteria
+
+This is a new section developed so that the promotion in rank criteria is separate and distinct from tenure criteria.  In essence, the text refers the reader to the rank definitions in Section 2.3.1 of this document.
+
+3.4.6 - Appeal of Unfavorable Tenure or Promotion Decisions
+
+Text further explaining the AAUP’s definition of “inadequate consideration”, which is the standard grounds for appeals in higher education (see below), has been added as per the Senate’s request.
+
+As noted above, the common appeals standard used by schools to address promotion/tenure denial is whether the original decision was based on “adequate consideration.”  This standard is based on AAUP recommended procedure addressing appeals pertaining to the non-renewal of a probationary appointment and tenure denial as reflected in the AAUP's Recommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure.  The relevant AAUP text reads:
+
+""Insofar as the faculty member alleges that the decision against renewal was based on inadequate consideration, the committee that reviews the faculty member’s allegation will determine whether the decision was the result of adequate consideration in terms of the relevant standards of the institution. The review committee will not substitute its judgment on the merits for that of the body or individual that made the decision. If the review committee believes that adequate consideration was not given to the faculty member’s qualifications, it will recommend reconsideration by the body or individual that made the decision, indicating the respects in which it believes the consideration may have been inadequate. It will provide copies of its findings to the faculty member, the body or individual that made the decision, and the president or other appropriate administrative officer.""
+
+AAUP guidance in the Statement on Procedural Standards in the Renewal or Nonrenewal of Faculty Appointments (Policy Documents and Reports, 94-98), further addresses the issue of ""adequate consideration"" as follows:
+
+It is easier to state what the standard “adequate consideration” does not mean than to specify in detail what it does. It does not mean that the review committee should substitute its own judgment for that of members of the department on the merits of whether the candidate should be reappointed or given tenure. The conscientious judgment of the candidate’s departmental colleagues must prevail if the invaluable tradition of departmental autonomy in professional judgments is to prevail. The term “adequate consideration” refers essentially to procedural rather than to substantive issues: Was the decision conscientiously arrived at? Was all available evidence bearing on the relevant performance of the candidate sought out and considered? Was there adequate deliberation by the department over the import of the evidence in the light of the relevant standards? Were irrelevant and improper standards excluded from consideration? Was the decision a bona fide exercise of professional academic judgment? These are the kinds of questions suggested by the standard “adequate consideration.”  If, in applying this standard, the review committee concludes that adequate consideration was not given, its appropriate response should be to recommend to the department that it assess the merits once again, this time remedying the inadequacies of its prior consideration.
+
+In addition to the above, a new paragraph was added that further elaborates on the VPAA’s role in the appeals process.
+
+3.4.7 – Post-Tenure Review
+
+The University’s policy has been supplemented with text and table clarifying when the review takes place as there has been some confusion in the past regarding this issue.
+
+3.4.7.1 - Post-Tenure Review Procedures/Guidelines
+
+New procedures have been developed for this evaluation.  
+
+3.5 - Faculty Personnel Files
+
+This is a new section that codifies how the University addresses the maintenance of Faculty Personnel Files.
+
+3.6 – Faculty Development
+
+3.6.2 – Sabbatical Leave
+
+I have reprinted the University’s Sabbatical Leave to the Faculty Development heading as opposed to the Leave section of the handbook.  Also, please note that the University’s current policy has been supplemented with procedural text addressing the submission and review of sabbatical applications.  Criteria for the review of such applications has also been added, as well as a reporting requirement upon return from the leave.
+
+3.7 - Faculty Compensation, Benefits, and Leaves
+
+The University has adopted a general HR Sick, FMLA, and Military leave policies that are applicable to faculty and staff alike.  Accordingly, the FMLA and Military Leave policies have been removed and replaced with a cross-reference to the new Employee HR document.  While it is admittedly not uncommon higher education practice for select employee leave policies to be summarized and/or reprinted in the Faculty Handbook, institutions that choose to do so run the risk of publishing contradictory policies by addressing a topic in more than one policy publication.  In our view, the better practice is to publish leave policies of general applicability to all employees in the Employee Handbook (which applies to both staff and faculty as I read the document) and limit this section to those leaves specific and unique to faculty.
+
+3.7.3.2 - Salary Continuance Plan for Medical Leave
+
+Standard FMLA leave is an unpaid leave; however, employees must use paid accrued benefits (i.e., sick and short-term disability) concurrently with an FMLA Leave, thereby allowing for some of an FMLA leave to be paid.  Pursuant to the Sick Leave Policy in the May 2017 Employee Handbook, full-time faculty accrue sick leave and may roll over up to 30-days of accrued sick leave per year.  Given the sick leave and short-term disability policies at Dillard are now applicable to regular full-time faculty, the Salary Continuance Plan is no longer applicable per the Dillard HR department.  As such, the policy has been stricken from the Handbook.
+
+3.8 - Faculty Separation from Service
+
+3.8.1 – Resignation
+
+Per the Senate’s request, the notification date has been changed from December 15th to April 15th.
+
+
+
+3.8.3 – Non-Reappointment
+
+The policy has been updated to reflect that non-tenure track full-time faculty that receive annual appointment letters are entitled to notice of non-reappointment in accordance with the dates listed in the policy.  Conversely, text has been added to reflect that such notice provisions do not apply to auxiliary and other faculty issued term appointment letters.
+
+3.8.3.1 - Standards for Reappointment
+
+This is a new section that set forth the standards considered by the University when making decisions to renew a full-time non-tenured faculty member’s annual appointment letter.
+
+3.8.4 – Dismissal for Adequate Cause
+
+3.8.4.1 - Full-time Faculty Procedures
+
+Professors Barbara Lee and William Kaplin suggest that ""[i]nstitutions should not comfortably settle for the bald adequate-cause standard.  Good policy and (especially for public institutions) good law should demand more."" Accordingly, such definitions ""should be sufficiently clear to guide the decision-makers who will apply them and to forewarn the faculty members who will be subject to them."" Kaplin & Lee, The Law of Higher Education 277-78 (3rd ed. Jossey-Bass).  As such, the University’s Professional Misconduct Policy text from the current Faculty Handbook has been supplemented with additional examples of the types of conduct that can lead to dismissal for cause.  
+
+In addition, new discipline and dismissal for cause procedures have been introduced and vetted by the Senate and administration.
+
+3.8.4.2 - Auxiliary Faculty Procedures
+
+Auxiliary faculty dismissal procedures have been added as per the request of Dr. Page.  The May 2012 Faculty Handbook was silent with regard to this issue.
+
+3.8.5 – Reduction in Force
+
+This is a new policy which was developed in collaboration with Dr. Wallace and subsequently vetted by the Senate.  A reduction in force results in the termination of a tenured faculty member or a full-time tenure-track faculty member prior to the expiration of an appointment term may occur as a result of financial exigency or the reduction or discontinuance of an academic program or School of instruction.  Detailed procedures, including the involvement of the Senate in reaching such decisions, guiding the process have been introduced,
+
+3.9 – Faculty Grievances
+
+A Faculty Grievance Policy has been developed since the current May 2012 Faculty Handbook was silent on this issue.
+
+
+
+
+
+ 
+
+
+
+
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Financial Exigency - Current and Proposed-2.txt [/INST] 1
+
+
+
+
+
+INTERNAL NOTES
+
+
+
+Supporting document links
+
+AAUP faculty role in budget
+
+Financial Ex. and Academic Governance
+
+Role of faculty in Financial Exigency
+
+Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure, Part 4
+
+Sample Handbook and Policies
+
+EAB Myths about Financial Exigency
+
+The proposal below does not provide a pathway for financial hardship declaration - a pathway to address financial difficulties before they become emergencies/exigency may be desired, but such a declaration should not be used as a functional, if undeclared, exigency. See, for instance, Section 3, subsection E of the AAUP Special Report on Covid-19 and Shared Governance at this link. 
+
+
+
+Draft Proposal of Financial Exigency and Program Closure Language (based on current Handbook language, tried to keep as much previous language as possible)
+
+Definition
+
+
+
+It is presently University policy and practice to involve the faculty and Board of Regents in planning and budgeting, and it is therefore likely that a financial problem would be clear to all as it developed. The involvement of the faculty in the budget and planning process, the faculty’s representation on the Budget Committee, and the regular reporting activity of the President and the CFO enable some of the faculty to be aware of the general financial condition of the University. The fact that the faculty chair is a member of the Board of Regents is another instance of faculty participation in University financial review. Nonetheless, it is possible that unforeseen and unpredictable developments could create a financial exigency not anticipated or expected by many of the faculty. Therefore, the following statement of policy attempts to prepare in advance the procedures for responding to financial problems that require a reduction in faculty.
+
+
+
+“Financial exigency” is understood to be an urgent need to reorder financial obligations in order to restore or preserve financial ability. “Financial ability” means that ability to provide from current income, both cash and accrued, the funds necessary to meet current expenses, including debt payments and sound reserves, without invading or depleting capital. The exigency must be bona fide, must affect the University as a whole, and may be declared only when short-term and limited solutions are not sufficient, and only after alternatives consonant with sound management have been explored or attempted.         
+
+Procedure for Declaring Financial Exigency
+
+
+
+
+
+The President will propose a declaration of financial exigency to the Budget Committee. The President and the CFO will present to this committee the information that indicates that financial exigency may need to be declared.
+
+
+
+After examining this information carefully, the Budget Committee and the Faculty Senate will present a written response and a recommendation to the President as to whether a condition of financial exigency should be declared. The Budget Committee will be given free access to all financial records of the University.
+
+
+
+If, after receiving the recommendations of the Budget Committee, the President determines that a condition of financial exigency should be declared, the faculty must be notified. The President must present the proposal to a meeting of the Faculty Assembly, including evidence that a bona fide financial exigency exists, that the decision has been made in good faith, and that alternative solutions have been adequately explored.
+
+The Board of Regents is solely authorized to declare a state of bona fide financial exigency. Such declaration shall be made only after a presentation of relevant financial data by the President to the Faculty Senate and the University Budget Committee.
+
+
+
+In those presentations, the President shall provide full particulars of the financial condition of the University,including at minimum, five years of audited financial statements, current and following-year budgets, and detailed cash-flow estimates for future years.  The presentation should also include the President’s preliminary recommendations on how the financial crisis can be alleviated. The recommendation of the University Budget Committee and the Faculty Senate on the matter shall be submitted in writing within thirty (30) days of meaningful consultation and shall accompany the President's recommendation to the Board of Regents
+
+
+
+The Executive Committee of the Board of Regents will then review the reports from the Budget Committee and Faculty Senate as well as the President’s recommendation. 
+
+
+
+After completing all of the above steps, the President, with the concurrence of the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents, may present the proposal to the Board of Regents and call upon the board to declare a financial exigency to exist.
+
+
+
+If the Board of Regents concurs with the proposal, the board declares financial exigency.
+
+Development of Steps to End Financial Exigency
+
+
+
+If financial exigency is declared, the Budget Committee will be responsible for recommending a package of budgetary reductions sufficient to end the condition as quickly as possible. This committee will seek information and advice from departments, committees, and officers of the University to enable it to make sound judgments about the impact of alternatives on the functions and programs of the University.
+
+
+
+After receiving the report of the Budget Committee, the President will recommend to the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents a package of budgetary adjustments that will end the condition of financial exigency as quickly as possible. The board will then adopt a financial exigency plan that will thereafter remain in effect until it is revised by the board or the period of financial exigency is declared ended by the board.
+
+
+
+Upon declaration of a financial exigency, the President, in collaboration with the Provost and the Faculty Senate, shall within thirty (30) days formulate a plan for the reduction in programs and personnel required to alleviate the financial crisis. In formulating such a plan, the retention of a viable academic program shall be the first consideration. The plan shall identify academic and administrative units to be reduced or eliminated. Where reduction of an academic unit is planned, the extent of the required reduction shall be specified, but the manner in which such reduction is to be achieved shall be determined in collaboration between the Provost, the Dean responsible for that unit and the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure Committee. In that process, reduction shall first take place from among part-time faculty, then from among untenured full-time faculty, and then, if necessary, from among the tenured faculty, giving due consideration to seniority and to the viability of the academic program.
+
+
+
+The Faculty Senate should determine whether all feasible alternatives to termination of appointments have been pursued, including expenditure of one-time money or reserves as bridge funding, furloughs, pay cuts, deferred compensation plans, early-retirement packages, deferral of nonessential capital expenditures, and cuts to noneducational programs and services, including expenses for administration.
+
+In order to make informed proposals about the financial impact of program closures or reductions in force, the faculty needs access to detailed program, department, and administrative-unit budgets.
+
+
+
+Steps Prior to Termination
+
+
+
+Reassignment: 
+
+
+
+Before the Administration issues notice to a tenured faculty member of its intention to terminate an appointment because of financial exigency, it will make every reasonable effort to place the faculty member in another suitable and available position. If a full teaching load in the faculty member's discipline is regularly carried by part-time or by untenured full-time faculty in another department or college of the University, the faculty member shall be entitled to reassignment to that department or college, unless it is determined, through the normal governance processes, that such reassignment would have a serious adverse impact on the academic program in the receiving unit. If a probationary faculty member is displaced as a result of such reassignment, the notice provisions of this Section shall apply to that faculty member
+
+
+
+Retraining: 
+
+If consultation with the receiving unit (including, where appropriate, the department chair and Dean) can establish that a limited period of additional training would lead to acceptance of the faculty member in a position outside their department or discipline, the University shall, upon request by the faculty member, provide a reasonable amount of financial and/or other support for such training. If retraining is approved under this Section, it shall normally not exceed one (1) calendar year.
+
+Procedure for Termination
+
+Notice
+
+All faculty and all administrators shall be notified immediately of the possibility of termination for reasons of financial exigency.
+
+
+
+Notification of termination of a faculty member’s contract shall be three months prior to contract expiration for first-year faculty and six months prior to contract termination for second-year faculty. Faculty who have served more than two years, or faculty with tenure, must be given one full year of notice or in the absence of appropriate notice, one year’s salary.
+
+
+
+Notification of termination on the grounds of financial exigency shall specify the reasons for and evidence supporting such termination, the effective date of termination, the faculty member's right to replacement, reinstatement or retraining (if applicable), the right to an appeal hearing, and the process for scheduling such a hearing.
+
+Order of Termination
+
+Decisions about which individual appointments are to be terminated because of financial exigency will be guided by the following considerations: In all cases of necessary faculty reductions, non-tenured faculty members in a department will be released before tenured faculty members except in circumstances where a serious distortion in the academic program would result. If tenured faculty must be released, the following factors will be considered in determining which faculty members are to be released: education and professional credentials, the length of the faculty member’s service to the University, the quality of the faculty member’s service to the University, the essential academic needs of the University of each potentially affected department, and the abilities of the individual faculty member in relation to the needs of the University and the potentially affected departments.
+
+Determination of Faculty Reductions
+
+The Vice President for Academic Affairs will recommend individual terminations to the ART Committee.
+
+The Appointment, Rank, and Tenure Committee, in consultation with the Dean responsible for the impacted academic unit, will make recommendations to the Provost and President regarding faculty reductions in force. 
+
+
+
+The faculty member must be notified of the proposal to be presented to the ART Committee that affect them and have the right to examine the information presented to the considered by the ART Committee.
+
+
+
+The ART Committee will make a recommendation regarding termination to the President
+
+
+The faculty member whose services are being terminated or reassigned must be notified of their proposed reassignment, retraining, or termination, and have the right to examine the information considered by the ART Committee.
+
+The ART Committee will make a recommendation regarding reassignment, retraining, or termination to the President.
+
+The President makes the final decision regarding terminations and notifies faculty members of terminations in writing.
+
+Appeals of Reassignment or Termination
+
+Following notice of termination because of financial exigency, the faculty member has the right to a full hearing before the Grievance Committee. The request must be presented in writing to the Grievance Committee within 14 calendar days of receipt of the notification. The Grievance Committee’s decision may be appealed to the President. The President’s decision may be appealed to the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents. (See “Complaint and Grievance Procedures” section.)
+
+
+
+
+
+A faculty member may appeal a proposed reassignment or termination resulting from financial exigency to the Faculty Committee. Such an appeal must be filed with the Office of the University Provost no later than thirty (30) days from the receipt of notice of reassignment or termination. The Faculty Committee shall deal with the matter within thirty (30) days, but it shall preserve the essentials of an on-the-record adjudicative hearing, giving both the faculty member and the Administration a full opportunity to present their respective cases. The issues in such a hearing may include: 
+
+Extent of Exigency. The existence and extent of the condition of financial exigency. The burden will rest on the Administration to prove the existence and extent of the condition. The findings of the University Review Committee in a previous proceeding involving the same issue may be introduced. 
+
+Validity of Judgments. The validity of educational judgments and the criteria for identification for termination. 
+
+Application of Criteria. Whether the criteria are being properly applied. 
+
+Continuation of Benefits
+
+For one year after termination, or until the terminated party becomes eligible for health insurance with a new employer, whichever comes first, the University shall provide health and major medical insurance for the terminated party and their family on the same basis as that fringe benefit was available to the faculty member prior to termination.  If the terminated party qualifies for early retirement and enters that program, then they shall be entitled to the health and other benefits of early retirement as set forth in the University retirement program in effect at that time.
+
+Re-employment
+
+When the service of a tenured faculty member is to be terminated for financial exigency, the President will attempt to place that faculty member in an existing vacant position for which the faculty member is qualified. In instances where, in the opinion of the President, placement within the institution is not a viable alternative, the institution will assist the faculty member in finding employment outside the University.
+
+
+
+When a tenured faculty member is terminated for financial exigency, the position will not be filled by a new appointee with the same areas of specialization as the terminated faculty member within a period of three years unless the terminated faculty member has been offered, in writing, reappointment to the position at the previous rank and salary held, with the addition of an appropriate increase that would constitute the raise that would have been awarded during the period that the faculty member was not employed by the University.
+
+New Appointments
+
+New appointments to vacated or new faculty positions will not be made during the period of financial exigency except on the basis of overwhelming need and after review and recommendation by the ART Committee.
+
+
+
+Termination of Appointment on Grounds of Formal Discontinuance of an Academic Program
+
+Conditions
+
+California Lutheran University may find itself in a situation in which, for bona fide reasons of good management, it may need to reorder academic program priorities and to eliminate faculty positions, an entire program, or an academic department. The conditions for such action normally entail decline in student interest and enrollment, academic program changes in response to student demand and the strategic plan, or reallocation of academic resources in order to maintain and improve financial stability.  The decision to discontinue an academic program or department of instruction shall be based on educational considerations, which shall not include cyclical or temporary variations in enrollment. Such a decision shall reflect long-range judgments that the educational mission of the University as a whole will be enhanced by the discontinuance. The committees and administrators considering formal discontinuance of a program or department, should take into account the cost of relocation, retraining, or termination of faculty in the program or department. 
+
+
+
+Termination of faculty members on term or probationary contracts because of reduction in student interest or changes in the University’s educational program should normally be made at the expiration of the contract, with appropriate notice. (See Separation From the University Section)
+
+
+
+In order to terminate a faculty member with a continuous (tenure) contract or before the expiration of a term or probationary contract, there must be a bona fide reduction of student interest rather than a cyclical or temporary variation of student interest in the courses, and/or a formal restructuring of the academic program of the University, including discontinuance of a program or field of study.
+
+Procedure
+
+Determining Faculty Reductions
+
+The decision to discontinue a program and to terminate a contract before its expiration because of reduction in student interest or academic program restructuring rests with the President upon a recommendation from the Vice President for Academic Affairs. In considering formal discontinuance of an academic program or department of instruction, the Administration shall first consult with the faculty of the affected program or department. The faculty’s recommendation and other evidence bearing on the issue shall be reviewed by the Faculty Senate. The Faculty Senate shall report to its faculty constituency before making a final recommendation on the matter to the appropriate administrator. The Senate’s recommendation shall be given great weight by the Administration. In the event the Administration disagrees with that recommendation, the University Provost shall meet with the Senate to discuss the reasons for such disagreement, before making a final decision on the matter. The University Provost shall communicate their final decision and the reasons therefor in writing to the appropriate faculty constituency.
+
+
+
+Before notice of termination is given to a faculty member, the Vice President for Academic Affairs must make a formal presentation to the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee and/or the Graduate Curriculum Committee, as appropriate, identifying the specific factors and providing supporting evidence from program review, enrollment, data or documented market factors. The designated curriculum committee(s) should evaluate the evidence, consider the long-term effects of the proposed changes on the University’s curriculum and strategic planning goals, and provide its recommendation regarding further action to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the President. The President makes the decision and gives notice to the affected faculty.
+
+
+
+Placement or Reassignment of Affected Faculty 
+
+
+
+Before the Administration issues notice to a tenured faculty member of its intention to terminate an appointment because of formal discontinuance of a program or department, it will make every reasonable effort to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position. If a full teaching load in the faculty member’s discipline is regularly carried by part-time or by untenured full-time faculty in another department or college of the University, the faculty member shall be entitled to reassignment to that department or college, unless it is determined, through the normal governance processes, that such reassignment would have a serious adverse impact on the academic program in the receiving unit. If a probationary faculty member is displaced as a result of such reassignment, the notice provisions of this Section shall apply to that faculty member. 
+
+
+
+Retraining 
+
+
+
+If consultation with the receiving unit (including, where appropriate, the department chair and Dean) can establish that a limited period of additional training would lead to acceptance of the faculty member in a position outside his or her department or discipline, the University shall, upon request by the faculty member, provide a reasonable amount of financial and/or other support for such training. 
+
+
+
+Order of Termination
+
+Decisions about which individual appointments are to be terminated will be guided by the following considerations: In all cases of necessary faculty reductions, non-tenured faculty members in a department will be released before tenured faculty members, except in circumstances where a serious distortion in the academic program would result. If tenured faculty must be released, the following factors will be considered in determining which faculty members are to be released: education and professional credentials, the length of the faculty member’s service to the University, the quality of the faculty member’s service to the University, the essential academic needs of each potentially affected department within the University, and the abilities of the individual faculty member in relation to the needs of the University and the potentially affected departments.
+
+Notice and Compensation
+
+Probationary faculty who are to be terminated must be given notice according to the regular guidelines for probationary faculty (See “Separation From the University” section).  Notification of termination of faculty members with a continuous (tenure-track) contract or before the expiration of a term or probationary contract shall be three months prior to contract expiration for first year faculty and six months prior to contract termination for second-year faculty. Faculty who have served more than two years must be given one full year of notice. In the absence of appropriate notice, one year’s salary must be given.
+
+Appeals Process
+
+Following a notice of the intention to terminate a contract because of a reduction of student interest and/or consolidation of a program, the faculty member has the right to a full hearing before the Grievance Committee. The request must be presented in writing to the Committee within 14 calendar days of receipt of the notification commencing with Step III of the Grievance Procedure. The Grievance Committee’s decision may be appealed to the President.  The President’s decision may be appealed to the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents.  (See “Complaint and Grievance Procedures” section.)
+
+
+
+A faculty member may appeal a proposed reassignment or termination resulting from discontinuance to the Faculty Grievance Committee. Such an appeal must be filed with the Office of the University Provost no later than thirty (30) days from the receipt of notice of reassignment or termination. The Grievance Committee shall deal with the matter expeditiously, but it shall preserve the essentials of an on-the-record adjudicative hearing, giving both the faculty member and the Administration a full opportunity to present their respective cases. The Grievance Committee shall make its recommendation to the President.
+
+
+
+Reemployment
+
+When a tenured faculty member is to be terminated for curricular reasons, the President will attempt  to place that faculty member in an existing vacant position for which the faculty member is qualified. When, in the opinion of the President, placement within the institution is not a viable alternative, the institution will assist the faculty member in finding employment outside the University. The final decision on relocation is within the discretion of the President.
+
+
+
+When a tenured faculty member is terminated for curricular reasons, the position will not be filled by a new appointee with the same areas of specialization as the terminated faculty member within a period of three years unless the terminated faculty member has been offered, in writing, reappointment to the position at the previous rank and salary held, with the addition of an appropriate increase that would constitute the raise that would have been awarded during the period that the faculty member was not employed by the University.
+
+
+
+	
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AAUP Recommendations 
+
+
+
+Before any proposals for program discontinuance on financial grounds are made or entertained, the faculty should have the opportunity to render an assessment in writing on the institution’s financial condition.
+
+2. Faculty bodies participating in the process may be drawn from the faculty senate or elected as ad hoc committees by the faculty; they should not be appointed by the administration.
+
+3. The faculty should have access to, at minimum, five years of audited financial statements, current and following-year budgets, and detailed cash-flow estimates for future years.
+
+4. In order to make informed proposals about the financial impact of program closures, the faculty needs access to detailed program, department, and administrative-unit budgets.
+
+5. The faculty should determine whether “all feasible alternatives to termination of appointments have been pursued,” including expenditure of one-time money or reserves as bridge funding, furloughs, pay cuts, deferred compensation plans, early-retirement packages, deferral of nonessential capital expenditures, and cuts to noneducational programs and services, including expenses for administration.
+
+6. Faculty members in a program being considered for discontinuance because of financial exigency should be informed in writing that it is being so considered and given at least thirty days in which to respond. Tenured, tenure-track, and contingent faculty members should be involved.
+
+c. (1) Termination of an appointment with continuous tenure, or of a probationary or other nontenured appointment before the end of the specified term, may occur under extraordinary circumstances because of a demonstrably bona fide financial exigency, i.e., a severe financial crisis that fundamen­tally compromises the academic integrity of the institution as a whole and that cannot be alleviated by less drastic means.
+
+As a first step, there should be an elected faculty governance body that participates in the deci­sion that a condition of financial exigency exists or is imminent and that all feasible alternatives to termination of appointments have been pursued, including expenditure of one-time money or reserves as bridge funding, furloughs, pay cuts, deferred-compensation plans, early-retirement packages, deferral of nonessential capital expenditures, and cuts to noneducational programs and services, including expenses for administration.6
+
+Judgments determining where within the overall academic program termination of appointments may occur involve con­siderations of educational policy, including affirmative action, as well as of faculty status, and should therefore be the pri­mary responsibility of the faculty or of an appropriate faculty body.7 The faculty or an appropriate faculty body should also exer­cise primary responsibility in determining the criteria for identifying the individuals whose appointments are to be terminated. These criteria may appropriately include considerations of length of service.
+
+The responsibility for identifying individuals whose appointments are to be terminated should be committed to a person or group designated or approved by the faculty. The allocation of this responsibility may vary according to the size and character of the institution, the extent of the terminations to be made, or other considerations of fairness in judgment. The case of a faculty member given notice of proposed termination of appointment will be governed by the following provisions.]
+
+(2) Before any proposals for program discon­tinuance on grounds of financial exigency are made, the faculty or an appropriate fac­ulty body will have opportunity to render an assessment in writing of the institution’s financial condition.
+
+[Note: Academic programs cannot be defined ad hoc, at any size; programs should be recognized academic units that existed prior to the declaration of finan­cial exigency. The term “program” should designate a related cluster of credit-bearing courses that constitute a coherent body of study within a discipline or set of related disciplines. When feasible, the term should designate a department or similar adminis­trative unit that offers majors and minors.]
+
+(i) The faculty or an appropriate faculty body will have access to at least five years of audited financial statements, current and following-year budgets, and detailed cash-flow estimates for future years.
+
+(ii) In order to make informed recom­mendations about the financial impact of program closures, the faculty or an appropriate faculty body will have access to detailed program, department, and administrative-unit budgets.
+
+(iii)  Faculty members in a program being considered for discontinuance because of  financial exigency will promptly be informed of this activity in writing and provided at least thirty days in which to respond to it. Tenured, tenure-track, and contingent faculty members will be informed and invited to respond.
+
+(3) If the administration issues notice to a particular faculty member of an intention to terminate the appointment because of financial exigency, the faculty member will have the right to a full hearing before a faculty committee. The hearing need not conform in all respects with a proceeding conducted pursuant to Regulation 5, but the essentials of an on-the-record adjudica­tive hearing will be observed. The issues in this hearing may include the following:
+
+(i) The existence and extent of the condi­tion of financial exigency. The burden will rest on the administration to prove the existence and extent of the condi­tion. The findings of a faculty committee in a previous proceeding involving the same issue may be introduced.
+
+(ii) The validity of the educational judg­ments and the criteria for identification for termination; but the recommenda­tions of a faculty body on these matters will be considered presumptively valid.
+
+(iii) Whether the criteria are being properly applied in the individual case.
+
+(4) If the institution, because of financial exi­gency, terminates appointments, it will not at the same time make new appointments, except in extraordinary circumstances where a serious distortion in the academic program would otherwise result. The appointment of a faculty member with tenure will not be terminated in favor of retaining a faculty member without tenure, except in extraordinary circumstances where a serious distortion of the academic program would otherwise result.
+
+(5) Before terminating an appointment because of financial exigency, the institution, with faculty participation, will make every effort to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position within the institution.
+
+(6) In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial exigency, the faculty member concerned will be given notice or severance salary not less than as prescribed in Regulation 8.
+
+(7) In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial exigency, the place of the faculty member concerned will not be filled by a replacement within a period of three years, unless the released faculty member has been offered reinstatement and at least thirty days in which to accept or decline it.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Current Handbook Policy
+
+Definition
+
+
+
+It is presently University policy and practice to involve the faculty and Board of Regents in planning and budgeting, and it is therefore likely that a financial problem would be clear to all as it developed. The involvement of the faculty in the budget and planning process, the faculty’s representation on the Budget Committee, and the regular reporting activity of the President and the CFO enable some of the faculty to be aware of the general financial condition of the University. The fact that the faculty chair is a member of the Board of Regents is another instance of faculty participation in University financial review. Nonetheless, it is possible that unforeseen and unpredictable developments could create a financial exigency not anticipated or expected by many of the faculty. Therefore, the following statement of policy attempts to prepare in advance the procedures for responding to financial problems that require a reduction in faculty.
+
+
+
+“Financial exigency” is understood to be an urgent need to reorder financial obligations in order to restore or preserve financial ability. “Financial ability” means that ability to provide from current income, both cash and accrued, the funds necessary to meet current expenses, including debt payments and sound reserves, without invading or depleting capital. The exigency must be bona fide, must affect the University as a whole, and may be declared only when short-term and limited solutions are not sufficient, and only after alternatives consonant with sound management have been explored or attempted.         
+
+Procedure for Declaring Financial Exigency
+
+The President will propose a declaration of financial exigency to the Budget Committee. The President and the CFO will present to this committee the information that indicates that financial exigency may need to be declared.
+
+
+
+After examining this information carefully, the Budget Committee will present a written response and a recommendation to the President as to whether a condition of financial exigency should be declared. The Budget Committee will be given free access to all financial records of the University.
+
+
+
+If, after receiving the recommendations of the Budget Committee, the President determines that a condition of financial exigency should be declared, the faculty must be notified. The President must present the proposal to a meeting of the Faculty Assembly, including evidence that a bona fide financial exigency exists, that the decision has been made in good faith, and that alternative solutions have been adequately explored.
+
+
+
+The Executive Committee of the Board of Regents will then review the Budget Committee’s report and the President’s recommendation. 
+
+
+
+After completing all of the above steps, the President, with the concurrence of the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents, may present the proposal to the Board of Regents and call upon the board to declare a financial exigency to exist.
+
+
+
+If the Board of Regents concurs with the proposal, the board declares financial exigency.
+
+Development of Steps to End Financial Exigency
+
+
+
+If financial exigency is declared, the Budget Committee will be responsible for recommending a package of budgetary reductions sufficient to end the condition as quickly as possible. This committee will seek information and advice from departments, committees, and officers of the University to enable it to make sound judgments about the impact of alternatives on the functions and programs of the University.
+
+
+
+After receiving the report of the Budget Committee, the President will recommend to the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents a package of budgetary adjustments that will end the condition of financial exigency as quickly as possible. The board will then adopt a financial exigency plan that will thereafter remain in effect until it is revised by the board or the period of financial exigency is declared ended by the board.
+
+Procedure for Termination
+
+Notice
+
+All faculty and all administrators shall be notified immediately of the possibility of non-reappointment for reasons of financial exigency.
+
+
+
+Notification of termination of a faculty member’s contract shall be three months prior to contract expiration for first-year faculty and six months prior to contract termination for second-year faculty. Faculty who have served more than two years must be given one full year of notice or in the absence of appropriate notice, one year’s salary.
+
+Order of Termination
+
+Decisions about which individual appointments are to be terminated because of financial exigency will be guided by the following considerations: In all cases of necessary faculty reductions, non-tenured faculty members in a department will be released before tenured faculty members except in circumstances where a serious distortion in the academic program would result. If tenured faculty must be released, the following factors will be considered in determining which faculty members are to be released: education and professional credentials, the length of the faculty member’s service to the University, the quality of the faculty member’s service to the University, the essential academic needs of the University of each potentially affected department, and the abilities of the individual faculty member in relation to the needs of the University and the potentially affected departments.
+
+Determination of Faculty Reductions
+
+The Vice President for Academic Affairs will recommend individual terminations to the ART Committee.
+
+
+
+The faculty member must be notified of the proposal to be presented to the ART Committee that affect them and have the right to examine the information presented to the ART Committee.
+
+
+
+The ART Committee will make a recommendation regarding termination to the President.
+
+
+
+The President makes the final decision regarding terminations and notifies faculty members of terminations in writing.
+
+Appeals
+
+Following notice of termination because of financial exigency, the faculty member has the right to a full hearing before the Grievance Committee. The request must be presented in writing to the Grievance Committee within 14 calendar days of receipt of the notification. The Grievance Committee’s decision may be appealed to the President. The President’s decision may be appealed to the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents. (See “Complaint and Grievance Procedures” section.)
+
+Continuation of Benefits
+
+For one year after termination, or until the terminated party becomes eligible for health insurance with a new employer, whichever comes first, the University shall provide health and major medical insurance for the terminated party and their family on the same basis as that fringe benefit was available to the faculty member prior to termination.  If the terminated party qualifies for early retirement and enters that program, then they shall be entitled to the health and other benefits of early retirement as set forth in the University retirement program in effect at that time.
+
+Re-employment
+
+When a tenured faculty member is to be terminated for financial exigency, the President will attempt to place that faculty member in an existing vacant position for which the faculty member is qualified. In instances where, in the opinion of the President, placement within the institution is not a viable alternative, the institution will assist the faculty member in finding employment outside the University.
+
+
+
+When a tenured faculty member is terminated for financial exigency, the position will not be filled by a new appointee with the same areas of specialization as the terminated faculty member within a period of three years unless the terminated faculty member has been offered, in writing, reappointment to the position at the previous rank and salary held, with the addition of an appropriate increase that would constitute the raise that would have been awarded during the period that the faculty member was not employed by the University.
+
+New Appointments
+
+New appointments to vacated or new faculty positions will not be made during the period of financial exigency except on the basis of overwhelming need and after review and recommendation by the ART Committee.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Financial Exigency - Current and Proposed.txt [/INST] 1
+
+
+
+
+
+INTERNAL NOTES
+
+
+
+Supporting document links
+
+AAUP faculty role in budget
+
+Financial Ex. and Academic Governance
+
+Role of faculty in Financial Exigency
+
+Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure, Part 4
+
+Sample Handbook and Policies
+
+EAB Myths about Financial Exigency
+
+The proposal below does not provide a pathway for financial hardship declaration - a pathway to address financial difficulties before they become emergencies/exigency may be desired, but such a declaration should not be used as a functional, if undeclared, exigency. See, for instance, Section 3, subsection E of the AAUP Special Report on Covid-19 and Shared Governance at this link. 
+
+
+
+Draft Proposal of Financial Exigency and Program Closure Language (based on current Handbook language, tried to keep as much previous language as possible)
+
+Termination of a tenured faculty member or, prior to the end of the term of appointment, of a probationary (tenure- track) faculty member or a special appointment faculty member may occur because of a demonstrably bona fide financial exigency.  
+
+Definition
+
+It is presently University policy and practice to involve the faculty and Board of Regents in planning and budgeting, and it is therefore likely that a financial problem would be clear to all as it developed. The involvement of the faculty in the budget and planning process, the faculty’s representation on the Budget Committee, and the regular reporting activity of the President and the CFO enable some of the faculty to be aware of the general financial condition of the University. The fact that the faculty chair is a member of the Board of Regents is another instance of faculty participation in University financial review. Nonetheless, it is possible that unforeseen and unpredictable developments could create a financial exigency not anticipated or expected by many of the faculty. Therefore, the following statement of policy attempts to prepare in advance the procedures for responding to financial problems that require a reduction in faculty.
+
+“Financial exigency” is understood to be an urgent need to reorder financial obligations in order to restore or preserve financial ability. “Financial ability” means that ability to provide from current income, both cash and accrued, the funds necessary to meet current expenses, including debt payments and sound reserves, without invading or depleting capital. The exigency must be bona fide, must affect the University as a whole, and may be declared only when short-term and limited solutions are not sufficient, and only after alternatives consonant with sound management have been explored or attempted.
+
+Procedure for Declaring Financial Exigency
+
+The President will propose a declaration of financial exigency to the Budget Committee. The President and the CFO will present to this committee the information that indicates that financial exigency may need to be declared.
+
+After examining this information carefully, the Budget Committee and the Faculty Senate will present a written response and a recommendation to the President as to whether a condition of financial exigency should be declared. The Budget Committee will be given free access to all financial records of the University.
+
+If, after receiving the recommendations of the Budget Committee, the President determines that a condition of financial exigency should be declared, the faculty must be notified. The President must present the proposal to a meeting of the Faculty Assembly, including evidence that a bona fide financial exigency exists, that the decision has been made in good faith, and that alternative solutions have been adequately explored.
+
+The Board of Regents is solely authorized to declare a state of bona fide financial exigency. Such declaration shall be made only after a presentation of relevant financial data by the President to the Faculty Senate and the University Budget Committee.  In those presentations, the President shall provide full particulars of the financial condition of the University, including at minimum, five years of audited financial statements, current and following-year budgets, and detailed cash-flow estimates for future years.  The presentation should also include the President’s preliminary recommendations on how the financial crisis can be alleviated. 
+
+The recommendation of the University Budget Committee and the Faculty Senate on the matter shall be submitted in writing within thirty (30) days of meaningful consultation and accompany the President's recommendation to the Board of Regents.  The President retains sole discretion to recommend a declaration of financial exigency to the Board of Regents.
+
+The Executive Committee of the Board of Regents will then review the reports from the Budget Committee and Faculty Senate, as well as the President’s final recommendation. 
+
+After completing all of the above steps, the President, with the concurrence of the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents, may present the proposal to the Board of Regents and call upon the Board to declare a financial exigency to exist.
+
+If the Board of Regents concurs with the proposal, the Board declares financial exigency.
+
+Development of Steps to End Financial Exigency
+
+If financial exigency is declared, the Budget Committee will be responsible for recommending a package of budgetary reductions sufficient to end the condition as quickly as possible. This committee will seek information and advice from departments, committees, and officers of the University to enable it to make sound judgments about the impact of alternatives on the functions and programs of the University.
+
+After receiving the report of the Budget Committee, the President will recommend to the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents a package of budgetary adjustments that will end the condition of financial exigency as quickly as possible. The board will then adopt a financial exigency plan that will thereafter remain in effect until it is revised by the board or the period of financial exigency is declared ended by the board.
+
+Upon the Board of Regents’ declaration of a financial exigency, the President, in collaboration with the Provost and the Faculty Senate, shall within thirty (30) days formulate a plan for addressing the state of financial exigency for the reduction in programs and personnel required to alleviate the financial crisis.  In formulating such a plan, the retention of a viable academic program shall be the first consideration.  In developing the plan, the President, Provost and Faculty Senate should determine whether all feasible alternatives to termination of appointments have been pursued, including normal attrition (e.g., voluntary resignations, non-reappointment, retirements), expenditure of one-time money or reserves as bridge funding, furloughs, pay cuts, deferred compensation plans, early-retirement packages, deferral of nonessential capital expenditures, and cuts to noneducational programs and services, including expenses for administration.
+
+If the plan does not require reductions in force of faculty, then the President will present the plan to the Board of Trustees (or, if appropriate, to the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees) for consultation and, if necessary, for action. The President then takes appropriate action as the Board directs. If the plan requires reductions in force, the plan shall identify academic and administrative units to be reduced or eliminated.  
+
+Where reduction of a program areas or academic unit is planned contemplated by the plan, the extent of the required reduction shall be specified.  The President will then charge the, but the manner in which such reduction is to be achieved shall be determined in collaboration between the Provost, the Dean responsible for that unit, and the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure Committee to collaboratively develop recommendations for action. The President, in consultation with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, will determine a date by which such recommendations must be provided.  In that process developing the criteria and recommendations for action, reduction shall first take place from among part-time faculty, then from among untenured full-time faculty, and then, if necessary, from among the tenured faculty, giving due consideration to seniority and to the viability of the academic program.
+
+The Faculty Senate should determine whether all feasible alternatives to termination of appointments have been pursued, including expenditure of one-time money or reserves as bridge funding, furloughs, pay cuts, deferred compensation plans, early-retirement packages, deferral of nonessential capital expenditures, and cuts to noneducational programs and services, including expenses for administration.
+
+In order to make informed proposals about the financial impact of program closures or reductions in force, the faculty needs access to detailed program, department, and administrative-unit budgets.  See the Determination of Faculty Reeducations section below for additional information. 
+
+
+
+Steps Prior to Termination
+
+Reassignment: 
+
+Before the Administration issues notice to a tenured faculty member of its intention to terminate an appointment because of financial exigency, it will make every reasonable effort to place the faculty member in another suitable and available position for which the faculty member is qualified with in the University.  If placement in another position would be facilitated by a reasonable period of training, the procedures in the Retraining section below will apply.
+
+Alternative Paragraph 2 for Consideration
+
+Before the Administration issues notice to a tenured faculty member of its intention to terminate an appointment because of financial exigency, the President (or the President’s designee), in consultation with the potential receiving unit (including, where appropriate, the immediate administrative supervisor and Dean), will attempt to place that faculty member in an existing or anticipated vacant position within the University for which the faculty member is qualified.  If placement in another position would be facilitated by a reasonable period of training, the procedures in the Retraining section below will apply.  When, in the opinion of the President, placement within the institution is not a viable alternative, the institution will assist the faculty member in finding employment outside the University.  The final decision on relocation is within the discretion of the President.
+
+If a full teaching load in the faculty member's discipline is regularly carried by part-time or by untenured full-time faculty in another academic unit or college/school of the University, the faculty member shall be entitled to reassignment to that academic unit or college/school, unless it is determined, through the normal governance processes, that such reassignment would have a serious adverse impact on the academic program in the receiving unit. 
+
+If a probationary faculty member is displaced as a result of such reassignment, the notice provisions of this Section shall apply to that faculty member (see Procedures for Non-Reappointment in the Separation From the University Section).
+
+Retraining
+
+If consultation with the receiving unit (including, where appropriate, the immediate administrative supervisor and Dean) can establish that a limited period of additional training would lead to acceptance of the faculty member in a position outside their academic unit or discipline, the University shall, upon request by the faculty member, provide a reasonable amount of financial and/or other support for such training within the limits of the University’s resources. Assistance may include, but need not be limited to, granting a paid leave for retraining or participation in other faculty development programs. 
+
+When, in the opinion of the President, placement within the University is not a viable alternative, the institution will assist the faculty member in finding employment outside the University.  Assistance in this regard may include, but need not be limited to, provision of outplacement seminars dealing with employment search strategies, career changes, and the like; use of University resources, as approved by the Provost, in the employment search; and other appropriate services offered through the Office of Academic Affairs.
+
+If retraining is approved under this Section, it shall normally not exceed one (1) calendar year.
+
+Procedure for Termination
+
+Notice
+
+All faculty and all administrators shall be notified immediately of the possibility of termination for reasons of financial exigency.
+
+Notification of termination of a faculty member’s contract shall be three months prior to contract expiration for first-year faculty and six months prior to contract termination for second-year faculty. Faculty who have served more than two years, or faculty with tenure, must be given one full year of notice or in the absence of appropriate notice, one year’s salary.
+
+Notification of termination on the grounds of financial exigency shall specify the reasons for and evidence supporting such termination, the effective date of termination, the faculty member's right to replacement, reinstatement, or retraining (if applicable), the right to an appeal hearing, and the process for scheduling such a hearing.
+
+Order of Termination
+
+Decisions about which individual appointments are to be terminated because of financial exigency will be guided by the following considerations: 
+
+In all cases of necessary faculty reductions, non-tenured faculty members in a department will be released before tenured faculty members except in circumstances where a serious distortion in the academic program would result. 
+
+If tenured faculty must be released, the following factors will be considered in determining which faculty members are to be released: 
+
+education and professional credentials, 
+
+the length of the faculty member’s service to the University, 
+
+the quality of the faculty member’s service to the University, 
+
+the essential academic needs of the University of each potentially affected department, and 
+
+the abilities of the individual faculty member in relation to the needs of the University and the potentially affected departments.
+
+Determination of Faculty Reductions
+
+The Vice President for Academic Affairs will recommend individual terminations to the ART Committee.
+
+The Appointment, Rank, and Tenure Committee, in consultation with the Dean responsible for the impacted academic unit, will make recommendations to the Provost and President regarding faculty member’s whose services are being considered for termination or reassignment reductions in force. 
+
+The faculty member must be notified of the proposal to be presented to the ART Committee that affect them and have the right to examine the information presented to the considered by the ART Committee.
+
+The ART Committee will make a recommendation regarding termination to the President
+
+The faculty member whose services are being terminated or reassigned must be notified of their proposed reassignment, retraining, or termination, and have the right to examine the information considered by the ART Committee.
+
+The ART Committee, in consultation with the Dean, will make a recommendation regarding reassignment, retraining, or termination to the Provost and President.
+
+The President makes the final decision regarding reassignments, retraining, or terminations and notifies faculty members of terminations in writing.
+
+Appeals of Reassignment or Termination
+
+Following notice of termination because of financial exigency, the faculty member has the right to a full hearing before the Grievance Committee. The request must be presented in writing to the Grievance Committee within 14 calendar days of receipt of the notification. The Grievance Committee’s decision may be appealed to the President. The President’s decision may be appealed to the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents. (See “Complaint and Grievance Procedures” section.)
+
+A faculty member may appeal a proposed reassignment or termination resulting from financial exigency to the Faculty Committee. Such an appeal must be filed with the Office of the University Provost no later than thirty (30) days from the receipt of notice of reassignment or termination.  A faculty member who does not request a hearing within the indicated time forfeits the right to a hearing. 
+
+The Faculty Committee shall deal with the matter within thirty (30) days, but it shall preserve the essentials of an on-the-record adjudicative hearing, giving both the faculty member and the Administration a full opportunity to present their respective cases. By mutual agreement of the committee and the President, more than one case may be heard simultaneously. 
+
+The issues in such a hearing may include: 
+
+Extent of Exigency. The existence and extent of the condition of financial exigency. The burden will rest on the Administration to prove the existence and extent of the condition. The findings of the University Review Committee in a previous proceeding involving the same issue may be introduced. 
+
+Validity of Judgments. The validity of educational judgments and the criteria for identification for termination.*
+
+Application of Criteria. Whether the criteria are being properly applied.* 
+
+*Determinations by the ART Committee regarding the validity of educational judgements and whether the criteria was applied properly will be considered presumptively valid. 
+
+
+
+Continuation of Benefits
+
+For one year after termination, or until the terminated party becomes eligible for health insurance with a new employer, whichever comes first, the University shall provide health and major medical insurance for the terminated party and their family on the same basis as that fringe benefit was available to the faculty member prior to termination.  If the terminated party qualifies for early retirement and enters that program, then they shall be entitled to the health and other benefits of early retirement as set forth in the University retirement program in effect at that time.
+
+Re-employment
+
+When the service of a tenured faculty member is to be terminated for financial exigency, the President will attempt to place that faculty member in an existing vacant position for which the faculty member is qualified. In instances where, in the opinion of the President, placement within the institution is not a viable alternative, the institution will assist the faculty member in finding employment outside the University.
+
+When a tenured faculty member is terminated for financial exigency, the position will not be filled by a new appointee with the same areas of specialization as the terminated faculty member within a period of three years unless the terminated faculty member has been offered, in writing, reappointment to the position at the previous rank and salary held, with the addition of an appropriate increase that would constitute the raise that would have been awarded during the period that the faculty member was not employed by the University.
+
+New Appointments
+
+New appointments to vacated or new faculty positions will not be made during the period of financial exigency except on the basis of overwhelming need and after review and recommendation by the ART Committee.
+
+
+
+Termination of Appointment on Grounds of Formal Discontinuance of an Academic Program or Academic Unit
+
+Conditions
+
+California Lutheran University may find itself in a situation in which, for bona fide reasons of good management, it may need to reorder academic program priorities and to eliminate faculty positions, an entire program, or an academic unit department. 
+
+The conditions for such action normally entail decline in student interest and enrollment, academic program changes in response to student demand and the strategic plan, or reallocation of academic resources in order to maintain and improve financial stability.  
+
+The decision to discontinue an academic program or academic unit of instruction shall be based on educational considerations, which shall not include cyclical or temporary variations in enrollment. Such a decision shall reflect long-range judgments that the educational mission of the University as a whole will be enhanced by the discontinuance. The committees and administrators considering formal discontinuance of a program or department, should take into account the cost of relocation, retraining, or termination of faculty in the program or academic unit. 
+
+Termination of faculty members on term or probationary contracts because of reduction in student interest or changes in the University’s educational program should normally be made at the expiration of the contract, with appropriate notice. (See Procedures for Non-Reappointment in the Separation From the University Section)
+
+In order to terminate a faculty member with a continuous (tenure) contract or before the expiration of a term or probationary contract, there must be a bona fide reduction of student interest rather than a cyclical or temporary variation of student interest in the courses, and/or a formal restructuring of the academic program of the University, including discontinuance of a program or field of study.
+
+Procedures
+
+Determining Faculty Reductions
+
+The decision to discontinue a program or academic unit and to terminate a contract before its expiration because of reduction in student interest or academic program restructuring rests with the Board of Regents, upon recommendation from the President and Provost.  
+
+Task Force Text
+
+In considering formal discontinuance of an academic program or department of instruction, the Administration shall first consult with the faculty of the affected program or department. The faculty’s recommendation and other evidence bearing on the issue shall be reviewed by the Faculty Senate. The Faculty Senate shall report to its faculty constituency before making a final recommendation on the matter to the appropriate administrator. The Senate’s recommendation shall be given great weight by the Administration. In the event the Administration disagrees with that recommendation, the University Provost shall meet with the Senate to discuss the reasons for such disagreement, before making a final decision on the matter. The University Provost shall communicate their final decision and the reasons therefor in writing to the appropriate faculty constituency.
+
+Before notice of termination is given to a faculty member, the Vice President for Academic Affairs must make a formal presentation to the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee and/or the Graduate Curriculum Committee, as appropriate, identifying the specific factors and providing supporting evidence from program review, enrollment, data or documented market factors. The designated curriculum committee(s) should evaluate the evidence, consider the long-term effects of the proposed changes on the University’s curriculum and strategic planning goals, and provide its recommendation regarding further action to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the President. The President makes the decision and gives notice to the affected faculty.
+
+Alternative Model for Consideration
+
+Those involved in making a decision to discontinue an academic program or academic unit will consider advice from the concerned program or academic unit and related areas of academic concentration on the short- and long-term implications of any proposed course of action.  Since these are areas in which the faculty has a significant interest and responsibility, the Faculty Senate will participate in the decision and its recommendation will be given great weight by the Administration.  However, final administrative authority concerning the levels of staffing of academic programs rests with the Administration; final authority to retain or discontinue an academic program or academic unit rests with the Board of Regents (see Article IV, Section 2 of the University’ Amended and Restated Bylaws). 
+
+The decision-making process set forth above will routinely follow the steps below: 
+
+Such an action may be proposed by a curriculum committee, by a College or School assembly, by the appropriate Dean, the Provost, the President, or by the academic program or academic unit itself. 
+
+Such a proposal will be considered first by the appropriate curriculum committee (i.e., Undergraduate Curriculum Committee or Graduate Curriculum Committee). The applicable curriculum committee will evaluate the proposal considering criteria used in the normal, periodic review of academic programs and units. As part of the evaluation, the curriculum committee and the appropriate Dean will consult with the faculty of the impacted program or unit. 
+
+The recommendations of the curriculum committee concerning discontinuance of an academic program or academic unit, which shall include the faculty of the impacted program or unit and Dean’s recommendations and other evidence bearing on the issue, will be reported to the Faculty Senate for review.
+
+The Faculty Senate shall report to the Faculty Assembly before making a final recommendation on the matter to the Provost.  
+
+The Faculty Senate’s recommendation shall be given great weight by the Provost. 
+
+In the event the Provost disagrees with that recommendation, the Provost shall meet with the Faculty Senate to discuss the reasons for such disagreement, before making a final recommendation on the matter. 
+
+The Provost will communicate a final decision and the reasons therefor in writing to the Faculty Assembly.
+
+Having considered the recommendations above and considered the vote of the Faculty Senate, the Provost will make a final written recommendation to the President on the matter.  If the Provost disagreed with the Faculty Senate’s recommendation, the Provost will communicate the reasons therefore in the written recommendation to the President.
+
+The President will then refer the above recommendations, along with the President’s independent recommendation, to the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees for final action. 
+
+Placement or Reassignment of Affected Faculty 
+
+If the decision to discontinue an academic program or academic unit entails the elimination of faculty positions, tenure rights will be protected insofar as possible and the following principles will apply: 
+
+The Administration will attempt to achieve any reductions through normal attrition (e.g., nonreappointments, retirements, etc.). 
+
+Before the Administration issues notice to a tenured faculty member of its intention to terminate an appointment because of formal discontinuance of a program or academic unit, it will make every reasonable effort to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position, for which the person is qualified, within the University.  If placement in another position would be facilitated by a reasonable period of training, the procedures in the Retraining section below will apply.
+
+Alternative Paragraph 2 for Consideration
+
+Before the Administration issues notice to a tenured faculty member of its intention to terminate an appointment because of formal discontinuance of a program or academic unit, the President (or the President’s designee), in consultation with the potential receiving unit (including, where appropriate, the immediate administrative supervisor and Dean), will attempt to place that faculty member in an existing or anticipated vacant position within the University for which the faculty member is qualified.  If placement in another position would be facilitated by a reasonable period of training, the procedures in the Retraining section below will apply.  When, in the opinion of the President, placement within the institution is not a viable alternative, the institution will assist the faculty member in finding employment outside the University.  The final decision on relocation is within the discretion of the President.
+
+If a full teaching load in the faculty member’s discipline is regularly carried by part-time or by untenured full-time faculty in another academic unit or college of the University, the faculty member shall be entitled to reassignment to that academic unit or college, unless it is determined, through the normal governance processes, that such reassignment would have a serious adverse impact on the academic program in the receiving unit.  
+
+If a probationary faculty member is displaced as a result of such reassignment, the notice provisions of this Section shall apply to that faculty member. 
+
+Retraining 
+
+If consultation with the receiving unit (including, where appropriate, the immediate administrative supervisor and Dean) can establish that a limited period of additional training would lead to acceptance of the tenured faculty member in a position outside his or her academic unit or discipline, the University shall, upon request by the faculty member, provide a reasonable amount of financial and/or other support for such training within the limits of the University’s resources. Assistance may include, but need not be limited to, granting a paid leave for retraining or participation in other faculty development programs.  
+
+When, in the opinion of the President, placement within the University is not a viable alternative, the institution will assist the faculty member in finding employment outside the University.  Assistance in this regard may include, but need not be limited to, provision of outplacement seminars dealing with employment search strategies, career changes, and the like; use of University resources, as approved by the Provost, in the employment search; and other appropriate services offered through the Office of Academic Affairs. 
+
+If retraining is approved by the President under this Section, it shall normally not exceed one (1) calendar year
+
+Order of Termination
+
+If no position is available within the University, with or without retraining or change in status, and the faculty member is not agreeable to any optional alternative courses of action, the faculty member's appointment may be terminated.  It is the responsibility of the Provost to forward recommendations for action regarding termination to the President.
+
+Decisions about which individual appointments are to be terminated will be guided by the following considerations: 
+
+In all cases of necessary faculty reductions, non-tenured faculty members in an academic unit will be released before tenured faculty members, except in circumstances where a serious distortion in the academic program would result. 
+
+If tenured faculty must be released, the following factors will be considered in determining which faculty members are to be released:
+
+education and professional credentials, 
+
+the length of the faculty member’s service to the University, 
+
+the quality of the faculty member’s service to the University, 
+
+the essential academic needs of each potentially affected academic unit within the University, and 
+
+the abilities of the individual faculty member in relation to the needs of the University and the potentially affected departments.
+
+Notice and Compensation
+
+Probationary faculty who are to be terminated must be given notice according to the regular guidelines for probationary faculty (See “Separation From the University” section).  Notification of termination of faculty members with a continuous (tenure-track) contract or before the expiration of a term or probationary contract shall be three months prior to contract expiration for first year faculty and six months prior to contract termination for second-year faculty. Faculty who have served more than two years must be given one full year of notice. In the absence of appropriate notice, one year’s salary must be given.
+
+Appeals Process
+
+Following a notice of the intention to terminate a contract because of a reduction of student interest and/or consolidation of a program, the faculty member has the right to a full hearing before the Grievance Committee. The request must be presented in writing to the Committee within 14 calendar days of receipt of the notification commencing with Step III of the Grievance Procedure. The Grievance Committee’s decision may be appealed to the President.  The President’s decision may be appealed to the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents.  (See “Complaint and Grievance Procedures” section.)
+
+A faculty member may appeal a proposed reassignment or termination resulting from discontinuance to the Faculty Grievance Committee. Such an appeal must be filed with the Office of the University Provost no later than thirty (30) days from the receipt of notice of reassignment or termination. The Grievance Committee shall deal with the matter expeditiously, but it shall preserve the essentials of an on-the-record adjudicative hearing, giving both the faculty member and the Administration a full opportunity to present their respective cases. The Grievance Committee shall make its recommendation to the President.
+
+Reemployment
+
+When a tenured faculty member is to be terminated for curricular reasons, the President will attempt  to place that faculty member in an existing vacant position for which the faculty member is qualified. When, in the opinion of the President, placement within the institution is not a viable alternative, the institution will assist the faculty member in finding employment outside the University. The final decision on relocation is within the discretion of the President.
+
+When a tenured faculty member is terminated for curricular reasons, the position will not be filled by a new appointee with the same areas of specialization as the terminated faculty member within a period of three years unless the terminated faculty member has been offered, in writing, reappointment to the position at the previous rank and salary held, with the addition of an appropriate increase that would constitute the raise that would have been awarded during the period that the faculty member was not employed by the University.
+
+
+
+
+AAUP Recommendations 
+
+
+
+Before any proposals for program discontinuance on financial grounds are made or entertained, the faculty should have the opportunity to render an assessment in writing on the institution’s financial condition.
+
+2. Faculty bodies participating in the process may be drawn from the faculty senate or elected as ad hoc committees by the faculty; they should not be appointed by the administration.
+
+3. The faculty should have access to, at minimum, five years of audited financial statements, current and following-year budgets, and detailed cash-flow estimates for future years.
+
+4. In order to make informed proposals about the financial impact of program closures, the faculty needs access to detailed program, department, and administrative-unit budgets.
+
+5. The faculty should determine whether “all feasible alternatives to termination of appointments have been pursued,” including expenditure of one-time money or reserves as bridge funding, furloughs, pay cuts, deferred compensation plans, early-retirement packages, deferral of nonessential capital expenditures, and cuts to noneducational programs and services, including expenses for administration.
+
+6. Faculty members in a program being considered for discontinuance because of financial exigency should be informed in writing that it is being so considered and given at least thirty days in which to respond. Tenured, tenure-track, and contingent faculty members should be involved.
+
+c. (1) Termination of an appointment with continuous tenure, or of a probationary or other nontenured appointment before the end of the specified term, may occur under extraordinary circumstances because of a demonstrably bona fide financial exigency, i.e., a severe financial crisis that fundamen­tally compromises the academic integrity of the institution as a whole and that cannot be alleviated by less drastic means.
+
+As a first step, there should be an elected faculty governance body that participates in the deci­sion that a condition of financial exigency exists or is imminent and that all feasible alternatives to termination of appointments have been pursued, including expenditure of one-time money or reserves as bridge funding, furloughs, pay cuts, deferred-compensation plans, early-retirement packages, deferral of nonessential capital expenditures, and cuts to noneducational programs and services, including expenses for administration.6
+
+Judgments determining where within the overall academic program termination of appointments may occur involve con­siderations of educational policy, including affirmative action, as well as of faculty status, and should therefore be the pri­mary responsibility of the faculty or of an appropriate faculty body.7 The faculty or an appropriate faculty body should also exer­cise primary responsibility in determining the criteria for identifying the individuals whose appointments are to be terminated. These criteria may appropriately include considerations of length of service.
+
+The responsibility for identifying individuals whose appointments are to be terminated should be committed to a person or group designated or approved by the faculty. The allocation of this responsibility may vary according to the size and character of the institution, the extent of the terminations to be made, or other considerations of fairness in judgment. The case of a faculty member given notice of proposed termination of appointment will be governed by the following provisions.]
+
+(2) Before any proposals for program discon­tinuance on grounds of financial exigency are made, the faculty or an appropriate fac­ulty body will have opportunity to render an assessment in writing of the institution’s financial condition.
+
+[Note: Academic programs cannot be defined ad hoc, at any size; programs should be recognized academic units that existed prior to the declaration of finan­cial exigency. The term “program” should designate a related cluster of credit-bearing courses that constitute a coherent body of study within a discipline or set of related disciplines. When feasible, the term should designate a department or similar adminis­trative unit that offers majors and minors.]
+
+(i) The faculty or an appropriate faculty body will have access to at least five years of audited financial statements, current and following-year budgets, and detailed cash-flow estimates for future years.
+
+(ii) In order to make informed recom­mendations about the financial impact of program closures, the faculty or an appropriate faculty body will have access to detailed program, department, and administrative-unit budgets.
+
+(iii)  Faculty members in a program being considered for discontinuance because of  financial exigency will promptly be informed of this activity in writing and provided at least thirty days in which to respond to it. Tenured, tenure-track, and contingent faculty members will be informed and invited to respond.
+
+(3) If the administration issues notice to a particular faculty member of an intention to terminate the appointment because of financial exigency, the faculty member will have the right to a full hearing before a faculty committee. The hearing need not conform in all respects with a proceeding conducted pursuant to Regulation 5, but the essentials of an on-the-record adjudica­tive hearing will be observed. The issues in this hearing may include the following:
+
+(i) The existence and extent of the condi­tion of financial exigency. The burden will rest on the administration to prove the existence and extent of the condi­tion. The findings of a faculty committee in a previous proceeding involving the same issue may be introduced.
+
+(ii) The validity of the educational judg­ments and the criteria for identification for termination; but the recommenda­tions of a faculty body on these matters will be considered presumptively valid.
+
+(iii) Whether the criteria are being properly applied in the individual case.
+
+(4) If the institution, because of financial exi­gency, terminates appointments, it will not at the same time make new appointments, except in extraordinary circumstances where a serious distortion in the academic program would otherwise result. The appointment of a faculty member with tenure will not be terminated in favor of retaining a faculty member without tenure, except in extraordinary circumstances where a serious distortion of the academic program would otherwise result.
+
+(5) Before terminating an appointment because of financial exigency, the institution, with faculty participation, will make every effort to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position within the institution.
+
+(6) In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial exigency, the faculty member concerned will be given notice or severance salary not less than as prescribed in Regulation 8.
+
+(7) In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial exigency, the place of the faculty member concerned will not be filled by a replacement within a period of three years, unless the released faculty member has been offered reinstatement and at least thirty days in which to accept or decline it.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Current Handbook Policy
+
+Definition
+
+
+
+It is presently University policy and practice to involve the faculty and Board of Regents in planning and budgeting, and it is therefore likely that a financial problem would be clear to all as it developed. The involvement of the faculty in the budget and planning process, the faculty’s representation on the Budget Committee, and the regular reporting activity of the President and the CFO enable some of the faculty to be aware of the general financial condition of the University. The fact that the faculty chair is a member of the Board of Regents is another instance of faculty participation in University financial review. Nonetheless, it is possible that unforeseen and unpredictable developments could create a financial exigency not anticipated or expected by many of the faculty. Therefore, the following statement of policy attempts to prepare in advance the procedures for responding to financial problems that require a reduction in faculty.
+
+
+
+“Financial exigency” is understood to be an urgent need to reorder financial obligations in order to restore or preserve financial ability. “Financial ability” means that ability to provide from current income, both cash and accrued, the funds necessary to meet current expenses, including debt payments and sound reserves, without invading or depleting capital. The exigency must be bona fide, must affect the University as a whole, and may be declared only when short-term and limited solutions are not sufficient, and only after alternatives consonant with sound management have been explored or attempted.         
+
+Procedure for Declaring Financial Exigency
+
+The President will propose a declaration of financial exigency to the Budget Committee. The President and the CFO will present to this committee the information that indicates that financial exigency may need to be declared.
+
+
+
+After examining this information carefully, the Budget Committee will present a written response and a recommendation to the President as to whether a condition of financial exigency should be declared. The Budget Committee will be given free access to all financial records of the University.
+
+
+
+If, after receiving the recommendations of the Budget Committee, the President determines that a condition of financial exigency should be declared, the faculty must be notified. The President must present the proposal to a meeting of the Faculty Assembly, including evidence that a bona fide financial exigency exists, that the decision has been made in good faith, and that alternative solutions have been adequately explored.
+
+
+
+The Executive Committee of the Board of Regents will then review the Budget Committee’s report and the President’s recommendation. 
+
+
+
+After completing all of the above steps, the President, with the concurrence of the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents, may present the proposal to the Board of Regents and call upon the board to declare a financial exigency to exist.
+
+
+
+If the Board of Regents concurs with the proposal, the board declares financial exigency.
+
+Development of Steps to End Financial Exigency
+
+
+
+If financial exigency is declared, the Budget Committee will be responsible for recommending a package of budgetary reductions sufficient to end the condition as quickly as possible. This committee will seek information and advice from departments, committees, and officers of the University to enable it to make sound judgments about the impact of alternatives on the functions and programs of the University.
+
+
+
+After receiving the report of the Budget Committee, the President will recommend to the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents a package of budgetary adjustments that will end the condition of financial exigency as quickly as possible. The board will then adopt a financial exigency plan that will thereafter remain in effect until it is revised by the board or the period of financial exigency is declared ended by the board.
+
+Procedure for Termination
+
+Notice
+
+All faculty and all administrators shall be notified immediately of the possibility of non-reappointment for reasons of financial exigency.
+
+
+
+Notification of termination of a faculty member’s contract shall be three months prior to contract expiration for first-year faculty and six months prior to contract termination for second-year faculty. Faculty who have served more than two years must be given one full year of notice or in the absence of appropriate notice, one year’s salary.
+
+Order of Termination
+
+Decisions about which individual appointments are to be terminated because of financial exigency will be guided by the following considerations: In all cases of necessary faculty reductions, non-tenured faculty members in a department will be released before tenured faculty members except in circumstances where a serious distortion in the academic program would result. If tenured faculty must be released, the following factors will be considered in determining which faculty members are to be released: education and professional credentials, the length of the faculty member’s service to the University, the quality of the faculty member’s service to the University, the essential academic needs of the University of each potentially affected department, and the abilities of the individual faculty member in relation to the needs of the University and the potentially affected departments.
+
+Determination of Faculty Reductions
+
+The Vice President for Academic Affairs will recommend individual terminations to the ART Committee.
+
+
+
+The faculty member must be notified of the proposal to be presented to the ART Committee that affect them and have the right to examine the information presented to the ART Committee.
+
+
+
+The ART Committee will make a recommendation regarding termination to the President.
+
+
+
+The President makes the final decision regarding terminations and notifies faculty members of terminations in writing.
+
+Appeals
+
+Following notice of termination because of financial exigency, the faculty member has the right to a full hearing before the Grievance Committee. The request must be presented in writing to the Grievance Committee within 14 calendar days of receipt of the notification. The Grievance Committee’s decision may be appealed to the President. The President’s decision may be appealed to the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents. (See “Complaint and Grievance Procedures” section.)
+
+Continuation of Benefits
+
+For one year after termination, or until the terminated party becomes eligible for health insurance with a new employer, whichever comes first, the University shall provide health and major medical insurance for the terminated party and their family on the same basis as that fringe benefit was available to the faculty member prior to termination.  If the terminated party qualifies for early retirement and enters that program, then they shall be entitled to the health and other benefits of early retirement as set forth in the University retirement program in effect at that time.
+
+Re-employment
+
+When a tenured faculty member is to be terminated for financial exigency, the President will attempt to place that faculty member in an existing vacant position for which the faculty member is qualified. In instances where, in the opinion of the President, placement within the institution is not a viable alternative, the institution will assist the faculty member in finding employment outside the University.
+
+
+
+When a tenured faculty member is terminated for financial exigency, the position will not be filled by a new appointee with the same areas of specialization as the terminated faculty member within a period of three years unless the terminated faculty member has been offered, in writing, reappointment to the position at the previous rank and salary held, with the addition of an appropriate increase that would constitute the raise that would have been awarded during the period that the faculty member was not employed by the University.
+
+New Appointments
+
+New appointments to vacated or new faculty positions will not be made during the period of financial exigency except on the basis of overwhelming need and after review and recommendation by the ART Committee.</s>"
+<s>[INST] Financial Exigency - SS Comments to Current and Proposed (5.16.22).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Financial Exigency - SS Comments to Current and Proposed (5.4.22).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Financial Exigency - SS Comments to Current and Proposed (Program Reduction).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Financial Exigency - SS Comments to Current and Proposed.txt [/INST] 1
+
+
+
+
+
+INTERNAL NOTES
+
+
+
+Supporting document links
+
+AAUP faculty role in budget
+
+Financial Ex. and Academic Governance
+
+Role of faculty in Financial Exigency
+
+Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure, Part 4
+
+Sample Handbook and Policies
+
+EAB Myths about Financial Exigency
+
+The proposal below does not provide a pathway for financial hardship declaration - a pathway to address financial difficulties before they become emergencies/exigency may be desired, but such a declaration should not be used as a functional, if undeclared, exigency. See, for instance, Section 3, subsection E of the AAUP Special Report on Covid-19 and Shared Governance at this link. 
+
+
+
+Draft Proposal of Financial Exigency and Program Closure Language (based on current Handbook language, tried to keep as much previous language as possible)
+
+Termination of a tenured faculty member or, prior to the end of the term of appointment, of a probationary (tenure- track) faculty member or a special appointment faculty member may occur because of a demonstrably bona fide financial exigency.  
+
+Definition
+
+It is presently University policy and practice to involve the faculty and Board of Regents in planning and budgeting, and it is therefore likely that a financial problem would be clear to all as it developed. The involvement of the faculty in the budget and planning process, the faculty’s representation on the Budget Committee, and the regular reporting activity of the President and the CFO enable some of the faculty to be aware of the general financial condition of the University. The fact that the faculty chair is a member of the Board of Regents is another instance of faculty participation in University financial review. Nonetheless, it is possible that unforeseen and unpredictable developments could create a financial exigency not anticipated or expected by many of the faculty. Therefore, the following statement of policy attempts to prepare in advance the procedures for responding to financial problems that require a reduction in faculty.
+
+“Financial exigency” is understood to be an urgent need to reorder financial obligations in order to restore or preserve financial ability. “Financial ability” means that ability to provide from current income, both cash and accrued, the funds necessary to meet current expenses, including debt payments and sound reserves, without invading or depleting capital. The exigency must be bona fide, must affect the University as a whole, and may be declared only when short-term and limited solutions are not sufficient, and only after alternatives consonant with sound management have been explored or attempted.
+
+Procedure for Declaring Financial Exigency
+
+The President will propose a declaration of financial exigency to the Budget Committee. The President and the CFO will present to this committee the information that indicates that financial exigency may need to be declared.
+
+After examining this information carefully, the Budget Committee and the Faculty Senate will present a written response and a recommendation to the President as to whether a condition of financial exigency should be declared. The Budget Committee will be given free access to all financial records of the University.
+
+If, after receiving the recommendations of the Budget Committee, the President determines that a condition of financial exigency should be declared, the faculty must be notified. The President must present the proposal to a meeting of the Faculty Assembly, including evidence that a bona fide financial exigency exists, that the decision has been made in good faith, and that alternative solutions have been adequately explored.
+
+The Board of Regents is solely authorized to declare a state of bona fide financial exigency. Such declaration shall be made only after a presentation of relevant financial data by the President to the Faculty Senate and the University Budget Committee.  In those presentations, the President shall provide full particulars of the financial condition of the University, including at minimum, five years of audited financial statements, current and following-year budgets, and detailed cash-flow estimates for future years.  The presentation should also include the President’s preliminary recommendations on how the financial crisis can be alleviated. 
+
+The recommendation of the University Budget Committee and the Faculty Senate on the matter shall be submitted in writing within thirty (30) days of meaningful consultation and accompany the President's recommendation to the Board of Regents.  The President retains sole discretion to recommend a declaration of financial exigency to the Board of Regents.
+
+The Executive Committee of the Board of Regents will then review the reports from the Budget Committee and Faculty Senate, as well as the President’s final recommendation. 
+
+After completing all of the above steps, the President, with the concurrence of the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents, may present the proposal to the Board of Regents and call upon the Board to declare a financial exigency to exist.
+
+If the Board of Regents concurs with the proposal, the Board declares financial exigency.
+
+Development of Steps to End Financial Exigency
+
+If financial exigency is declared, the Budget Committee will be responsible for recommending a package of budgetary reductions sufficient to end the condition as quickly as possible. This committee will seek information and advice from departments, committees, and officers of the University to enable it to make sound judgments about the impact of alternatives on the functions and programs of the University.
+
+After receiving the report of the Budget Committee, the President will recommend to the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents a package of budgetary adjustments that will end the condition of financial exigency as quickly as possible. The board will then adopt a financial exigency plan that will thereafter remain in effect until it is revised by the board or the period of financial exigency is declared ended by the board.
+
+Upon the Board of Regents’ declaration of a financial exigency, the President, in collaboration with the Provost and the Faculty Senate, shall within thirty (30) days formulate a plan for addressing the state of financial exigency for the reduction in programs and personnel required to alleviate the financial crisis.  In formulating such a plan, the retention of a viable academic program shall be the first consideration.  In developing the plan, the President, Provost and Faculty Senate should determine whether all feasible alternatives to termination of appointments have been pursued, including normal attrition (e.g., voluntary resignations, non-reappointment, retirements), expenditure of one-time money or reserves as bridge funding, furloughs, pay cuts, deferred compensation plans, early-retirement packages, deferral of nonessential capital expenditures, and cuts to noneducational programs and services, including expenses for administration.
+
+If the plan does not require reductions in force of faculty, then the President will present the plan to the Board of Trustees (or, if appropriate, to the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees) for consultation and, if necessary, for action. The President then takes appropriate action as the Board directs. If the plan requires reductions in force, the plan shall identify academic and administrative units to be reduced or eliminated.  
+
+Where reduction of a program areas or academic unit is planned contemplated by the plan, the extent of the required reduction shall be specified.  The President will then charge the, but the manner in which such reduction is to be achieved shall be determined in collaboration between the Provost, the Dean responsible for that unit, and the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure Committee to collaboratively develop recommendations for action. The President, in consultation with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, will determine a date by which such recommendations must be provided.  In that process developing the criteria and recommendations for action, reduction shall first take place from among part-time faculty, then from among untenured full-time faculty, and then, if necessary, from among the tenured faculty, giving due consideration to seniority and to the viability of the academic program.
+
+The Faculty Senate should determine whether all feasible alternatives to termination of appointments have been pursued, including expenditure of one-time money or reserves as bridge funding, furloughs, pay cuts, deferred compensation plans, early-retirement packages, deferral of nonessential capital expenditures, and cuts to noneducational programs and services, including expenses for administration.
+
+In order to make informed proposals about the financial impact of program closures or reductions in force, the faculty needs access to detailed program, department, and administrative-unit budgets.  See the Determination of Faculty Reeducations section below for additional information. 
+
+
+
+Steps Prior to Termination
+
+Reassignment: 
+
+Before the Administration issues notice to a tenured faculty member of its intention to terminate an appointment because of financial exigency, it will make every reasonable effort to place the faculty member in another suitable and available position for which the faculty member is qualified with in the University.  If placement in another position would be facilitated by a reasonable period of training, the procedures in the Retraining section below will apply.
+
+Alternative Paragraph 2 for Consideration
+
+Before the Administration issues notice to a tenured faculty member of its intention to terminate an appointment because of financial exigency, the President (or the President’s designee), in consultation with the potential receiving unit (including, where appropriate, the immediate administrative supervisor and Dean), will attempt to place that faculty member in an existing or anticipated vacant position within the University for which the faculty member is qualified.  If placement in another position would be facilitated by a reasonable period of training, the procedures in the Retraining section below will apply.  When, in the opinion of the President, placement within the institution is not a viable alternative, the institution will assist the faculty member in finding employment outside the University.  The final decision on relocation is within the discretion of the President.
+
+If a full teaching load in the faculty member's discipline is regularly carried by part-time or by untenured full-time faculty in another academic unit or college/school of the University, the faculty member shall be entitled to reassignment to that academic unit or college/school, unless it is determined, through the normal governance processes, that such reassignment would have a serious adverse impact on the academic program in the receiving unit. 
+
+If a probationary faculty member is displaced as a result of such reassignment, the notice provisions of this Section shall apply to that faculty member (see Procedures for Non-Reappointment in the Separation From the University Section).
+
+Retraining
+
+If consultation with the receiving unit (including, where appropriate, the immediate administrative supervisor and Dean) can establish that a limited period of additional training would lead to acceptance of the faculty member in a position outside their academic unit or discipline, the University shall, upon request by the faculty member, provide a reasonable amount of financial and/or other support for such training within the limits of the University’s resources. Assistance may include, but need not be limited to, granting a paid leave for retraining or participation in other faculty development programs. 
+
+When, in the opinion of the President, placement within the University is not a viable alternative, the institution will assist the faculty member in finding employment outside the University.  Assistance in this regard may include, but need not be limited to, provision of outplacement seminars dealing with employment search strategies, career changes, and the like; use of University resources, as approved by the Provost, in the employment search; and other appropriate services offered through the Office of Academic Affairs.
+
+If retraining is approved under this Section, it shall normally not exceed one (1) calendar year.
+
+Procedure for Termination
+
+Notice
+
+All faculty and all administrators shall be notified immediately of the possibility of termination for reasons of financial exigency.
+
+Notification of termination of a faculty member’s contract shall be three months prior to contract expiration for first-year faculty and six months prior to contract termination for second-year faculty. Faculty who have served more than two years, or faculty with tenure, must be given one full year of notice or in the absence of appropriate notice, one year’s salary.
+
+Notification of termination on the grounds of financial exigency shall specify the reasons for and evidence supporting such termination, the effective date of termination, the faculty member's right to replacement, reinstatement, or retraining (if applicable), the right to an appeal hearing, and the process for scheduling such a hearing.
+
+Order of Termination
+
+Decisions about which individual appointments are to be terminated because of financial exigency will be guided by the following considerations: 
+
+In all cases of necessary faculty reductions, non-tenured faculty members in a department will be released before tenured faculty members except in circumstances where a serious distortion in the academic program would result. 
+
+If tenured faculty must be released, the following factors will be considered in determining which faculty members are to be released: 
+
+education and professional credentials, 
+
+the length of the faculty member’s service to the University, 
+
+the quality of the faculty member’s service to the University, 
+
+the essential academic needs of the University of each potentially affected department, and 
+
+the abilities of the individual faculty member in relation to the needs of the University and the potentially affected departments.
+
+Determination of Faculty Reductions
+
+The Vice President for Academic Affairs will recommend individual terminations to the ART Committee.
+
+The Appointment, Rank, and Tenure Committee, in consultation with the Dean responsible for the impacted academic unit, will make recommendations to the Provost and President regarding faculty member’s whose services are being considered for termination or reassignment reductions in force. 
+
+The faculty member must be notified of the proposal to be presented to the ART Committee that affect them and have the right to examine the information presented to the considered by the ART Committee.
+
+The ART Committee will make a recommendation regarding termination to the President
+
+The faculty member whose services are being terminated or reassigned must be notified of their proposed reassignment, retraining, or termination, and have the right to examine the information considered by the ART Committee.
+
+The ART Committee, in consultation with the Dean, will make a recommendation regarding reassignment, retraining, or termination to the Provost and President.
+
+The President makes the final decision regarding reassignments, retraining, or terminations and notifies faculty members of terminations in writing.
+
+Appeals of Reassignment or Termination
+
+Following notice of termination because of financial exigency, the faculty member has the right to a full hearing before the Grievance Committee. The request must be presented in writing to the Grievance Committee within 14 calendar days of receipt of the notification. The Grievance Committee’s decision may be appealed to the President. The President’s decision may be appealed to the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents. (See “Complaint and Grievance Procedures” section.)
+
+A faculty member may appeal a proposed reassignment or termination resulting from financial exigency to the Faculty Committee. Such an appeal must be filed with the Office of the University Provost no later than thirty (30) days from the receipt of notice of reassignment or termination.  A faculty member who does not request a hearing within the indicated time forfeits the right to a hearing. 
+
+The Faculty Committee shall deal with the matter within thirty (30) days, but it shall preserve the essentials of an on-the-record adjudicative hearing, giving both the faculty member and the Administration a full opportunity to present their respective cases. By mutual agreement of the committee and the President, more than one case may be heard simultaneously. 
+
+The issues in such a hearing may include: 
+
+Extent of Exigency. The existence and extent of the condition of financial exigency. The burden will rest on the Administration to prove the existence and extent of the condition. The findings of the University Review Committee in a previous proceeding involving the same issue may be introduced. 
+
+Validity of Judgments. The validity of educational judgments and the criteria for identification for termination.*
+
+Application of Criteria. Whether the criteria are being properly applied.* 
+
+*Determinations by the ART Committee regarding the validity of educational judgements and whether the criteria was applied properly will be considered presumptively valid. 
+
+
+
+Continuation of Benefits
+
+For one year after termination, or until the terminated party becomes eligible for health insurance with a new employer, whichever comes first, the University shall provide health and major medical insurance for the terminated party and their family on the same basis as that fringe benefit was available to the faculty member prior to termination.  If the terminated party qualifies for early retirement and enters that program, then they shall be entitled to the health and other benefits of early retirement as set forth in the University retirement program in effect at that time.
+
+Re-employment
+
+When the service of a tenured faculty member is to be terminated for financial exigency, the President will attempt to place that faculty member in an existing vacant position for which the faculty member is qualified. In instances where, in the opinion of the President, placement within the institution is not a viable alternative, the institution will assist the faculty member in finding employment outside the University.
+
+When a tenured faculty member is terminated for financial exigency, the position will not be filled by a new appointee with the same areas of specialization as the terminated faculty member within a period of three years unless the terminated faculty member has been offered, in writing, reappointment to the position at the previous rank and salary held, with the addition of an appropriate increase that would constitute the raise that would have been awarded during the period that the faculty member was not employed by the University.
+
+New Appointments
+
+New appointments to vacated or new faculty positions will not be made during the period of financial exigency except on the basis of overwhelming need and after review and recommendation by the ART Committee.
+
+
+
+Termination of Appointment on Grounds of Formal Discontinuance of an Academic Program or Academic Unit
+
+Conditions
+
+California Lutheran University may find itself in a situation in which, for bona fide reasons of good management, it may need to reorder academic program priorities and to eliminate faculty positions, an entire program, or an academic unit department. 
+
+The conditions for such action normally entail decline in student interest and enrollment, academic program changes in response to student demand and the strategic plan, or reallocation of academic resources in order to maintain and improve financial stability.  
+
+The decision to discontinue an academic program or academic unit of instruction shall be based on educational considerations, which shall not include cyclical or temporary variations in enrollment. Such a decision shall reflect long-range judgments that the educational mission of the University as a whole will be enhanced by the discontinuance. The committees and administrators considering formal discontinuance of a program or department, should take into account the cost of relocation, retraining, or termination of faculty in the program or academic unit. 
+
+Termination of faculty members on term or probationary contracts because of reduction in student interest or changes in the University’s educational program should normally be made at the expiration of the contract, with appropriate notice. (See Procedures for Non-Reappointment in the Separation From the University Section)
+
+In order to terminate a faculty member with a continuous (tenure) contract or before the expiration of a term or probationary contract, there must be a bona fide reduction of student interest rather than a cyclical or temporary variation of student interest in the courses, and/or a formal restructuring of the academic program of the University, including discontinuance of a program or field of study.
+
+Procedures
+
+Determining Faculty Reductions
+
+The decision to discontinue a program or academic unit and to terminate a contract before its expiration because of reduction in student interest or academic program restructuring rests with the Board of Regents, upon recommendation from the President and Provost.  
+
+Task Force Text
+
+In considering formal discontinuance of an academic program or department of instruction, the Administration shall first consult with the faculty of the affected program or department. The faculty’s recommendation and other evidence bearing on the issue shall be reviewed by the Faculty Senate. The Faculty Senate shall report to its faculty constituency before making a final recommendation on the matter to the appropriate administrator. The Senate’s recommendation shall be given great weight by the Administration. In the event the Administration disagrees with that recommendation, the University Provost shall meet with the Senate to discuss the reasons for such disagreement, before making a final decision on the matter. The University Provost shall communicate their final decision and the reasons therefor in writing to the appropriate faculty constituency.
+
+Before notice of termination is given to a faculty member, the Vice President for Academic Affairs must make a formal presentation to the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee and/or the Graduate Curriculum Committee, as appropriate, identifying the specific factors and providing supporting evidence from program review, enrollment, data or documented market factors. The designated curriculum committee(s) should evaluate the evidence, consider the long-term effects of the proposed changes on the University’s curriculum and strategic planning goals, and provide its recommendation regarding further action to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the President. The President makes the decision and gives notice to the affected faculty.
+
+Alternative Model for Consideration
+
+Those involved in making a decision to discontinue an academic program or academic unit will consider advice from the concerned program or academic unit and related areas of academic concentration on the short- and long-term implications of any proposed course of action.  Since these are areas in which the faculty has a significant interest and responsibility, the Faculty Senate will participate in the decision and its recommendation will be given great weight by the Administration.  However, final administrative authority concerning the levels of staffing of academic programs rests with the Administration; final authority to retain or discontinue an academic program or academic unit rests with the Board of Regents (see Article IV, Section 2 of the University’ Amended and Restated Bylaws). 
+
+The decision-making process set forth above will routinely follow the steps below: 
+
+Such an action may be proposed by a curriculum committee, by a College or School assembly, by the appropriate Dean, the Provost, the President, or by the academic program or academic unit itself. 
+
+Such a proposal will be considered first by the appropriate curriculum committee (i.e., Undergraduate Curriculum Committee or Graduate Curriculum Committee). The applicable curriculum committee will evaluate the proposal considering criteria used in the normal, periodic review of academic programs and units. As part of the evaluation, the curriculum committee and the appropriate Dean will consult with the faculty of the impacted program or unit. 
+
+The recommendations of the curriculum committee concerning discontinuance of an academic program or academic unit, which shall include the faculty of the impacted program or unit and Dean’s recommendations and other evidence bearing on the issue, will be reported to the Faculty Senate for review.
+
+The Faculty Senate shall report to the Faculty Assembly before making a final recommendation on the matter to the Provost.  
+
+The Faculty Senate’s recommendation shall be given great weight by the Provost. 
+
+In the event the Provost disagrees with that recommendation, the Provost shall meet with the Faculty Senate to discuss the reasons for such disagreement, before making a final recommendation on the matter. 
+
+The Provost will communicate a final decision and the reasons therefor in writing to the Faculty Assembly.
+
+Having considered the recommendations above and considered the vote of the Faculty Senate, the Provost will make a final written recommendation to the President on the matter.  If the Provost disagreed with the Faculty Senate’s recommendation, the Provost will communicate the reasons therefore in the written recommendation to the President.
+
+The President will then refer the above recommendations, along with the President’s independent recommendation, to the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees for final action. 
+
+Placement or Reassignment of Affected Faculty 
+
+If the decision to discontinue an academic program or academic unit entails the elimination of faculty positions, tenure rights will be protected insofar as possible and the following principles will apply: 
+
+The Administration will attempt to achieve any reductions through normal attrition (e.g., nonreappointments, retirements, etc.). 
+
+Before the Administration issues notice to a tenured faculty member of its intention to terminate an appointment because of formal discontinuance of a program or academic unit, it will make every reasonable effort to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position, for which the person is qualified, within the University.  If placement in another position would be facilitated by a reasonable period of training, the procedures in the Retraining section below will apply.
+
+Alternative Paragraph 2 for Consideration
+
+Before the Administration issues notice to a tenured faculty member of its intention to terminate an appointment because of formal discontinuance of a program or academic unit, the President (or the President’s designee), in consultation with the potential receiving unit (including, where appropriate, the immediate administrative supervisor and Dean), will attempt to place that faculty member in an existing or anticipated vacant position within the University for which the faculty member is qualified.  If placement in another position would be facilitated by a reasonable period of training, the procedures in the Retraining section below will apply.  When, in the opinion of the President, placement within the institution is not a viable alternative, the institution will assist the faculty member in finding employment outside the University.  The final decision on relocation is within the discretion of the President.
+
+If a full teaching load in the faculty member’s discipline is regularly carried by part-time or by untenured full-time faculty in another academic unit or college of the University, the faculty member shall be entitled to reassignment to that academic unit or college, unless it is determined, through the normal governance processes, that such reassignment would have a serious adverse impact on the academic program in the receiving unit.  
+
+If a probationary faculty member is displaced as a result of such reassignment, the notice provisions of this Section shall apply to that faculty member. 
+
+Retraining 
+
+If consultation with the receiving unit (including, where appropriate, the immediate administrative supervisor and Dean) can establish that a limited period of additional training would lead to acceptance of the tenured faculty member in a position outside his or her academic unit or discipline, the University shall, upon request by the faculty member, provide a reasonable amount of financial and/or other support for such training within the limits of the University’s resources. Assistance may include, but need not be limited to, granting a paid leave for retraining or participation in other faculty development programs.  
+
+When, in the opinion of the President, placement within the University is not a viable alternative, the institution will assist the faculty member in finding employment outside the University.  Assistance in this regard may include, but need not be limited to, provision of outplacement seminars dealing with employment search strategies, career changes, and the like; use of University resources, as approved by the Provost, in the employment search; and other appropriate services offered through the Office of Academic Affairs. 
+
+If retraining is approved by the President under this Section, it shall normally not exceed one (1) calendar year
+
+Order of Termination
+
+If no position is available within the University, with or without retraining or change in status, and the faculty member is not agreeable to any optional alternative courses of action, the faculty member's appointment may be terminated.  It is the responsibility of the Provost to forward recommendations for action regarding termination to the President.
+
+Decisions about which individual appointments are to be terminated will be guided by the following considerations: 
+
+In all cases of necessary faculty reductions, non-tenured faculty members in an academic unit will be released before tenured faculty members, except in circumstances where a serious distortion in the academic program would result. 
+
+If tenured faculty must be released, the following factors will be considered in determining which faculty members are to be released:
+
+education and professional credentials, 
+
+the length of the faculty member’s service to the University, 
+
+the quality of the faculty member’s service to the University, 
+
+the essential academic needs of each potentially affected academic unit within the University, and 
+
+the abilities of the individual faculty member in relation to the needs of the University and the potentially affected departments.
+
+Notice and Compensation
+
+Probationary faculty who are to be terminated must be given notice according to the regular guidelines for probationary faculty (See “Separation From the University” section).  Notification of termination of faculty members with a continuous (tenure-track) contract or before the expiration of a term or probationary contract shall be three months prior to contract expiration for first year faculty and six months prior to contract termination for second-year faculty. Faculty who have served more than two years must be given one full year of notice. In the absence of appropriate notice, one year’s salary must be given.
+
+Appeals Process
+
+Following a notice of the intention to terminate a contract because of a reduction of student interest and/or consolidation of a program, the faculty member has the right to a full hearing before the Grievance Committee. The request must be presented in writing to the Committee within 14 calendar days of receipt of the notification commencing with Step III of the Grievance Procedure. The Grievance Committee’s decision may be appealed to the President.  The President’s decision may be appealed to the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents.  (See “Complaint and Grievance Procedures” section.)
+
+A faculty member may appeal a proposed reassignment or termination resulting from discontinuance to the Faculty Grievance Committee. Such an appeal must be filed with the Office of the University Provost no later than thirty (30) days from the receipt of notice of reassignment or termination. The Grievance Committee shall deal with the matter expeditiously, but it shall preserve the essentials of an on-the-record adjudicative hearing, giving both the faculty member and the Administration a full opportunity to present their respective cases. The Grievance Committee shall make its recommendation to the President.
+
+Reemployment
+
+When a tenured faculty member is to be terminated for curricular reasons, the President will attempt  to place that faculty member in an existing vacant position for which the faculty member is qualified. When, in the opinion of the President, placement within the institution is not a viable alternative, the institution will assist the faculty member in finding employment outside the University. The final decision on relocation is within the discretion of the President.
+
+When a tenured faculty member is terminated for curricular reasons, the position will not be filled by a new appointee with the same areas of specialization as the terminated faculty member within a period of three years unless the terminated faculty member has been offered, in writing, reappointment to the position at the previous rank and salary held, with the addition of an appropriate increase that would constitute the raise that would have been awarded during the period that the faculty member was not employed by the University.
+
+
+
+
+AAUP Recommendations 
+
+
+
+Before any proposals for program discontinuance on financial grounds are made or entertained, the faculty should have the opportunity to render an assessment in writing on the institution’s financial condition.
+
+2. Faculty bodies participating in the process may be drawn from the faculty senate or elected as ad hoc committees by the faculty; they should not be appointed by the administration.
+
+3. The faculty should have access to, at minimum, five years of audited financial statements, current and following-year budgets, and detailed cash-flow estimates for future years.
+
+4. In order to make informed proposals about the financial impact of program closures, the faculty needs access to detailed program, department, and administrative-unit budgets.
+
+5. The faculty should determine whether “all feasible alternatives to termination of appointments have been pursued,” including expenditure of one-time money or reserves as bridge funding, furloughs, pay cuts, deferred compensation plans, early-retirement packages, deferral of nonessential capital expenditures, and cuts to noneducational programs and services, including expenses for administration.
+
+6. Faculty members in a program being considered for discontinuance because of financial exigency should be informed in writing that it is being so considered and given at least thirty days in which to respond. Tenured, tenure-track, and contingent faculty members should be involved.
+
+c. (1) Termination of an appointment with continuous tenure, or of a probationary or other nontenured appointment before the end of the specified term, may occur under extraordinary circumstances because of a demonstrably bona fide financial exigency, i.e., a severe financial crisis that fundamen­tally compromises the academic integrity of the institution as a whole and that cannot be alleviated by less drastic means.
+
+As a first step, there should be an elected faculty governance body that participates in the deci­sion that a condition of financial exigency exists or is imminent and that all feasible alternatives to termination of appointments have been pursued, including expenditure of one-time money or reserves as bridge funding, furloughs, pay cuts, deferred-compensation plans, early-retirement packages, deferral of nonessential capital expenditures, and cuts to noneducational programs and services, including expenses for administration.6
+
+Judgments determining where within the overall academic program termination of appointments may occur involve con­siderations of educational policy, including affirmative action, as well as of faculty status, and should therefore be the pri­mary responsibility of the faculty or of an appropriate faculty body.7 The faculty or an appropriate faculty body should also exer­cise primary responsibility in determining the criteria for identifying the individuals whose appointments are to be terminated. These criteria may appropriately include considerations of length of service.
+
+The responsibility for identifying individuals whose appointments are to be terminated should be committed to a person or group designated or approved by the faculty. The allocation of this responsibility may vary according to the size and character of the institution, the extent of the terminations to be made, or other considerations of fairness in judgment. The case of a faculty member given notice of proposed termination of appointment will be governed by the following provisions.]
+
+(2) Before any proposals for program discon­tinuance on grounds of financial exigency are made, the faculty or an appropriate fac­ulty body will have opportunity to render an assessment in writing of the institution’s financial condition.
+
+[Note: Academic programs cannot be defined ad hoc, at any size; programs should be recognized academic units that existed prior to the declaration of finan­cial exigency. The term “program” should designate a related cluster of credit-bearing courses that constitute a coherent body of study within a discipline or set of related disciplines. When feasible, the term should designate a department or similar adminis­trative unit that offers majors and minors.]
+
+(i) The faculty or an appropriate faculty body will have access to at least five years of audited financial statements, current and following-year budgets, and detailed cash-flow estimates for future years.
+
+(ii) In order to make informed recom­mendations about the financial impact of program closures, the faculty or an appropriate faculty body will have access to detailed program, department, and administrative-unit budgets.
+
+(iii)  Faculty members in a program being considered for discontinuance because of  financial exigency will promptly be informed of this activity in writing and provided at least thirty days in which to respond to it. Tenured, tenure-track, and contingent faculty members will be informed and invited to respond.
+
+(3) If the administration issues notice to a particular faculty member of an intention to terminate the appointment because of financial exigency, the faculty member will have the right to a full hearing before a faculty committee. The hearing need not conform in all respects with a proceeding conducted pursuant to Regulation 5, but the essentials of an on-the-record adjudica­tive hearing will be observed. The issues in this hearing may include the following:
+
+(i) The existence and extent of the condi­tion of financial exigency. The burden will rest on the administration to prove the existence and extent of the condi­tion. The findings of a faculty committee in a previous proceeding involving the same issue may be introduced.
+
+(ii) The validity of the educational judg­ments and the criteria for identification for termination; but the recommenda­tions of a faculty body on these matters will be considered presumptively valid.
+
+(iii) Whether the criteria are being properly applied in the individual case.
+
+(4) If the institution, because of financial exi­gency, terminates appointments, it will not at the same time make new appointments, except in extraordinary circumstances where a serious distortion in the academic program would otherwise result. The appointment of a faculty member with tenure will not be terminated in favor of retaining a faculty member without tenure, except in extraordinary circumstances where a serious distortion of the academic program would otherwise result.
+
+(5) Before terminating an appointment because of financial exigency, the institution, with faculty participation, will make every effort to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position within the institution.
+
+(6) In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial exigency, the faculty member concerned will be given notice or severance salary not less than as prescribed in Regulation 8.
+
+(7) In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial exigency, the place of the faculty member concerned will not be filled by a replacement within a period of three years, unless the released faculty member has been offered reinstatement and at least thirty days in which to accept or decline it.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Current Handbook Policy
+
+Definition
+
+
+
+It is presently University policy and practice to involve the faculty and Board of Regents in planning and budgeting, and it is therefore likely that a financial problem would be clear to all as it developed. The involvement of the faculty in the budget and planning process, the faculty’s representation on the Budget Committee, and the regular reporting activity of the President and the CFO enable some of the faculty to be aware of the general financial condition of the University. The fact that the faculty chair is a member of the Board of Regents is another instance of faculty participation in University financial review. Nonetheless, it is possible that unforeseen and unpredictable developments could create a financial exigency not anticipated or expected by many of the faculty. Therefore, the following statement of policy attempts to prepare in advance the procedures for responding to financial problems that require a reduction in faculty.
+
+
+
+“Financial exigency” is understood to be an urgent need to reorder financial obligations in order to restore or preserve financial ability. “Financial ability” means that ability to provide from current income, both cash and accrued, the funds necessary to meet current expenses, including debt payments and sound reserves, without invading or depleting capital. The exigency must be bona fide, must affect the University as a whole, and may be declared only when short-term and limited solutions are not sufficient, and only after alternatives consonant with sound management have been explored or attempted.         
+
+Procedure for Declaring Financial Exigency
+
+The President will propose a declaration of financial exigency to the Budget Committee. The President and the CFO will present to this committee the information that indicates that financial exigency may need to be declared.
+
+
+
+After examining this information carefully, the Budget Committee will present a written response and a recommendation to the President as to whether a condition of financial exigency should be declared. The Budget Committee will be given free access to all financial records of the University.
+
+
+
+If, after receiving the recommendations of the Budget Committee, the President determines that a condition of financial exigency should be declared, the faculty must be notified. The President must present the proposal to a meeting of the Faculty Assembly, including evidence that a bona fide financial exigency exists, that the decision has been made in good faith, and that alternative solutions have been adequately explored.
+
+
+
+The Executive Committee of the Board of Regents will then review the Budget Committee’s report and the President’s recommendation. 
+
+
+
+After completing all of the above steps, the President, with the concurrence of the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents, may present the proposal to the Board of Regents and call upon the board to declare a financial exigency to exist.
+
+
+
+If the Board of Regents concurs with the proposal, the board declares financial exigency.
+
+Development of Steps to End Financial Exigency
+
+
+
+If financial exigency is declared, the Budget Committee will be responsible for recommending a package of budgetary reductions sufficient to end the condition as quickly as possible. This committee will seek information and advice from departments, committees, and officers of the University to enable it to make sound judgments about the impact of alternatives on the functions and programs of the University.
+
+
+
+After receiving the report of the Budget Committee, the President will recommend to the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents a package of budgetary adjustments that will end the condition of financial exigency as quickly as possible. The board will then adopt a financial exigency plan that will thereafter remain in effect until it is revised by the board or the period of financial exigency is declared ended by the board.
+
+Procedure for Termination
+
+Notice
+
+All faculty and all administrators shall be notified immediately of the possibility of non-reappointment for reasons of financial exigency.
+
+
+
+Notification of termination of a faculty member’s contract shall be three months prior to contract expiration for first-year faculty and six months prior to contract termination for second-year faculty. Faculty who have served more than two years must be given one full year of notice or in the absence of appropriate notice, one year’s salary.
+
+Order of Termination
+
+Decisions about which individual appointments are to be terminated because of financial exigency will be guided by the following considerations: In all cases of necessary faculty reductions, non-tenured faculty members in a department will be released before tenured faculty members except in circumstances where a serious distortion in the academic program would result. If tenured faculty must be released, the following factors will be considered in determining which faculty members are to be released: education and professional credentials, the length of the faculty member’s service to the University, the quality of the faculty member’s service to the University, the essential academic needs of the University of each potentially affected department, and the abilities of the individual faculty member in relation to the needs of the University and the potentially affected departments.
+
+Determination of Faculty Reductions
+
+The Vice President for Academic Affairs will recommend individual terminations to the ART Committee.
+
+
+
+The faculty member must be notified of the proposal to be presented to the ART Committee that affect them and have the right to examine the information presented to the ART Committee.
+
+
+
+The ART Committee will make a recommendation regarding termination to the President.
+
+
+
+The President makes the final decision regarding terminations and notifies faculty members of terminations in writing.
+
+Appeals
+
+Following notice of termination because of financial exigency, the faculty member has the right to a full hearing before the Grievance Committee. The request must be presented in writing to the Grievance Committee within 14 calendar days of receipt of the notification. The Grievance Committee’s decision may be appealed to the President. The President’s decision may be appealed to the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents. (See “Complaint and Grievance Procedures” section.)
+
+Continuation of Benefits
+
+For one year after termination, or until the terminated party becomes eligible for health insurance with a new employer, whichever comes first, the University shall provide health and major medical insurance for the terminated party and their family on the same basis as that fringe benefit was available to the faculty member prior to termination.  If the terminated party qualifies for early retirement and enters that program, then they shall be entitled to the health and other benefits of early retirement as set forth in the University retirement program in effect at that time.
+
+Re-employment
+
+When a tenured faculty member is to be terminated for financial exigency, the President will attempt to place that faculty member in an existing vacant position for which the faculty member is qualified. In instances where, in the opinion of the President, placement within the institution is not a viable alternative, the institution will assist the faculty member in finding employment outside the University.
+
+
+
+When a tenured faculty member is terminated for financial exigency, the position will not be filled by a new appointee with the same areas of specialization as the terminated faculty member within a period of three years unless the terminated faculty member has been offered, in writing, reappointment to the position at the previous rank and salary held, with the addition of an appropriate increase that would constitute the raise that would have been awarded during the period that the faculty member was not employed by the University.
+
+New Appointments
+
+New appointments to vacated or new faculty positions will not be made during the period of financial exigency except on the basis of overwhelming need and after review and recommendation by the ART Committee.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Financial Exigency.txt [/INST] Terminations Due to Financial Exigency and Program Discontinuation Unrelated to Financial Exigency
+
+Chapter III.T of the current Faculty Handbook addresses Terminations.  Per the policy, tenure-track and tenured faculty may be terminated due to either prolonged mental or physical illness or the elimination of faculty positions.  For Wednesday’s meeting, I’d like to focus on the latter.  However, please know that I will be recommending to the review team that the prolonged mental or physical illness clause be stricken from the handbook as it is based on former Regulation 4(e) of the AAUP’s Recommended Institutional Regulations, which was rescinded in 2012 because it essentially violated the ADA.  See the AAUP report Rights and Responsibilities of Faculty Members Who Have Disabilities for more information.  If a faculty member’s performance is such that the essential functions of the job cannot be performed even with reasonable accommodations under the ADA, then the administration and faculty member should attempt to seek a negotiated resolution.  Failing a mutually satisfactory resolution, the University may seek dismissal for adequate cause.  See page 36 of the 2012 AAUP Accommodating Faculty Members Who Have Disabilities report.
+
+Elimination of Faculty Positions
+
+Per Chapter III.T, the termination of a faculty appointment may occur through the elimination of a position by means of a “review of a tenure track position and discontinuation of the position, as provided for in Chapter IV.”
+
+Chapter IV. E - Contingencies and Resource Allocation in turn addresses terminations due to “financially contingent situations.”  It sets forth three main criteria to be used in financially contingent situations, as well as detailed procedures regarding how such decisions will be made and ultimately declared by the Board.  It is important to note that the policy does not define financial contingencies.
+
+For several decades, the AAUP’s operative definition of “financial exigency” was “a financial crisis that threatened the very existence of an institution.”  In 2013, in the AAUP report entitled, The Role of the Faculty in Conditions of Financial Exigency, the term was redefined as “a severe financial crisis that fundamentally compromises the academic integrity of the institution as a whole.”  OWU’s policy, contrary to position outlined in the 2013 report above, does not define what constitutes a “financial contingent situation.”  This is not unusual.  Per data from a July 2020 AAUP report entitled Policies on Academic Freedom, Dismissal for Cause, Financial Exigency and Program Discontinuance (provides a statistical analysis of the presence of AAUP-recommended policies on academic freedom, dismissal for cause, financial exigency, and program discontinuance in 197 faculty handbooks/collective bargaining agreements), 13% of the schools sampled used the AAUP’s definition of financial exigency, compared to 33% of whom adopted an alternative definition, and 55% who failed to define the term at all. See pages 10 and 11 of the report.  
+
+Not defining financial exigency is, in my view, potentially advantageous to the University as it does not tie the Board to a rigid definition.  However, I wanted to confer with you on this issue and confirm that I should not move to define “financial exigency.”  It also raises the question whether I should move to modify Chapter IV.E in any substantial manner with regard to financial exigency.  Making substantive modifications may cause the review team or other members of the faculty to become more familiar with the above referenced AAUP materials, which in turn may result in a call for a formal financial exigency definition and a demand to adopt other AAUP recommended regulations in this area.  That said, I can certainly offer an alternative procedural approach with respect to proposals pertaining to non-academic programs, services, and personnel as suggested by Rock in his annotated review of the Faculty Handbook.  
+
+New Policy Addressing Terminations Due to Program Discontinuation
+
+As noted above, Chapter IV. E - Contingencies and Resource Allocation is limited to “financially contingent situations.”  Current University policy does not include a policy addressing dismissal of tenured faculty due to program discontinuations unrelated to financial contingencies that are based on educational considerations.  I suspect that the handbook is silent in this regard because the 1940 AAUP Statement on Academic Freedom did not recognize terminations due to program discontinuation based on educational considerations when the handbook was originally drafted.  Regulation 4(d) of the Association’s Recommended Institutional Regulations, however, does and it was adopted many years after the 1940 AAUP statement.  As such, I recommend that Chapter III.T of the current Faculty Handbook be amended to include a subsection devoted to terminations due to program discontinuations.  
+
+Standard policy in this area requires that such discontinuations be based essentially on educational considerations as “determined primarily by the faculty or a faculty committee.”  Educational considerations do not include cyclical or temporary variations in enrollment.  Rather, they reflect long-term judgements that the mission of the University is enhanced by the discontinuation.  Like the financial exigency, most schools have clauses that require the institution to make efforts to transfer a faculty member to another position.  If a transfer is not feasible, then appropriate length notice or severance salary is provided.  Standard policy at many schools, as recommended by the AAUP, is also to allow for an appeal to a faculty committee.  
+
+At the end of this document is an example of such a policy from Drew University, which is brief and to the point.  Similar succinct policies can be found in the Albion (2.15.4), Lewis and Clark (3.14.4), and Luther (410.1.2) handbooks. For more comprehensive policy examples, please see the Susquehanna (4.14.3) and Kenyon (2.3.15) faculty handbooks.  Other examples can be provided upon request.
+
+With your permission, I will provide a model policy addressing such terminations in the initial draft of the updated handbook.
+
+
+
+Other Reasons for Termination of Faculty
+
+Although not common practice, the Board and administration should note that John Carrol University, on the advice of its legal counsel, recently adopted a clause that permits tenured faculty to be terminated due “budgetary hardship.”  I cannot represent to the review team or your faculty that such a policy is industry practice; however, given current demographic projections and the financial constraints caused by Covid, I am compelled to at least bring this development to your attention.  I also suspect that other institutions’ Boards may eventually decide they have no other choice than to follow John Carrol’s lead given higher ed financial forecasts.  Those that do, however, should be prepared for faculty allegations that the institution does not value academic freedom or tenure.  They also must steel for bad press and potential censure from the AAUP.  The political fall-out will be severe.
+
+Here is a link to the JCU policy:  https://jcu.edu/sites/default/files/2020-11/Budgetary%20Hardship%20Revised_comparison.pdf.  I can also send minutes from a faculty meeting where the Chair of the Board and President discussed the changes with the John Carrol faculty upon request.
+
+Below are a few news links addressing the John Carrol policy:
+
+https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/03/05/john-carroll-u-dramatically-alters-terms-tenure
+
+https://www.wksu.org/education/2021-03-05/john-carroll-university-professors-outraged-over-loss-of-tenure-protections
+
+https://bestofsno.com/52345/college/the-potential-impact-of-handbook-amendments-on-jcus-national-ranking/
+
+My recommendation is that a policy like JCU’s should not be pursued as part of this engagement and our focus should be on adopting a termination due to program discontinuation policy.  I am concerned that pursuing such a policy will adversely impact the faculty’s approval of the updated handbook.
+
+
+
+
+Drew University Example
+
+Discontinuance of an Academic Program or Department Not Mandated by Financial Exigency
+
+Termination of an appointment with continuous tenure, or of a probationary or specified appointment before the end of the specified term, may occur as a result of a bona fide formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction. Relocation of faculty members according to normal planning procedures may occur as a result of a reduction in a program or department of instruction. In the case of termination resulting from the discontinuance of a program or department, the following standards and procedures will apply:
+
+The decision to discontinue formally a program or department of instruction will be based upon educational considerations as determined by the Faculty or appropriate committee thereof. If, through the processes of review and final decision, the administration and Board of Trustees differ with the faculty judgment, the reasons for the disagreement shall be stated and the Faculty shall have an opportunity for further consideration and further communication of its views.
+
+Before the President issues notice to a faculty member of the intention to terminate an appointment because of formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction, the University will make every effort to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position. If placement in another position would be facilitated by a reasonable period of training, financial and other support for such training will be proffered. If no such position is available, the faculty member’s appointment may then be terminated, with provision for severance salary equitably adjusted to the faculty member’s length of past and potential service.
+
+A faculty member may appeal a proposed relocation or termination resulting from a discontinuance and has a right to a full hearing before a faculty committee. The hearing need not conform in all respects with a Termination for Cause proceeding (see D.4. below), but the essentials of an on-the-record adjudicative hearing will be observed. The issues in such a hearing may include the University’s failure to satisfy any of the conditions specified in this section. In such a hearing a faculty determination that a program or department is to be discontinued will be considered presumptively valid, but the burden of proof on other issues will rest on the administration.</s>"
+<s>[INST] Flagler College IWPM Proposal Draft 2 new sig.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Flagler College IWPM Proposal.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] FM Changes.txt [/INST] To make language regarding salary increases commensurate with promotion the same for tenure-line faculty as they are in the current draft for Professors of the Practice (ex. on page 64, lines 2-3):  
+
+
+
+Proposed amendment:  Article IV, Section 3, pg. 59, lines 2-13.  Follow with “This will usually be accompanied by a salary increase above the faculty member’s then-annual salary amount.”
+
+
+
+Same addition on pg. 62 regarding promotion to Professor:  line 8:  “Promotion, if granted, will become effective with the next academic year, and will usually be accompanied by a salary increase above the faculty member’s then-annual salary amount.”
+
+
+
+And again on pg. 70, line 35: “Tenure, I granted, will become effective with the next academic year, and will usually be accompanied by a salary increase above the faculty member’s then-annual salary amount.”</s>"
+"<s>[INST] FSEC, FAC, Legal, Dean Comments.txt [/INST] FSEC, FAC, Deans, and Legal Comments to 3rd Draft
+
+
+
+
+
+Full-Time Faculty Evaluation Process, Criteria, and Standards 
+
+Tom Knutsen (Legal): Suggests the following text be added under the above header: 
+
+“The policies and procedures set forth herein are designed to ensure that all faculty are treated fairly in matters dealing with faculty rank, advancement, promotions in rank, and tenure. This handbook reflects current procedures which may change from time to time.”  
+
+Faculty Evaluation Schedule
+
+Deans: All deans support one to three years of credit being given to candidates (instead of two years maximum), at the discretion of the provost.
+
+Faculty Evaluation Criteria and Documentation 
+
+ELCA Values
+
+Sharon Docter: There are many references in the document concerning the requirement that faculty members serve ELCA values.  I suspect that this was also in our old handbook.   (I wasn’t able to tell from the document which changes were new).  I understand that this is something that will probably need to stay for many reasons, but it does make me a little bit nervous.    How do you define what the ELCA values are?  What if the ELCA values change, so that requirements are imposed that those teaching at Lutheran colleges be Christian?  The vagueness of what ELCA values are makes me nervous, but I do understand that this is something that may have to stay.
+
+Emma Hooper: I share Sharon’s concern about basing our faculty evaluations on values that we, as faculty, do not have any authority over. It also appears that the addition of the mention of ELCA values is being added and was not in our existing Faculty Evaluations Process and Standards document. Would it make more sense to expect faculty to adhere to the University’s Mission, something that faculty at least have some ability to provide input on, which are grounded in ELCA values? My concern is that the values of the ELCA are too removed from CLU faculty oversight.
+
+Deans: Deans suggest that DEI be weaved throughout the dossier and/or added as a preamble, and not placed in its own category.  We recommend either leaving out mention of the ELCA or articulating the values of ELCA related to DEI. Concerns were raised about elevating ELCA when ELCA’s own DEI efforts related to race have shown minimal results, even though the aspirations are laudable.
+
+
+
+Contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
+
+Sharon Docter: I liked the inclusion of DEI as a criterion.  I also appreciated that the faculty member has the flexibility to incorporate contributions that enhance DEI across all areas (teaching, advising, service).  I liked that the phrase “and/or” is used when discussing the areas where DEI can be incorporated.  It does seem at some point a definition about contributions to DEI work would be needed, but I would think that is something that can be worked on at a later time.
+
+Deans: See comments under ECLA Values section.
+
+Campus Citizenship
+
+Deans: It is recommended that the task force looks at the AAUP section related to collegiality. https://www.aaup.org/report/collegiality-criterion-faculty-evaluation
+
+Teaching Effectiveness
+
+Sharon Docter: I note that under “Reflection and Iterative Growth,” (p. 7) there is the requirement that “student achievement or other outcomes improve over time.”  This seems like a difficult standard for faculty to meet.  Can I really say at this point that student achievement in my courses has improved over time?  I would like to think so, but sometimes no matter how effective I believe myself to be, there may not be a difference in grade distributions or student achievement or how well they are doing, because a whole host of factors contribute to student achievement.  Certainly the quality of teaching is important, but other factors invariably also influence student achievement so I would suggest striking this criterion.
+
+Emma Hooper: 
+
+In the Teaching Effectiveness section (p. 5), it states that faculty will be evaluated based on the course goals, which are generally articulated in course syllabi. However, course goals are sometimes developed by a program collectively or influenced by accrediting bodies. In this case, perhaps faculty should be evaluated in how they interpret and reach goals, but not necessarily articulate or define them.  Also in the Teaching Effectiveness section (p. 6), a criteria is that, “the instructor strives to make achievement equitable.” This seems a little vague to me, and like it could be interpreted to mean that if a student receives poor grades in a course, then the faculty member is not making achievement equitable. It seems like this criteria should clarify what making “achievement equitable” means or it should clarify that the faculty member should make “access to achievement equitable.”
+
+I agree with Sharon that the criteria that “student achievement or other outcomes improve over time” (p. 7) is overly vague. If a class is run well and students perform well from the start, then how would improvement in student achievement or other outcomes be assessed? Should this be clarified to say something like, “when student achievement or other outcomes are initially substandard, they improve over time?”
+
+Deans: We applaud the attempt to be as comprehensive as possible, but we question how practical it is to have 32 sub-criteria for effective teaching. 
+
+In addition, we want to add that there are no clear links with institutional, school, or program learning outcomes.
+
+Student Advising/Mentoring
+
+Sharon Docter: I know that advising evaluations are currently distributed and included in the candidate’s confidential file.  It seems like the candidate should have the opportunity to see and reflect upon these evaluations.  They could perhaps respond to criticisms or comments that may be unfair.  I understand that the rationale for not sharing the advising evaluations with the candidate is to protect the confidentiality of the advisees, but perhaps a minimum number of advisee could be established (e.g., 25 advisees), so that the faculty member who has the minimum number of advisees would be able to see and respond to feedback while still protecting the confidentiality of the advisees.  If faculty are to improve as advisors and mentors, it seems that this feedback is critical.
+
+Ryan Medders: Should advising be a separate criteria for evaluation? Given the new professional advising model we’ve switched to, I think that it is appropriate to delete this element. And TUG professors are now mentors, which is a very different service than advising. Perhaps this can be folded into service to the department?
+
+FAC: This section needs to be modified to better reflect the new advising system, but with particular attention paid to how it will negatively and differentially affect how graduate school faculty are evaluated in this category. There is a significant concern regarding keeping transcript evaluation, assistance with degree posting, etc. out of any ART criteria.
+
+Service
+
+Emma Hooper: The ART Packet for All Candidates is first mentioned in the Service section, should it be referred to earlier with regard to the Teaching, Advising, and Scholarship sections? Also, I assume that a revision of this document is planned, but I just wanted to confirm that the Packet document will also be updated according to these revisions. Is that the plan?
+
+Community Service
+
+Deans: Deans agree that service in this category must be related to activities that bring disciplinary expertise to the community.
+
+President: Would like a clause added stressing that service is required in all three areas.
+
+Academic Unit Guidelines 
+
+Emma Hooper: When discussing the Establishment and Approval of Academic Evaluation Guidelines (p. 14), the document states that, “The Provost will forward the proposed division guidelines, decisions, and related information to the President for final approval.” However, this is in contradiction to the ADRI chart, which indicates that faculty have Approval authority over the ability to “Develop Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure Criteria (Specific).” The ADRI chart stipulates that the Provost has veto power, but does not grant the president any authority over specific ART criteria.
+
+Deans: Deans agree that academic units should provide ART with guidelines regarding expectations for Teaching, Research, and Service.
+
+Faculty Evaluations
+
+Annual Report
+
+Deans expressed concerns about the following:
+
+Faculty have often been resistant to step into leadership roles, and the added work involved in evaluating their colleagues may create more of a barrier to having these leadership roles filled. One solution may be a more explicit requirement for leadership for promotion to full professor.
+
+A second concern is a challenge that people at all levels in the organization face in being able to write clear, helpful, attainable goals.
+
+The dean is expected to comment on progress toward goal attainment, however, any such comments will be less than helpful if goals are poorly articulated, poorly written, or unattainable.
+
+Course Evaluations
+
+FAC: There is concern regarding the language used in the new criteria regarding, “No consistently negative student ratings of teacher accessibility or interaction skills.” 
+
+
+As graduate faculty often teach the same cohort of students over a number of years,  and the fact that grad faculty serve multiple roles as students’ dissertation chairs, write remediation plans, grade comps, etc., there is a possibility for the halo/horn effect and reputational bias to influence evaluations. 
+
+
+
+Second- and Fourth-Year Reviews
+
+Submission of Dossier
+
+Sharon Docter: Annual evaluations now part of dossier (p. 21):  While I can see that there is some value in including the annual evaluations as part of the dossier, I have mixed feelings about this.  The annual evaluations I regard as a tool for the faculty member to use in putting together their dossier and as a faculty member would prefer that they not be included as part of the dossier.
+
+Emma Hooper: I am not necessarily opposed to including Annual Faculty Reports in the ART evaluation process; however, as we are revising this process, it may also be helpful to review the Annual Faculty Report requirements and structure. For example, the current Annual Report focuses more on reporting scholarship, rather than reflecting on or self-assessing it. In the suggested revision document (p. 16), when discussing the Annual Report, the document states that, “The self assessment should also describe the progress made in reaching the goals identified in the previous year.  Finally, it should propose measurable goals for the following academic year.” Currently, I don’t believe that the Annual Report clearly or directly requires this.
+
+Process – Dean Evaluation
+
+All deans support that the candidate would receive their feedback during 2nd and 4th year reviews and that the 6th year dean evaluation would remain confidential.  The process would increase transparency and accountability.
+
+
+
+Tenure Policy, Eligibility, and Standards 
+
+Eligibility for Tenure
+
+President: The president would like to add a clause indicating that the Board has the authority to grant the president a tenure appointment at the time of initial hire. 
+
+Extending the Probationary Period
+
+Tom Knudsen (Legal): Legal has made suggested edits to this clause.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Procedures for Promotion and Tenure Review
+
+Confirmation of Candidacy
+
+Todd Knudsen (Legal):  Suggests removal of Foreign National text. 
+
+Eligibility
+
+FAC: Unclear if the candidate has to have completed 10 year/4 years or be in their 10th year/4th year. FAC suggests IN their 10th year/4th year was the intention and this should be clarified to reflect that more clearly. 
+
+Dossier
+
+Deans: Deans agree with dossier deadlines being moved forward to the end of June so chairs and deans could complete their reviews in the summer.
+
+Academic Affairs Committee
+
+Ryan: Made comment that dossier should only go to board upon request.  
+
+Appeals
+
+Tom Knudsen (Legal): 
+
+In response to the prejudicial and inadequate consideration definitions; Are these the only two ways “procedural” error can occur? Curious as to the provenance of these definitions.
+
+In response to the added note addressing discrimination complaints raised in an appeal: Is this the appropriate place for this statement?
+
+Post-tenure/Post-6th Year Review Policy and Procedures 
+
+Procedures
+
+Deans: Deans agreed that there needs to be some sort of repercussion of a faculty member not performing post-tenure.  All were agreed that there should be an articulated expectation of what is required of a Full Professor and for those who do not meet these expectations, then they may be reverted to a rank that better fits their performance. In addition, we are concerned that the proposal does not specify a role for the deans in the post-tenure review.
+
+
+
+
+
+Dean Evaluation
+
+Deans: All deans support that the 6th year dean evaluation would remain confidential.  The process would increase transparency and accountability.
+
+
+
+Miscellaneous Issues Raised by Deans
+
+Non-tenure to Tenure Track. A process needs to be developed for this change.
+
+Not-ranked to Ranked Faculty. A process needs to be developed for this change.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] FSEC, Legal, Dean Comments.txt [/INST] FSEC, FAC, Deans, and Legal Comments to 3rd Draft
+
+
+
+
+
+Full-Time Faculty Evaluation Process, Criteria, and Standards 
+
+Todd Knutsen (Legal): Suggests the following text be added under the above header: 
+
+“The policies and procedures set forth herein are designed to ensure that all faculty are treated fairly in matters dealing with faculty rank, advancement, promotions in rank, and tenure. This handbook reflects current procedures which may change from time to time.”  
+
+Faculty Evaluation Schedule
+
+Deans: All deans support one to three years of credit being given to candidates (instead of two years maximum), at the discretion of the provost.
+
+Faculty Evaluation Criteria and Documentation 
+
+ELCA Values
+
+Sharon Docter: There are many references in the document concerning the requirement that faculty members serve ELCA values.  I suspect that this was also in our old handbook.   (I wasn’t able to tell from the document which changes were new).  I understand that this is something that will probably need to stay for many reasons, but it does make me a little bit nervous.    How do you define what the ELCA values are?  What if the ELCA values change, so that requirements are imposed that those teaching at Lutheran colleges be Christian?  The vagueness of what ELCA values are makes me nervous, but I do understand that this is something that may have to stay.
+
+Emma Hooper: I share Sharon’s concern about basing our faculty evaluations on values that we, as faculty, do not have any authority over. It also appears that the addition of the mention of ELCA values is being added and was not in our existing Faculty Evaluations Process and Standards document. Would it make more sense to expect faculty to adhere to the University’s Mission, something that faculty at least have some ability to provide input on, which are grounded in ELCA values? My concern is that the values of the ELCA are too removed from CLU faculty oversight.
+
+Deans: Deans suggest that DEI be weaved throughout the dossier and/or added as a preamble, and not placed in its own category.  We recommend either leaving out mention of the ELCA or articulating the values of ELCA related to DEI. Concerns were raised about elevating ELCA when ELCA’s own DEI efforts related to race have shown minimal results, even though the aspirations are laudable.
+
+
+
+Contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
+
+Sharon Docter: I liked the inclusion of DEI as a criterion.  I also appreciated that the faculty member has the flexibility to incorporate contributions that enhance DEI across all areas (teaching, advising, service).  I liked that the phrase “and/or” is used when discussing the areas where DEI can be incorporated.  It does seem at some point a definition about contributions to DEI work would be needed, but I would think that is something that can be worked on at a later time.
+
+Deans: See comments under ECLA Values section.
+
+Campus Citizenship
+
+Deans: It is recommended that the task force looks at the AAUP section related to collegiality. https://www.aaup.org/report/collegiality-criterion-faculty-evaluation
+
+Teaching Effectiveness
+
+Sharon Docter: I note that under “Reflection and Iterative Growth,” (p. 7) there is the requirement that “student achievement or other outcomes improve over time.”  This seems like a difficult standard for faculty to meet.  Can I really say at this point that student achievement in my courses has improved over time?  I would like to think so, but sometimes no matter how effective I believe myself to be, there may not be a difference in grade distributions or student achievement or how well they are doing, because a whole host of factors contribute to student achievement.  Certainly the quality of teaching is important, but other factors invariably also influence student achievement so I would suggest striking this criterion.
+
+Emma Hooper: 
+
+In the Teaching Effectiveness section (p. 5), it states that faculty will be evaluated based on the course goals, which are generally articulated in course syllabi. However, course goals are sometimes developed by a program collectively or influenced by accrediting bodies. In this case, perhaps faculty should be evaluated in how they interpret and reach goals, but not necessarily articulate or define them.  Also in the Teaching Effectiveness section (p. 6), a criteria is that, “the instructor strives to make achievement equitable.” This seems a little vague to me, and like it could be interpreted to mean that if a student receives poor grades in a course, then the faculty member is not making achievement equitable. It seems like this criteria should clarify what making “achievement equitable” means or it should clarify that the faculty member should make “access to achievement equitable.”
+
+I agree with Sharon that the criteria that “student achievement or other outcomes improve over time” (p. 7) is overly vague. If a class is run well and students perform well from the start, then how would improvement in student achievement or other outcomes be assessed? Should this be clarified to say something like, “when student achievement or other outcomes are initially substandard, they improve over time?”
+
+Deans: We applaud the attempt to be as comprehensive as possible, but we question how practical it is to have 32 sub-criteria for effective teaching. In addition, we want to add that there are no clear links with institutional, school, or program learning outcomes.
+
+Student Advising/Mentoring
+
+Sharon Docter: I know that advising evaluations are currently distributed and included in the candidate’s confidential file.  It seems like the candidate should have the opportunity to see and reflect upon these evaluations.  They could perhaps respond to criticisms or comments that may be unfair.  I understand that the rationale for not sharing the advising evaluations with the candidate is to protect the confidentiality of the advisees, but perhaps a minimum number of advisee could be established (e.g. 25 advisees), so that the faculty member who has the minimum number of advisees would be able to see and respond to feedback while still protecting the confidentiality of the advisees.  If faculty are to improve as advisors and mentors, it seems that this feedback is critical.
+
+Ryan Medders: Should advising be a separate criteria for evaluation? Given the new professional advising model we’ve switched to, I think that it is appropriate to delete this element. And TUG professors are now mentors, which is a very different service than advising. Perhaps this can be folded into service to the department?
+
+Service
+
+Emma Hooper: The ART Packet for All Candidates is first mentioned in the Service section, should it be referred to earlier with regard to the Teaching, Advising, and Scholarship sections? Also, I assume that a revision of this document is planned, but I just wanted to confirm that the Packet document will also be updated according to these revisions. Is that the plan?
+
+Community Service
+
+Deans: Deans agree that service in this category must be related to activities that bring disciplinary expertise to the community.
+
+President: Would like a clause added stressing that service is required in all three areas.
+
+Academic Unit Guidelines 
+
+Emma Hooper: When discussing the Establishment and Approval of Academic Evaluation Guidelines (p. 14), the document states that, “The Provost will forward the proposed division guidelines, decisions, and related information to the President for final approval.” However, this is in contradiction to the ADRI chart, which indicates that faculty have Approval authority over the ability to “Develop Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure Criteria (Specific).” The ADRI chart stipulates that the Provost has veto power, but does not grant the president any authority over specific ART criteria.
+
+Deans: Deans agree that academic units should provide ART with guidelines regarding expectations for Teaching, Research, and Service.
+
+Faculty Evaluations
+
+Annual Report
+
+Deans expressed concerns about the following:
+
+Faculty have often been resistant to step into leadership roles, and the added work involved in evaluating their colleagues may create more of a barrier to having these leadership roles filled. One solution may be a more explicit requirement for leadership for promotion to full professor.
+
+A second concern is a challenge that people at all levels in the organization face in being able to write clear, helpful, attainable goals.
+
+The dean is expected to comment on progress toward goal attainment, however, any such comments will be less than helpful if goals are poorly articulated, poorly written, or unattainable.
+
+
+
+Second- and Fourth-Year Reviews
+
+Submission of Dossier
+
+Sharon Docter: Annual evaluations now part of dossier (p. 21):  While I can see that there is some value in including the annual evaluations as part of the dossier, I have mixed feelings about this.  The annual evaluations I regard as a tool for the faculty member to use in putting together their dossier and as a faculty member would prefer that they not be included as part of the dossier.
+
+Emma Hooper: I am not necessarily opposed to including Annual Faculty Reports in the ART evaluation process; however, as we are revising this process, it may also be helpful to review the Annual Faculty Report requirements and structure. For example, the current Annual Report focuses more on reporting scholarship, rather than reflecting on or self-assessing it. In the suggested revision document (p. 16), when discussing the Annual Report, the document states that, “The self assessment should also describe the progress made in reaching the goals identified in the previous year.  Finally, it should propose measurable goals for the following academic year.” Currently, I don’t believe that the Annual Report clearly or directly requires this.
+
+Process – Dean Evaluation
+
+All deans support that the candidate would receive their feedback during 2nd and 4th year reviews and that the 6th year dean evaluation would remain confidential.  The process would increase transparency and accountability.
+
+
+
+Tenure Policy, Eligibility, and Standards 
+
+Eligibility for Tenure
+
+President: The president would like to add a clause indicating that the Board has the authority to grant the president a tenure appointment at the time of initial hire. 
+
+Extending the Probationary Period
+
+Todd Knudsen (Legal): Legal has made suggested edits to this clause.
+
+Procedures for Promotion and Tenure Review
+
+Confirmation of Candidacy
+
+Todd Knudsen (Legal):  Suggests removal of Foreign National text. 
+
+Dossier
+
+Deans: Deans agree with dossier deadlines being moved forward to the end of June so chairs and deans could complete their reviews in the summer.
+
+Appeals
+
+Todd Knudsen (Legal): 
+
+In response to the prejudicial and inadequate consideration definitions; Are these the only two ways “procedural” error can occur? Curious as to the provenance of these definitions.
+
+In response to the added note addressing discrimination complaints raised in an appeal: Is this the appropriate place for this statement?
+
+Post-tenure/Post-6th Year Review Policy and Procedures 
+
+Procedures
+
+Deans: Deans agreed that there needs to be some sort of repercussion of a faculty member not performing post-tenure.  All were agreed that there should be an articulated expectation of what is required of a Full Professor and for those who do not meet these expectations, then they may be reverted to a rank that better fits their performance. In addition, we are concerned that the proposal does not specify a role for the deans in the post-tenure review.
+
+Dean Evaluation
+
+Deans: All deans support that the 6th year dean evaluation would remain confidential.  The process would increase transparency and accountability.
+
+
+
+Miscellaneous Issues Raised by Deans
+
+Non-tenure to Tenure Track. A process needs to be developed for this change.
+
+Not-ranked to Ranked Faculty. A process needs to be developed for this change.</s>"
+<s>[INST] Georgian Court IWPM Proposal v8.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] GLCA Mandatory External Review Policies.txt [/INST] Wooster
+
+Below is text from Wooster’s handbook addressing external letters.
+
+LETTERS FROM EXTERNAL EXPERTS 
+
+Statements from external experts are helpful in evaluating faculty performance and potential. External reviewers are contacted by the Provost and requested to comment on the quality of the candidates’ scholarly work. At least one external evaluation is expected for faculty during their 4th-year review at the College (usually during the fourth year of service); and at least two evaluations are expected for faculty being considered for tenure and/or promotion to associate professor (usually during the sixth year of service). Faculty members are not expected to have an external evaluation during their 2nd-year review. 
+
+Faculty members undergoing their 4th-year review or a tenure and/or promotion review, are asked to submit a list of 8-10 experts in their field who can comment on the quality of their professional work and activity. Faculty are strongly encouraged to include, when possible, colleagues who already hold the same or higher rank as that for which you are applying, and people who have experience in a liberal arts college, as they may have a better idea of the many demands in such a setting. You may also wish to consider someone whose work is tied to your research who does not hold an academic appointment. Please note that the external reviewers will be asked to submit a c.v. along with their evaluation. Therefore, you should select experts whose c.v. will reflect a commensurate record of professional accomplishments. For each possible reviewer, faculty should include: 
+
+		Name and contact information (including current e-mail address and phone number) 
+
+		A brief description of why they believe each person is appropriate to evaluate their work, including their area of research and its relation to the candidate’s. Include recent noteworthy publications if this is not readily identifiable on the reviewer’s public web page. 
+
+		For each reviewer, an indication of the relationship the faculty has with them (e.g., met at a conference, served together on a panel, have not met but familiar with my work, have never met, etc.). 
+
+Faculty should not include their dissertation advisor, members of the dissertation committee, friends, untenured assistant professors, or previous or current collaborators. Faculty are not to contact their reviewers regarding this matter. The Provost will select and contact reviewers from the list to evaluate the materials submitted. For reviews of colleagues in joint positions or interdisciplinary hires, the Provost will aim to ensure that external letters represent multiple disciplinary perspectives. 
+
+Faculty should upload all materials they wish to provide to external reviewers to FacultyFolio in the folder corresponding to their current review, such as “[LastName] [Year] – 4yr External Reviewer Materials.” 
+
+These should include: 
+
+	Curriculum Vitae 
+
+	Published Research (such as articles, book chapters, encyclopedia entries, creative work) 
+
+As applicable, faculty may also wish to include: 
+
+	Book Proposals 
+
+	Submitted manuscripts (clearly indicating status of submission) 
+
+	Grant proposals 
+
+	Book Reviews 
+
+	Links to digital scholarship 
+
+If candidates wish to submit materials in hard copy due to the nature of the work, they should provide copies to Academic Affairs and indicate that they are for external review. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Denison
+
+Note: Denison’s Faculty HB does not clearly outline its external review process.  There are clauses throughout the “Procedures Pertaining to Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion” that reference the role of external reviews.  Those are reprinted below.
+
+b.	Responsibilities of the Candidate
+
+6. Candidates for tenure and promotion shall provide a list of individuals who can recommend external reviewers qualified to make expert and objective evaluations of the candidate's scholarship 
+
+d. 	Responsibilities of Department Chair
+
+9.	Department chairs are responsible for asking candidates for tenure and promotion to provide a list of individuals who can recommend external reviewers qualified to make expert and objective evaluation of the candidate's scholarship. The department chair and the candidate shall forward the list of individuals to the Provost. The candidate should also submit a list of people who are disqualified from serving as external reviewers because of their familiarity with the candidate. Reviewers should not include anyone whom the candidate knows personally or professionally in such a way that the reviewer's opinion of the candidate's work might be predicted on the basis of their relationship. 
+
+10. In cases of tenure and promotion where outside reviewers submit evaluations of scholarship or creative works, tenured members of the department may read those reviews, and department chairs must read those reviews, but only after the department letter is completed. Colleagues who, after reading these reviews, wish to write an amendment to their letters addressing issues raised by the external reviews may do so. However, these amendments must be submitted to the chair who must then write an amendment to the departmental letter, following the procedures for approval of the draft departmental letter and sharing the completed amendment with the candidate as described below. Candidates in turn may submit a response to the amendment through the chair. In other words, all amendments to individual and departmental letters must follow the same procedures as those for departmental letters. 
+
+
+
+
+Kenyon
+
+At Kenyon, external review letters are included in the promotion and tenure dossier.  Below is the clause addressing the inclusion of external review letters in the dossier.
+
+3. Three evaluators from outside the College. The candidate submits five names and addresses, along with a rationale for each selection. The rationale should provide a brief description of the expertise of the external reviewers, and should explain the nature and extent of the member's relationship with them, so that TPC members will be aware of this context when reading the external evaluations of scholarly/artistic engagement. Candidates should not nominate evaluators with whom they share close personal relationships, who have served as their direct supervisors, or with whom they have closely collaborated on a creative or scholarly project since their last review. The Associate Provost selects three outside evaluators from whom to solicit letters. Three letters are required to complete the dossier. Any questions about this process should be directed to the Associate Provost.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Oberlin
+
+Below is text from Oberlin’s Procedures for Tenure addressing the role of external reviews.
+
+The evaluation of a candidate for tenure is expected to proceed along the following steps: 
+
+a. The candidate completes a Personal Information Report, which includes an optional self- evaluation component, and assembles materials that will be part of the tenure dossier, including a current curriculum vitae and copies of any scholarly or artistic work that the candidate wishes to include for evaluation. 
+
+b. The candidate compiles a list of scholars who might serve as external evaluators of the candidate’s scholarship or artistic activity. The department creates its own, similar, list of external evaluators. Friends, former teachers, or close collaborators of the candidate may not be among the external evaluators. Any level of collaboration or friendship should be disclosed by the candidate. It is desirable, but not necessary, to include among the external evaluators at least one person with experience teaching at a liberal arts college. However, the primary consideration in selection of evaluators is their professional expertise and ability to assess the quality and importance of the work under review. 
+
+c. The candidate compiles a list of Oberlin College Faculty outside of the candidate’s department who might serve as observers of the departmental deliberations concerning the tenure case. These observers will have complete access to materials used by the department and are to receive copies of the Department Report and the Chair’s Report (see paragraph h below). They are to submit, independently, letters to the Dean attesting to the fairness of the departmental process, or noting any manner in which the department may have failed to follow proper procedure in considering the tenure case. It is not the role of these outside observers to comment on the merits of the tenure case. Any tenured member of the Faculty (excluding those serving on the College Faculty Council or the General Faculty Council) may serve in the role of observer. The candidate should discuss the choice of observers with the chair or with the Dean. The two observers must be mutually acceptable to the candidate and the department. 
+
+d. The Dean meets with the candidate and the Chair of the department to discuss the tenure evaluation process, giving special attention to the materials to be included in the dossier. If the process is expected to deviate in any way from the normal process outlined here (e.g., if specific evidence of scholarly or artistic productivity is to be presented outside of the normal review process) the Dean, the candidate, and the Chair must agree on this departure and state such agreement in writing. A ranked list of potential external evaluators is agreed upon at this time, but the Dean has authority to make the final choice of evaluators. 
+
+e. The Chair secures agreement from three external evaluators and sends materials to them, together with a cover letter outlining their responsibilities. The cover letter is to follow the format provided by the Dean’s Office. The names of the external evaluators are not shared with the candidate. The Chair also secures agreement from two persons to serve as observers. 
+
+f. The Chair arranges for former students to be surveyed (perhaps by electronic means) for their assessment of the teaching and mentoring abilities of the candidate. (Note that this surveying is conducted entirely by the faculty, not by students.) The department is expected to provide qualitative and quantitative summaries of the survey results. 
+
+g. The Chair compiles the tenure dossier that, in addition to the items mentioned above, includes all student evaluation of teaching forms collected while the candidate has been on the Oberlin 
+
+Faculty and all progress toward tenure reports previously generated by the department or by the divisional Faculty Council. The department is expected to provide qualitative and quantitative summaries of these forms. 
+
+h. After letters have been received from the external evaluators and other materials are in place and have been reviewed by members of the department, the department meets to discuss the case, in the presence of the observers. A vote is taken openly2 on the question of whether or not the candidate should be recommended for tenure. Only persons who have reviewed the materials and have participated in the deliberations are permitted to vote, although this participation may be via telephone or video conferencing. The Chair then writes the Department Report, presenting the committee’s assessment of the performance of the candidate in each of several areas. All other committee members review the Department Report for accuracy and completeness. The Chair also prepares the Chair’s Report, which reports the committee vote, presents any minority views within the committee, and certifies the process that was followed in committee deliberations. The Chair’s report will be made available to the candidate and should not include the names of any committee members when reporting the votes. 
+
+i. The final versions of the Department Report and the Chair’s Report are given to the candidate and department at least one week before being sent, with the dossier, to the divisional Faculty Council. This is to insure for the candidate the opportunity to provide the Council with additional information if he or she feels such information is advisable. A copy of this information is to be given to the Department for its response. 
+
+j. The divisional Faculty Council reviews the tenure dossier. It may ask for clarification or for additional input from the department and/or the candidate. 
+
+k. If after consideration of a recommendation regarding tenure it becomes apparent that the divisional Faculty Council may take an action to decide against the recommendation submitted by the department, or against the awarding of tenure, the Council shall delay action on the case until the Dean has informed the candidate and the department Chair about the concerns of the Council and subsequently informed the Council about whatever views may have been expressed in response by the persons who were consulted. 
+
+l. The divisional Faculty Council votes in favor of or against recommending tenure for the candidate. A majority of at least two votes is required for the adoption by the Faculty Council of a decision to recommend the award of tenure. Abstentions do not affect the outcome of voting. If a total of three or more Faculty Council members withdraw or abstain from voting on a tenure recommendation, then only a simple majority is required for a positive recommendation. 
+
+m. If the vote of the divisional Faculty Council is positive, the decision is forwarded to the General Faculty Council, which makes its own recommendation. 
+
+n. The President presents to the Trustees the cases of those candidates being recommended for tenure. The Trustees have the power to ratify a positive recommendation and award an appointment with continuous tenure or to deny the awarding of tenure. 
+
+For Faculty members appointed as Associate Professors or Professors, a tenure decision may be made at the time of appointment or a short probationary period may be specified in the initial appointment letter. If a tenure decision is made in conjunction with an offer of appointment, parts (a) - (l) of the process outlined above will be modified through discussions between the department and the Council. Typically, the department will evaluate the record of scholarship, augmenting its judgment with that of external sources where possible. The department will also assess teaching ability through the review of student evaluations of teaching collected at the candidate’s current institution. After reviewing the evidence, the department will send a recommendation to the Council. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Earlham
+
+Below is text addressing the external review of scholarship from Earlham’s Evaluation Process for Teaching Faculty Contract Renewal and for Tenure Recommendations policy.
+
+f) External Review of Scholarship
+
+As part of the four-year review and the tenure review file, each faculty member is asked to suggest up to five outside individuals who might be asked to review the file, along with a brief explanation for each choice. People with whom the faculty member has had direct experience, for example, a dissertation advisor, or a co-author should not be members of the list. The Academic Dean will select two for the fourth year review and three for the tenure review and has the option to ask for additional names from which to choose. The reviewers will be invited to read a package of the candidate’s work, which will include the self-evaluation, a cv, and anything the faculty member would like to submit for consideration. Individuals hired before 2013 who are on tenure track have the option of taking advantage of this opportunity.
+
+Faculty will have the opportunity to respond to the evaluation of outside reviewers and that response will also become part of the file.
+
+The external review of scholarship contributes to the evaluation of Quality of Mind, but other indicators also remain important to demonstrating Quality of Mind (see section B – Appointment and Renewal Criteria, subsection 2.b. Quality of Mind). “Scholarship” for this external review could include not only books, monographs, and published articles, but also conference papers, external grants, performances, exhibitions, and products of student-faculty collaborations as appropriate to the faculty member’s position at Earlham. There is no specific numerical quota for the amount of scholarship that must be in the file; the emphasis instead is on the quality of that scholarship, as a demonstration of scholarly engagement within a faculty member’s field and of overall Quality of Mind.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Wabash
+
+Below is the clause from Wabash’s Tenure policy addressing external reviews.
+
+3. The faculty member will identify four outside evaluators of his or her research or creative work and will provide their names and contact information to the Dean of the College’s office by June 15 preceding the semester of the tenure review. The faculty member will also provide a brief rationale for the appropriateness of the persons submitted as potential reviewers. The Dean of the College, after consultation with the Department Chair and the appropriate Division Chair, will select two evaluators. At the date established on the review timetable (which is generally aligned near the first day of fall classes), the Dean will send the evaluators the faculty member’s up-to-date CV, copies of the candidate’s research or creative work, the Faculty Handbook statement on the expectation of faculty excellence (section 2.1), and a letter indicating that the College seeks an assessment of the quality, originality, and significance of the faculty member’s research or creative work. (A copy of the Dean’s letter will be included in the review dossier.) While the evaluators’ reports are shared only with the department review committee and the Academic Personnel Committee, their contents will be summarized in the discussion with the faculty member after the review is completed. 
+
+
+
+
+Ursinus
+
+In preparation for tenure review, candidates shall submit the following to the Dean: (1) list of external reviewers of the professional product(s); (2) professional product(s) for review; and (3) the candidate’s professional dossier. 
+
+1. External Reviewers: 
+
+By May 1 of the academic year preceding the tenure review, and without making contact with any of the individuals, the candidate submits to the Dean the names of four outside evaluators (other than professional collaborators or co-authors) who are qualified to judge the quality of the candidate's professional work. The candidate should also submit to the Dean a prospective list of materials to be reviewed. 
+
+• The candidate should identify each name by position, title, address, email address, telephone numbers, professional or other relationship, if any, with the candidate, and a brief description of the qualifications for reviewing the candidate's work. 
+
+• The Dean will consult with the Faculty Review Committee (FRC) chair to construct a list of four additional persons with a strong record of accomplishment in the candidate's field of expertise. 
+
+• The candidate may veto two names from this list. From this combined list of at least six names, the Dean in consultation with the Promotion and Tenure Committee, will choose three names, normally two of whom must be selected from the candidate's list.
+
+• It is the responsibility of the Dean to establish contact with the selected individuals, send them the materials to be reviewed, and solicit confidential reviews from them.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] GLCA Program DC Policy Data.txt [/INST] Policies regarding termination due to program/department discontinuation at institutions in the Great Lakes Colleges Association (GLCA) 
+
+
+
+Institution
+
+Termination Due to Program/Department Discontinuation Policy
+
+Financial Exigency Definition
+
+Antioch
+
+Yes.  See page 60 of their handbook. 
+
+Antioch College does not consider itself bound by other definitions and determinations used by other institutions or academic associations. The president of Antioch College and the Board of Trustees shall make the determination that a state of financial exigency exists or is imminent. The president shall have consulted with the Budget Committee for advice in making that determination. The following criteria, any one of which will be sufficient, will inform that decision: 
+
+i. A decline in total student enrollment totaling 20% or more over a period of three years; 
+
+ii. A current operating deficit, as defined by the Budget Committee, in excess of 3% of the College budget for three consecutive years, or 10% in a single year.
+
+
+
+Allegheny
+
+Yes. See page 68 of their handbook. 
+
+No definition
+
+
+
+Wooster
+
+No specific policy in handbook, but see following text from the Dismissal for Cause Policy: “It is not intended to address the College’s authority to dismiss faculty due to other circumstances, including financial exigency and change of institutional program.” 
+
+No Financial Exigency Policy in handbook.
+
+Kenyon
+
+No specific policy, however, Policy 2.3.14 states: “The reallocation of positions between and among departments and interdisciplinary programs for reasons other than financial exigency is not treated here.”
+
+No Financial Exigency Policy 
+
+
+
+Oberlin
+
+No
+
+No Financial Exigency Policy
+
+
+
+Denison
+
+No
+
+No Financial Exigency Policy.  See following text: “Academic offerings, practices, and personnel policies are subject to change in the event of exigent circumstances, including the ongoing COVID-19 situation.”
+
+Institution
+
+Termination Due to Program/Department Discontinuation Policy
+
+Financial Exigency Definition
+
+Kalamazoo
+
+Yes.  Any appointment may be terminated by the Administration with the approval of the Board of Trustees, for the following reasons: 1) adequate cause; 2) financial exigency; or 3) a change in institutional conditions or directions which affect the faculty member's department or the College as a whole.
+
+Financial exigency, as established by the Board of Trustees in consultation with the administration and faculty, is defined as a situation where an imminent financial crisis exists which threatens the survival of the institution as a whole and which cannot be alleviated by less drastic means.
+
+
+
+Hope
+
+Yes. Termination of a continuous appointment, or the dismissal of a teacher prior to the expiration of a term appointment, is possible on four grounds: adequate cause (see B7), financial exigency, the discontinuance of a program not mandated by financial exigency, and reasons related to physical or mental health.
+
+Financial exigency is understood as an imminent financial crisis which threatens the solvency of the institution and which cannot be alleviated by less drastic means.
+
+Less drastic means include but are not limited to extensive cost-cutting, a freeze on or reduction in compensation, early retirement, elimination of non-tenured and non-academic positions, reassignment of tenured faculty, reduction of faculty appointments to part-time status, and change in investment policy. In the weighing of alternatives, the retention of a viable academic program is the foremost consideration.
+
+Albion
+
+Yes.  2.15.4.
+
+Not defined.
+
+Wabash 
+
+3.2 The term “tenure” means that the services of a faculty member with tenure will be terminated only for cause (for example, continuing to perform, despite written warning, at a level below that prescribed in this handbook) or due to the College’s changing needs and circumstances.
+
+No Financial Exigency Policy.  See text in column 1.</s>"
+<s>[INST] GMC IWPM Proposal.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] GMU Annual IWPM Update Service Pro.txt [/INST] 2
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+28
+
+
+
+
+
+2
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+June 22, 2015
+
+
+
+
+
+Dr. Kathleen Owens
+
+President
+
+Gwynedd-Mercy University
+
+1325 Sumneytown Pike
+
+Gwynedd Valley, PA 19437
+
+
+
+Dear Kathy:
+
+
+
+We are pleased to offer this contract for Gwynedd-Mercy University’s subscription to Stevens Strategy’s Annual Institution-wide Policy Manual Update Service.  Stevens Strategy, in June of each year, will gather from the University all new and updated policies.  All new and updated policies should be emailed by the University in Microsoft Word format to Stephen Lazarus, SLazarus@StevensStrategy.com by June 31 of each year.  We will also analyze changes in the University’s accreditor standards and higher education best practices as of June and suggest amendments to University policies based upon these changes.  We will send our suggested modifications to the University in the Microsoft Word template by July 15 in each year for your review and approval.  All of our document editing will utilize Microsoft’s “Track Changes” software.  The University will respond with a list of approved changes by July 31 each year also utilizing Microsoft word and Microsoft’s “Track Changes” software.  By the end of August in each year, we will send to you a completely updated Institution-Wide Policy Manual. 
+
+
+
+This contract for Stevens Strategy’s Annual Institution-wide Policy Manual Update Service will begin in June 2016 and is for a five-year period.  The first payment of $10,000 is due upon the signing of this contract.  Thereafter, the college will be billed $10,000, plus inflation, annually beginning in June of 2017 and ending after the invoice submitted in June of 2020.  Payments are due on a net 15 day basis.  
+
+
+
+Should you find this contract acceptable, please sign two copies and return one to our headquarters at:  PO Box 72, 12 Island View, Grantham, NH 03753.  
+
+
+
+If you should wish to make this and all future payments by check, please forward the first payment of $10,000 to Stevens Strategy, LLC along with the signed contract.   
+
+
+
+If you should wish to make this and all future payments for this project by credit card, please fill out the following information ($10,000 plus a small transaction fee equal to our cost for the transaction will be added to your charges):
+
+
+
+I wish to make payment by: ____Visa ____MasterCard ____American Express
+
+
+
+
+
+	Credit Card Number: _____________________________
+
+	3 or 4 Digit Security Code: _____
+
+
+
+	Expiration Date: __/__
+
+
+
+	Print Name(s) on Card: _________________________________________________
+
+	____ Personal Card ____ Corporate Card
+
+
+
+	Cardholder Address:	________________________________________________
+
+				________________________________________________
+
+
+
+If you should wish to make this and all future payments by wire, please wire the first payment of $10,000 as follows:
+
+
+
+Stevens Strategy, LLC
+
+PO Box 72
+
+Grantham, NH 03753
+
+
+
+Bank:  Lake Sunapee Bank
+
+9 Main Street
+
+Newport, New Hampshire
+
+Acct#: 8236782210
+
+ABA#:  211770200
+
+
+
+We are exceptionally good at this work.  Our clients consistently give our work high ratings, and they also rate very highly the value of our work compared to the price for our services.  
+
+
+
+We will exceed your expectations.
+
+
+
+
+
+Offered for:						Accepted for:
+
+Stevens Strategy®, LLC					Gwynedd-Mercy University
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+_________________________				__________________________
+
+John A. Stevens						Dr. Kathleen Owens
+
+President						President
+
+
+
+
+Attachment One, Service Portfolio:
+
+Stevens Strategy offers an array of strategic management consulting services to the leaders of colleges, universities and schools.  
+
+
+
+Strategic Planning
+
+
+
+Effective strategic planning is the lynchpin for successful management of educational institutions in our rapidly-changing world.  The Stevens Strategy 5-phased strategic planning process has been proven successful at numerous colleges, universities and schools, whether they are large or small, public or independent.  
+
+
+
+Our process encourages the president and board to lead their institution in developing its vision and strategy, yet it also provides a process that allows the whole campus community—its faculty, staff, students, alumni and others—to take ownership of the plan through extensive involvement in its development.  The consistent achievement of both of these objectives (executive leadership and broad ownership) while producing a sound and compelling strategic plan is a feat that distinguishes the Stevens Strategy process.  
+
+
+
+The five strategic planning phases include:
+
+
+
+I. 	 Process Design
+
+II. 	 Responses to Strategic Issues
+
+III.   Strategic Agenda Development
+
+IV.	 Operational Planning
+
+V.	 Implementation
+
+
+
+Strategic Governance
+
+
+
+Governing your institution strategically starts at the top of the organization...and the bottom… and everywhere else.  We can help your Board learn to govern strategically, focusing on high level policy and the measurement of key areas of institutional performance.  And we can work with your whole institution to determine what internal governance and management structures and systems for collaboration, communication, and decision-making will serve it most effectively.  We help boards of trustees, senior administrators, faculty and staff understand their domains of authority and roles in a sound system of shared governance.  Our experienced consultants can help your institution improve its capacity for making big strategic decisions effectively and quickly, as required by a rapidly-changing marketplace.
+
+
+
+Focused Strategic Analysis
+
+ 
+
+In addition to comprehensive strategic planning, we work closely with our clients in providing a variety of strategic analyses that focus on selected areas within the institution, specific issues or unique planning scenarios.  We apply the principles of our comprehensive strategic planning process to particular institutional needs to enable institutional leadership to evaluate the environment, think strategically and make significant decisions about the future with confidence and alacrity.  These projects include:
+
+ 
+
+Strategic Mission Review
+
+ 
+
+We lead institutions through the process of reconsideration of basic elements of their mission, helping them to determine the answers to critical questions: Should they provide co-educational or single-sex educational programming? Should they remain or become a liberal arts or comprehensive college or university, or should they merge with another institution?  We help the whole campus community—board, executive team, faculty, staff, students and alumni—work together to determine and share ownership of the course that will best allow the institution to sustain its mission and thrive in the future.
+
+ 
+
+Programs and Resource Optimization (PRO)
+
+ 
+
+Stevens Strategy has developed Programs and Resource Optimization (PRO), a new transformational academic program review process.  PRO is an analytical review of academic programs that engages the institution and involves faculty, staff, alumni and trustees.  The academic program review process has four key analytic components: Mission-Centeredness, Quality, Marketability, and Responsibility Center Data-based Analysis.  Each academic program is reviewed and measured based upon Mission, Quality, Marketability, and Net Income and ranked within three tiers from extremely successful to extremely unsuccessful.  With the analytical output of PRO, institutions can shift resources and develop goals that optimize academic program offerings and strategically manage change.  These findings can drive transformational decisions that result in significant shifts in institutional quality and financial performance.
+
+ 
+
+Strategic Organizational Review
+
+ 
+
+Are your key organizational units operating efficiently and effectively?  How do you know if you are getting the most from your resources, whether you are taking appropriate advantage of the latest technology, or if there are better ways to deliver institutional services?  We can help your institution to review processes, analyze expected and realized results, and assess customer satisfaction.  Then, based on these findings, we can help you to develop and implement changes to increase your organizational effectiveness and efficiency.  With major change efforts such as process redesign or organizational restructuring, we work closely with your staff to ensure that those who will be most affected by changes in the work environment are deeply involved in the process of analysis, assessment, and work redesign.  
+
+ 
+
+Candidate Identification Search
+
+ 
+
+Our Candidate Identification Search process focuses on providing just back-room search support—securing qualified candidates for our clients in an expedited fashion and costing about half as much as a traditional search process.  Unlike a traditional search, the client determines the job description, job classification and desired salary range for the open position, manages its internal search decision-making process, conducts on its own off-site or campus visits with semi-finalists and finalists, addresses candidate negotiations and is responsible for the appointment process.  By taking institutional ownership of these elements of the search process and relying on Stevens Strategy for back-room search support, considerable savings are realized.
+
+ 
+
+Accelerated or Abridged Planning
+
+ 
+
+In cases where significant planning efforts have already been initiated but require expert input and/or guidance to move forward or where time or resource constraints make the full strategic planning process impractical, we can introduce an abridged version of our traditional planning process to help your institution achieve success.  We can also focus our efforts on aspects of one of our time-tested phases of strategic planning, like strategic issue identification or operational planning.
+
+
+
+Strategic Enrollment Management, including Survey Research
+
+ 
+
+We guide institutions though the consideration of what their markets for students should be, how they should position and price themselves in those markets, what the quality, size and mix of their student body should be, and what they should do to recruit and retain that student body.  We conduct a thorough program and organizational evaluation and develop with you a research plan that relies upon internal and market-based focused group discussions and random sample surveys to determine student satisfaction with your current programs and how these programs and new ones might appeal to the marketplace.  Typically we work with a cross-functional team to develop an enrollment management plan based upon our evaluation and the results of our research.
+
+ 
+
+Strategic Infrastructure Review
+
+ 
+
+We help institutions determine how their physical campus should be developed and physical spaces should be allocated to achieve their mission; what mechanisms for planning, resource allocation, and delivering quality services will enable them to achieve their vision; and what uses of technology, in and out of the classroom, by faculty and administrators, and across programs and sites, will best enable them to deliver services and programs that meet the needs of their stakeholders and support their mission.
+
+ 
+
+Strategic Technology Assessment and Implementation
+
+ 
+
+Change is difficult and technology can be confusing—together they can bring an institution to its knees.  We have the people, the expertise, and the implementation processes to bring your systems on-line successfully and with as little disruption as possible.  We can help you assess which administrative computer system is best for your institution, when you should upgrade, what features are most important for you, and how much can you afford.  We can help your institution address these key questions during the all-important systems selection process.  Then we can manage the implementation of your selected information systems smoothly, efficiently, and in the context of your institutional culture and needs.
+
+ 
+
+Compensation System and Salary Equity Analyses
+
+ 
+
+Our compensation and equity studies help our clients determine the competitive rates of pay at peer higher education institutions.  The studies serve to provide timely information regarding compensation programs—including detailed information related to wages, salaries and employee benefits—offered to faculty and administrative personnel at comparable higher education institutions.  We also provide strategies for simplifying an institution’s employee classification and organizational systems as part of this product.  
+
+
+
+Regional Workforce Analysis
+
+ 
+
+Our Regional Workforce Analysis service identifies those industries in your institution’s state or region that are critical to the economy; determines through a tested process realistic predictions of each industry’s labor needs and the gap between supply and demand in these areas of need; and then develops a plan for your institution or system of institutions to fill the gap.
+
+
+
+
+
+Financial Analysis and Planning
+
+
+
+Through financial planning, we guide you in the preparation of comprehensive plans for financial operations, reporting systems, benchmarking and other methods to manage your finances more effectively.  Our Financial Planning Model predicts institutional income and expense over periods of five years.  It is a fixed and variable income/cost model that is designed to respond to all the relevant financial planning assumptions at your campus.  We design and test the model, using your historical audited financial information.  Our Revenue Center Analysis System identifies the divisions or schools that generate cash for your institution and those that use it, showing the way to making thoughtful resource allocation decisions.
+
+
+
+Institution-Wide Policy Development 
+
+
+
+Our Policy Manual service consists of the organization and preparation of a systematized and comprehensive policy manual suitable for searchable use on an institution's Intranet.  This allows all members of the campus community to have access to a consistent, ""living"" policy manual in which there is only one policy on each addressed topic.  An institution-wide policy manual gives an institution a greater ability to mitigate risk, enhance stakeholder relationships and otherwise allow for smooth administrative operations. Stevens Strategy also offers these related policy development services:
+
+
+
+Comprehensive Facilitation of the Policy Manual Preparation Process
+
+
+
+We also provide a comprehensive facilitation service during Policy Manual preparation for an additional fee.  As part of the facilitation service, Stevens Strategy representatives schedule regular bi-weekly on-campus visits, meeting with school representatives and campus governance bodies to ensure that national best practices are thoroughly considered and time-lines for the drafting process are adhered to.   While off-site, Stevens Strategy representatives are in constant communication with your institution to determine areas that need most of our facilitation attention.  Our campus visits focus on areas that need the most support to complete the drafts effectively.
+
+
+
+Best Practice Faculty Governance Policy Development 
+
+
+
+Stevens Strategy is a leader in drafting and formulating faculty related governance practices and policies that incorporate current industry best practices.  We offer expertise in developing modern definitions and practices regarding faculty rank and contract terms, appropriate faculty hiring procedures, faculty evaluation criteria and procedures, development and/or enhancement of appropriate faculty committees, tenure and post tenure faculty review procedures, and policies regarding advancement in rank.  Our comprehensive facilitation service is included with the Faculty Governance Policy Development product.  And our Faculty Governance Policy Development service is included in the Institution-Wide Policy Development and Facilitation products but can be purchased separately depending on the individual needs of the institution.
+
+
+
+
+Attachment Two, Biographical Sketches:
+
+
+
+Wanda Durrett Bigham, Stevens Strategy Senior Consultant, is a seasoned higher education administrator and leader. She served for ten years as President of Huntingdon College and six years as President at Marycrest College.  Prior to those appointments, she was Vice President for Development at Emerson College and Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Acting Graduate Dean at Morehead State University.  More recently, she has served for seven years as the Associate General Secretary (Interim) for the General Board of Higher Education, responsible for the Division of Higher Education, and as Assistant General Secretary of the Office of Schools, Colleges, and Universities for the General Board of Higher Education and Ministry of the United Methodist Church.  In those roles, she provided educational services, including evaluation of performance and professional development, for Methodist institutions in the United States and around the world.  Dr. Bigham has been a consultant to higher education in the areas of leadership, strategic planning, governance, team building, and executive searches.  She has been an ACE Fellow and holds a certificate from the Institute for Educational Management at Harvard University.  She earned her Ed.D. degree at the University of Kentucky, her M.H.E. and M.M. at Morehead State University, and her B.M.E. at Murray State University.
+
+
+
+Keiko Broomhead has nearly 15 years of higher education experience focusing on enrollment management, student services, and student affairs.  Currently she serves as Vice President of Enrollment Management and Student Affairs at Wentworth Institute of Technology.  At Wentworth she led the integration of Enrollment Management and Student Affairs divisions and oversees a staff of 88.  She has spearheaded the college’s enrollment management efforts for over a decade with a solid record of success in meeting and exceeding institutional goals.  Ms. Broomhead has played a leading role in the college’s strategic planning effort, serving as co-chair of the Planning Committee.  She is a Contributing Writer for Color, a multicultural magazine for professionals of color.  She has experience in international education and taught for two years in Japan.  Her written work has appeared in the publication Study in the USA.  She is certified as a College Planning Specialist.  She holds a B.A. from Oberlin College, an Ed.M. from Harvard University, and an Ed.D. from Northeastern University.
+
+
+
+Elise Burton is a senior consultant and is an affiliate faculty member with the Master of Nonprofit Management Program at Regis University.  She has extensive experience in higher education and nonprofit legal issues with a focus on higher education policy, compliance and governance.  Elise teaches Legal Issues for Nonprofit Organizations, both in the classroom and online for Regis.  She is also a co-creator and frequent teacher of the Service Oriented Field Experience (SOFE) described in her chapter, ""Distance and Service Learning in the Accelerated Format,"" in New Directions in Adult and Continued Education, Jossey-Bass (Spring, 2003).  Elise has co-authored and is currently updating a reference text for Colorado nonprofit organizations, Colorado Nonprofit Management: Understanding The Legal Issues, Bradford Publishing Company, Denver, Colorado. (May, 2004). Elise is a member of the National Association of College and University Attorneys and serves on its Publications Committee.  She received her A.B. in Political Science from Barnard College; holds a Masters in Nonprofit Management from Regis University, which she obtained as a Fellow of The Colorado Trust; and has a J.D. from the University of Virginia School of Law.
+
+
+
+Charles Collier has provided strategic and operational recommendations, insight into consumer decision-making, and online strategy services to colleges and universities for the last 15 years.  He has worked with both not-for-profit and for-profit higher education institutions on projects related to competitive analysis, brand development, and strategic planning.  His higher education clients include Stanford University, Tufts University, Boston University, Duke University, Northwestern University, Rice, Nova Southeastern University, Barry University, Miami-Dade College, Babson College, Career Education Corporation, and Kaplan University.  Mr. Collier founded Mount Vernon Strategies, a market research and strategic consulting company in Boston, MA.  His clients also include Private Equity firms, Fortune 1000 firms, and start-ups.  He holds a B.A. from Tufts University and an M.A. in International Relations from Boston University.
+
+
+
+Robert DeColfmacker has over 30 years of experience in higher education, entrepreneurship and nonprofit governance.  His higher education experience includes time spent as a faculty member, administrator, college president, trustee and board chairman.  He also has significant entrepreneurial experience in both the proprietary and nonprofit sectors of postsecondary education and in the formation and development of private business enterprises.  He has successfully guided turnarounds of schools and colleges and private businesses.  Bob also has significant nonprofit governance experience, having spent time as trustee and commissioner in both higher education and healthcare related enterprises.  His interest and expertise lies in strategic management and financial planning for colleges and universities, as well as board development.  Prior to joining Stevens Strategy, he was Chairman of the Board of Learning Tools, a diversified education company in which he continues to have an interest.  Bob also recently served as Interim President of The Landing School in Maine.  Bob is a member (and former board chairman) of the Board of Trustees of Southern New Hampshire University & currently chairs the university’s Audit and Compliance Committee.  He is also a member of the National Association of Corporate Directors. Bob holds a B.S. degree in Economics and Finance from Southern New Hampshire University and an M.P.A. from the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.
+
+
+
+Dale Hamel has over 20 years of experience in higher education administration, predominantly in public higher education financing, policy, and planning. He has spent the last 15 years in senior policy and finance positions in Massachusetts public higher education, at both the institutional and state levels, and prior to that worked at three prestigious private higher education institutions in the Boston area. His areas of expertise include strategic, capital, and operational planning; financial modeling; and accreditation preparation. Dale has participated in numerous college accreditation, institutional charter, and program approval teams. He joined Stevens Strategy in 2009 and continues to hold the position of Senior Vice President for Administration, Finance and Technology at a Massachusetts college. Dale has undergraduate degrees in business administration (B.A.) and computer information systems (B.S.) from Ferris State University, an MBA from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, an Ed.M. from Boston University, and a doctorate in Higher Education Administration (Ph.D.) with a focus on college finance from Boston College.
+
+
+
+Ellen Hurwitz is an award winning professor of history, author and past president of three institutions of higher learning: Albright College, New England College, and American University of Central Asia in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan where she is President Emerita and Executive Director of its Foundation.  She also served as Acting President at Pine Manor College. She is a Senior Fellow at the Institute of International Liberal Education at Bard College, scholar in residence at the Winter Park Institute of Rollins College, and senior consultant with Stevens Strategy.  Dr. Hurwitz has been at the forefront of interdisciplinary learning in the humanities and social sciences and has developed seminal programs at five universities. She has brought her international, multilingual communication skills to the development of learning partnerships and dialogues across diverse political, national, and religious climates.  Since her return to the United States in August, 2011 she has been speaking and writing about  leadership at an American style university located at the crossroads of civilization, where efforts to develop democratic institutions are challenged by habits of mind and relationships with Russia, Iran, Turkey, China, Afghanistan and the United States. She is also engaged in the development of a cutting edge university, leadership coaching in the US and abroad, and in reflective writing on leadership and the liberal arts in the United States and overseas.  She holds a BA from Smith College and an M.A. and Ph.D. in Russian and Byzantine Studies from Columbia University, where she was appointed Chair of the University Seminar on Slavic History and Culture.
+
+
+
+Bob Johnson is an IT professional with over 25 years of experience in both higher education and the private sector.  Having directed efforts for universities such as Hofstra University, University of New Hampshire, Dartmouth College, and Duke University, Bob has experience in the transformation of both the business and technical aspects of information technology.  With demonstrated expertise in the areas of networking, data centers, classroom technologies, security, physical infrastructure, unified communications, and RF technologies (cell and radio), he is a recognized global leader in convergence efforts.  His focus is on positioning the correct technologies to forward an institution’s business needs and maximize resources in doing so.  In addition, he has experience in realigning technical staff and establishing funding and cost recovery models to ensure these efforts are sustainable and right sized.  Bob has an A.A. degree in liberal arts from the State University of New York at Farmingdale and a B.A. degree in economics from SUNY Stony Brook.
+
+
+
+Susan C. Lane has more than 30 years of experience in Massachusetts higher education and has been active in national, regional and state education organizations, working consistently to improve access to higher education, build quality programs responsive to changing student needs and to support students of all ages, levels and disciplines in achieving their educational goals. She has extensive experience in strategic planning at institutional and policy levels including the establishment of multi-site campus locations. Most recently she has consulted with both public and independent institutions to establish a new continuing education model and to create a national teacher education center. Dr. Lane has a strong and active commitment to team building and to the development of collaborate teams across internal and external entities to accomplish stated goals and ensure long-term success.  Prior to her current consulting work, Dr. Lane served as President of The New England Institute of Art. She served for seven years at The University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth, as Associate Vice Chancellor for Professional and Continuing Education, as an Adjunct Professor in Education,
+
+and was Interim Chair in the Education Department. Dr. Lane held the positions of Associate Dean and Associate Professor of Education at Lesley University and Senior Officer and Acting Dean of Graduate and Continuing Education at the Massachusetts College of Art. Dr. Lane also has served as Deputy for Higher Education in the Massachusetts Governor's Office for Education Affairs and was Staff Associate for Academic Affairs for the Massachusetts Board of Regents for Higher Education.  Dr. Lane earned her EdD in Administration, Planning and Social Policy from the Harvard University Graduate School of Education, an MBA from University of Massachusetts, Boston, an MEd degree from Boston University's School of Education and BA in Government and International Relations from Clark University. 
+
+
+
+Stephen Lazarus, a senior consultant with Stevens Strategy, has over ten years of higher education experience with a focus on higher education policy, compliance, and governance matters.  Stephen has worked with the following higher education clients in developing their policies and procedures: Flagler College, Gwynedd-Mercy College, Lynn University, Immaculata University, Paine College, Southern California University of Health Sciences, Voorhees College, Khalifa University (U.A.E), Dominican College, Pacific Oaks College, Saybrook University, Wentworth Institute of Technology, Nebraska Methodist College, University of San Diego, Emerson College, Friends University, Bethany College, D’Youville College, Fontbonne University, Gannon University, Huston-Tillotson University, Caldwell College, Lourdes College, Medaille College, Saint Leo University, Spalding University, Saint Joseph College, Saint Xavier University, and Thiel College.  Prior to joining Stevens Strategy in 2007, Stephen worked as a consultant with Higher Education Executive Associates.  He also spent 6 years practicing law in South Florida with a focus on healthcare law and insurance defense litigation.  He holds a B.A. degree from Loyola University, New Orleans and a J.D. from the Catholic University of America in Washington, DC.
+
+
+Brendan Leonard has over 20 years of management experience in the higher education and health care industries.  He has spent the last 16 years consulting primarily in the higher education industry, focusing on strategic planning, process redesign, systems implementation, and human resources systems assessment and design.  He has worked as a senior consultant with Stevens Strategy since its founding more than ten years ago and now serves as Senior Advisor and Consultant with the firm.  He is Stevens Strategy’s expert in its strategic planning stakeholder conference and operational planning process.  His higher education clients include Barry University, Berklee College of Music, Colorado Mountain College, Drexel University, Eastern Michigan University, Gwynedd-Mercy College, Holy Family University, Howard University, Immaculata University, Ithaca College, LaGuardia Community College, Marian Court College, New England College, Penn State College of Medicine, Rollins College, Rosemont College, Southern California University of Health Sciences, University of Montana, Vaughn College of Aeronautics and Technology, Vermont State College System.  In addition, Brendan spent 7 years working in health care financial planning, financial reporting and analysis, and systems implementation.  Prior to joining Stevens Strategy, in 2003, Brendan served as Senior Associate at Kaludis Consulting and Senior Consultant for HCm, Inc.  He is former Vice Chair of the Board of Trustees at Saybrook University and served as Chair of the Trusteeship Committee.  He holds a B.A. degree from Haverford College and an M.B.A. from the Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley.
+
+
+
+Susan Leonard has nearly 20 years of human resources experience, including 6 in higher education specifically.  She has actively practiced and provided direct oversight for all human resources functions in both academic and business settings.  Her most recent institutional position was Interim Assistant Vice President and Executive Director of Human Resources at Eastern Michigan University.  In that position, she managed a staff of 20 professionals providing HR consultation and service to 2,200 employees at a 24,000-student institution.  Susan successfully directed the implementation of the human resources/payroll module of the SCT Banner ERP systems.  She has achieved the highest professional designation in the field of human resources, Senior Professional in Human Resources (SPHR) from the Society of Human Resource Management.  Her Stevens Strategy clients have included Colorado Mountain College, Holy Family University, and Immaculata University.  She holds a B.S. degree in Organizational Communications and Psychology from Eastern Michigan University.
+
+
+
+Christina McFarlane comes to Stevens Strategy after having worked in administration at Harvard College.  She has experience in academic advising, curricular policy, student affairs services, support services and mentoring for international and at-risk students, study abroad advising, and residential life. In addition, she is experienced in conducting quantitative and qualitative research and performing financial analyses.  Christina has worked both domestically and internationally, across a range of institutions including governmental agencies, secondary schools, nonprofit organizations and another higher education consulting firm.  She holds a B.A. degree in Psychology and Political Science from University of Notre Dame and an Ed.M. degree in Education Policy and Management from Harvard University.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Kelli Rainey has 10 years of higher education experience in institutional effectiveness, operational planning, and assessment.  Dr. Rainey is a Senior Consultant with Stevens Strategy and leads our Succession Planning service area.  She also serves as the Dean of Academic Support Services at Johnson C. Smith University where she oversees the management of information technology, library services, and institutional research.  She serves as a key advisor to senior administrators on strategies and initiatives to support student learning, service delivery, workplace efficiencies and organizational effectiveness. Moreover, as an accreditation liaison, Dr. Rainey is well versed in regional accreditation standards, regulations and procedures for effective demonstration of institutional compliance.  Dr. Rainey holds an Ed.D. in higher education and organizational change from Benedictine University, M.A. in applied psychology from Fairfield University, and an B.A. in communication from Lynchburg College.  She also has a graduate certification in institutional research from Pennsylvania State University.  Dr. Rainey’s doctoral dissertation explored the subject of succession planning in higher education.
+
+
+
+Mark Schulman was appointed President of Saybrook University in San Francisco in 2010, his third presidency.  He has extensive background in communications and education consulting and higher education administration.  He was President of Goddard College in Plainfield, Vermont from 2003 to 2010 and led the successful turn-around of the institution.  His prior leadership positions include President and Professor of Humanities at Antioch University Southern California; Academic Dean/Vice President, Dean of the College, and Professor at Pacific Oaks College; Chairperson, Communication Department/Director, Graduate Media Studies/Lead Faculty, Distance Learning/ Distinguished Lecturer in Communications at the New School for Social Research; Chairperson/Deputy Chairperson, Communications, Film and Video Department, and Associate Professor at City College of New York.  Dr. Schulman's extensive academic experience also includes positions at Saint Mary's College of California, Antioch College, and Mount Vernon College.  Dr. Schulman's work has been published in a number of reports, journals and texts relevant to his areas of interest. He has made numerous presentations and lectures, most recently as part of the Panel on Administrative Issues at the Symposium on Progressive Education at Goddard College and the Vermont Leadership Institute Panel on Leadership.  He served as the President of the Vermont Higher Education Council in 2006-2007; on the Executive Committee of the Association of Vermont Independent Colleges from 2005 to 2010; and on the Board of Directors of Vermont Businesses for Social Responsibility from 2005 to 2010.  Dr. Schulman received his Doctor of Philosophy in Communications from The Union Institute and University.
+
+
+
+Ryne A. Sherman is a recognized expert in psychological assessment with over 10 years of experience working in the field. Dr. Sherman is a Senior Consultant with Stevens Strategy and leads our Applicant Success Assessment service.  He is also President of Sherman Assessment and Projections, Inc. and Assistant Professor of psychology at Florida Atlantic University. Dr. Sherman is a nationally recognized expert in predicting academic achievement in higher education. He has over 20 publications in peer-reviewed academic journals and is currently the principal investigator on a National Science Foundation grant examining the joint roles of personality and environments on behavior. Our Applicant Success Assessment service is grounded on the science of personality and can be used to measure non-cognitive (i.e., personality; motivation) factors that are related to school and career success. This assessment tool goes beyond what traditional cognitive ability tests (e.g., SAT, ACT) can tell us to identify students who are likely to achieve in higher education. Moreover, unlike traditional cognitive ability tests, scores on our tool have virtually no adverse impact based on sex, race, or ethnicity. Stevens Strategy’s Applicant Success Assessment service can be used to (a) select high achieving students that other tests miss, (b) identify students who may struggle with secondary education, but may otherwise be successful in life (i.e., high risk / high potential students), (c) develop programs and interventions for these high risk / high potential students, and (d) fit students with colleges and universities where they are more likely to thrive. Ryne received his B.A. in Psychology and History at Monmouth College in 2006 and his M.A. and Ph.D. in personality/social psychology from the University of California, Riverside in 2011.
+
+
+
+John A. Stevens is Founder and President of Stevens Strategy, LLC, a full-service consulting firm specializing in managing the process of strategic change in colleges, universities and schools.  He also serves as a Founder and Principal of Chronos Company, LLC, organized to design, oversee the development of, raise and disburse capital for and engage in other activities related to the creation of Chronos UniversityTM.  Chronos UniversityTM will be the first residential institution to provide an individualized and completely technology-based instructional program to traditional undergraduate students.  He has more than 40 years of higher education experience in strategic planning, institutional organization and governance, process redesign, financial planning, information system selection and implementation, collective bargaining and executive search.  He has provided consulting service to approximately 100 independent and public institutions from our nation’s largest universities to its smallest colleges and schools, specializing in small to mid-sized institutions and the process of strategic change within them.  In 2003, after 17 years at another higher education consulting firm, Dr. Stevens began Stevens Strategy.  At his previous firm, he served as its Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer and the head of its Strategy Consulting Practice.  He has served as Assistant to the Chancellor of the Massachusetts Board of Higher Education, Vice President for Administration of Rhode Island School of Design, Assistant to the President of Boston University and President and Chairman of the Board of Little Red Schoolhouse, Inc.  He has also served as a representative of the Board of Higher Education on the Massachusetts Community College System and the Massachusetts State College System Boards of Trustees; as a member of the University of Massachusetts Political Science Advisory Board; as a member of the New School Jazz Program Board of Governors and the International Board of Advisors to the Shala Valley Project, an effort to trace the origins and evolution of settlement in Northern Albania from the earliest times to the present; as Vice Chairman of the Board of the Urban League of Eastern Massachusetts and as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of New England College, a small residential, liberal arts college in Henniker, New Hampshire.  He served there as interim president on a pro bono basis, as well.  Dr. Stevens currently serves periodically as a mentor at Harvard University Graduate School of Education.  He holds the B.A. degree from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst and the Ed.M. and Ed.D. degrees from Harvard University.
+
+
+
+Michael Townsley has more than 20 years of experience in academic services, financial systems, budgets, marketing strategy, payment plans, IT administration, ancillary operations, and site management.  Mike is Senior Consultant with Stevens Strategy and former President of Pennsylvania Institute of Technology.  During his 20 years as Senior Vice President for Finance and Administration at Wilmington College, he played a key role in making it one of the fastest growing private colleges in the country.  He is the author of The Small College Guide to Financial Health:  Beating the Odds and CD’s entitled The Financial Toolbox for Colleges and Universities and The Strategic Turnaround Toolbox, all published by NACUBO between 2002 and 2005.  His newest book, Financial Strategy and Management Guidebook For Presidents, Chief Administrative Officers, and Boards of Trustees in Higher Education, will be published shortly by Stevens Strategy.   Dr. Townsley holds a Ph.D. from the University of Pennsylvania. His dissertation analyzed the impact of market share on pricing policies.  He also holds degrees from University of Delaware and Purdue University.  His additional training includes work with Lilly Endowment and Columbia University. Dr. Townsley has published widely and conducted studies on the financial structure of colleges, universities and for-profit institutions.
+
+
+
+Jeanie Watson has held positions of leadership and responsibility at a broad spectrum of institutions and organizations: president for nine years at Nebraska Wesleyan University; dean at Tulane University, Hamline University, and Southwestern University; teaching faculty at Rhodes College, Gustavus Adolphus College, Stonehill College, the University of Nebraska, and Marshall University; director and higher education specialist at TIAA-CREF; and associate vice president of development at the University of Minnesota Medical Foundation.  As president of Nebraska Wesleyan, she oversaw the restructuring of the Board of Trustees; academic program development and growth to include masters degrees and a pre-collegiate concurrent enrollment program; the design and implementation of a forward-looking strategic plan; a doubling of the student headcount; and the construction of new campus facilities, as well as the establishment of a satellite campus in Omaha.  Dr. Watson has also been active professionally on multiple national higher education boards and committees, e.g., American Council on Education (ACE); Board of Directors of the Council of Independent Colleges (CIC); the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities (NAICU); University Senate of the United Methodist Church; Board of Directors of the National Association of Schools and Colleges of the United Methodist Church; the Executive Board of Higher Education Resource Services (HERS); and the NCAA Division III Presidents Council. She has also consulted at colleges and universities across the country. She was post-doctoral Visiting Scholar at Columbia University and studied at an NEH Summer Seminar at Princeton and the New Presidents Program at Harvard.  She received her Ph.D. from Ohio, M.A. from Midwestern State, and B.A. from Baylor.  She is the author or editor for six books and numerous articles.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Attachment Three, Clients:
+
+
+
+Dr. Stevens’ and Stevens Strategy Clients (Stevens Strategy Clients are italicized):
+
+
+
+
+
+Albright College
+
+American University of Central 
+
+  Asia, Kyrgyzstan
+
+Ancilla College
+
+Association of Adventist 
+
+  Colleges And Universities
+
+Association of Private 
+
+  Universities of Japan
+
+Association of Theological 
+
+  Schools
+
+The Austen Group (A CIC 
+
+  Project)
+
+Barry University
+
+Bellarmine University
+
+Bob Jones University
+
+Berklee College of Music
+
+Brandeis University
+
+Butler University
+
+Cabrini College
+
+Cedar Crest College
+
+Chester College
+
+Clearwater Christian College
+
+College of Notre Dame of 
+
+  Maryland
+
+College of Saint Scholastica
+
+Colleges of the Fenway
+
+Colorado Mountain College
+
+Dar Al-Hekma University, Saudi 
+
+  Arabia
+
+Davis and Elkins College
+
+Dominican College
+
+Drexel University
+
+Drew University
+
+Earlham College
+
+Emerson College
+
+Flagler College
+
+Fei Tian Academy
+
+Foreman Christian College, 
+
+  Pakistan
+
+Franklin College, The 
+
+  American College in 
+
+  Switzerland
+
+Gallaudet University
+
+Gannon University
+
+Georgian Court University
+
+Gerson Lehrman Group
+
+Gettysburg College
+
+Goddard College
+
+Goodwin College
+
+Gwynedd-Mercy College
+
+Graduate Theological Union
+
+Hellenic College
+
+Hiram College
+
+Holy Family University
+
+Immaculata University
+
+Indiana University
+
+Jackson State University
+
+Johnson C. Smith University
+
+Keene State College
+
+Kentucky Wesleyan College
+
+Khalifa University of Science and 
+
+  Technology, United Arab 
+
+  Emirates
+
+LaGuardia Community College
+
+Linfield College
+
+Lewis University
+
+Lynn University
+
+Maine College of Art
+
+Marian Court College
+
+Mid-Continent University
+
+Mount Aloysius College
+
+Mount Holyoke College 
+
+Myers University
+
+Neumann College
+
+New England Association of 
+
+  Schools and Colleges
+
+New England College
+
+New Hampshire Institute of 
+
+  Art
+
+New School Jazz and 
+
+  Contemporary Music 
+
+  Program
+
+New York Chiropractic College
+
+New York University
+
+North Bennet Street School
+
+Northeastern University
+
+Northfield Mount Hermon 
+
+  School
+
+Nyack College
+
+Pacific Oaks College and 
+
+  Children’sSchool
+
+Paine College
+
+Peirce College
+
+Pine Manor College
+
+Polytechnic of Namibia
+
+Presbyterian College
+
+Pro Arts Consortium
+
+Radford University
+
+Regis College
+
+Rosemont College
+
+Saint Joseph College
+
+Seton Hall University
+
+Smith College
+
+South Dakota School of Mines 
+
+  and Technology
+
+Southern California University   
+
+  of Health Sciences
+
+Southern New Hampshire 
+
+  University
+
+Springfield College
+
+St. Mary-of-the-Woods College
+
+Stevens Institute of Technology
+
+Thomas University
+
+Thunderbird Graduate School
+
+Tiffin University
+
+Unity College
+
+Universidad del Sur, Chiapas, 
+
+  Mexico
+
+University of Alaska
+
+University of Baltimore
+
+University of Delaware
+
+University of Evansville
+
+University of Indianapolis
+
+University of Maine
+
+University of Mary Hardin-
+
+  Baylor
+
+University of Massachusetts 
+
+  At Amherst
+
+University of Medicine and 
+
+  Dentistry of New Jersey
+
+University of Mount Union
+
+University of Nebraska, Lincoln, 
+
+  Boros Center
+
+University of New Hampshire
+
+University of Pennsylvania
+
+University of St. Thomas
+
+Vaughn College of Aeronautics 
+
+  and Technology
+
+Voorhees College
+
+Virginia Five Consortium
+
+Wayne State University
+
+Webster University
+
+Wentworth Institute of 
+
+  Technology
+
+West Virginia University
+
+Wheelock College
+
+Wilmington College
+
+Wilson College
+
+Woods Hole Oceanographic 
+
+  Institute
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com</s>"
+<s>[INST] GMU V.1 (Section One) (3.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] GMU V.1 (Section Two) (1.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] GMU V.4 (3.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Governance Statement Update (2).txt [/INST] Governance. 
+
+The Role of the Board of Trustees
+
+As set forth in the Articles of Incorporation, as well as Article I of the Bylaws of Spring Arbor University and Section 5.2 of the Board Manual, the Board of Trustees is the exclusive fiduciary and legally constituted governing body of Spring Arbor University. The Board of Trustees is responsible for establishing the mission of the university and ensuring that the university holds true to that mission.  In this role, the Board sets institutional policy, academic policy and other policies and practices in order to fulfill its legal and fiduciary responsibilities. Comprised within its fiduciary responsibility is the responsibility of the Board of Trustees to ensure that all activities, policies, practices, and university documents that define policies and practices (e.g., manuals, bylaws, charters, etc.) are in alignment with the established university position on governance.  Accordingly, the Board of Trustees exercises the right of periodic review of any and all aspects of governance of the University, the right to intervene, modify, amend or rescind any policy or practice formulated by the President, administrative officers, the Faculty, or other campus constituency or organization, and the right to enact policies and practices as it deems proper for the governance of the University.
+
+The Role of the President and Administration
+
+In order to promote the efficient and timely management of the University, the Board of Trustees delegates authority to manage the day-to-day operations of the University to the President, with the responsibility to inform the Board of trends, issues, activities, concerns, proposed changes in programs and services, and proposed changes in University policies and practices.  Included in this delegation is the duty to exercise such authority responsibly and prudently and to be held accountable to the Board for all decisions.  Any powers delegated by the Board of Trustees to the President may be rescinded by action of the Board.  
+
+The President, in turn, has the authority to sub-delegate any conferred powers and authority to other University officers.  Accordingly, the President is authorized to describe the relationships between the President and administrative officers of the University and the distribution of authority from the Board of Trustees to these officers.  These officers have such authority as is expressly provided for by the President, as well as such implied authority as is necessary and appropriate to carry out that which is expressly granted.  All authority is subject to the right of superintendence and preemption, which is reserved to those officers that are superior in line of authority and subject to policies and procedures governing the exercise of that authority.  Duties, responsibility and authority distributed may be delegated to subordinates unless otherwise restricted, provided, that the delegator is be ultimately responsible for the proper exercise of such delegated duties, responsibility and authority. 
+
+In fulfilling the above roles, the President and University officers have a responsibility to promote a collaborative environment that engages faculty, staff and students where appropriate as they work toward the common purpose of achieving the University’s mission. In many instances, the President will consult University officers and other University constituencies in developing recommendations presented to the Board. However, administrative matters such as budgets, time constraints, laws, and the policies of external groups, bodies, and agencies having jurisdiction over the institution, among other things, may set limits to the opportunities for additional input to the President and University officers. 
+
+
+
+
+The Role of the Full-time Faculty
+
+The full-time faculty has responsibility in formulating and forwarding timely recommendations to the Vice President for Academic Affairs, University President for curriculum, subject matter and methods of instruction, research, faculty status (this area includes appointment, retention, promotion, tenure, and dismissal) and academic policy relating to the educational process. On these matters, the power of review or final decision is lodged in the Board of Trustees (or delegated by it to the President). When a faculty recommendation in these policy areas is not adopted by the Board of Trustees (or delegated by it to the President), it is desirable that the faculty should, following such communication, have opportunity for further consideration and further transmittal of its views to the President or Board.  The realization of faculty advice may be limited due to a variety of factors including but not limiting to budgets, personnel limitations, the time element, and the laws or policies of other groups, bodies and agencies. 
+
+Role of Staff
+
+The staff supports the administration and faculty in fulfilling the University’s mission by assisting in conducting the day-to-day affairs of the University under the direction of the University’s senior officers.  In matters of University governance, the staff��s role is advisory in nature through participation in staff meetings and representation on select University standing committees and ad hoc committees and task forces.
+
+The Role of Students
+
+In most cases, Spring Arbor University students participate in the governance of the University through the Student Government Association (SGA), which serves as the primary voice for students. Representatives from other student groups or the student body may also be involved in collaborative decisions when appropriate, particularly when institutional decisions or planning will have a significant effect on students, through representation on select University standing committees and ad hoc committees and task forces.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Governance Statement Update.txt [/INST] Governance. 
+
+The Role of the Board of Trustees
+
+As set forth in the Articles of Incorporation, as well as Article I of the Bylaws of Spring Arbor University and Section 5.2 of the Board Manual, the Board of Trustees is the exclusive fiduciary and legally constituted governing body of Spring Arbor University. The Board of Trustees is responsible for establishing the mission of the university and ensuring that the university holds true to that mission.  In this role, the Board sets institutional policy, academic policy and other policies and practices in order to fulfill its legal and fiduciary responsibilities. Comprised within its fiduciary responsibility is the responsibility of the Board of Trustees to ensure that all activities, policies, practices, and university documents that define policies and practices (e.g., manuals, bylaws, charters, etc.) are in alignment with the established university position on governance.  Accordingly, the Board of Trustees exercises the right of periodic review of any and all aspects of governance of the University, the right to intervene, modify, amend or rescind any policy or practice formulated by the President, administrative officers, the Faculty, or other campus constituency or organization, and the right to enact policies and practices as it deems proper for the governance of the University.
+
+The Role of the President and Administration
+
+In order to promote the efficient and timely management of the University, the Board of Trustees delegates authority to manage the day-to-day operations of the University to the President, with the responsibility to inform the Board of trends, issues, activities, concerns, proposed changes in programs and services, and proposed changes in University policies and practices.  Included in this delegation is the duty to exercise such authority responsibly and prudently and to be held accountable to the Board for all decisions.  Any powers delegated by the Board of Trustees to the President may be rescinded by action of the Board.  
+
+The President, in turn, has the authority to sub-delegate any conferred powers and authority to other University officers.  Accordingly, the President is authorized to describe the relationships between the President and administrative officers of the University and the distribution of authority from the Board of Trustees to these officers.  These officers have such authority as is expressly provided for by the President, as well as such implied authority as is necessary and appropriate to carry out that which is expressly granted.  All authority is subject to the right of superintendence and preemption, which is reserved to those officers that are superior in line of authority and subject to policies and procedures governing the exercise of that authority.  Duties, responsibility and authority distributed may be delegated to subordinates unless otherwise restricted, provided, that the delegator is be ultimately responsible for the proper exercise of such delegated duties, responsibility and authority. 
+
+In fulfilling the above roles, the President and University officers have a responsibility to promote a collaborative environment that engages faculty, staff and students where appropriate as they work toward the common purpose of achieving the University’s mission. In many instances, the President will consult University officers and other University constituencies in developing recommendations presented to the Board. However, administrative matters such as budgets, time constraints, laws, and the policies of external groups, bodies, and agencies having jurisdiction over the institution, among other things, may set limits to the opportunities for additional input to the President and University officers. 
+
+
+
+
+The Role of the Full-time Faculty
+
+The full-time faculty has responsibility in formulating and forwarding timely recommendations to the Vice President for Academic Affairs, University President for curriculum, subject matter and methods of instruction, research, faculty status (i.e. faculty contract, promotion, tenure) and academic policy relating to the educational process. On these matters, the power of review or final decision is lodged in the Board of Trustees (or delegated by it to the President). When a faculty recommendation in these policy areas is not adopted by the Board of Trustees (or delegated by it to the President), it is desirable that the faculty should, following such communication, have opportunity for further consideration and further transmittal of its views to the President or Board.  The realization of faculty advice may be limited due to a variety of factors including but not limiting to budgets, personnel limitations, the time element, and the laws or policies of other groups, bodies and agencies. 
+
+Role of Staff
+
+The staff supports the administration and faculty in fulfilling the University’s mission.  The staff assists in conducting the day-to-day affairs of the University under the direction of the University’s senior officers.  In matters of University governance, the staff’s role is advisory in nature through participation in staff meetings and representation on select University standing committees and ad hoc committees and task forces.
+
+The Role of Students
+
+In most cases, Spring Arbor University students participate in the governance of the University through the Student Government Association (SGA), which serves as the primary voice for students. Representatives from other student groups or the student body may also be involved in collaborative decisions when appropriate, particularly when institutional decisions or planning will have a significant effect on students, through representation on select University standing committees and ad hoc committees and task forces.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Hearing Format.txt [/INST] (9) At the hearing, the following guidelines will commonly be observed:
+
+Call to Order: The Chair of the hearing committee will call the hearing to order, introduce the members of the hearing committee, introduce the parties, and review the hearing procedures.  Witnesses must be sequestered outside the hearing room until they are called to testify.
+
+Opening Remarks: Starting with the University administrator appointed by the President to present the University’s case, each party will be given the opportunity to make opening remarks limited to [15 minutes] each.  The purpose of opening remarks is to orient the committee to the nature of the case and to the facts the parties intend to establish.  Opening remarks shall not be considered evidence.  There will be no opportunity for follow up questioning by the members of the committee at the conclusion of opening remarks.
+
+Presentation of the University’s Case: At the conclusion of opening remarks, the designated University administrator shall present evidence (witness testimony, documents, etc.) in support of dismissal for cause.  The University’s witnesses may be questioned by the administrator representing the University, as well as members of the committee and the faculty member.  The designated University administrator will be typically limited to a total of [three (3) hours] to present the University’s case.  At the discretion of the committee, additional time may be extended.  Conversely, the committee, at its discretion, may impose reasonable limits on the number of factual witnesses and the amount of cumulative evidence that may be introduced.  After all University witnesses have been questioned and the University concludes its presentation of evidence, the chair of the committee will call for a break, after which the faculty member will present the faculty member’s case.
+
+The Faculty Member's Case: The faculty member may present evidence (witness testimony, documents, etc.) in support of the faculty member’s position.  All of the faculty member’s witnesses may be questioned by the faculty member, as well as members of the committee and the University administrator designated by the President. The faculty member will be limited to a total of [three (3) hours] to present a response.  At the discretion of the committee, additional time may be extended.  Conversely, the committee, at its discretion, may impose reasonable limits on the number of factual witnesses and the amount of cumulative evidence that may be introduced.  After the faculty member concludes the presentation of evidence, the chair of the committee will call for a short break prior to the parties’ closing remarks.
+
+Closing Remarks: At the conclusion of all the evidence, the designated University administrator may make closing remarks to the committee, followed by the closing remarks of the faculty member.  Closing remarks shall not exceed [fifteen (15) minutes] each.  Because the University has the burden of proof, the University representative may also make final remarks in response to the faculty member’s closing.  Such final remarks may not exceed [ten (10) minutes].</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Heidi Short's Review of FHB copy to share with FSEC-1 copy.txt [/INST] ATTACHMENT 2
+
+Review of Faculty Constitution and Handbooks
+
+Dr. Heidi Short (of Trower & Trower, Inc.)
+
+2.9.21
+
+See end of this document for links to faculty handbooks that contain examples of points made in this report. Every institution has its own unique culture and challenges, so each handbook is unique, as well. These sample handbooks have language in particular sections that provide illustrative examples.
+
+
+
+Faculty Constitution
+
+
+
+Content Suggestions
+
+Start with CLU mission. Everything faculty do should tie back to the institution’s mission.
+
+Include statement of shared governance.
+
+“Authority of the Faculty” has no mention of shared governance.
+
+Item 1 says, “The President delegates to the Faculty ​primary responsibility ​for governance of such fundamental areas as curriculum; subject matter and methods of instruction; research; faculty status; and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process.” 
+
+The list of primary responsibilities in the faculty constitution should be directly in line with the list of faculty duties delineated in the university bylaws.
+
+Primary responsibility is not exclusive responsibility, therefore there ought to be some explanation about what “primary means” at CLU.
+
+The primary responsibilities delegated to faculty are still shared responsibilities. They are normally exercised in cooperation with the Provost and/or President who retain veto power in compelling instances. 
+
+Some mention of veto authority should be included in the faculty constitution.
+
+To be clear, the language in the faculty constitution needs to be in sync with (and derived from) the University Bylaws.
+
+
+
+Faculty Governance Handbook
+
+
+
+Overarching issue: 
+
+This document rests on a problematic assumption:  that faculty have exclusive authority over issues where authority is, or should be, shared or vested in the President, Provost and/or other individuals or bodies. This is counter to best practice and should be corrected. 
+
+
+
+Other issues of important yet overarching concern: 
+
+
+
+The handbook:
+
+Does not clearly delineate the role of Faculty Senate or Faculty Assembly, especially vis-à-vis shared governance. It is unclear what decisions are made in which body—which fall to Assembly and which to Senate? Many things must be approved at the Assembly level, which must stall decisions given how infrequently the Assembly meets.
+
+
+
+Does not clarify the reporting structure for faculty committees. Do they report to the Senate? The Provost? Who? It also does not indicate how university officials/entities (e.g, the Provost, the Senate) can hold committees accountable for performing important tasks in timely ways.
+
+
+
+Provides no realistic or viable process for “checks and balances” among the participants in shared governance. The current “checks and balances” sections involve the faculty and the Provost only.
+
+
+
+Suggests that faculty authority is siloed and discreet, not shared. For example, the document does not describe how authority is shared with Deans, the Provost and other administrators and bodies, etc.
+
+
+
+Lacks any description of the role of department chairs or deans.  Faculty handbooks usually delineate the role academic department and division heads play in the decision-making processes of the institution.
+
+
+
+As it is written, diminishes the role of the Provost. That may not be what is lived out at CLU, but best practice suggests that the handbook clarifies the definition, role, and authority of Provost, Deans, Associate Deans, Department Chairs, and Faculty. Faculty, staff, and administrators have created a decision-making matrix that can be found here. This resource clarifies the roles of key constituents.
+
+
+
+Removes senate voting privileges from the President and Provost. This is highly unusual. In most institutions, the President and Provost are voting members either by virtue of their leadership roles and/or by any faculty status they hold. In some institutions, in fact, the President presides over faculty meetings (see Augustana, GA Tech and Lafayette below for examples). If it remains the fact that the President and Provost do not have voting rights, then it may be necessary to state that the President has veto rights (inferred from the University Bylaws) that she can delegate to the Provost.
+
+
+
+Content Suggestions
+
+Include CLU’s mission in the beginning. Everything faculty do should tie back to the institution’s mission. Most handbooks—faculty, employee, and student—begin with the institution’s mission.
+
+Include statement of shared governance that reinforces what “shared” means at Cal Lutheran.
+
+Include a description of faculty’s role in shared governance and ensure that this role aligns with best practice. The best handbooks state explicitly the role of the Board, the role of the President, and the role of the faculty. The descriptions of these roles must be in sync with the delegation of authority as expressed in the University Bylaws.
+
+Explain the role of the Faculty Assembly and differentiate it from the role of the Faculty Senate. The handbook’s current description is unclear.
+
+Remove reference to the faculty going straight to the Board of Regents. Best practice suggests that faculty do not have a direct line to the Board of Regents but rather that clear channels and structures facilitate the flow of communication and recommendations (see below for examples of this). 
+
+Identify the channel of faculty-regent communication that makes the most sense for Cal Lutheran.
+
+Non-profit boards are not structured to be representative ones. Therefore, it does not align with best practices to assume that the Faculty Regent can or should serve as a representative of the faculty per se. 
+
+It is unusual and contrary to AGB recommendations and best practice for a faculty member to sit on the Board of Regents because such a role can result in direct conflict of interest with many issues that come before the Board.
+
+Many institutions have faculty serve on board committees so that the values of shared governance are upheld, but the potential for conflict of interest is removed. 
+
+Consider a model at CLU where a faculty member or even two are routine guests at the BOR Academic Affairs committee. 
+
+Further consider giving these faculty members opportunities to not only attend meetings but to offer input and deliver presentations at the invitation of the Committee chair.
+
+Checks and balances sections (under Faculty Senate and Faculty Assembly sections, pages 9 and 15) make it seem as though faculty control decisions. This presumption is in direct conflict with the CLU Bylaws that state that the university President is delegated the authority for “the governance of the faculty, staff, and students” (Section 7Cv). 
+
+Neither the CLU Bylaws nor industry best practice supports the level of faculty control as presented in this section and throughout the handbook. 
+
+Decision-making, even in areas of “primary responsibilities,” is a shared function. It does not reside solely in the hands of the faculty.
+
+There is virtually no mention of the Deans throughout this section or related ones.
+
+At most institutions, the President or Chief Academic Officer can veto decisions of the faculty for compelling reasons.
+
+Create a functional process for checks and balances. Though decision-making is a shared phenomenon under shared governance, best practice typically identifies the President as having final authority on all operational issues. Presidential authority is delegated by the Board of Regents.  
+
+The current appeals process at CLU can only result in circular decision-making. It erroneously suggests that the faculty have the final say in all decisions. This opens the university to considerable risk.
+
+Currently, there are no checks and balances on the work of the IRB (p. 29), nor is there any university guidance around budgets, safety protocols, etc. for the IRB. The handbook does not require the IRB to submit meeting minutes or an annual report to the administration which poses liability risks for the university. As a result, it is not clear who is responsible if strict health and safety protocols are not followed and someone gets hurt or sick. 
+
+Consider changing Committee Descriptions (pp. 22-27) to reflect best practices by aligning descriptions around headings such as “Membership” and “Responsibilities.”
+
+The responsibilities assumed by all committees must be approved by the university President since the CLU Bylaws delegate faculty governance to her.
+
+Committee cannot stand alone; they must report to someone or some group. Which committee should report to the Faculty Senate? Which should report directly to the Provost? Others? 
+
+Under Faculty Committee Guidelines (p. 21), take out language about how summer committee work is paid. This is a Human Resources issue.
+
+The handbook states that the Faculty Affairs Committee (FAC) “represent the interests of the faculty regarding workloads, working conditions, salaries, fringe benefits, rules governing promotion and tenure, professional development, and other matters pertaining to faculty welfare” (p. 30).  This seems like an extraordinarily broad role that may not be an appropriate one for a faculty committee. Should this committee be charged with recommending salaries and fringe benefits? These sound like the types of recommendations that should come from the Provost and Human Resources professionals. Perhaps the ADRI exercise will clarify who should assume these types of responsibilities. It is unlikely that they fall to a faculty committee. Any overlap will be determined by the ADRI exercise.
+
+Consider how changes to the handbook should be handled—by the Senate or by the Faculty Assembly (all 180 full time faculty). Currently, the Senate proposes amendments to the Assembly.
+
+Consider whether the Faculty Assembly’s veto power over senate decisions is appropriate. If the Assembly is to retain veto power, is the current scope of such veto power to broad? Is the percentage of votes necessary to overturn the senate too low?
+
+
+
+Format Suggestion
+
+Number sections for easy reference.
+
+
+
+Faculty Policy Handbook (FPHB)
+
+Overarching problem: Many of the policies described in this document are Human Resources policies. As such, they should reside in Human Resources with a link and/or short reference in the FPHB. Some institutions devote the last chapter of their faculty handbooks to employment policies, marked clearly “Human Resources policies” others simply provide a clickable link to those policies that are issued by Human Resources. See below (Sample Faculty Handbooks) for an example of this.
+
+
+
+Content Suggestions
+
+In the section “Definition of Faculty” (p. 11) there is a description of emeritus status that includes privileges of the status, such as access to bookstore, health facilities and CLUnet. It might be more appropriate for this to reside in Human Resources.
+
+“Types of Contracts” (p. 13) indicates that continuous (tenured) faculty are entitled to annual contract renewal “subject to the terms and conditions of employment that exist at the time of each annual renewal.” This is impossible—in a normal year contracts are sent to faculty before fall enrollment numbers. In 2020, very little was known about the impact of COVID restrictions, making the terms and conditions of employment even less clear. The President should have the ability to change contracts due to significant financial impacts on the university.
+
+The handbook states that full-time faculty on a 9-month term of service contract are paid on the basis of a 12-month year (p. 13). Check with your VP for administration and/or legal counsel to see if this runs counter to labor regulations.
+
+Remove Harassment Policy from section on “Faculty Rights” (p. 16). This is a Human Resources policy (relevant to all CLU employees). There can simply be a link in the handbook to the policy.
+
+Remove Employment of Family Members and Policy on Gifts and Gratuities (p. 25). These are Human Resources policies.
+
+The policy on Consensual Relationships (pp. 25-26) also overlaps with Human Resources policies, although in the faculty handbook, there is specific information regarding relationships between professor and student.
+
+Consider removing Complaint and Grievance procedures (pp. 39-40). There is also a Human Resources policy covering this, but in the Faculty Handbook, it relates specifically to academic freedom.
+
+Separation from the University (pp. 66-77): 
+
+Indicates that a faculty member considering retirement may receive a one-time stipend for financial planning services. Is this a codified benefit or was it a one-time, time-specific benefit? If it is the latter, it should be deleted.
+
+Lists reasons for non-reappointment. There could be other reasons than those listed for non-reappointment, such as violation of University policies. As such, consider clarifying that this list is suggestive not exhaustive.
+
+Terminations section (p. 69) is specific. I suggest it be worded more generally to allow for changes in labor regulations. 
+
+Procedures for Declaring Financial Exigency (p. 73) suggests that the faculty, and specifically the Budget Committee, have an important role in declaring financial exigency. This would be a highly unusual role for faculty or a committee. Financial issues at this level are determined at most campuses by senior management and the Board, not by faculty or a committee.
+
+Consider adding a mechanism for dealing with financially difficult situations that emerge before exigency would ever come into play. If exigency is one of the only ways to reduce or change the staffing level of faculty, the university’s ability to respond to a financial crisis in timely ways is greatly hindered. This issue became front and center during the pandemic when policies and structures prohibited many institutions from making the time-sensitive decisions that would have been in the best insteps of institutional sustainability. The following article explains this timely issue:
+
+https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2020/03/16/will-the-coronavirus-lead-to-declarations-of-financial-exigency-colleges-need-a-better-way/?sh=4ef43362582c.
+
+Under the procedures for termination of faculty (p. 75):
+
+The handbook states that benefits will be continued for a year after termination. Is this the case? Do your carrier contracts allow it? If not, this statement must be removed.
+
+The handbook states that the ART Committee can approve new appointments to vacated or new faculty positions during financial exigency if there is overwhelming need (p. 75). Again, this would be a highly unusual role for the faculty, and it runs counter to the authority delegated to the President in the University Bylaws. I suggest this be removed. 
+
+Dismissal for cause (p. 76) provides a list of reasons a faculty member can be dismissed. There could be other reasons for dismissal, but the language here suggests these are the only reasons. Consider clarifying that this list is suggestive not exhaustive.
+
+The Policy Appendix (pp. 78-108) contains many Human Resources policies: Compensation, Fringe Benefits, Leave Policies, Working Conditions Policies (including Closure, Disaster Plan, Equal Employment Opportunity, Nonsexist use of Language, Outside Activities, Conflict of Interest, Hazardous Waste Disposal, Release of Information about Students, Fund raising, Smoking Policy, Alcohol Abuse/Drug Free Workplace, Political Activity and Public Statements, Use of University Facilities and Services, Use of University Name and Seal), Library and Computer Use Policies, Research and Publication Policies, Expense Reimbursement, External Relations Policies, and Chapel and Convocation.
+
+All of these policies should be referred to with a clickable link.
+
+Faculty Responsibilities section will need to be rewritten to reflect the work that comes out of the ADRI exercise as approved by the President.
+
+
+
+Format Suggestions
+
+Number sections for easy reference.
+
+Move the section “Appointment of Faculty” to earlier in the document. It would flow better if it followed “Faculty Personnel Policies” and “Faculty Contracts.”
+
+
+
+Sample Faculty Handbooks 
+
+
+
+Seattle Pacific University
+
+https://spu.edu/~/media/university-leadership/provost/documents/Faculty%20Bylaws%20Revised%20081513.ashx
+
+Overall, one of the most clear and comprehensive documents on faculty governance to emerge in this review.
+
+Starts with a clear explanation of how/why university mission is the primary driver of the document and the duties it describes. 
+
+Describes the role of the faculty of the whole vis a vis faculty senate and other key groups. 
+
+Explains the notion of “shared responsibility” so there is little confusion about lines of authority. 
+
+Positions the president, provost, and faculty as the collaborators they should be.
+
+States who each faculty committee is responsible to (the faculty senate, the school dean, etc).
+
+Clarifies the role of the school deans.
+
+Highly recommend that this document be considered a template for CLU revisions. 
+
+
+
+Augustana College
+
+https://www.augustana.edu/files/2020-09/2020-21_FACULTY_HANDBOOK_8-7-20.pdf
+
+Clear language on the role and responsibilities of faculty.
+
+President presides at meetings of the faculty.
+
+Has a chapter on “all college policies.” While here, they have not removed Human Resources Policies, they identify them as policies that apply to all employees.
+
+Delineates role of department chairs.
+
+
+
+Gettysburg College
+
+http://www.gettysburg.edu/offices/provost/pdfs/2019/FacultyHandbook24edition100318.pdf
+
+Collaborative language in relation to faculty responsibilities reflects shared governance values.
+
+President and Provost are voting members of the faculty and are members of the Faculty Council
+
+Clearly describes shared governance communication channels.
+
+Delineates role of department chairs.
+
+
+
+Georgia Tech
+
+https://policylibrary.gatech.edu/faculty-handbook/
+
+The President presides over faculty meetings.
+
+
+
+Marshall University
+
+https://www.marshall.edu/faculty-senate/the-faculty-senate-purposes-powers-and-functions/
+
+Example of checks and balances. President can reject faculty resolutions for “serious and compelling reasons.”
+
+Clear language about the role of faculty senate.
+
+
+
+Lafayette College
+
+https://provost.lafayette.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/25/2020/11/2020-21-Faculty-Handbook-Rev-11-1-20.pdf
+
+Clearly describes shared governance communication channels.
+
+The President presides at meetings of the faculty.
+
+Clear descriptions of the roles of Board, President and Faculty.
+
+
+
+St. Olaf College
+
+https://wp.stolaf.edu/facultyhandbook/table-of-contents/
+
+Includes sections on the role of Associate Deans, Department Chairs and Program Directors with concise descriptions of their responsibilities.
+
+
+
+
+
+Bowdoin College
+
+https://www.bowdoin.edu/academic-affairs/pdf/19-20facultyhandbook.pdf
+
+Wording on referencing employment policies in the faculty handbook: “Additional information concerning degree requirements and student academic conduct may be found in the College Catalogue and the Student Handbook. Policies applicable to all College employees, including faculty, have generally been omitted from this Handbook; for the most current version of these policies, consult the Employee Handbook or contact the Human Resources office. The Faculty, Student, and Employee Handbooks and updates, announcements and other resources are available on the College website.”</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Hi Karlyn and Dale.txt [/INST] Hi Karlyn and Dale,
+
+Attached are suggested revisions to the Faculty Article of the Code of Regulations.
+
+The proposed revisions more closely align the article with the AAUP/AGB/ACE Joint Statement on the Government of Colleges and Universities (“Joint Statement”), which can be found here:  https://www.aaup.org/report/statement-government-colleges-and-universities.  The pertinent clause in the Join Statement is Section 5, which states in part:
+
+The faculty has primary responsibility for such fundamental areas as curriculum, subject matter and methods of instruction, research, faculty status, and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process.
+
+With respect to faculty status matters, the Joint Statement states:
+
+Faculty status and related matters are primarily a faculty responsibility; this area includes appointments, reappointments, decisions not to reappoint, promotions, the granting of tenure, and dismissal. The primary responsibility of the faculty for such matters is based upon the fact that its judgment is central to general educational policy. Furthermore, scholars in a particular field or activity have the chief competence for judging the work of their colleagues; in such competence it is implicit that responsibility exists for both adverse and favorable judgments. Likewise, there is the more general competence of experienced faculty personnel committees having a broader charge. Determinations in these matters should first be by faculty action through established procedures, reviewed by the chief academic officers with the concurrence of the board. The governing board and president should, on questions of faculty status, as in other matters where the faculty has primary responsibility, concur with the faculty judgment except in rare instances and for compelling reasons which should be stated in detail.
+
+As you can see from the above, it is apparent that text in the current Code of Regulations was informed by the Joint Statement; however, the listings of responsibilities in the Code does not fully mirror the statement insomuch as it references merit increases and leaves of absences.  
+
+As will be fully articulated in my forthcoming report next week, and as I mentioned in my March 21st email, the Joint Statement does advocate later in Paragraph 5 that the faculty participate in the determination of ""policies and procedures governing salary increases.”  The fact that salary increases is not included in the listing of “primary” faculty responsibilities, however, is an important distinction because the term “primary responsibility” as used in the Joint Statement imparts that the power of review or final decision lodged in the governing board or delegated by it to the president should be exercised adversely only in ""exceptional circumstances, and for reasons communicated to the faculty.”  Nonetheless, the Board should be prepared for the faculty to cite the Joint Statement if it were to decide that the reference to salary increases should be removed from Article VIII.  For this reason, I am suggesting that the clause be supplemented to state the faculty will have primary responsibility for “evaluation criteria for merit increases…”. 
+
+Like salary increases, faculty leaves are not listed as an area of primary faculty responsibility.  Regardless, the faculty will more than likely cite the AAUP ""Statement of the Principles on Leaves of Absence” (“Statement”) in opposition to the removal of leaves of absences from the article.  The AAUP’s statement in this regard advocates that faculty leave policies and procedures be developed with full faculty participation.  The primary focus of the AAUP statement centers upon leaves that support the professional development of faculty members.  However, there is a sentence in the Statement indicating that faculty leaves should also be granted for illness, recovery, and maternity. With regard to the latter, it is important to note that the Statement was written in 1972, well before the introduction of the Americans with Disabilities Act.  Based on the above, I am recommending that Article VIII of the Code be amended to state that the faculty will have primarily responsibility for “professional development leave of absences.”  Finally, as I mentioned in prior conversations, it is common for leaves of absences specific to faculty to be published in a faculty handbook, including sabbatical, professional development and to a somewhat lesser extent, faculty parental leave policies.  
+
+Of course, the Board is fully within its rights to simply strike the references to merit increases and leaves of absences if it wants to fully align with listing of primary responsibilities in the Joint Statement.  Moreover, the Board may disregard AAUP recommended standards altogether if it so chooses as the AAUP is not a regulatory organization.</s>"
+<s>[INST] HR (3rd Draft)(7.19).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] HR (4th Draft)(8.19).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Human Resource Definitions (4th Draft).txt [/INST] Human Resource Definitions
+
+
+
+A.
+
+Absent: an employee is considered absent if they are unavailable for work as assigned or scheduled. 
+
+Abuse: (a) attempting to cause or causing physical harm; (b) placing another in fear of imminent serious physical harm; (c) causing another to engage involuntarily in sexual relations by force, threat or duress or engaging or threatening to engage in sexual activity with a dependent child; (d) engaging in mental abuse, which includes threats, intimidation or acts designed to induce terror; (e) depriving another of medical care, housing, food or other necessities of life; or (f) restraining the liberty of another . 
+
+Abusive Behavior: includes domestic violence, stalking, sexual assault and kidnapping.
+
+Accredited College or University: a term covering both the initial and ongoing approval of an institution of higher education as meeting the standards established by a recognized regional or national accrediting association for membership in the association. Accrediting associations are voluntary membership organizations that undertake to monitor the academic and administrative quality of their members, which are either entire institutions or components.
+
+Alcohol or Alcoholic Beverage: any liquid suitable for drinking by human beings, except prescription drugs or over-the-counter medications, which contains one-half of one percent or more of alcohol by volume.
+
+Applicant: an individual who has applied for a specific position at Olin College, including individuals not currently employed by the College and current College Employees seeking promotional or transfer opportunities to different positions.
+
+B.
+
+Background Check: means the process of gathering and reviewing criminal history records.
+
+Business Activity: any College commercial activities, including but not limited to purchasing, selling, hiring, contracting, investing, licensing, and leasing.
+
+Business Premises: Pursuant to Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 119, business premise is defined as the Employee’s place of work.
+
+C.
+
+Candidates for Employment: a current, former, or prospective Employee recommended for hire, transfer, or promotion and to whom a contingent offer will be made.
+
+Child: a biological, adopted or foster child; a stepchild; a legal ward; or a child for whom an Employee has assumed the responsibilities of parenthood.
+
+College Activity: means services, programs, or activities that Olin College operates or sponsors, or in which College Employees engage in through their College roles.
+
+College Assets: are items of tangible or intangible property owned by, leased to, licensed to, or in the possession of the College. Examples include name, money, land, buildings, property, improvements, proprietary information, inventory, College Information Technology Resources, equipment (including computers), accounts receivable, supplies, museum pieces, art objects, furniture, materials, intellectual property, tools, and vehicles.
+
+College Data: any information collected, manipulated, stored, reported, or presented in any format, on any medium, at any location by any department, program or office of the College in support of Olin College’s mission.
+
+College Housing: any housing property being made available for College Employees for either short-term or long-term, purposes.
+
+College Information Technology Resources: are assigned computer accounts, email services, and the shared College network(s), which includes resources and facilities operated by the College, whether owned, leased, used under license or by agreement, including, but not limited to: telephones (including mobile devices) and telephone equipment, voice mail, SMS, desktop and laptop computers, , hardware, software, networks, computing laboratories, databases, files, information, software licenses, computing-related contracts, network bandwidth, usernames, passwords, documentation, DVDs, and other electronic media or storage devices. Email, chat, faxes, mail, any connection to the College's network(s) or use of any part of the College’s network(s) to access other networks, connections to the Internet that are intended to fulfill information processing and communications functions, communication services, hardware, including printers, scanners, fax machines, any off-campus computers and associated equipment provided for the purpose of College work or associated activities.
+
+College Record: includes any record that is made, produced, executed, received, or maintained by any Olin College department, office, or Employee in connection with the transaction of College business, including records considered to be confidential in nature.  This definition applies to all College Records without regard to format and includes but is not limited to documents in paper, electronic, and other media formats.  Electronic documents will be treated as if they were paper documents.  Therefore, any electronic files, including records of communications and reports sent online, that fall into one of the document types on the above schedule will be maintained for the appropriate amount of time.
+
+Conflict of Commitment: external activities (e.g., consultation arrangements, service on boards, leadership positions in external organizations) involving a dedication of time or other obligations that interfere with an Employee’s fulfillment of College responsibilities.
+
+Conflict of Interest: means a divergence between an employee’s Financial Interests and that employee’s College obligations, such that an independent observer might reasonably question whether the performance of the College obligations are adversely affected (or have the potential to be) by considerations of personal gain.
+
+Confidential Information: non-directory information pertaining to Olin College students, alumni, and employee records, the College’s financial records and trade secrets, and any other information maintained in a confidential manner according to College policy or practice. Olin is bound by law or contract to protect some types of confidential information, and in other instances the College requires protection of confidential information beyond legal or contractual requirements as an additional safeguard.
+
+Controlled Substance: a drug or other substance, or immediate precursor, included in schedule I, II, III, IV, or V of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as amended).
+
+Conviction: means a finding of guilt (including a plea of nolo contendere) or imposition of sentence, or both, by any judicial body charged with the responsibility to determine violations of the federal or state criminal drug statutes.
+
+
+
+Criminal Conviction or Plea of Guilty or Plea of No Contest of Criminal Charges: includes all convictions and pleas that acknowledge criminal responsibility (a guilty plea) or an agreement not to contest (nolo contendere) of these crimes: any felony, drug-statute crime, sex offense, and any crimes subject to the jurisdiction of a military court, which occur after an employee or affiliate has been formally offered and accepted a position to work or provide services for the College. This also includes registration as a convicted sex offender with any governmental authority where such registration is in effect after an employee or affiliate has been formally offered and accepted a position to work or provide services for the College. This does not include a first conviction or plea for any of the following misdemeanors: drunkenness, simple assault, speeding, minor traffic violations, affray, or disturbance of the peace.
+
+Criminal Drug Statute: means a federal or non-federal criminal statute involving the manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of any controlled substance.
+
+Criminal Records Check: means the process of gathering and reviewing criminal history records or information furnished by a criminal justice agency or third-party vendor in the business of obtaining and providing criminal history records relating to an individual’s criminal convictions.  A criminal history record does not include an individual’s conviction records that have been sealed by court order.  Criminal records include in-state, out-of-state and international criminal history, including misdemeanor and felony convictions.
+
+D.
+
+Dependent Child: a child who is a financial dependent of the Employee, as defined by the IRS.
+
+Developmental Evaluation: the written assessment of a staff member’s job performance and productivity related to a set of criteria and objectives set forth by the Job Description during a specified period of time.  Other factors evaluated may include teamwork, customer service, accomplishments, strengths and weaknesses, development opportunities, progress to goals and goals for the upcoming year.
+
+Disability: a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the Major Life Activities of an individual; and a record of such an impairment.  A sensory, mental, or physical impairment that (i) Is medically cognizable or diagnosable; or (ii) Exists as a record or history.  A physical or mental chronic or episodic condition, including, without limitation, HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, epilepsy, seizure disorder, diabetes, clinical depression, bipolar disorder, multiple sclerosis, and heart disease, that limit one or more major life activities of an individual.  Whether the individual’s physical or mental condition limits a major lift activity shall be determined without respect to any mitigating measures, such as medication, unless the mitigating measure itself limits a Major Life Activity.
+
+Disciplinary Action: employment-related action (including imposition of sanctions) undertaken to correct or modify unacceptable job performance or behavior to acceptable standards. Such corrective action may include a verbal warning, written warning, a Performance Improvement Plan, suspension without pay, demotion (may include a reduction in pay), transfer, fines and/or termination of employment.
+
+Discrimination: Discrimination (disparate treatment and disparate impact) occurs when an adverse employment action is taken and is based upon a protected class.  Disparate treatment occurs when an Employee suffers less favorable treatment than others because of the protected class.  Disparate impact occurs when an employment policy, although neutral on its face, adversely impacts persons in a protected class.
+
+Domestic Violence: abuse against an Employee or the Employee’s family member by: (a) a current or former spouse of the Employee or the Employee’s family member; (b) a person with whom the Employee or the Employee’s family member shares a child in common; (c) a person who is cohabitating with or has cohabitated with the Employee or the Employee’s family member; (d) a person who is related by blood or marriage to the Employee; or (e) a person with whom the Employee or Employee’s family member has or had a dating or engagement relationship.
+
+E.
+
+Effective Date of Employment and Effective Date of Reinstatement: the date of commencement of employment or reinstatement of employment after a lapse in pay of thirty (30) calendar days or more, but no later than the first day for which the Employee or Independent Contractor is eligible for compensation or, in the case of an Independent Contractor re-hired under a new contract, the date of commencement of employment under the new contract.
+
+Emeritus Status: an honor conferred by the College to show respect for a distinguished career.
+
+Remote Work or Telecommuting: a remote work or telecommuting arrangement is defined as one in which a staff member is able to work from home or another appropriate location for at least part of the workweek on a regular basis. 
+
+Employee: an individual who is paid a salary or wage directly by Olin College.  As distinguished from an Independent Contractor, the College has the right to direct and control the worker, not only as to the result to be accomplished, but also as to the details as to how the work is to be accomplished.
+
+Employment Eligibility Verification (Form I-9): the Federal form employers use to verify the work- authorization status of all newly hired Employees in the United States.
+
+Equal Opportunity: the principle of non-discrimination in education and employment that emphasizes opportunities in education and employment for all individuals irrespective of race or personal characteristics associated with race, color, citizenship status, national origin or ancestry, sex, sexual orientation or preference, age, religion, physical or mental disability, of a qualified individual, pregnancy or pregnancy-related condition, genetic information, membership in Uniformed Services, veteran status, or any other factor protected by applicable state or federal laws.
+
+Essential Employees: includes Public Safety, Facilities Services, and Dining Services staff and vendors, as announced by the College on the date of the closure.
+
+Essential Functions of the Job: refer to those job activities that are determined by the College to be essential or core to performing the job; these functions cannot be eliminated.
+
+Exempt Employees: College Employees who are exempt from minimum wage and overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act as amended.  All faculty are classified as Exempt.
+
+External Activity: outside financial, business, political, professional, public service and academic activities.
+
+F.
+
+Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA): a federal law governing minimum wage, overtime pay, child labor and record keeping requirements.
+
+Financial Interest: anything of monetary value, including but not limited to, compensation, payments for service (e.g. consulting fees or honoraria), royalties, equity or ownership interests (with the exception of owning not more than 1% of any publicly traded class of shares of any company), and intellectual property rights.
+
+Foreign National: any person residing in the United States who is not a U.S. citizen, or a permanent resident or ""Immigrant"".
+
+G.
+
+Garnishments: court ordered deductions from earnings for monies owed to a company, government or individual, for example, monies owed in child support, unpaid student loans, bankruptcy collection, unpaid taxes and/or other debt.
+
+Good Standing: means that the former Employee had a satisfactory employment record during employment at the College.
+
+Grievance: any complaint arising from employment with the College relating to compensation, hours of work, working conditions, job assignments, verbal or written warnings, performance evaluations, or the interpretation or application of a College policy or procedure.   A Grievance does not apply to the following: 
+
+Issues falling within the jurisdiction of other College policies and procedures (i.e., unlawful discrimination and harassment complaints, etc.); 
+
+Determination or content of a College policy or procedure appropriately approved by the College governance system; 
+
+Normal actions taken or recommendations made by individuals acting in an official capacity in the grievance resolution process; and 
+
+Failure to satisfy the individual making the grievance after the grievance process has been completed.
+
+H.
+
+
+
+I.
+
+Immigrant: a foreign national in the United States for an indefinite period as a U.S. lawful permanent resident, with Lawful Permanent Residency (LPR) status, i.e., “green card” holder. An immigrant can remain in the United States indefinitely and work without restriction for any U.S. employer.
+
+Independent Contractor or Consultant: an individual or firm engaged in an established business, trade or profession who provides services to the College and whose fees are reported on the IRS Form 1099-MISC. An Independent Contractor is not an Employee of the College; an Independent Contractor is a worker who: (a) is engaged in an independently established profession or business; (b) provides a service outside of the College’s usual course of business; and (c) is free from the College’s control or direction when providing services.
+
+Intersession: the period between Christmas Day and New Year’s Day.
+
+Introductory Period: the initial ninety (90) day period of employment, during which both the Staff Member and supervisor carefully consider whether the Staff Member is willing and/or able to meet the standards and expectations of the job and if the Staff Member should be retained by the College.
+
+J.
+
+Job Description: a description that documents the responsibilities, skills, competencies, essential functions, and duties associated with an Employee’s position and defines the qualifications and requirements to perform those duties.
+
+K.
+
+
+
+L.
+
+
+
+M.
+
+Major Life Activities: include the following, but are not limited to: caring for oneself, performing manual tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, thinking, communicating and working.
+
+Maternity Leave: covers the birth mother, and it only includes time during which the birth mother is physically unable to work as certified by her health care provider. Maternity leave is only available to female faculty and staff members.
+
+Military Service: service in the uniformed services covers all categories of military training and service, including duty performed on a voluntary or involuntary basis, in time of peace or war. It includes, but is not limited to: Active Duty, Active Duty for Training, Initial Act of Duty for Training, Inactive Duty Training, full time National Guard duty, and absence from work to determine fitness for any of the above types of duty.
+
+Misuse of College Assets: includes, but is not limited to, forgery, promissory notes, time sheets, leave forms, Independent Contractor agreements, purchase orders, vendor invoices, budgets, etc.); misrepresentation of information on documents; misappropriations of funds, securities, and supplies use of an asset to create illegal items or items for illegal use (for example: drug paraphernalia, lock picks, fireworks, firearms, explosive devices, eavesdropping devices, code-breaking devices, etc.); use of an asset to violate College policy or a federal, state or local law; theft, conversion, intentional damage, or destruction of any asset; improprieties in the handling or reporting of money transactions; and authorizing or receiving payments for goods not received or services not performed.
+
+N.
+
+Non-Exempt Employees: Employees who are covered by minimum wage, overtime, and time card provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act as amended.  These Employees receive overtime pay for any hours worked over forty (40) per week.
+
+Non-Immigrant: a foreign national in the United States for a finite period on temporary legal status. A nonimmigrant can work only for a petitioning employer for the period of time granted by DHS. Nonimmigrant classifications include (as related to this policy):
+
+H-1B: Status accorded to foreign national specialty occupation professionals who have been petitioned by an employer for a position that requires a bachelor’s degree or its equivalent as a minimum for entry into that position;
+
+TN: Status accorded to a Mexican or Canadian foreign national who has been petitioned by an employer for a position listed in the North American Free Trade Agreement.
+
+O-1: Status accorded to foreign nationals who have reached the very top of their field of endeavor and are considered one of the top experts in their field.
+
+J-1: Status accorded to foreign national exchange visitors including students, faculty, researchers and scholars eligible to conduct duties as delineated by their status and program sponsor.
+
+O.
+
+Out of State Employee: an Employee of Olin College whose primary work site is located outside the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
+
+P.
+
+Parent: a biological, adoptive, foster, or stepparent of any Employee or an Employee’s spouse or significant other, or another person who assumed the responsibilities of parenthood when the Employee or the Employee’s spouse or significant other was a Child.
+
+Part-Time Benefit Eligible Employees: part-time Employees who work no fewer than twenty (20) hours and no more than thirty (30) hours a week on regular basis for an indefinite period of time.  Part-time Employees will be eligible for benefits only as specifically outlined under the provisions of applicable benefit plans.
+
+Personnel File: means the current official file or files regardless of location, relating to an Employee of the College, which contains documents and data recorded in the usual course of official College business relating specifically to the individual's employment qualifications, job description and records relating to job offer, promotion, demotion, transfer, layoff and separation, compensation, annual review, disciplinary proceedings, education and training records, policy acknowledgements.
+
+Promotion: movement to a position in another classification at a greater level of responsibility and will normally be accompanied by an increase in compensation.
+
+Q.
+
+Qualified Individual: is a person who meets legitimate skill, experience, education, or other requirements of an employment position that person holds or seeks, and who can perform the essential functions of the position with or without Reasonable Accommodation.
+
+Qualifying Exigency: qualifying exigencies are situations arising from the military deployment of an Employee’s spouse, son, daughter, or parent to a foreign country.  Qualifying Exigencies include the following: Short-notice deployment; Military events and related activities; Childcare and school activities of the service member’s child; Financial and legal arrangements for the service member; Counseling; Rest and recuperation of the service member; Attending to certain post-deployment activities, including attending arrival ceremonies, reintegration briefings and events, and other official ceremonies or programs sponsored by the military for a period of ninety (90) days following the termination of the covered military member’s active duty status, and addressing issues arising from the death of a covered military member; or Additional activities that the employer and Employee shall agree qualify as an exigency and agree to both the timing and duration of such leave.
+
+R.
+
+Reasonable Accommodations: modifications or adjustments to the work environment, or to the manner or circumstances under which the position held or desired is customarily performed, that enable a qualified individual to perform the essential functions of that position.  Also, modifications or adjustments that enable an individual with a disability to enjoy equal benefits and privileges of employment as enjoyed by similarly situated Employees without disabilities.
+
+Reduction in Force: a separation from employment due to lack of funds, lack of work, program restructuring for economic or programmatic reasons, reorganization, or other business needs, with no likelihood or expectation that the Employee will be recalled because the position itself is eliminated.
+
+Reference Check: means the process of contacting individuals directly or through a third-party vendor, including current and former employers, companies, and educational institutions that may reasonably be relied upon to provide relevant information regarding fitness for employment.
+
+Religious Practice or Belief: a sincerely held practice or observance that includes moral or ethical beliefs as to what is right and wrong, most commonly in the context of the cause, nature and purpose of the universe. Religion includes not only traditional, organized religions, but also religious beliefs that are new, uncommon, not part of a formal religious institution or sect, or only subscribed to by a small number of people. Social, political, or economic philosophies, as well as mere personal preferences, are not considered to be religious beliefs.
+
+Relocation Expenses: expenses associated with packing, loading, hauling, insuring or temporarily storing property (no more than thirty (30) days), unpacking, transportation and lodging during the move.
+
+Remote Working: entails a work-at-home arrangement or a remote-access arrangement for at least part of the workweek on a regular basis.
+
+Retaliation: Engaging in conduct that may reasonably be perceived to either (a) adversely affect a person’s work environment because of their good faith participation in the reporting, investigation, and/or resolution of a report of a violation of Policy No. : Equal Employment Opportunity; or (b) discourage a reasonable person from making a report or participating in an investigation under Policy No. : Equal Employment Opportunity, or any other local, state, or federal complaint process (e.g., filing a complaint with an entity like the U.S. Department of Education).  
+
+S.
+
+Serious Health Condition: is an illness, injury, impairment or physical or mental condition that involves (a) inpatient care in a hospital, hospice or residential medical care facility, or (b) continuing treatment by a health care provider.  Employees may not take Family and Medical Leave for the care of a child who is over 18 unless the child is incapable of self-care due to a mental or physical disability.
+
+Staff Member: is defined as an individual employed in any non-faculty category, including an individual who is deemed to be either Exempt or Non-Exempt under the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and/or applicable state law. 
+
+T.
+
+Tardy: When an employee fails to arrive to work at the scheduled time or leaves work before the end of the scheduled workday.
+
+
+
+Transfer: movement to a different position in the same, or in some cases, a lower basic job classification and pay range level.  A Transfer is accompanied by an equal or lower rate of pay.
+
+U.
+
+Undue Hardship: in general, with respect to provision of a Reasonable Accommodation, Undue Hardship means significant difficulty or expense.  Some factors to be considered when determining whether an undue hardship exists are the nature and cost of the Reasonable Accommodation, overall financial resources of the employer, type of operations, and the impact of a Reasonable Accommodation upon the College’s operation and ability to conduct business.
+
+Uniformed Services: means the Armed Forces; the Army National Guard and the Air National Guard when engaged in active duty for training, inactive duty training, or full-time National Guard duty; the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service; and any other category of persons designated by the President in time of war or national emergency. For purposes of USERRA coverage only, service as an intermittent disaster response appointee of the NDMS (National Disaster Medical System) when federally activated or attending authorized training in support of their Federal mission is deemed “service in the uniformed services,”' although such appointee is not a member of the “uniformed services” as defined by USERRA.
+
+V.
+
+Verification Screens: means the process of verifying an Applicant’s education, professional licenses, academic credentials, and work experience.
+
+Visa: a stamp placed in the foreign national's passport that enables the foreign national to apply for entry into the United States in the status listed on the visa.
+
+Volunteer: any uncompensated individual who is authorized by a College department or office to perform humanitarian, charitable or public services on behalf of the College, or to gain personal or professional experience in specific endeavors.  By definition, Volunteers perform services without promise, expectation or receipt of any compensation, future employment or any other tangible benefit.
+
+Vulnerable Persons: include minors, developmentally disabled individuals regardless of age and vulnerable individuals regardless of age.  Vulnerable persons include those who are mentally incapacitated, whether temporarily or permanently, for any cause including but not limited to intoxication, drugs, or mental incompetence.
+
+Vulnerable Population Programs: means College-sponsored programs and activities, including but not limited to academic programs and camps, serving Vulnerable Persons.
+
+W.
+
+Work Related Injury or Illness: an injury or illness that occurs on the job to an eligible Employee for which benefits are awarded and payable by Workers’ Compensation.
+
+Worker’s Compensation: a program of compensation insurance that pays benefits to an Employee who experiences a job-related injury.
+
+X.
+
+
+
+Y.
+
+
+
+Z.</s>"
+<s>[INST] HUMAN SUBJECTS RESEARCH.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Immaculata IWPM Phase I Meeting Proposed Agenda-1.txt [/INST] Immaculata University 
+
+
+
+Institution-wide Policy Manual Project 
+
+Phase I Initial Campus Meeting
+
+Tuesday, March 15, 2011
+
+
+
+
+
+Proposed Agenda
+
+
+
+
+
+	Meeting with President Fadden and Vice President Heath (.5 Hour)
+
+Introductions
+
+Project Goals
+
+
+
+	Institution-wide Policy Manual PowerPoint Presentation (1.5 Hours)
+
+Overview of Proposed IWPM Volume Content and the Three Phase Process
+
+Question and Answers
+
+Attendees: University Executive Officers and other key campus stakeholders invited to attend by the President
+
+
+
+Strategy and Logistics Discussions (1.0 to 1.5 Hours)
+
+Project Calendar
+
+Volume Review Team Membership
+
+Selection of Institutional Project Manager
+
+Key Policy Issues/Concerns
+
+Overview of Current University Policy Materials
+
+Overview of Relevant Accreditation Standards
+
+
+
+	Institution-wide Policy Manual PowerPoint Presentation (If Necessary) (1 Hour)
+
+If desired, Stevens Strategy will present another PowerPoint presentation for the benefit of other campus stakeholders not invited to the initial session 
+
+
+
+Debrief Meeting with President Fadden, Vice President Heath and the Institutional Project Manager (.5 Hour)</s>"
+"<s>[INST] IMMIGRATION SPONSORSHIP POLICY.txt [/INST] WORK AUTHORIZATION AND IMMIGRATION SPONSORSHIP POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+
+
+Policy Number:
+
+III – 3.2.7
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President, Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+
+
+
+
+Any candidate for employment at Canisius College who is not a U.S. citizen or Legal Permanent Resident and who requires immigration status to begin or maintain employment in the United States.
+
+History:
+
+
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to comply with federal regulations regarding the sponsorship of foreign nationals for temporary or permanent residency and define the college’s policy and internal procedures regarding the approval of such sponsorships. 
+
+POLICY
+
+It is the policy of Canisius College to offer employment-based visa sponsorship, which confers the right to work for a U.S. employer in the United States on a temporary or permanent basis, for certain eligible positions at the college.
+
+Human Resources is the only office with the authority to represent to a current or prospective employee that the college will sponsor the foreign national for H-1B or O-1 nonimmigrant status, U.S. Permanent Residence, or any other immigration classification. Any such commitments made by departments or individuals outside of Human Resources are not binding on the college. In addition, Human Resources is the only department authorized to communicate with the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and the U.S. Department of State (DOS), and to sign all forms requiring a college signature on behalf of the college. Similarly, Human Resources is the only department authorized to retain private attorneys in such matters. Attorneys representing individual college employees or candidate for employment are not authorized to file employment-based petitions on behalf of Canisius College. Approved of college sponsorship by Human Resources is not a guarantee of reappointment or promotion.
+
+The authority to grant employment eligibility to foreign nationals ultimately rests with the federal government. The college makes no representation concerning the success or timing of any application for employment eligibility. If an application is ultimately rejected or authorization to work in the U.S. is revoked by the federal government, the college reserves the right to withdraw an offer of employment or terminate employment.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Foreign Nationalany person residing in the United States who is not a U.S. citizen, or a permanent resident or ""immigrant"" as defined herein.
+
+Immigranta foreign national in the United States for an indefinite period as a U.S. lawful permanent resident, with Lawful Permanent Residency (LPR) status, i.e., “green card” holder. An immigrant can remain in the United States indefinitely and work without restriction for any U.S. employer.
+
+Nonimmigranta foreign national in the United States for a finite period on temporary legal status. A nonimmigrant can work only for a petitioning employer for the period of time granted by DHS. Nonimmigrant classifications include (as related to this policy):
+
+H-1B: Status accorded to foreign national specialty occupation professionals who have been petitioned by an employer for a position that requires a bachelor’s degree or its equivalent as a minimum for entry into that position;
+
+TN: Status accorded to a Mexican or Canadian foreign national who has been petitioned by an employer for a position listed in the North American Free Trade Agreement.
+
+O-1: Status accorded to foreign nationals who have reached the very top of their field of endeavor and are considered one of the top experts in their field.
+
+J-1: Status accorded to foreign national exchange visitors including students, faculty, researchers and scholars eligible to conduct duties as delineated by their status and program sponsor.
+
+Visaa stamp placed in the foreign national's passport that enables the foreign national to apply for entry into the United States in the status listed on the visa.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+Canisius College sponsors eligible employees for work-related visas and/or permanent residency on a case-by-case basis. The decision to provide immigration sponsorship must be approved by the provost for eligible faculty positions or area vice president for eligible staff positions. Once approved by the provost or area vice president, the sponsorship is managed through Human Resources.
+
+Human Resources, in consultation with the provost or area vice president as applicable and legal counsel, determines what visa category is the most appropriate for the position and the intentions of the individual. This determination is based on considerations such as the type of appointment or employment offer being made; the length of the proposed visit; how quickly the person is needed; the source of funding of the person's visit; the possibility the college may wish to employ the individual permanently; the current immigration status of the individual if already in the United States; and the foreign national's country of citizenship. The visas most often used to permit a foreign national to be employed at Canisius are the nonimmigrant H-1B, the nonimmigrant O-1, the permanent resident visa based on employment at the college, and the TN for Canadian nationals with professional positions.
+
+While a department or prospective foreign national employee’s wishes may be taken in to consideration, as noted above Human Resources, in collaboration with legal counsel and the provost or area vice president as applicable, makes the decision as to which visa category is appropriate.
+
+H-1B Visas
+
+The H-1B visa is a temporary, nonimmigrant visa that is signed and submitted by a U.S. employer on behalf of a foreign national (i.e. the visa is employer-sponsored and employer-specific). To secure an H-1B visa, the college must demonstrate that the position is one that requires special preparation and that the person being sponsored has the required preparation and education.
+
+The following guidelines apply with regard to acquiring, transferring, or extending H-1B nonimmigrant visa status:
+
+Only a college department, not an employee, may initiate the sponsorship process;
+
+Departmental requests for H-1B sponsorship must be submitted in writing to Human Resources and meet the following minimum requirements:
+
+Written approval for sponsorship from the area vice president or provost must accompany the request:
+
+For eligible faculty positions, the approval of the provost is required for all applications for H-1B visas;
+
+For eligible non-academic positions, the approval of the applicable area vice president is required for all applications for H-1B visas;
+
+The position to be filled by the foreign national must be full-time;
+
+The position requires specialized and complex knowledge that the foreign national will apply in the position;
+
+There is sufficient justification that the proposed foreign national is uniquely qualified through education, training and/or experience for the position;
+
+The position offers the H-1B employee the same benefits package as a U.S. citizen offered the same position; and
+
+The H-1B employee is paid the ""prevailing wage"" or higher as determined by Human Resources based on the best available wage sources;
+
+If approved by the area vice president or provost, Human Resources will begin the application process via college-selected outside immigration counsel; 
+
+Foreign national employees may retain their own immigration counsel at their expense if they choose; however, they are not permitted to apply for H-1B status based on their employment at the college using any attorney not retained by the college;
+
+College sponsorship of H-1B visas does not impact the sponsored employee's at-will or other employment status at the college.
+
+O-1 Visas
+
+Similar to the H-1B visa, an O-1 visa is a temporary, nonimmigrant visa that is signed and submitted by a U.S. employer on behalf of a foreign national (i.e. the visa is employer-sponsored and employer-specific). To secure an O-1 visa, the college must demonstrate that the foreign national possesses extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics, or has a demonstrated record of extraordinary achievement in the motion picture or television industry and has been recognized nationally or internationally for those achievements.
+
+The following guidelines will apply when initially acquiring, transferring, or extending O-1 nonimmigrant visa status:
+
+Only a college department, not an employee, may initiate the sponsorship process;
+
+Departmental requests for O-1 sponsorship must be submitted in writing to Human Resources and meet the following minimum requirements:
+
+Written approval for sponsorship from the area vice president or provost must accompany the request:
+
+For eligible faculty positions, the approval of the provost is required for all applications for O-1 visas;
+
+For eligible non-academic positions (e.g., an athletic coach), the approval of the applicable area vice president is required for all applications for O-1 visas;
+
+For an O-1A visa, presentation of evidence that the beneficiary has received either:
+
+Received a major, internationally-recognized award or evidence of at least (3) three of the following:
+
+Receipt of nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor;
+
+Membership in associations in the field for which classification is sought which require outstanding achievements, as judged by recognized national or international experts in the field;
+
+Published material in professional or major trade publications, newspapers or other major media about the beneficiary and the beneficiary’s work in the field for which classification is sought;
+
+Original scientific, scholarly, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field;
+
+Authorship of scholarly articles in professional journals or other major media in the field for which classification is sought;
+
+A high salary or other remuneration for services as evidenced by contracts or other reliable evidence;
+
+Participation on a panel, or individually, as a judge of the work of others in the same or in a field of specialization allied to that field for which classification is sought; 
+
+Employment in a critical or essential capacity for organizations and establishments that have a distinguished reputation;
+
+If the above criteria do not readily apply to the foreign national’s occupation, the department may submit comparable evidence in order to establish eligibility; OR
+
+A significant national or international awards or prizes in the particular field, such as an Academy Award, Emmy, Grammy or Director's Guild Award (or been nominated for such an award or proze), or evidence of at least (3) three of the following:
+
+Performed and will perform services as a lead or starring participant in productions or events which have a distinguished reputation as evidenced by critical reviews, advertisements, publicity releases, publications, contracts or endorsements;
+
+Achieved national or international recognition for achievements, as shown by critical reviews or other published materials by or about the beneficiary in major newspapers, trade journals, magazines, or other publications;
+
+Performed and will perform in a lead, starring, or critical role for organizations and establishments that have a distinguished reputation as evidenced by articles in newspapers, trade journals, publications, or testimonials;
+
+A record of major commercial or critically acclaimed successes, as shown by such indicators as title, rating or standing in the field, box office receipts, motion picture or television ratings and other occupational achievements reported in trade journals, major newspapers or other publications;
+
+Received significant recognition for achievements from organizations, critics, government agencies or other recognized experts in the field in which the beneficiary is engaged, with the testimonials clearly indicating the author's authority, expertise and knowledge of the beneficiary's achievements;
+
+A high salary or other substantial remuneration for services in relation to others in the field, as shown by contracts or other reliable evidence;
+
+If the above standards do not readily apply to the beneficiary’s occupation in the arts, the department may submit comparable evidence in order to establish eligibility (this exception does not apply to the motion picture or television industry).
+
+If approved by the provost or area vice president, Human Resources will begin the application process via college-selected outside immigration counsel; 
+
+Foreign national employees may retain their own immigration counsel at their expense if they choose; however, they are not permitted to apply for O-1 status based on their employment at the college using any attorney not retained by the college;
+
+College sponsorship of O-1 visas does not impact the sponsored employee's at-will or other employment status at the college.
+
+Permanent Residency (Employee Sponsored Green Card)
+
+At its discretion, the college may elect to sponsor certain eligible faculty and administrative staff for permanent residence status. 
+
+Congress has designated three employment-based sponsorship preferences:
+
+An Employment-Based First (EB-1): An Employment-Based First preference petition is used by the college for individuals who meet the regulatory definition of an ""Outstanding Professor or Researcher."" This preference category avoids the necessity of filing an Application for Alien Employment Certification and therefore is the most direct of all paths to employment-based permanent residence. The Employment-Based First preference is also used for an “Alien of Extraordinary Ability,” a petition is filed only for certain senior administrative staff employees. 
+
+An Employment-Based Second (EB-2): An Employment-Based Second preference petition filed with the USCIS must be accompanied by an approved Application for Alien Employment Certification commonly called a labor certification. This document must be filed with and approved by the U.S. Department of Labor. 
+
+Permanent Labor Certifications (“PERM”): PERM certifications are approved on the basis of documentation of a bona fide effort to recruit qualified United States citizens and permanent residents for a given position. For a conventional PERM application, the applicable department must be able to demonstrate the following:
+
+Through advertising and other recruiting methods that it was unsuccessful in recruiting a qualified U.S. worker for the position; 
+
+The position to be filled by the foreign national is a bona fide job opening available to U.S. workers;
+
+The job requirements for the position adhere to what is customarily required for the occupation in the U.S. (i.e., the position may not be tailored to the foreign national’s qualifications); 
+
+That no more qualified US citizen is available for the position; and
+
+The foreign national will be paid at least the prevailing wage for the occupation in the area of intended employment.
+
+Note: A “special handling” labor certification application must be filed within 18 months of the date the final candidate was selected. In some cases, regulations require an additional recruitment effort to be conducted under the auspices of the United States Department of Labor even if a search has already been conducted for the position.
+
+Procedures: 
+
+The following procedures apply regarding permanent residence immigration sponsorship at Canisius:
+
+Only a college department, not an employee, may initiate the employment-based sponsorship process;
+
+Departmental requests for employment-based sponsorship must be submitted in writing to Human Resources and meet the following minimum requirements:
+
+The position to be filled by the foreign national must be permanent in nature (i.e., there is a reasonable expectation that the individual will continue to be employed by the college for three years or longer) and full-time: 
+
+Faculty must be full-time tenured or tenure-track faculty with an academic rank of instructor, assistant, associate, or professor;
+
+Other full-time positions, including but not limited to term appointment faculty and staff positions, must be in the best interest of the college based on compelling need;
+
+Students, visiting scholars, visiting faculty, temporary and part-time employees are not eligible for sponsorship;
+
+Written approval from the area vice president or provost must accompany the for the employment-based sponsorship request:
+
+For eligible faculty positions, the approval of the provost is required;
+
+For eligible non-academic positions, the approval of the applicable area vice president is required;
+
+Based upon the above eligibility and approval criteria, the process to apply for employment-based sponsorship will be initiated through Human Resources: 
+
+The college and the foreign national will work with an immigration attorney selected by the college to represent both the college and the employee throughout the process and select the most appropriate employment-based sponsorship preferences;
+
+Foreign nationals may retain their own immigration counsel at their expense if they choose; however, they are not permitted to apply for permanent residence based on their employment at the college using any attorney not retained by the college;
+
+College sponsorship does not impact the sponsored employee's at-will or other employment status at the college.
+
+Note: If the foreign national does not qualify for college sponsorship for permanent residence, the employee may be able to petition on his/her own behalf or through sponsorship by a family member.
+
+Visitors under the North American Free Trade Agreement (TN)
+
+The TN visa category is part of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and enables qualified Canadian and Mexican citizens to enter the United States to engage in professional business activities on a temporary basis. No college approvals are required beyond the normal approvals required for hiring individuals for the position in question.
+
+The TN visa category requires that the applicant:
+
+Is a citizen of Canada or Mexico;
+
+Enters the U.S. on a temporary basis;
+
+Possesses the minimum qualifications of one of the professions specified in Appendix 1603.D.1 of the NAFTA treaty. The Appendix also stipulates the minimum qualifications for entry into the U.S. in each occupation. (See https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2012-title8-vol1/pdf/CFR-2012-title8-vol1-sec214-6.pdf.):
+
+The most common minimum requirement is a Baccalaureate degree and licensure, if required for the profession. 
+
+A foreign national must have licensure before he or she can obtain TN status.
+
+Canadian Citizens
+
+For Canadian citizens, Human Resources issues a letter to the prospective employee outlining the job title, salary, dates (the appointment must be temporary) and job responsibilities. The letter must state the specific credentials required for the job. The employee must present the letter and proof that he or she possesses those credentials at the time of entry to the U.S. There is a fee collected by the immigration service from the employee upon entry in TN status. 
+
+Mexican Citizens
+
+For Mexican citizens, Human Resources issues a letter to the prospective employee outlining the job title, salary, dates (the appointment must be temporary) and job responsibilities. The letter must state the specific credentials required for the job. The employee must present the letter and proof that he or she possesses those credentials at the time of application for the TN visa as well as at the time of entry to the U.S. 
+
+Refer to CBP’s website for additional information and requirements for applying for TN visa admission to the United States.
+
+Sponsorship for Other Nonimmigrant Visas (J-1, B-1, Etc.)
+
+The college may sponsor other work-related non-immigrant visas for certain positions. The decision to provide non-immigrant sponsorship must be approved by the provost for all faculty positions or by the area vice president for all staff positions. Once approved by the provost or area vice president, visa procurement is managed through Human Resources.
+
+Retention of Immigration Counsel and Coverage of Expenses 
+
+Upon appropriate approvals as applicable, the college will be responsible for the payment of those costs and fees required to be paid by employers pursuant to federal regulations.  (Note that TN Visa application fees are the responsibility of the foreign national). Pursuant to applicable regulations, this includes all fees related to all employer-based work authorizations (i.e. H-1B, O-1), as well as the payment of legal fees for preparing, filing, and obtaining labor certification for the permanent sponsorship of a foreign employee. However, the college will not be responsible for the payment of any attorney’s fees or costs associated with the remaining steps of the sponsorship process, namely the Form I-140 and Form I-485.  
+
+Foreign national employees are free to obtain their own attorney to represent their personal interests in the immigration process at his/her own expense. Any private counsel hired by the employee, however, is not permitted to represent the college in the immigration process.  In addition, foreign national employees are responsible for paying fees that pertain to visas for their family member(s), as well any premium processing fees if he or she desires to expedite the process and if the delay is not caused by a lack of planning on the part of the college.
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Hiring Policy</s>"
+<s>[INST] Information Security Policies.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] INFORMATION SECURITY PROGRAM.txt [/INST] INFORMATION SECURITY PROGRAM
+
+Effective Date:
+
+May 8, 2017
+
+Policy Number:
+
+II – 2.4.8
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Chief Information Officer
+
+Applicability:
+
+All Canisius College employees.
+
+History:
+
+ 
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to define the college’s information security program (“ISP”), which establishes a college-wide approach to information security and prescribes mechanisms that help identify and prevent the compromise and misuse of covered data and information; defines mechanisms that allow the college to satisfy its legal and ethical responsibilities with regard to its networks’ and computer systems’ connectivity to worldwide networks; and prescribes an effective mechanism for responding to external complaints and queries about real or perceived non-compliance with this program.
+
+POLICY
+
+It is the policy of the college to maintain a comprehensive ISP in compliance with the Gramm Leach Bliley Act (GLBA). The objective of the ISP is to: ensure the security and confidentiality of covered data and information in compliance with applicable GLBA rules as published by the Federal Trade Commission; safeguard against anticipated threats to the security or integrity of covered data and information, including electronic data; and guard against unauthorized access to or use of covered data and information that could result in harm or inconvenience to college students, employees, and customers.
+
+The college’s ISP incorporates, by reference, college-wide and departmental policies and procedures that address the security and confidentiality of College Data encompassed by the definition of “covered data and information” below. These include, but are not limited to:
+
+Access Control Policy
+
+Acceptable Use of College Computer and Network Systems Policy
+
+Audit and Accountability Control Policy 
+
+Computer Asses Disposal Policy
+
+Computer Asset Replacement Policy
+
+Confidential Information Policy
+
+Configuration Management Policy
+
+Data Classification Policy
+
+Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Policy
+
+Identification and Authentication Policy
+
+Identity Theft Prevention Policy
+
+Information Technology Personnel Security Policy
+
+Information Technology Physical and Environmental Protection Policy
+
+Information Technology Security Awareness and Training Policy 
+
+Media Protection Policy
+
+Mobile Device Use and Support Policy
+
+Payment Card Information Security Policy
+
+Risk and Security Assessment Policy
+
+Student Records (FERPA) Policy
+
+System and Communication Protection Policy
+
+System and Information Integrity Policy
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Authorized User—are all individuals, including, but not limited to, employees, temporary employees, faculty, students, alumni, trustees, campus visitors, contractors, vendors, consultants and their related personnel, and other individuals authorized by the college to access a college computer, the college network(s), or information systems that collect, process, maintain, use, share, disseminate or dispose of College Data.
+
+Cardholder Data - full magnetic stripe or the Primary Account Number (PAN) plus any of the following: cardholder name; expiration date; service code; CVC2/CVV2/CID (a three- or four-digit number displayed on the signature panel of the card or, in the case of American Express, on the face of the card.
+
+College Data— any information collected, manipulated, stored, reported, or presented in any format, on any medium, at any location by any department, program or office of the college in support of the college’s mission.
+
+College Employees—includes Canisius College executive officers, administrators, faculty, staff, student employees, contractors, and others who act on behalf of the college.
+
+College Information System—a set of information resources organized expressly for the collection, processing, maintenance, use, sharing, dissemination, or disposition of information. The term system is used throughout this policy to represent all types of computing platforms that can process, store, or transmit College Data.
+
+Covered Data and Information—means all Non-Public Personnel Information of customers required to be protected under the Title V of the Gramm Leach Bliley Act of 1999 (“GLBA”), including Student Financial Information. In addition to this coverage, which is required under federal law, the college chooses as a matter of policy to also include in this definition any Cardholder Data received in the course of business by the college, whether or not such Cardholder Data is covered by GLBA. Covered Data and Information includes both paper and electronic records.  Covered Data and Information is classified as Private, Highly Restricted College Data pursuant to the Data Classification Policy.
+
+Data Custodians—the custodian of College Data is generally responsible for the processing and storage of College Data. The custodian is responsible for the administration of controls as specified by the Data Owner. By definition, Data Custodians are also Authorized Users.
+
+Data Owners—the owner of a collection of College Data is usually the manager responsible for the creation of that data or the primary user of that information. This role often corresponds with the management of department. In this context, ownership does not signify proprietary interest, and ownership may be shared. By definition, Data Owners are also Authorized Users.
+
+Members of the College Community—includes any person who is a student, college employee, volunteer, trustee, alumni, as well as college organizations, clubs, groups, and teams. This definition also includes all college departments, offices and programs.
+
+Non-Public Personal Information—any personally identifiable financial or other personal information, not otherwise publicly available, that the college has obtained from a customer in the process of offering a financial product or service; such information provided to the college by another financial institution; such information otherwise obtained by the college in connection with providing a financial product or service; or any list, description, or other grouping of customers (and publicly available information pertaining to them) that is derived using any information listed above that is not publicly available. Examples of personally identifiable financial information include names, date and place of birth, mother’s maiden name, biometric records, addresses, telephone numbers, bank and credit card account numbers, income and credit histories, tax returns, asset statements, and social security numbers, both in paper and electronic form.
+
+Personally Identifiable Information or PII—any information about an individual that (i) can be used to distinguish or trace an individual’s identity, such as name, date and place of birth, mother’s maiden name or biometric records, (ii) is linked or linkable to an individual, such as medical, educational, financial and employment information, which if lost, compromised or disclosed without authorization, could result in harm to that individual; and (iii) is protected by federal, state or local laws and regulations or industry standards.
+
+Private College Data—any College Data classified as Private-Highly Restricted and Private-Restricted pursuant to this policy. By definition, Private College Data includes, but is not limited to, Covered Data and Information, Student Financial Information, Personally Identifiable Information, Student Education Records, Human Subjects Research Data or Other Sensitive Research Data, Protected Health Information, Cardholder Data, and Sensitive Authentication Data.  See the College Data Classification Policy for additional information.
+
+Public College Data—College Data that by law are available to the public upon request, and that the loss of the data would not cause significant personal, institutional, or other harm.
+
+Sensitive Authentication Data—Full track data (magnetic strip data or equivalent on a chip, CAV2/CVC2/CVV2/CID, and PINs/PIN blocks.
+
+Student Education Records—as defined by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), student education records are all records which contain information directly related to a student and maintained by the college, including those files, documents, and other materials (in handwriting, print, computer media, video or audio tape, film, microfilm, and microfiche) that contain information directly related to a student which are maintained by the college or by a person acting for the college pursuant to college or department policy. Information that is captured as a result of a student’s various activities at the college is part of the student record. This information includes, but may not be limited to, logs, databases or other records of: websites the student has visited, purchases made at college facilities, entry day/time into college facilities, library use and biometric records.
+
+Student Financial Information—information the college or its affiliates have obtained from a student in the process of offering a financial product or service, or such information provided to the college by another financial institution. Offering a financial product or service includes offering student loans to students, receiving income tax information from a student’s parent when offering a financial aid package, and other miscellaneous financial services as defined in 12 CRF §225.28. Examples of student financial information include addresses, phone numbers, bank and credit card account numbers, income and credit histories and Social Security numbers, in both paper and electronic format.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+In compliance with the GLBA, the college’s ISP includes the following elements: 
+
+Appoint an ISP coordinator;
+
+Conduct a risk assessment of likely security and privacy risks;
+
+Institute a training program for all employees who have access to covered data and information;
+
+Oversee service providers and contracts, and 
+
+Evaluate and adjust the ISP on an annual basis.
+
+I.	Designation of the ISP Coordinator
+
+In order to comply with GLBA, the college has designated the chair of the ITS Systems and Security Committee (SSC) to serve in the role of ISP coordinator. The chair of the SSC, as well as the committee members, must work closely with college legal counsel and all relevant academic and administrative schools and departments throughout the college. The chair of SSC is appointed by the chief information officer.
+
+The coordinator (or the coordinator’s designee) must help the relevant offices of the college identify reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of customer information; evaluate the effectiveness of the current safeguards for controlling these risks; design and implement a safeguards program, and regularly monitor and test the program.
+
+II.	Risk Assessment and Safeguards
+
+In accordance with the Risk and Security Assessment Policy, the coordinator (or the coordinator’s designee) must work with all relevant areas of the college to identify potential and actual risks to security and privacy of information. Each department head, or designee, will conduct an annual data security review, with guidance from the coordinator. Vice presidents will be asked to identify any employees in their respective areas that work with covered data and information. In addition, the relevant departments of ITS will conduct an annual review of procedures, incidents, and responses, and will document all relevant materials.  Selective publication of these materials is for the purpose of educating the college community on network security and privacy issues. ITS will assure that procedures and responses are appropriately reflective of those widely practiced at other institutions of higher education, as measured by four advisory groups: The Educause Security Institute, The Internet2 security working group, the SANS Top Twenty risks list, and the Federal NIST Computer Security Resource Center. 
+
+In order to protect the security and integrity of the college network and its data, ITS develops and maintains a registry of all computers attached to the college network. This registry includes, where relevant, IP address or subnet, MAC address, physical location, operating system, intended use (server, personal computer, lab machine, dorm machine, etc.), the person, persons, or department primarily responsible for the machine, and whether the machine has special access to any confidential data covered by relevant external laws or regulations.
+
+ITS assumes the responsibility of assuring that patches for operating systems or software environments are reasonably up to date for systems that it administers and keeps records of patching activity. Furthermore, ITS seeks to enforce: i) currency with respect to security level of all systems attached to the network; and ii) virus and worm protection of all systems attached to the network. ITS reviews its procedures for patches to operating systems and software, and keeps current on potential threats to the network and its data. Risk assessments will be updated annually in accordance with the Risk Assessment and Security Policy.
+
+ITS bears primary responsibility for the identification of internal and external risk assessment, but all members of the college community are involved in risk assessment. ITS, working in conjunction with the relevant college offices, will conduct regular risk assessments, including but not limited to the categories listed by GLBA. Department heads will cooperate with the committee and play an active role in addressing security in their areas.
+
+At the conclusion of the assessment process, ITS presents a report to the Senior Leadership Team (with a copy to the appropriate Data Owner) that includes suggested policy, control and procedural improvements and strategies for addressing the risk. The Senior Leadership Team then makes decisions on policy, procedures and associated controls, budget, and system operational and management changes. As new policies, procedures, and associated controls are implemented as a result of the risk assessment process, ITS, in collaboration with the SSC and applicable Data Owners, monitors the affected system(s) to verify that the implemented controls continue to meet expectations. Refer to the Risk and Security Assessment Policy for more information.
+
+The college’s administrative software systems, processes, and devices are limited to Authorized Users. Moreover, information system access is limited to the types of transactions and functions that authorized users are permitted to execute. The college’s administrative software systems schema and reports identify those users who have been granted such access. Moreover, the college annually conducts an audit that requires departmental supervisors to verify those individuals that may continue to have electronic access to Private College Data, including Covered Data and Information via the college’s administrative software systems.
+
+In accordance with the Information Technology Physical and Environmental Protection Policy, ITS assures the physical security of ITS administered computers, including servers, which contain or have access to Private College Data, including Covered Data and Information. The SSC conducts a survey of other physical security risks, including the storage of covered paper records in non-secure environments, and other procedures which may expose the college to risks.
+
+While the college has discontinued usage of social security numbers as student identifiers, one of the largest security risks may be the possible non-standard practices concerning social security numbers, e.g. continued reliance by some college employees on the use of social security numbers. Social security numbers are considered protected information under both GLBA and the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). By necessity, student social security numbers still remain in the college student information system. The college will conduct an assessment to determine who has access to social security numbers, in what systems the numbers are still used, and in what instances students are inappropriately being asked to provide a social security number. This assessment will cover college employees as well as subcontractors such as the bookstore and food services.
+
+ITS ensures that all electronic Private College Data is encrypted in transit and that the central databases are strongly protected from security risks. See the System and Communications Protection, Media Protection, and Mobile Device Use and Support policies for additional information.
+
+
+
+ITS has developed an Identity Theft Prevention Policy to detect and mitigate any actual or attempted attacks on covered systems. In addition, ITS has developed a contingency plan which includes incident response procedures for actual or attempted unauthorized access to Private College Data, including Covered Data and Information. 
+
+The information security coordinator will periodically review the college’s disaster recovery program and data-retention policies and present a report to the Senior Leadership Team.
+
+III.	Employee Management, Training, and Education
+
+All Canisius College employees are expected to adhere to the Canisius College Standards of Ethical Conduct and other applicable policies. In addition, the college requires that all new college hires undergo background and reference checks prior to hire. See the college’s Background, Reference and Verification Screens and Information Technology Personnel Security policies.
+
+While directors and supervisors are ultimately responsible for ensuring compliance with the college’s information security policies, controls and procedures, ITS and the SSC work in cooperation with Human Resources to develop training and education programs for all employees who have access to Private College Data, including Covered Data and Information.
+
+		In addition to the above, ITS posts news of email scams, phishing attempts and other malicious actions to inform Authorized Users of possible threats.
+
+Refer to the Information Technology Security Awareness and Training Policy for additional information.
+
+IV.	Oversight of Service Providers and Contracts
+
+The information security program requires the college to take reasonable steps to select and retain service providers who maintain appropriate safeguards for covered data and information. The Business and Finance Office will request assurances of GLBA compliance to all covered contractors.
+
+At a minimum, contracts with service providers must include the following provisions:
+
+An explicit acknowledgement that the contract allows the service provider to access to Private College Data (including Covered Data and Information); 
+
+A specific definition or description of the Private College Data (including Covered Data and Information) permitted to be accessed by the service provider; 
+
+A stipulation that the Private College Data (including Covered Data and Information) will be held in strict confidence by the service provider and accessed only for the explicit business purpose of the contract; 
+
+An assurance in writing from the service provider that it will protect the Private College Data (including Covered Data and Information) it accesses according to commercially acceptable standards (e.g., NIST 800-171 Standards) and no less rigorously than it protects its own confidential data. Service provider are required to acknowledge in writing that they are responsible for the security of Private College Data that the service provider possesses or otherwise stores, processes, or transmits on behalf of the college;
+
+A provision providing that service provider personnel accessing Private College Data (including Covered Data and Information) possess the same level of security clearance as a college employee granted access to the same data;
+
+A provision providing for the return or destruction of all Private College Data (including Covered Data and Information) received by the service provider upon completion or termination of the contract with the college;
+
+An agreement that any violation of the contract’s confidentiality conditions may constitute a material breach of the contract and entitles the college to terminate the contract without penalty; and 
+
+A provision ensuring that the contract’s confidentiality requirements shall survive any termination agreement.
+
+Refer also to the Payment Card Information Security Policy for vendor requirements applicable to the Cardholder Data Environment.
+
+ITS, in collaboration with the applicable Data Owner, will monitor the vendor’s compliance with all contractually required information security-related policies and controls.
+
+V.	Evaluation and Revision of the Information Security Program
+
+GLBA mandates that this program be subject to periodic review and adjustment. ITS will review its information security-related policies, controls, and procedures at least once each year. Processes in other relevant offices of the college such as data access procedures and the training program undergo regular review. The ISP itself as well as the related data retention policy are reevaluated annually in order to assure ongoing compliance with existing and future laws and regulations.
+
+VII.	Information Security Policy Exceptions Request 
+
+All departments are expected to comply with the ISP and college information security policies, which are designed to establish the controls necessary to protect College Data, including Covered Data and Information.
+
+If a Data Owner determines that compliance with any information security policy and associated control or procedure adversely impacts a business process of the department, the Data Owner may request an exception as follows:
+
+A Data Owner (or an appointed designee) seeking an exception must submit an Exception Request Form (see Appendix) for an exception to the chief information officer for review. The written request must provide:
+
+Business or technical justification detailing the reasons for the exception, including the college policy and associated control for which the exception is being requested;
+
+Scope of the requested exception, including quantification (i.e., cost) and requested duration (not to exceed one (1) year); 
+
+Analysis of all associated risks;
+
+Explanation of alterative controls to mitigate the risks;
+
+Explanation of any residual risks; and
+
+Approval of the area vice president that oversees the department requesting the exception;
+
+The chief information officer will gather any necessary background information and make a recommendation to approve or deny the request;
+
+The chief information officer will approve or deny the request for an exception;
+
+The requestor will be notified of the decision to approve or deny;
+
+All requests for exception will be retained by the chief information officer for the period of the exception; and
+
+Exceptions are valid for a one-year period unless otherwise noted. If the exception is still required, the Data Owner may seek to renew the exception and provide any additional risks identified since the previous request. If the conditions have substantially changed, a new request for exception must be submitted to the chief information officer. Where little has changed, the review process may be shortened as recommended by the chief information officer.
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Acceptable Use of College Computer and Network Systems Policy
+
+Access Control Policy
+
+Audit and Accountability Control Policy 
+
+Background, Reference and Verification Screens Policy
+
+Cloud Computing Policy
+
+Confidential Information Policy
+
+Configuration Management Policy
+
+
+
+Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Policy
+
+Identity Theft Prevention Policy
+
+Identification and Authentication Policy
+
+Information Security Program
+
+Information Technology Personnel Security Policy
+
+Information Technology Physical and Environmental Protection Policy
+
+Information Technology Security Awareness and Training Policy 
+
+Media Protection Policy
+
+Mobile Device Use and Support Policy
+
+Password Policy
+
+Payment Card Information Security Policy
+
+Record Retention and Disposal Policy
+
+Risk and Security Assessment Policy
+
+Standards of Ethical Conduct
+
+Student Records (FERPA) Policy
+
+System and Communications Protection Policy 
+
+System and Data Integrity Policy</s>"
+"<s>[INST] INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INCIDENT RESPONSE.txt [/INST] INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INCIDENT RESPONSE
+
+Effective Date:
+
+
+
+Policy Number:
+
+II – 2.4.
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Chief Information Officer/Chief Information Security Officer
+
+Applicability:
+
+All Canisius College employees.
+
+History:
+
+ 
+
+
+
+The purpose of this policy is to define standard methods for identifying, documenting, and responding to Information Technology Security Incidents.  
+
+POLICY 
+
+It is the policy of Canisius College to respond promptly to an Information Technology Resource Security Incident (“Security Incident”).  A swift response to a Security Incident that threatens the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of a College Information System and assets is critical.  Without a rapid response, a system or assets could be compromised, and the College could be in violation of Federal, State, or Local statutes, client contracts, and/or in its own policies.
+
+The Security Incident response process may start with an explicit report of a security breach, but it is more likely to start as the result of a routine investigation into some anomalous system or network behavior.  For example, a server may be operating slowly, or a printing service may stop working.  Because of the potential for unauthorized release or modification of College Data, in addition to service disruption, it is important to assess the possibility that strange behavior may be the result of some security problem before taking steps to correct a “normal” problem.
+
+When it is determined that an incident may be security related, the nature of the recovery effort must be modified accordingly.  Information Technology Services (ITS) staff will be notified to ensure the following: 
+
+							The appropriate information is collected and documented, 
+
+							Ascertain the nature and scope of the security breach, and, 
+
+							If appropriate, facilitate an investigation by law enforcement.  
+
+Depending on the nature and scope of a breach, it may also be necessary to make client and/or public disclosure, which will require the involvement of the appropriate company officials.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Security Incident: occurs when there is a serious threat of or unauthorized access or acquisition to an Information System or non-public College Data that compromises the security, confidentiality, or integrity of the data.  A Security Incident also occurs where there has been unauthorized access or acquisition of encrypted data and the confidential process or key to the encryption is also compromised.  Security Incidents can range from the unauthorized use of another authorized user’s account or system privileges to the execution of malicious code, viruses, worms, Trojan horses, cracking utilities, or attacks by crackers or hackers.  Security Incidents may also involve the physical theft of an Information Technology Resource or an authorized user’s technology, such as a computer, Mobile Device, or other electronic media, or may occur as the result of a weakness in information systems or components (e.g., hardware design or system security procedures).
+
+A non-exhaustive list of incidents that qualify as Security Incidents include:
+
+							A system alarm or similar indication from an intrusion detection tool;
+
+							Suspicious entries in a system;
+
+							Accounting discrepancies; 
+
+							Unexplained new user accounts or file names;
+
+							Unexplained modification or deletion of data; 
+
+							System crashes or poor system performance;
+
+							Unusual time of usage; and
+
+							Unusual usage patterns.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+I.	Security Incident Response Procedures
+
+The Security Incident Response Flowchart (see Section III below) provides the process for responding to a Security Incident.  While following this process, it is important to keep the following in mind:
+
+							Discovery
+
+							The Security Incident response process may start with an explicit report of a security breach, or from a routine audit investigation into some anomalous system or network behavior, or from a vulnerability scan results, or from a formal infringement notification, or from internal sources reporting, or suspicions activities from intrusion detections systems, intrusion prevention system, intrusion prevention firewalls, etc.
+
+							The College designates ITS staff to be available on a 24/7 basis to respond to intrusion detection systems, etc.
+
+							Evaluate
+
+							The Chief Information Officer/Chief Information Security Officer will evaluate and classify the Security Incident in accordance with the Incident Severity Classification criteria (see Section II below).
+
+							If the incident is deemed to be a Level 2 incident or higher pursuant to the Incident Severity Classification criteria (see Section II below), a Security Incident Response Team will be assembled at the direction of the President.  Under such circumstances, the Chief Information Officer/Chief Information Security Officer will manage and lead the team.  Members of the team may include ITS staff and any additional individuals deemed appropriate by the President in consultation with Senior Leadership. Follow guidance set forth in the Computer Security Incident Response Plan Operating Plan.
+
+							Document
+
+							The key to proper investigation is proper documentation. The discovery of a Security Incident needs to be properly by a member of the Security Response Incident Team. 
+
+							Notification
+
+							Information must be shared with individuals involved in the investigation.
+
+							It is important that all members of the Security Incident Response Team are up to date as events unfold.  Much of the information, however, may be confidential, so care should be taken to protect confidentiality of discussions. 
+
+							The Chief Information Officer/Chief Information Security Officer will report all incidents involving the College’s Cardholder Data Environment to the applicable card association.
+
+							Acknowledgment
+
+							Initial notifications regarding an incident must be acknowledged to demonstrate action will be taken immediately to contain the incident
+
+							Containment
+
+							Swift containment is necessary to prevent the spread of worms, further compromise or disclosure of information.  Containment of the incident and investigation may be pursued simultaneously
+
+							Investigation
+
+							After an incident has been contained, the system can be freely investigated. All action taken will be documented by the team.
+
+							Eradication
+
+							Eradication may be necessary to eliminate components of the incident such as deleting malicious code or disabling breached user accounts.
+
+							Recovery
+
+							Recover to normal operations
+
+							Harden systems or processes to prevent similar incidents
+
+							Closure
+
+							Review incident and close open incidents
+
+							Final Report
+
+							Following any Security Incident, the team must produce an incident response report (a “report”).
+
+							The team will be responsible for issuing the final report to the Senior Leadership Team.
+
+							The report shall include at a minimum the following:
+
+							A description of the Security Incident;
+
+							Type of College Data or other information exposed and/or potentially at risk of exposure from the Security Incident;
+
+							Type of Information System damaged or potentially at risk of damage or loss due to the Security Incident;
+
+							Steps taken for containment of the Security Incident;
+
+							Steps taken for remediation of the Security Incident;
+
+							Logging of all internal and external communications issued, including all emails and phone calls regarding the Security Incident;
+
+							Interactions with law enforcement and disciplinary authorities regarding the Security Incident (if applicable); and
+
+							Legal obligations and actions taken to satisfy those legal obligations regarding the Security Incident.
+
+II.	Incident Severity Classification
+
+A.	Level 1 Incident – Security incident involving Public Data
+
+							The local system administrator is responsible for containment, investigation, rebuild, and hardening system. 
+
+							The local administrator should properly document the incident and report it to the Chief Information Officer/Chief Information Security Officer.  
+
+B.	Level 2 Incident – Security Incident Involving Restricted Data
+
+							The local system administrator is to immediately contact the Chief Information Officer/Chief Information Security Officer.
+
+							A Security Incident Response Team will be formed to formulate a response.
+
+Notify and Consult with Senior Leadership on next steps.
+
+C.	Level 3 Incident – Security Incident Involving Confidential Data
+
+							The local system administrator is to immediately contact the Chief Information Officer/Chief Information Security Officer.
+
+A Security Incident Response Team will be formed to formulate a response.
+
+Notify and Consult with Senior Leadership on next steps.
+
+Notify law enforcement if necessary.
+
+Consult with Chief Communications Officer for any necessary Public statement(s).
+
+							
+
+
+III.	Security Incident Flow Chart
+
+
+
+
+
+IV.	Incident Prevention
+
+Wherever possible and in conjunction with the application of other College policies relating to information security, including but not limited to the ITS Contingency Plan, as well as the Information Security Program Policy, the College will undertake to prevent Security Incidents by monitoring and scanning its own network(s) and systems for anomalies and developing clear protection procedures for the configuration of its Information Systems.
+
+V.	Training
+
+Regular Incident Response training is necessary to keep company team members current on processes needed for the proper reactive measures to events that might compromise the information system.
+
+The Chief Information Officer or designee: 
+
+							Trains appropriate personnel in their Incident Response roles and responsibilities with respect to the information system; and 
+
+							Provides refresher training at least annually or whenever the Incident Response procedures are modified. 
+
+VI.	Incident Response Testing and Exercises
+
+Regular Incident Response testing and exercises assists in ensuring compliance of Incident Response procedures and keeps applicable team members current on this policy.
+
+Accordingly, ITS tests and/or exercises the Incident Response capability for the information system at least once a year using the existing incident response procedures to determine the incident response effectiveness and documents the results.  This policy and its procedures will be adjusted as needed to improve processes if the testing reveals a need for modifications.
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+							Acceptable Use of College Computer and Network Systems Policy
+
+							Confidential Information Policy
+
+							Configuration Management Policy
+
+							Data Classification Policy
+
+							Identity Theft Prevention Policy
+
+							Information Security Program Policy
+
+							Catastrophic Events and Continuity of Operations</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Initial Recommendations (7.22 Meeting).txt [/INST] 22
+
+
+
+
+
+July 22, 2022
+
+
+
+TO:	Review Team
+
+FROM: 	Stephen Lazarus
+Sr. Consultant
+Stevens Strategy
+
+RE: 	Faculty Handbook Content Recommendations
+
+Below I provide some initial observations regarding the University’s current Faculty Handbook and share some high-level recommended changes to better align the Faculty Handbook with best practices.
+
+General Comments re: Handbook
+
+Overall Organization of Handbook
+
+As an outside reader, I found the handbook to lack continuity in terms of overall organization and hard to navigate and locate certain policies.  
+
+Can discern that some sections are newer than others based on tone, terminology, and content.
+
+For example, while evaluation criteria and procedures for personnel actions are briefly set forth in Chapter III, Paragraph O, one must refer to Chapter Five, Paragraph A to learn more about the submission of Faculty Information Sheets and the role peer evaluators, student course evaluations, the student board, and peer teaching observations play in the evaluation process.  I advocate that all these matters be addressed in one section of a handbook.  
+
+I recommend that the overall organization of the document be modified so that the reader does not have to move between various chapters to gain a full understanding of current policy and procedure. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ 
+
+Some Ambiguity in Describing Key Processes
+
+
+
+Examples:
+
+
+
+Clearly Define Faculty Personnel Evaluation Criteria, Standards, and Procedures 
+
+Current criteria, standards and procedures for reappointment, tenure, promotion and merit increases are ambiguous in the handbook. 
+
+Better defining and detailing these critical internal processes and procedures will help to better communicate faculty rights and responsibilities with notice, clarity, transparency, and consistency. 
+
+Evaluation Criteria
+
+The three main Evaluation Criteria listed in Chapter III.O, they are not defined.  Instead, the criteria is delineated in the FPC Statement of Policies and Procedures document.  
+
+I suggest integrating some of the criteria from the FPC Statement of Policies and Procedures into the handbook and providing some additional definitions to the terms utilized.
+
+For example, the FPC Statement of Policies and Procedures document references “quality of advising.”  
+
+What qualifies as “quality”?  
+
+The new FPC Self Report Form references mentoring; however, there is no mention of mentoring in the Handbook or the FPC Statement of Policies and Procedures.
+
+So better alignment is needed.
+
+Standards
+
+The standards for reappointment, promotion, tenure and merit increments are not clear in the handbook.  
+
+While scholarship expectations for tenure are addressed in the FPC Statement of Policies and Procedures document, a clearly defines standard that outlines expectations in all three areas will lead to more clarity.   
+
+For example, Chapter III.G addresses Non-Renewal of Appointments, indicating that such non-renewal occurs when the individual’s work is “not of sufficient quality.”  However, there is no guidance in the handbook defining what is insufficient quality.  Better practice is to articulate clear standards for reappointment.  
+
+
+
+Procedures
+
+Chapter III.O describes personnel decision procedures in brief, devoting only a paragraph to the entire process.  For transparency and clarity, more procedural detail is warranted that delineates the respective roles and responsibilities of the FPC, Provost, President and, where applicable, the Board.  At a minimum, text comparable to the step-wise process for evaluating external Provost candidates for tenure should be considered.
+
+
+
+Converting Term Faculty to Tenure Track
+
+
+
+What are the standards for doing so?
+
+
+
+
+
+Amending the Faculty Handbook
+
+The handbook does not outline how the handbook is amended.  
+
+
+
+Opportunity to Align Handbook with University Values 
+
+There is an opportunity to integrate the University’s values into the handbook.  
+
+Notably, the handbook should include a statement reflecting an expectation of DEI contributions to align with the recent self-report changes approved by the FPC.
+
+
+
+Opportunity to Remove Obsolete Policies 
+
+U.  Statement on Retirement
+
+It is my understanding that the policy is not current.
+
+W.  Library Staff Member with Faculty Rank
+
+Based on conversations with Dale, there are no longer any Librarians at OWU with faculty rank and the University no longer appoints faculty librarians with faculty standing.
+
+Policy statement in Chapter III.W also incongruent with Chapter V.G (Policy Statement on Appointment of Librarians)
+
+Appendix E - University Policy on Harassment, Including Sexual Harassment
+
+Replaced by Title IX Policy and Sexual Harassment Policy
+
+Non-Title IX, Sexual Misconduct
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Review of TOC
+
+Organized into Five Chapters
+
+Chapter One: Code of Regulations
+
+Either remove or link?
+
+
+
+Chapter Two: Faculty Bylaws and Committees
+
+Academic Departments and Chair
+
+No current text addressing the appointment of Department Chairs or their evaluation.  I have model text I’d like to share with the team.  Should it be published here or in Chapter Three?
+
+
+
+Chapter Three: Faculty Personnel Policies
+
+3.2 - Kinds of Positions
+
+Update to identify key titles in use at OWU and/or needed (Faculty-in-Residence) 
+
+The title Visiting Faculty, for example is used in a few places in the handbook.  The title should be defined.
+
+Honorific Faculty: I recommend new text addressing “Honorific Faculty” be developed:
+
+Emeritus/a
+
+Endowed/Named Chairs
+
+Additional Questions: 
+
+Should tenure track faculty be bifurcated into tenure track and tenured faculty?
+
+Librarians: Should Librarians be listed under the Kinds of Positions heading?
+
+Adjunct: Should the adjunct text remain in handbook
+
+
+
+
+
+3.3 – Kinds of Appointments
+
+Part-Time Faculty
+
+Move Part-time Term Policies to a New Chapter
+
+
+
+3.4 - Faculty Contracts
+
+It will include the following:
+
+Annual Contract Period (reprinted from Chapter III.C.3)
+
+Contract Terms (reprinted from Chapter III.D): I recommend current OWU text be supplemented to codify the University’s current practice of identifying the faculty member’s department in the contract. 
+
+Area of Appointment Policy: Since current practice is to appoint a faculty member to a department or program, I recommend this be codified in a formal policy.
+
+Joint Appointments: Recommend formal policy addressing how the University addresses Joint Appointments, including reference to MOU’s.
+
+
+
+3.5 – Faculty Recruitment, Initial Appointment, and Placement in Rank
+
+Faculty Credential Policy to Address HLC Assumed Practice B.2
+
+Appointment of Foreign Nationals: I recommend that the University adopt a clause indicating that the appointment of foreign nationals is dependent on the continuing compliance with US immigration laws. 
+
+Open Issue: Add faculty recruitment procedures?
+
+
+
+3.6 – Faculty Rights and Standards of Professional Conduct (Newly Recommended Section)
+
+I recommend that the University develop a new section in Chapter Three entitled “Faculty Rights and Standards of Professional Conduct” to house policies adopted or endorsed by the University that speak to issues of professional conduct for all members of the regular, full-time faculty and safeguard their attendant rights.  
+
+Adopting such a section will allow the university to clearly demonstrate evidence of compliance with HLC Assumed Practice CRRT.B.10.020 A.3 of Higher Learning Commission Assumed Practice Policy Number: CRRT.B.10.020:
+
+“The institution provides its students, administrators, faculty, and staff with policies and procedures informing them of their rights and responsibilities within the institution.”
+
+Policy topics: 
+
+AAUP Academic Freedom
+
+AAUP Statement on Professional Ethics
+
+AAUP Statement on Plagiarism
+
+Observance of University Policies Clause
+
+Faculty-Specific Conflicts of Interests
+
+Outside Activities Policy: Supplement current OWU Policy
+
+Faculty-Student Relationships (Draft as a baseline)
+
+Prohibition of Harassment and Unlawful Discriminations
+
+Violations of Faculty Rights, Academic Freedom, and Professional Ethics
+
+
+
+3.7 - Contractual Obligations of a Faculty Member
+
+I recommend that the University’s current clause be rewritten to describe faculty responsibilities more fully to fully comply with HLC Assumed Practice CRRT.B.10.020 A.3.  
+
+The section is organized by Teaching, Scholarly/Creative Work, and Service responsibilities, with an added section addressing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion activities.  Topics addressed:
+
+Teaching
+
+	Teaching Load (From Chapter V)
+
+Guidelines for Reduced Loads (From Chapter V)
+
+	Overloads/Underloads
+
+	Course Syllabi
+
+	Scheduled Class Meetings
+
+	Advising
+
+	Availability to Students and Colleagues (i.e., Office Hours)
+
+	Students with Disabilities
+
+	Knowledge of University Academic Policies and Curricula
+
+Research and Creative Activity
+
+Service
+
+Contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusivity
+
+
+
+3.8 Personnel Records (From Chapter III.P)
+
+
+
+3.9 – Faculty Evaluation 
+
+Evaluation Criteria: Integrate FPC Evaluation Criteria
+
+Evaluation Components and Review Materials
+
+Policies From Chapter V.A
+
+Separate Sections for:
+
+Reappointment
+
+Tenure
+
+Promotion to Full Professor
+
+Merit Increments
+
+*Each subsection to include eligibility requirements, standards, and evaluation procedures.
+
+Tenure
+
+Strike de facto tenure clause and replace with statement that tenure is awarded affirmatively by the Board of Trustees. 
+
+Develop an Extension of Probationary Period Policy
+
+
+
+3.10 – Faculty Professional Development (New Subsection)
+
+New subsection that includes all policies addressing professional development, including the Pre and Post-Tenure Sabbatical Policies.
+
+
+
+
+
+3.11 – Faculty Awards 
+
+
+
+3.12 – Faculty Compensation, Benefits, and Non-Professional Development Leaves
+
+Per my recent memo, I recommend that this section be devoted to compensation, benefits and non-professional development leaves that are unique to faculty.
+
+Policies in these areas that are also applicable to administrators and staff will be linked.
+
+Include New Parental Leave Policy
+
+3.13 - Separation from Service
+
+Includes all policies addressing separation from service, including dismissal and termination.
+
+3.13.3: Policies and Procedures Governing Dismissal for Cause 
+
+Supplement to include additional examples of cause
+
+Improve hearing procedures: deadlines and other common practices
+
+Define appealable grounds: “inadequate consideration” and “prejudicial procedural error”
+
+Preclude salary clause to dismissals due to incompetence or gross misconduct (AAUP says no such payments for cases involving “moral turpitude”)
+
+3.13.4: Terminations
+
+Recommend Move Contingencies and Resource Allocation Text to this Section
+
+
+
+Termination due to Program Discontinuation Not Involving Financial Contingencies (New Policy)
+
+
+
+Earlham
+
+Drew
+
+Antioch -Discontinuation or Reduction of Program
+
+Allegheny
+
+
+
+3.14 – Faculty Grievances (New Policy)
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER FOUR – PART-TIME FACULTY PERSONNEL POLICIES
+
+This is a new section that includes the terms set forth in Chapter III.C.  
+
+
+
+CHAPTER FIVE – ALLOCATION AND REVIEW OF FACULTY POSITIONS
+
+This chapter mirrors Chapter IV of the current Handbook, with the exception of the following:
+
+Recommend that Contingencies and Resource Allocation be moved to the Termination section
+
+Recommend that External Candidate Appointed as Provost and Granted Tenure be moved to the Evaluation (Tenure) section
+
+
+
+SELECT POLICY TOPICS
+
+
+
+Alternatives Models to Current Annual Reappointment Evaluations
+
+
+
+See Spreadsheet
+
+Oberlin, Hope, and OWU are the only GLCA schools that have a peer committee evaluate pre-tenure candidate annually for reappointment
+
+
+
+5 Schools Use a Mid-Probationary Model
+
+
+
+5 GLCA Schools use a 2/4/6 Model 
+
+
+
+
+
+Student Course Evaluations: 
+
+
+
+Select Courses vs Every Course
+
+
+
+The following comparison institutions require all courses to be evaluated by students:
+
+College of Wooster
+
+Oberlin 
+
+Luther Lake Forest
+
+Depauw University
+
+
+
+Rational for not making available to Department Peers and Chairs:  
+
+See e.g., Occidental College
+
+
+
+DEI Responsibilities
+
+
+
+Not clear whether there is an obligation to make DEI contributions in all three categories.
+
+
+
+Annual Self Report Form only asks for DEI Contributions as it relates to teaching and student support under Section I.
+
+
+
+Faculty Grievance Policy
+
+Description of Faculty Executive Committee reflects it addresses faculty grievances for matters not already assigned to other committees
+
+
+
+Academic Unit Guidelines 
+
+
+
+External Reviews - Remain Optional?
+
+
+
+Wooster
+
+Earlham
+
+Denison
+
+Southwest
+
+Haverford
+
+
+
+Initial Appointment (Search Committee) Procedures?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Imposition of Minor Sanctions
+
+Replace FPC “rescinding” clause with an alternative grievance or appeals process.  Should a Faculty Grievance Policy be adopted?
+
+
+
+Termination Due to Prolonged Mental or Physical Illness
+
+This policy is based on AAUP recommended regulation 4.e, which was rescinded by the AAUP in 2012.  I recommend it be stricken.
+
+
+
+Statement on Retirement 
+
+Strike the Phased Retirement Policy since it is obsolete.
+
+Develop a Faculty Grievance Policy
+
+
+
+
+
+Develop Policy re: Termination of Tenured Faculty Due to Program Discontinuation 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Leaves
+
+Limit to Professional Development Leaves and Faculty Parental Leave Policy
+
+Link to all other HR Leave Policies.
+
+Supplement Faculty Leave Policy (i.e., Sabbatical) to incorporate common elements: 
+
+professional development purpose of the leave
+
+detailed application and approval procedures
+
+requirement for faculty to return to the university or re-pay salary
+
+prohibit renumerated employment during the leave
+
+
+
+Of note, many institutions will permit a yearlong leave at half pay in lieu of a semester leave at full pay.  Is this an approach the University would like to consider adopting?
+
+
+
+
+
+Strike Appendix E – University Policy on Harassment, Including Sexual Harassment
+
+This is a dated policy that is not consistent with the University’s Title IX Policy.  I recommend that the policy be stricken and replaced with a link to the Title IX Policy, as well as other applicable HR Policy addressing unlawful discrimination and harassment.
+
+
+
+Faculty Handbook Amendment Policy
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Open Issues
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	Annual Evaluation of Probationary Faculty	
+
+Annual Evaluation vs. Mid-Probationary or 2/4/6 Year Evaluation Cycle
+
+Possible Alternative:
+
+Annual Evaluation by Department Peers and Chair.  If recommendation for non-renewal then forward to FPC for review?
+
+Followed by a mid-probationary comprehensive evaluation by the FPC?
+
+Tenure at Initial Appointment?
+
+
+
+Termination Payments
+
+Keep?
+
+Contingencies and Resource Allocations Policy
+
+
+
+Termination of Tenured Faculty Due to Program Discontinuation not Related to Financial Contigencies
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Chapter One
+
+Faculty Bylaws
+
+Article I: Organization
+
+Section 1. 
+
+Update members of the faculty listing by removing Chaplain.
+
+Article III: Meetings
+
+Add clause to allow for electronic meetings.
+
+Section 2.
+
+Add clause that permits electronic voting when meeting held via electronic platform.
+
+Amendments
+
+I recommend that a clause requiring either President or Board ratification of faculty approved amendments to the bylaws and committees be adopted to serve as a “check and balance” that the faculty is not self-delegating a responsibility delegated to the President or reserved to the Board.
+
+It is not uncommon for Faculty and Faculty Senate constitutions and/or bylaws to require either Board or President ratification of faculty-approved amendments to these documents. By way of peer example, Berea College’s Constitution of the General Faculty Assembly and College Faculty Assembly requires 2/3rds of the members present and voting to amend the Constitution.  Moreover, an amendment becomes effective upon the “assent of the President, and if substantive, the Board of Trustees.”  If the President withholds assent, the General Faculty Assembly or College Faculty Assembly may then reconsider the issue at a subsequent meeting.  If the action is reaffirmed by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of the concerned body present and voting, and the President still withholds assent, the matter will be referred to the Board of Trustees for final action. Similarly, amendments to Juniata College's Faculty Constitution requires Board ratification.  For faculty-approved amendments (2/3rds majority faculty vote of those voting at a meeting) to the College’s Faculty Bylaws, approval by the President is required.  Union College requires President approval for all non-substantive amendments to the College’s governing system, which includes faculty standing committees.  Substantive amendments require Board approval.
+
+
+
+Still other schools state in their institutional Bylaws that rules and regulations governing the Faculty’s affairs may be prescribed by the Faculty, subject to Board approval.  Article VII of the Bylaws of Bowdoin College are an example of such an approach. 
+
+
+
+Faculty Committees
+
+Committee on University Governance
+
+Fiscal Planning and Budgetary role: Not uncommon for faculty to play a role in budgetary process due to the AAUP’s position on this subject.  See https://www.aaup.org/report/role-faculty-budgetary-and-salary-matters.  Below are a few examples from comparison institutions:
+
+Hamilton College Faculty Committee on Budget and Finance (page 12)
+
+The Committee shall be provided with the necessary information to advise the President and Vice Presidents and report to the Faculty on the development of the annual budget, institutional priorities, and capital expenditures, including matters relating to the physical plant; monitor faculty compensation and benefits; advise on criteria and procedures for allocation of resources; examine financial and budget projections; participate in determining the existence or imminence of financial exigency; and consult with the President or officers on any matters they, or other committee members, wish to bring to the committee. The committee shall report at least once each academic year to the Faculty. 
+
+Haverford College Administrative Advisory Committee
+
+The Administrative Advisory Committee offers advice to the President and other senior administrators on all matters relating to the financial health and operation of the College. This responsibility includes: 
+
+Participation in the preparation of the annual budget for the coming fiscal year and a review of the previous year's performance. As part of this process, AAC reviews data pertaining to all of the major areas of revenue and expenditure and gives its advice as to the proper balance between competing needs. 
+
+Review of progress towards the College's long term plans; 
+
+Review of general salary and fringe benefit policies; 
+
+Advice on planning for and maintenance of the College's buildings and grounds; 
+
+Review of the College's development priorities and plans. 
+
+Subcommittee on Faculty Compensation, Study, and Research. The Faculty members of AAC form a separate Subcommittee on Faculty Compensation, Study, and Research. The Subcommittee meets occasionally to advise the Provost and the Vice President for Finance and Administration, as appropriate, on matters where faculty concern is strong such as: 
+
+		Faculty salary administration and compensation policy; 
+
+		Research and travel funds; 
+
+		The environment for faculty research and study; 
+
+		Faculty housing. 
+
+The Subcommittee coordinates its advice with that of the Faculty Affairs and Planning Committee (FAPC), especially in areas where there are significant budgetary implications. 
+
+Provost Evaluation Role: Not unusual for faculty to participate in the evaluation of the Provost on a periodic basis at the request of the Provost. Was current schedule ever approved by the President or Board? 
+
+Practice derived from recommendation AAUP Standards: See https://www.aaup.org/report/faculty-evaluation-administrators
+
+Committee on Women and Gender
+
+It appears that the charge of this committee overlaps with the functions of the Council for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.  Is it still an active committee? 
+
+Consideration should also be given to reclassifying the committee as a University-wide Committee given its charge and membership. 
+
+Committee on Intercollegiate Athletics: 
+
+Not an uncommon faculty committee due to the AAUP’s position on this subject.  See https://www.aaup.org/report/role-faculty-governance-college-athletics.  Below are a few examples from comparison institutions:
+
+Hamilton College Faculty Committee on Athletics:
+
+The Committee shall review policies related to athletics, including but not limited to scheduling and class attendance, gender and sport equity, use of facilities, and recruiting and admissions. The Committee shall advise the Director of Athletics and the Administration, report to the Faculty at least once each academic year, and bring legislation to the Faculty as appropriate. 
+
+Wesleyan Council on Student Affairs
+
+Amend to reflect that the council formulates and recommends to the President basic policies in all matters related to student life outside the classroom.
+
+Designate as a University Wide Committee?
+
+Academic Conduct Review Board
+
+Designate as a University Wide Committee?
+
+Some schools will delineate student conduct and academic conduct/honor boards/committees as a University-wide Committee.  See e.g., See Hamilton College’s Honor Court and Judicial Boards.
+
+Departments and Department Chairs (Newly Recommended Section)
+
+Or Publish in Chapter Two?
+
+
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Initial recommendations.txt [/INST] 22
+
+
+
+
+
+June 28, 2022
+
+
+
+TO:	Karlyn Crowley, Rock Jones, and Dale Brugh
+
+FROM: 	Stephen Lazarus
+Sr. Consultant
+Stevens Strategy
+
+RE: 	Faculty Handbook Content Recommendations
+
+Below is a high-level listing of policy areas I recommend either be supplemented or developed.
+
+Biggest issue to address first is overall organization of the document.
+
+Chapter Two
+
+Faculty Bylaws
+
+Article I: Organization
+
+Section 1. 
+
+Update members of the faculty listing by removing Chaplain?
+
+Article III: Meetings
+
+Add clause to allow for electronic meetings.
+
+Section 2.
+
+Add clause that permits electronic voting when meeting held via electronic platform.
+
+Amendments
+
+I recommend that a clause requiring either President or Board ratification of faculty approved amendments to the bylaws and committees be adopted to serve as a “check and balance” that the faculty is not self-delegating a responsibility delegated to the President or reserved to the Board.
+
+It is not uncommon for Faculty and Faculty Senate constitutions and/or bylaws to require either Board or President ratification of faculty-approved amendments to these documents. By way of peer example, Berea College’s Constitution of the General Faculty Assembly and College Faculty Assembly requires 2/3rds of the members present and voting to amend the Constitution.  Moreover, an amendment becomes effective upon the “assent of the President, and if substantive, the Board of Trustees.”  If the President withholds assent, the General Faculty Assembly or College Faculty Assembly may then reconsider the issue at a subsequent meeting.  If the action is reaffirmed by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of the concerned body present and voting, and the President still withholds assent, the matter will be referred to the Board of Trustees for final action. Similarly, amendments to Juniata College's Faculty Constitution requires Board ratification.  For faculty-approved amendments (2/3rds majority faculty vote of those voting at a meeting) to the College’s Faculty Bylaws, approval by the President is required.  Union College requires President approval for all non-substantive amendments to the College’s governing system, which includes faculty standing committees.  Substantive amendments require Board approval.
+
+
+
+Still other schools state in their institutional Bylaws that rules and regulations governing the Faculty’s affairs may be prescribed by the Faculty, subject to Board approval.  Article VII of the Bylaws of Bowdoin College are an example of such an approach. 
+
+
+
+Faculty Committees
+
+Committee on University Governance
+
+
+
+Fiscal Planning and Budgetary role: Not uncommon for faculty to play a role in budgetary process due to the AAUP’s position on this subject.  See https://www.aaup.org/report/role-faculty-budgetary-and-salary-matters.  Below are a few examples from comparison institutions:
+
+Hamilton College Faculty Committee on Budget and Finance (page 12)
+
+The Committee shall be provided with the necessary information to advise the President and Vice Presidents and report to the Faculty on the development of the annual budget, institutional priorities, and capital expenditures, including matters relating to the physical plant; monitor faculty compensation and benefits; advise on criteria and procedures for allocation of resources; examine financial and budget projections; participate in determining the existence or imminence of financial exigency; and consult with the President or officers on any matters they, or other committee members, wish to bring to the committee. The committee shall report at least once each academic year to the Faculty. 
+
+Haverford College Administrative Advisory Committee
+
+The Administrative Advisory Committee offers advice to the President and other senior administrators on all matters relating to the financial health and operation of the College. This responsibility includes: 
+
+Participation in the preparation of the annual budget for the coming fiscal year and a review of the previous year's performance. As part of this process, AAC reviews data pertaining to all of the major areas of revenue and expenditure and gives its advice as to the proper balance between competing needs. 
+
+Review of progress towards the College's long term plans; 
+
+Review of general salary and fringe benefit policies; 
+
+Advice on planning for and maintenance of the College's buildings and grounds; 
+
+Review of the College's development priorities and plans. 
+
+Subcommittee on Faculty Compensation, Study, and Research. The Faculty members of AAC form a separate Subcommittee on Faculty Compensation, Study, and Research. The Subcommittee meets occasionally to advise the Provost and the Vice President for Finance and Administration, as appropriate, on matters where faculty concern is strong such as: 
+
+		Faculty salary administration and compensation policy; 
+
+		Research and travel funds; 
+
+		The environment for faculty research and study; 
+
+		Faculty housing. 
+
+The Subcommittee coordinates its advice with that of the Faculty Affairs and Planning Committee (FAPC), especially in areas where there are significant budgetary implications. 
+
+Provost Evaluation Role: Not unusual for faculty to participate in the evaluation of the Provost on a periodic basis at the request of the Provost. Was current schedule ever approved by the President or Board? 
+
+Practice derived from recommendation AAUP Standards: See https://www.aaup.org/report/faculty-evaluation-administrators
+
+Committee on Women and Gender
+
+It appears that the charge of this committee overlaps with the functions of the Council for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.  Is it still an active committee? 
+
+Consideration should also be given to reclassifying the committee as a University-wide Committee given its charge and membership. 
+
+Committee on Intercollegiate Athletics: 
+
+Not an uncommon faculty committee due to the AAUP’s position on this subject.  See https://www.aaup.org/report/role-faculty-governance-college-athletics.  Below are a few examples from comparison institutions:
+
+Hamilton College Faculty Committee on Athletics:
+
+The Committee shall review policies related to athletics, including but not limited to scheduling and class attendance, gender and sport equity, use of facilities, and recruiting and admissions. The Committee shall advise the Director of Athletics and the Administration, report to the Faculty at least once each academic year, and bring legislation to the Faculty as appropriate. 
+
+Wesleyan Council on Student Affairs
+
+Amend to reflect that the council formulates and recommends to the President basic policies in all matters related to student life outside the classroom.
+
+Designate as a University Wide Committee?
+
+Academic Conduct Review Board
+
+Designate as a University Wide Committee?
+
+Some schools will delineate student conduct and academic conduct/honor boards/committees as a University-wide Committee.  See e.g., See Hamilton College’s Honor Court and Judicial Boards.
+
+
+
+Chapter Three
+
+Kinds of Positions
+
+Should tenure track faculty be bifurcated into tenure track and tenured faculty?
+
+Librarians: Should Librarians be listed under the Kinds of Positions heading?
+
+Adjunct: Should the adjunct text remain in handbook and, if so, should it be moved to under the Kinds of Positions heading?
+
+Honorific Faculty: I recommend new text addressing “Honorific Faculty” be developed:
+
+Emeritus/a
+
+Endowed/Named Chairs
+
+Part-Time Faculty
+
+Move Part-time Policies to a New Chapter: Why publish information such as benefits for full-time in another chapter, but list part-time benefit and promotion information in Chapter Three?
+
+New Section Addressing Faculty Contracts
+
+I recommend that formal heading be added to Chapter III addressing faculty contracts.  It will include the following:
+
+Annual Contract Period (reprinted from Chapter III.C.3.
+
+Contract Terms (reprinted from Chapter III.D): I recommend current OWU text be supplemented to codify the University’s current practice of identifying the faculty member’s department in the contract. 
+
+Area of Appointment Policy: Since current practice is to appoint a faculty member to a department or program, I recommend this be codified in a formal policy.
+
+Joint Appointments: Does the University permit appointments wherein a faculty member’s responsibilities are devoted to multiple departments or an interdisciplinary program in fields in which the University offers a major or minor? If so, then I recommend that a policy addressing this topic be developed.
+
+
+
+Initial Appointment and Placement in Rank 
+
+Does the University want to include recruitment policies and procedures in this section of the Chapter?
+
+
+
+Ranks and Salary of Initial Appointment (Supplement Current University Policy)
+
+I recommend that a subsection be added that delineates the types of faculty ranks and corresponding initial minimum qualifications
+
+Who makes final determination on initial assignment of rank?  Current policy is silent in this regard.
+
+
+
+Faculty Credentials Policy (Add University’s Current Policy)
+
+I recommend that the University’s faculty credential policy be either reprinted here or in another chapter of the Faculty Handbook.
+
+Appointment of Foreign Nationals (Newly Recommended Policy)
+
+I recommend that the University adopt a clause indicating that the appointment of foreign nationals is dependent on the continuing compliance with US immigration laws. 
+
+
+
+Faculty Rights and Standards of Professional Conduct (Newly Recommended Section)
+
+I recommend that the University develop a new section in Chapter Three entitled “Faculty Rights and Standards of Professional Conduct” to house policies adopted or endorsed by the University that speak to issues of professional conduct for all members of the regular, full-time faculty and safeguard their attendant rights.  Policy topics should include: 
+
+Academic Freedom
+
+AAUP Statement on Professional Ethics
+
+AAUP Statement on Plagiarism
+
+Observance of University Policies Clause
+
+Faculty-Specific Conflicts of Interests
+
+Outside Activities Policy: Supplement current OWU Policy
+
+Intellectual Property Rights
+
+No set of policies, however, can take the place of the professional integrity of faculty members as members of the professoriate, participants in disciplinary communities, and University citizens.  Therefore, in addition to being familiar with and observing the University’s policies and procedures, a clause is also included indicating that faculty members are expected to conduct themselves according to the prevailing professional and ethical standards of the teaching profession as a whole and their respective academic disciplines
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Contractual Obligations of a Faculty Member/Develop New Section Addressing Faculty Duties and Responsibilities
+
+I recommend that the University’s current clause be rewritten to describe faculty responsibilities more fully as described below.  I also recommend that the text addressing outside activities be moved to the “Faculty Rights and Standards of Professional Conduct” section above.  This section is commonly organized by Teaching, Scholarly/Creative Work, and Service responsibilities, with an added section addressing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion activities.  Below is a model outline of the topics addressed:
+
+
+
+Teaching
+
+	Teaching Load (Move to this Section?)
+
+	Reduced Teaching Loads
+
+	Overloads
+
+	Course Syllabi
+
+	Scheduled Class Meetings
+
+	Advising
+
+	Availability to Students and Colleagues (i.e., Office Hours)
+
+	Students with Disabilities
+
+	Knowledge of University Academic Policies and Curricula
+
+Research and Creative Activity
+
+Service
+
+Contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusivity
+
+Collegiality? 
+
+
+
+Contractual Obligations of Department Chairs (Newly Recommended Section)
+
+Criteria for Personnel Decisions
+
+Develop Detailed Evaluation Criteria
+
+Keep weightings?
+
+MOVE EVALUATION OF FACULTY MEMBERS FROM CHAPTER V TO HERE?
+
+Salary
+
+New model addressing Merit reviews.
+
+What happens when there is a substandard evaluation?  Especially for tenured faculty?
+
+Develop Clear Standards for Promotion in Academic Rank
+
+Develop rank standards.
+
+Develop detailed procedures for reappointment, promotion, tenure, and merit evaluations: Clarity regarding FPC, Provost, President, and Board’s role.
+
+NOTE: Does Board approve promotion to Associate Professor?
+
+Tenure
+
+Strike de facto tenure clause and replace with statement that tenure is awarded affirmatively by the Board of Trustees. 
+
+Develop an Extension of Probationary Period Policy
+
+Develop detailed procedures for reappointment, promotion, tenure, and merit evaluations: Clarity regarding FPC, Provost, President, and Board’s role.
+
+External Review Process for Tenure Evaluations?
+
+
+
+Expand Reasons for Non-Reappointment
+
+At present, current University policy states that non-reappointment is limited to work not being of sufficient quality (see Chapter Three, Section G).  However, institutional need is also a consideration, and this should be stated affirmatively.
+
+I also recommend that clear standards for reappointment be adopted.
+
+standard for reappointment for a non-tenured full-time tenure-line faculty member is promise, based upon performance in the areas of teaching, scholarly and creative productivity, and service, of a career as a teacher and of growth as a scholar or artist.  Such promise is demonstrated via evidence documenting:
+
+Effective teaching and the promise of continued progress toward meeting the standards for tenure.
+
+Continuing active involvement with the faculty member’s discipline, as evidenced by a developing agenda of scholarly or create activity.
+
+Effective contributions in service, including but not limited to promise of becoming a successful academic advisor.
+
+In addition, to merit a successful review, a faculty member must also successfully perform of the duties and responsibilities of the full-time teaching faculty (see Article IV, Section 1) and exhibit conduct in accordance with professional standards (see Article III).  Unless evidence to the contrary is presented, it will be assumed that the faculty member is successfully performing assigned duties and has exhibited conduct in accordance with professional standards.
+
+
+
+Supplement Policies and Procedures Governing Dismissal for Cause 
+
+Supplement to include additional examples of cause
+
+Improve hearing procedures: deadlines and other common practices
+
+Limit appeal grounds to “inadequate consideration” and “prejudicial procedural error”
+
+Move to strike salary clause for dismissal for cause cases (AAUP even says no such payments for cases involving “moral turpitude”)
+
+
+
+Imposition of Minor Sanctions
+
+Replace FPC “rescinding” clause with an alternative grievance or appeals process.  Should a Faculty Grievance Policy be adopted?
+
+
+
+Termination Due to Prolonged Mental or Physical Illness
+
+This policy is based on AAUP recommended regulation 4.e, which was rescinded by the AAUP in 2012.  I recommend it be stricken.
+
+
+
+Statement on Retirement 
+
+Strike the Phased Retirement Policy since it is obsolete.
+
+
+
+
+
+Contingencies and Resource Allocations Policy
+
+
+
+The Board and Administration will want to carefully weigh whether it wants to amend this policy.  The current policy does define financial exigency, which is contrary to AAUP recommendations Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure, Part 4.  This, however, is not necessarily unusual.  
+
+
+
+Institutions opt to adopt a financial exigency definition outside of the AAUP’s recommended terminology.  Per data from a July 2020 AAUP report entitled Policies on Academic Freedom, Dismissal for Cause, Financial Exigency and Program Discontinuance (provides a statistical analysis of the presence of AAUP-recommended policies on academic freedom, dismissal for cause, financial exigency, and program discontinuance in 197 faculty handbooks/collective bargaining agreements),13% of the schools sampled used the AAUP’s definition of financial exigency, compared to 33% of whom adopted an alternative definition and 55% who failed to define the term at all.  See pages 10 and 11 of the report.  Thus, it is not uncommon for an institution to adopt a financial exigency definition that diverges from the AAUP recommended definition. 
+
+
+
+Develop Policy re: Termination of Tenured Faculty Due to Program Discontinuation 
+
+
+
+Develop an Overload Policy
+
+
+
+Supplement Reduced Load Policy
+
+List examples of reasons for the seeking a reduced load
+
+Modify approval process so that the Provost makes the final decision, not the FPC.
+
+
+
+Faculty Leaves
+
+
+
+Limit to Professional Development Leaves and Faculty Parental Leave Policy
+
+Link to all other HR Leave Policies.
+
+Supplement Faculty Leave Policy (i.e., Sabbatical) to incorporate common elements: 
+
+professional development purpose of the leave
+
+detailed application and approval procedures
+
+requirement for faculty to return to the university or re-pay salary
+
+prohibit renumerated employment during the leave
+
+
+
+Of note, many institutions will permit a yearlong leave at half pay in lieu of a semester leave at full pay.  Is this an approach the University would like to consider adopting?
+
+
+
+
+
+Replace Appendix E – University Policy on Harassment, Including Sexual Harassment
+
+This is a dated policy that is not consistent with the University’s Title IX Policy.  I recommend that the policy be stricken and replaced with a link to the Title IX Policy, as well as other applicable HR Policy addressing unlawful discrimination and harassment.
+
+
+
+Faculty Handbook Amendment Policy
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Open Issues
+
+	Recruitment Procedures?
+
+	
+
+	Keep Evalution Criteria Weights?
+
+	
+
+	Academic UNit Guidelines?
+
+	
+
+	Library Staff Members
+
+	How want to address?
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	Merge Chapter III and Chapter V Evaluation Policies?
+
+	Annual Evaluation of Probationary Faculty	
+
+Annual Evaluation vs. Mid-Probationary or 2/4/6 Year Evaluation Cycle
+
+Academic Freedom
+
+Reprint AAUP Statement?
+
+Tenure at Initial Appointment?
+
+What changes are needed in terms of Library staff?
+
+What revisions are needed to Allocation of Faculty positions?
+
+
+
+What reviews require final approval from the Board (tenure and promotion to full)?
+
+
+
+Dismissal for Cause
+
+															Does the Board want to keep the following clause for III.R.9?  Have AAUP representatives attended past dismissal hearings?
+
+															The proceedings of the Faculty Hearing Panel shall be closed to all but the parties involved, their advisers and aides, provided always that the National Office of the American Association of University Professors may have an official observer present during the hearings.
+
+Termination Payments
+
+Keep?
+
+
+
+
+
+Contingencies and Resource Allocations Policy
+
+
+
+The Board and Administration will want to carefully weigh whether it wants to amend this policy.  The current policy does define financial exigency, which is contrary to AAUP recommendations Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure, Part 4.  This, however, is not necessarily unusual.  
+
+
+
+Institutions opt to adopt a financial exigency definition outside of the AAUP’s recommended terminology.  Per data from a July 2020 AAUP report entitled Policies on Academic Freedom, Dismissal for Cause, Financial Exigency and Program Discontinuance (provides a statistical analysis of the presence of AAUP-recommended policies on academic freedom, dismissal for cause, financial exigency, and program discontinuance in 197 faculty handbooks/collective bargaining agreements),13% of the schools sampled used the AAUP’s definition of financial exigency, compared to 33% of whom adopted an alternative definition and 55% who failed to define the term at all.  See pages 10 and 11 of the report.  Thus, it is not uncommon for an institution to adopt a financial exigency definition that diverges from the AAUP recommended definition. 
+
+
+
+Termination of Tenured Faculty Due to Program Discontinuation 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com</s>"
+<s>[INST] Innopolis U IWPM Pro v2 JAS.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Innopolis U IWPM Pro v5 JAS.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Institutional Need Examples.txt [/INST] Wartburg
+
+2.2.5.5 Subsequent Contracts and the Monitoring of Institutional Need 
+
+The Dean of the Faculty, in consultation with the Faculty Council, annually examines, from an institution-wide perspective, the need for each tenure-track position and full-time titled position. Institutional need refers to the degree to which a position held by a faculty member is judged by the Dean, using the procedure described below, to be necessary to support the academic programs of the College. The examination of institutional need for these positions is part of the College's routine monitoring of its use of institutional resources. An important purpose of this monitoring process is to keep tenure-track and full-time titled faculty informed, on a regular basis and in a timely way, of the status of their position with respect to continuing institutional need. 
+
+Reappointment to a tenure-track contract or, in the case of full-time titled faculty, reissuance of a term contract is predicated on a continuing institutional need existing for the position. Whether or not a subsequent contract is offered to a tenure-track or titled faculty member also is a function of the outcome of the faculty evaluation process (Section 2.7). However, in the event that a faculty member is not offered a subsequent contract due to lack of institutional need for the position, the faculty member shall not undergo the faculty evaluation process (Section 2.7.6.1). 
+
+The College President is the final authority in decisions regarding the reappointment of tenure-track faculty and reissuing term contracts to titled faculty. The final deadlines for notification of non- reappointment for tenure-track faculty are stated in Section 2.10.3.2; the notification deadline for reissuance of contracts to full-time titled faculty is stated in Section 2.2.5.3. However, the procedure for examining institutional need (described below) is designed to give faculty notification of the outcome of this process prior to these deadlines since the determination of institutional need is a prerequisite condition for undergoing the faculty evaluation process. 
+
+2.2.5.5.1 Procedure for Monitoring Institutional Need 
+
+The Dean of the Faculty, in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair(s) and the Faculty Council, shall examine the institutional need for all tenure-track positions each year as well as full-time titled faculty positions in the final year of a contract period. The monitoring process itself shall take into account such factors as overall student enrollment, course enrollment patterns, numbers of majors and minors, departmental, general education and other program staffing needs, the role of the department or program in fulfilling the College's mission, and any other information deemed relevant to this process by the Dean and the Faculty Council. 
+
+On or before October 15 the Dean shall send written notification to those Department Chairs who have tenure-track positions or full-time titled positions (in the final contract year) located in their department; faculty in these positions shall also receive a copy of this notification. This notification shall describe the Dean's finding with respect to continuing institutional need for the position. 
+
+If it is a finding of diminishing need, but not serious enough to require non-reappointment or non- reissuance, then the Dean's notification shall also describe the signs or evidence of diminishing need. In the event that the Dean finds that there is a seriously diminished institutional need for the position, the Dean shall recommend to the President that, based on lack of need, no subsequent contract be offered. In either of these instances, the Dean and Faculty Council shall meet jointly with the Department Chair of the department in which the position is located; this meeting shall occur prior to the November 1 deadline date for the Dean to submit a recommendation to the College President. The purpose of this meeting with the Dean and Faculty Council is to give the Department Chair an opportunity to respond to and discuss the implications of a finding of diminished institutional need. 
+
+Following this meeting, the Dean, in consultation with the Faculty Council, shall review the initial finding. In cases where the Dean had given notice of diminishing need that was not serious enough to require non-reappointment or non-reissuance of contract, the Department Chair shall receive, on or before November 10, written feedback from the Dean regarding the outcome of the meeting. In cases where the Dean had given notice of seriously diminished need which that required non-reappointment or non- reissuance of contract, the Dean shall submit, on or before November 1, a written recommendation on institutional need for the position to the College President, where the final decision rests. Subsequent to receiving the Dean’s recommendation, the President shall receive written consultation from Faculty Council and should meet with the Faculty Council for consultation prior to making a final decision. In the event that the President is not able to meet within the timeline, he shall provide written feedback to Faculty Council. The President's decision on non-reappointment or non-reissuance of contract due to lack of institutional need shall be sent in writing to the appropriate Department Chair(s), the faculty member in the position, and the Chair of the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure Committee on or before November 10. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Redlands University
+
+3.9.6 Institutional Need 
+
+Before approving teaching positions with renewable contracts, the Administration must give all due consideration to determining that for the foreseeable future a given position will well serve the University’s needs. Nevertheless, institutional need can change in unpredictable ways, and it is ultimately the Administration’s responsibility to evaluate the long-term staffing requirements across the University and allocate faculty positions accordingly. Specifically, it is the Administration’s responsibility to prevent necessary positions’ being displaced by unnecessary ones, to ensure over time that departments have the positions they need most to support the major and general education curricula for which they are responsible. 
+
+Therefore, prior to all contract renewals of tenure track or Visiting Faculty appointments, the Administration will consider the University’s long-term need for a continuing position in the area of a faculty member’s expertise. Accordingly, the Provost, in consultation as appropriate with department chairs and faculty committees, will examine the need for positions, taking into account such factors as 
+
+School, departmental, or college-wide curricular planning or other planning that may affect the department or program in which the candidate is primarily employed, 
+
+correspondence between the faculty member’s expertise and the department, school, or college’s educational needs, 
+
+current or projected enrollment—overall School or college enrollment and enrollment in specific academic programs, 
+
+current or projected staffing needs, including present patterns of tenure in the School, department, or program, projected retirement dates of present faculty members, and the effect of these factors on School, departmental, and college-wide flexibility, or 
+
+the overall financial condition of the University. 
+
+In the rare case in which a Dean determines that a position no longer meets the requirement of institutional need, the Dean writes a report to the Provost detailing the reasons for this conclusion. Alternatively, the Provost, consulting with deans, faculty committees, and individual faculty members as appropriate, may make such a determination him- or herself. With the concurrence of the President, the Provost has authority to act and inform the person that he or she will not be reappointed for reasons of institutional need. In such a case, every effort will be made to inform the person affected as soon as possible but no later than the end of the academic year prior to the scheduled review. Otherwise, the Administration shall be construed as tacitly affirming the institutional need for the appointment. 
+
+In any instance of nonreappointment for reasons of institutional need, the position will not be replaced within a period of three (3) years, unless the released faculty member, if otherwise qualified, has been offered reinstatement and given a reasonable time of at least twenty (20) working days in which to accept or decline the University's offer. A faculty member rehired under this provision will be reinstated at his or her previously earned rank, at an appropriate salary as determined by the faculty salary plan (Ch. 4).</s>"
+"<s>[INST] INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY POLICY AND PROCEDURES revised (SS Comments).txt [/INST] INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY POLICY AND PROCEDURES 
+
+
+
+Per Faculty Motion; adopted by the Board of Trustees on XX, 2022
+
+(Adapted from the 2017 Lafayette College Faculty Handbook)
+
+
+
+Bethany College is committed to fostering an environment that promotes and protects the creation and dissemination of knowledge, inventions, and artistic works by faculty, staff, and students.  The fullest realization of this goal is achieved only when the College ensures academic freedom for all of its community members, protects its identity, and functional interest, and recognizes the ownership, whether shared or individual, of intellectual properties and patents.  This policy aims to safeguard and protect those rights.
+
+
+
+A robust Intellectual Property (IP) Policy is necessary for fostering scholarship in the community and for promoting the best interests of the College.  The College’s IP policy should encourage innovation and the creation and dissemination of IP for the public good, rather than implement procedures motivated by a desire to develop sources of revenue.  A strong IP policy balances the IP rights and obligations of the faculty, staff and students with the institutional rights and obligations of the College.  The policy stated herein is structured to include a clear and fair system for the distribution of any benefits accrued, if and where appropriate, by IP created by members of the Bethany community. 
+
+
+
+Definitions of terms used are given at the end of this policy statement (Section X.X)
+
+
+
+X.1 Scope
+
+
+
+The guiding principle of the IP policy is that the products of teaching and scholarship, except patents, are the property of the community member.  The College, however, has the sole ownership interest in copyrightable material if it involves an identity interest (Section X.1.1). If a community member employs an extraordinary use of College resources in developing copyrightable material, then the IP rights will be determined by the deliberate determination procedure (Section X.1.2).  Community members who develop patentable discoveries using College resources have a duty to disclose and assign patent rights to the College.  In those cases where patentable inventions are created by a community member with only incidental use of College-supplied computers, email and phones, however, the patent rights are retained by the creator.  In addition, the College will retain an ownership interest in intellectual properties that are the result of a work for hire as defined by United States copyright law, as well as intellectual property that may be classified as an Institutional Work (Section X.1.3) or falls under any of the miscellaneous categories listed in Section X.1.4.
+
+
+
+X.1.1 Identity Interest.  The College has an identity interest in copyrightable materials that are integral to, and reflect more directly on, the identity of the College rather than the identity of the creator.  The College has an identity interest in items distributed beyond the College, such as but not limited to: the college catalogue, alumni bulletins, institutional web pages, admissions brochures and campaign materials.  Copyrightable materials in which the College has an identity interest will be owned by the College. 
+
+X.1.2. Extraordinary Use of College Resources. The College has an ownership interest in copyrightable materials generated with extraordinary use of College resources, which refers to support by the College that is not normally available to a community member in their standard role (see section X.7.5)
+
+X.1.3: Institutional Work: The College has an ownership interest in intellectual property that may be classified as an Institutional Work, which includes works that are supported by a specific allocation of Bethany College funds or that are created at the direction of Bethany College for a specific Bethany College purpose.  Institutional Works also include works whose authorship cannot be attributed to one or a discrete number of authors but rather result from simultaneous or sequential contributions over time by multiple faculty and students.  For example, software tools developed and improved over time by multiple faculty and students where authorship is not appropriately attributed to a single or defined group of authors would constitute an institutional work.  The mere fact that multiple individuals have contributed to the creation of a work shall not cause the work to constitute an institutional work.
+
+X.1.4: Other: In addition to the above, ownership in intellectual property will normally rest with the College, rather than with the creator, under the following circumstances:
+
+If the work includes the name, seal, logo, insignia, trademark or watermark of Bethany College as an endorsement, enhancement, or sanction for a product or service.
+
+Electronic Courses: With respect to faculty materials produced for online instructions, copyright ownership is treated no differently than faculty materials produced for the classroom.  If the materials are not Institutional Works or developed via the significant use of College resources, the faculty member owns the copyright for those materials created for online use.  Any electronic course materials that are Institutional Works or created or developed by faculty with the use of extraordinary use of College resources will be considered the property of Bethany College.  This applies to electronic course material whether or not it was, is or may be eligible for copyright or patent. 
+
+With respect to the foregoing works, the College may decide to assign its copyright to the author or authors of the work on a case-by-case basis.  
+
+X.1.5: Licensing: Faculty members who create teaching and classroom materials, such as class notes, syllabi, curriculum guides, or laboratory notebooks, or online learning modules shall grant the College a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use, display, copy, distribute, and prepare derivative works for administrative use, as well as use in educational programs and courses provided directly by the College to its students for the duration of time that the faculty member is employed by the College.  The details of the licensing agreement will specify, among other things, the end of the licensing agreement, for example when an originator of the used in an online course retires or ceases to be employed by the College.
+
+
+
+X.2 Implications for Faculty, Staff and Students. The extent to which the College’s IP policy affects the different constituencies on campus is given below. 
+
+ 
+
+X.2.1  Faculty.   Faculty members who create products of teaching and scholarship own their IP except for patentable inventions, in which case the ownership rights rest with the College.  Pedagogical, literary, artistic and creative works are owned by the faculty member, consistent with American Association of University Professors guidelines about copyrights and the prevailing view in academia.  Recorded lectures, lecture notes and other course notes such as problem sets and syllabi are the faculty member’s IP.  Works related to scholarship, such as journal articles, books, textbooks, videos, photos, and artistic works in any medium, are also the faculty member’s IP. 
+
+ 
+
+The use of resources normally available to the faculty member does not abrogate that right.  For faculty, the support normally provided in the form of salary, lab or studio space, funding for sabbatical leaves, and internal grants available on a competitive basis through the Faculty Development Committee are considered normal support (see X.7.5 for further definition of normal support). 
+
+ 
+
+The IP generated in outside employment (such as consulting) or without College resources is not covered by this policy.  Faculty members are bound by the terms of employment set forth in Faculty Policy Manual XXX. 
+
+ 
+
+X.2.2  Staff.  In most cases the copyrightable materials created by a staff member is relate to the identity interests of the College, and therefore is owned by the College.  In some cases, however, a staff member may undertake a project that is considered scholarly work, in which the College has no identity interest.  In such cases, ownership goes to the creator, even though the default is to give it to the College.  Staff members who develop patentable discoveries using College resources have a duty to assign patent rights to the College. 
+
+ 
+
+X.2.3  Students.  For students, the College does not have an identity interest in their IP except when they are employees of the College or are under the supervision of a faculty member.  If a student project is developed in the context of normal coursework, then the rights to copyrightable materials is retained by the student.  If students are under the supervision of a faculty member and are working on IP of the faculty member, then the faculty member and student are strongly encouraged to draw up a written agreement in consultation with the Intellectual Property Policy Committee, specifying the terms of how the IP generated by their collaboration will be handled before the project begins.  If patentable inventions involve significant faculty mentorship and/or Bethany resources, then the student has a duty to assign patent rights to the College.  In all other circumstances where students are employed by the College, the IP policy for staff applies (Section X.2.2) 
+
+ 
+
+X.2.4 Group Projects.  In the case when there are two or more community members collaborating in the creation of patentable inventions, all parties should sign a disclosure form in consultation with the Intellectual Property Policy Committee.  This disclosure form should indicate a fair distribution of fractional shares among the collaborators. 
+
+ 
+
+X.3 Process for Deliberate Determination of IP Rights 
+
+ 
+
+X.3.1 Deliberate determination is not required.  For all scholarly work (except for patents) in which the College has no ownership interest (i.e., no identity interest, there is no extraordinary use of College resources, etc.) there is no need to report the creation of IP by a community member to the Intellectual Property Policy Committee.  Outside consulting and work done by community members without College resources is not subject to the reporting requirements.  
+
+
+
+In those cases where the College has a routine and clear case of an identity interest or the product is clearly a work for hire or Institutional Work, the College owns the copyrightable material and there is no need to report it to the Intellectual Property Policy Committee.  
+
+
+
+X.3.2 Deliberate Determination Required. In the case of patents or when copyrightable materials have received extraordinary support from the College, the creator must declare the IP to the Intellectual Property Policy Committee via the disclosure form as soon as the situation becomes clear.  The Intellectual Property Policy Committee will make recommendations regarding the most suitable distribution of IP rights between the creator and College as well as distribution of partial shares between community members.  Normally, within sixty (60) days of receiving complete formal disclosures of IP requiring deliberate determination, the Intellectual Property Policy Committee will make a recommendation to the Provost.  After receiving the report from the Intellectual Property Policy Committee, the Provost will make a determination of IP rights in writing, normally within thirty (30) days. The distribution of IP rights should be specified in writing and signed by the creator and College’s representative. 
+
+ 
+
+If the College does not commercialize the IP within five years of making a determination, or does not pay the community member net revenue as described in X.4.1, then the creator shall assume an exclusive license to commercialize the patent, including the ability to license to others permission to utilize the patent.  In such cases, the net revenue is still divided between the creator and the College, as laid out in section X.4. 
+
+ 
+
+X.3.2.1 Disclosure Form.  The form for disclosure of IP requiring deliberate determination of IP rights will be available in the XXXX Manual and website. 
+
+ 
+
+X.3.2.2.2 The Intellectual Property Policy Committee will be composed of the chair of the Faculty Development Committee, a representative appointed by the Provost, and a third member chosen by the Provost and the Chair of Faculty Development Committee.  In considering cases involving patents or other matters that fall outside the expertise of the three committee members, the Intellectual Property Policy Committee will ask qualified faculty members as well as external professional counsel to advise on an ad hoc basis as needed.  The Intellectual Property Policy Committee will also serve as a resource for any questions about IP policy and procedures for the community, and initial inquiries about the need for deliberate determination can be made on an informal basis. 
+
+ 
+
+X.3.3 Third Party Agreements.  All IP defined by Scope in X.1 produced by work sponsored by public or private organizations is governed by this policy, unless otherwise specified in a written contract or in federal or state laws and regulations. Contracts with third parties can contain provisions governing IP rights that supersede the College policy.  The Provost must approve the IP provisions in such contracts, and normally such contracts must also be reviewed by the General Counsel. 
+
+ 
+
+X.3.4  Appeal of the Provost’s Determination of IP Rights.  In the event where the creator disagrees with the Provost’s determination of IP rights, the creator may appeal the decision to the President within thirty days.  Upon receiving the appeal, the President will render a decision regarding the appeal within thirty days.  
+
+ 
+
+X.4  Revenue.  If revenue is generated by IP held by the College, the College and creator will split the revenue in the following manner.  The first $10,0000 of net revenue will go to the creator.  The creator will receive sixty percent, and the College forty percent, of further revenue.  The College agrees to pay annually to the creator(s), or to the creator’s heirs, successors, or assigns, 60% of the net revenue per invention, with an additional 10% of net revenue per invention allocated to the creator’s department or program.  Net revenue is defined as gross income less the costs of submitting and protecting and preserving patent and related property rights, and such other costs, taxes, or reimbursements as may be necessary or required by law.  When there are two or more creators, each creator shall share equally in the creator’s share of revenue, unless all creators previously have agreed in writing to a different distribution of such share. This distribution will continue regardless of the creator’s status at the College. 
+
+ 
+
+If it so wishes, the College can agree to provide the creator with an exclusive, or non-exclusive license to commercialize the patent, including licensing it to others.  In such cases, the net revenue is still divided between the creator and the College as laid out in section X.4.  Such agreements will be provided in writing to the creator. 
+
+ 
+
+X.4.1 Payment of Revenue.  Annually, net revenue for a creator is collected and held by the College from July 1st to June 30th, and is paid to the creator the following August 30th or the nearest business day after August 30th.   
+
+ 
+
+Each annual payment will be accompanied by a document accounting for source of revenue and all costs from July 1st to June30th.  The College cannot recoup costs from previous revenue payments made to the creator(s). 
+
+ 
+
+X.5 Transfer of IP Rights.  There are circumstances in which either the creator or College may want to transfer IP ownership to the other.  For IP developed without significant use of College resources and held by a community member, the community member may ask the College to consider accepting assignment of ownership, but the College has no obligation to do so.  Even if the College has clear ownership of IP, the transfer of IP ownership to the community member may be appropriate, especially if it facilitates the distribution of the IP to the greater community.   
+
+ 
+
+X.6 Consultants.  When the College has an identity or functional interest in copyrightable materials created by hired consultants, the College will stipulate by contract that ownership stays with the College.  Hired consultants are not considered community members and as such are not covered by this policy. 
+
+ 
+
+X.7 Definitions 
+
+ 
+
+X.7.1 Intellectual Property (IP).  Intellectual property is a creative work or invention in which the law allows ownership rights for the creator.  The two main types of IP in the academic environment are copyrights and patents.  Copyrights are an exclusive legal right available to creators to print, publish, perform, film, or record literary, artistic, or musical material.  Patent protection is granted by the government to the creator for inventions that are useful, non-obvious and novel products or processes. 
+
+ 
+
+X.7.2 Community Members.  Faculty, staff, and students. 
+
+ 
+
+X.7.3 Creator.  One community member, or two or more collaborators, who develop the IP. 
+
+ 
+
+X.7.3.1 Collaborators.  Two or more community members who share in the creation of IP.  In the case of more than one creator, fractional shares will be agreed upon beforehand to the extent possible.  If parties outside the community are involved in the creation of IP that requires deliberate determination, then distribution of IP rights between all parties should be described prior to or as part of the disclosure process. 
+
+ 
+
+X.7.4  Scholarly Work.  Scholarly work refers to original work including publications, exhibitions, and/or performances.  The guidelines for recognized forms of scholarly work in each discipline are located XXXXXX and are described in XXXXX of the Faculty XXXX. 
+
+ 
+
+X.7.5 Normal Support for a Community Member.  For all community members, College-supplied computing, email and phone resources are considered normal support.  For faculty, normal support also includes salary, laboratory or studio space, funding for sabbatical leaves, start-up grants, competitive grants distributed through the Faculty Development Committee, as well as other widely advertised grant opportunities from the College and other funds available through competitive processes.  For staff, salary and laboratory or studio space are considered normal support.  For students, normal support entails the use of College-owned resources either freely available to students (for example, computer labs and workstations on campus) or available on loan (computers, cameras, video recording devices, etc.) or through courses (art supplies, for example). 
+
+ 
+
+X.7.6 Extraordinary Support for a Community Member.  A community member who receives support beyond the normal support afforded to the community member is receiving extraordinary support. 
+
+ 
+
+X.7.7 Work for Hire.  Under the 1976 Copyright Law, “a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment” is considered “work for hire,” in which case the copyright becomes the property of the employer.  Within the context of academia, however, most institutions do not consider scholarly work (except for patents) done by faculty and students to be the property of the institution, except in cases where the institution has an identity interest, and/or has given extraordinary resources for the creation of the work. 
+
+
+
+X.7.8 .Institutional Work: include works that are supported by a specific allocation of College funds or that are created at the direction of College for a specific Bethnay College purpose.  Institutional Works also include works whose authorship cannot be attributed to one or a discrete number of authors but rather result from simultaneous or sequential contributions over time by multiple faculty and students.
+
+ 
+
+X.7.9 Federal Grants and Bayh-Dole Act of 1980.  The Bayh-Dole act permits a college or university to elect to pursue ownership of IP developed with the support of federal research grants in preference to the government.  In particular, Bethany College can determine IP rights and responsibilities, with the framework of federal guidelines.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Interview Q.txt [/INST] What is your overall impression of the university’s current promotion and tenure evaluation system?
+
+What is working well?
+
+What is not working well?
+
+In your opinion, should academic units develop specific interpretations of the university's evaluation standards for promotion and tenure?
+
+What changes, if any, to the evaluation system would you like to see introduced?
+
+What is your overall impression of the university’s six-year (post-tenure) review process?
+
+What role, if any, should Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) play in the tenure and promotion evaluation process?
+
+
+
+
+
+Possible Follow Up Questions:
+
+
+
+Would you prefer an evaluation system that relies on goal setting?
+
+In your opinion, should the university develop weights for each evaluation standard?</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Interview Themes (Final).txt [/INST] 2
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+32
+
+Interview Themes
+
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+Below we provide the major themes that emerged from the interviews conducted with faculty members, department chairs/program directors, and the deans during our visit to campus last week.  The themes presented below have not necessarily been stated by everyone interviewed but represent what we believe to be the overarching thoughts, concerns, and suggestions for improvement raised by those interviewed.  
+
+The University’s tenure and promotion standards and evaluative procedures should be refined to offer greater clarity.  The opacity creates anxiety for candidates and heightens stress. 
+
+There are “unwritten rules” followed by the ART and/or Deans, as well as points of emphasis that vary year-to-year depending on committee membership. 
+
+The promotion and tenure standards are a “moving target.”
+
+The current P&T process “lacks transparency” and has a “gotcha” approach.
+
+There is a lack of clarity regarding scholarship expectations. What constitutes scholarship and “peer review”?
+
+The majority of those interviewed are in favor of schools/colleges, departments and/or academic units developing discipline-specific guidelines that further define levels of performance in the faculty evaluation categories.
+
+There was no consensus amongst those interviewed as to whether weights for each evaluation criterion should be developed at the university-level.  Some interviewees expressed they prefer “flexibility” vs rigid weights.
+
+Many expressed that the overall evaluation system should be more formative in nature.  For example, junior faculty believe teaching evaluations should be shared with them and that the annual department/program director chair evaluation should include feedback and a developmental plan/goal setting component.
+
+There is a concern that those that have heavy administrative responsibilities are not being fairly evaluated (i.e., administrative service is not being given enough weight in the promotion and tenure process).  
+
+The burden of administrative services is unevenly distributed, and, in the case of DEI work, falls disproportionately on faculties of color.
+
+Expectations have evolved regarding scholarship, but not for service.
+
+Work done as part of a faculty’s administrative paid assignments should be considered in the promotion and tenure review process.
+
+There was a strong consensus among those interviewed that DEI should be integrated into the evaluation process.  All that voiced an opinion on DEI inclusion favored “weaving” examples of DEI achievements under all four evaluations criterion.  The majority also advocate adopting DEI as a stand-alone evaluative criterion.
+
+Some interviewees advocated that the Provost no longer be a member of the ART committee.
+
+Many expressed that the six-year senior faculty evaluation process lacks “teeth.”  
+
+One faculty member suggested that senior tenured faculty who exceed expectations as part of the six-year review be awarded a stipend.
+
+Some advocated for the allowance of initial appointments with tenure.
+
+One faculty member advocated for allowance for early tenure application.
+
+There was a general call for more training by various stakeholder groups. 
+
+Some expressed a need for chairs to be trained on evaluation best practices. 
+
+Junior faculty indicated that there is a need for dossier writing training, as well as mentoring to help in navigating the process.
+
+“Information is trapped within knowledge networks.” 
+
+“Depends on who you know and whether you can tap into the knowledge network.”
+
+If DEI is incorporated into the evaluative process, there is a recognition that training will be needed.
+
+Some expressed the need for new ART members to be trained when they come onboard, particularly given the introduction of the ART subcommittees.
+
+A few interviewed believe that the departmental level review for P&T evaluations should be refined.  One Dean opined that departments should evaluate candidates via the formation of a department-level faculty committee or a polling of the department’s faculty members, with allowance for outside evaluators in smaller departments/programs.
+
+Many voiced the need for external evaluations.
+
+Some interviewees are in favor of requiring external reviewers.  
+
+Others preferred that the use of external reviewers remain optional, but that junior faculty be made aware of this option.
+
+Some noted that evaluation dates do not align very well and should be revised.  For example, some noted that the ART is oftentimes awaiting receipt of the Dean evaluations, which slows the process.
+
+ART and administrative evaluations should be solely based on the evaluative file.  Outside material and “backroom conversations” with others not officially involved in the evaluative process should not be permitted.
+
+With respect to Student Evaluations, a few interviewees suggested that the current instrument is not a strong as it should be and required updating.  
+
+One former ART member noted that it would be helpful to pool two years of a candidate’s student evaluation data for publication in an easy-to-read spreadsheet.
+
+Another interviewee noted that disparate student evaluation instruments should be developed for undergraduate and graduate courses.
+
+Many noted that mentoring expectations will need to be defined.  
+
+One interviewee suggested that the new “mentoring” category should also include junior faculty mentoring activities in addition to student mentoring.
+
+The President, Chairs/Program Directors, and Deans expressed interest in evaluating collegiality.  
+
+Some noted that the promotion to Full Professor standard is too oriented towards time in rank vs. quality of performance.  
+
+One interviewee noted that the Full Professor rank standard too closely mirrors the Associate Professor rank standard.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Interview Themes.txt [/INST] Interview Themes
+
+
+
+Below we provide the major themes that emerged from the interviews completed with faculty members, department chairs/program directors, and the deans during our visit to campus last week.  The themes presented below have not necessarily been stated by everyone interviewed but represent what we believe to be the overarching thoughts, concerns, and suggestions for improvement raised by those interviewed.  
+
+The University’s tenure and promotion standards should be refined to offer greater clarity.  The opacity creates a lot of anxiety for candidates and heightens stress.  
+
+There are “unwritten rules” followed by the ART and/or Deans, as well as points of emphasis that vary year-to-year depending on committee membership. 
+
+The promotion and tenure standards are a “moving target.”
+
+The current P&T process “lacks transparency” and has a “gotcha” approach.
+
+There is a lack of clarity regarding scholarship expectations in the promotion and tenure process.  For example, what constitutes scholarship and “peer review”?
+
+The majority of those interviewed are in favor of schools/colleges, departments and/or academic units developing discipline-specific guidelines that further define levels of performance in the faculty evaluation categories.
+
+There was no consensus amongst those interviewed as to whether weights for each evaluation criterion should be developed at the university-level.  Some interviewees expressed they prefer “flexibility” vs rigid weights.
+
+Many expressed that the overall evaluation system should be more formative in nature.  For example, junior faculty believe teaching evaluations should be shared with them and that the annual department/program director chair evaluation should include feedback and a developmental plan/goal setting component.
+
+There is a concern that those that have heavy administrative responsibilities are not being fairly evaluated by ART (i.e., administrative service is not being given enough weight in the promotion and tenure process).  
+
+The burden of administrative services is unevenly distributed, and, in the case of DEI work, falls disproportionately on faculties of color.
+
+Expectations have evolved regarding scholarship, but not for service.
+
+Work done as part of a faculty’s administrative paid assignments should be considered in the promotion and tenure review process.
+
+There was a strong consensus among those interviewed that DEI should be integrated into the evaluation process.  All that voiced an opinion on DEI inclusion favored “weaving” examples of DEI achievements under all four evaluations criterion.  The majority also advocate adopting DEI as a stand-alone evaluative criterion.
+
+Some interviewees advocated that the Provost not be a member of the ART committee.
+
+Many expressed that the six-year senior faculty evaluation process lacks “teeth.”  
+
+One faculty member suggested that senior tenured faculty who exceed expectations as part of the six-year review be given a stipend.
+
+Some advocated for the allowance of initial appointments with tenure.
+
+One faculty member advocated for allowance for early tenure application.
+
+There was a general call for more training by various stakeholder groups. 
+
+Some expressed a need for chairs to be trained on evaluation best practices. 
+
+Junior faculty indicated that there is a need for dossier writing training. 
+
+Junior faculty would appreciate mentoring and help in navigating the process
+
+If DEI is incorporated into the evaluative process, there is a recognition that training will be needed.
+
+New ART members need to be trained when they come onboard.  This is particularly important now that there are two ART subcommittees.
+
+“Information is trapped within knowledge networks.” “Depends on who you know and whether you can tap into the knowledge network.”
+
+A few interviewed believe that the departmental level review for P&T evaluations should be updated.  A Dean thought that perhaps departments should evaluate candidates via the formation of a department committee or a polling of the department faculty members.
+
+Some interviewees are in favor of requiring external reviewers.  Others preferred that the use of external reviewers remain optional.
+
+Some noted that evaluation dates do not align very well and should be revised.  For example, the ART is oftentimes awaiting receipt of the Dean evaluations, which slows the process.
+
+Some notes that ART and administrative evaluations must be solely based on the evaluative file.  
+
+With respect to Student Evaluations, a few interviewees suggested that the current instrument is not a strong as it should be.  
+
+One former ART member noted that it would be helpful to pool two years of a candidate’s student evaluation data for publication on an easy-to-read spreadsheet.
+
+Another interviewee noted that disparate student evaluation instruments should be developed for undergraduate and graduate students.
+
+Mentoring expectations will need to be defined.  “What does mentoring mean?”
+
+One interviewee noted that the new “mentoring” category should also include junior faculty mentoring activities in addition to student mentoring.
+
+The President, Chairs/Program Directors, and Deans expressed interest in evaluating collegiality.  
+
+The ART member group expressed concern regarding how to effectively evaluate collegiality.
+
+The promotion to Full Professor is too oriented towards time in rank vs. quality of performance.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Intro to Faculty Classifications (Removed).txt [/INST] The faculty at Ohio Wesleyan University is comprised of the Full-Time Teaching Faculty, Part-Time Faculty, Administrative Faculty, and those individuals afforded faculty recognition status via a Courtesy or Honorific Appointment. 
+
+Full-Time Teaching Faculty
+
+Tenure-Line Faculty
+
+Tenured Faculty
+
+Tenure Track (Probationary) Faculty
+
+Endowed Chairs
+
+Non-Tenure Track Term Faculty
+
+Visiting Faculty
+
+Faculty in Residence (New)
+
+Part-time Faculty
+
+Instructor
+
+Lecturer
+
+Senior Lecturer
+
+Administrative Faculty
+
+Courtesy Faculty
+
+Librarians
+
+Adjunct Faculty
+
+Honorific Faculty
+
+Emeritus
+
+Endowed Chairs
+
+Each category is described below:</s>"
+"<s>[INST] IP Reference Text.txt [/INST] The Department’s Evaluation
+
+The full-time faculty of the candidate’s department shall evaluate whether the faculty member’s performance meets or exceeds the applicable standards for reappointment, promotion, merit, or tenure as applicable.  When fewer than three full-time faculty exist within a department, faculty from cognate areas will be asked to participate in the evaluation. The Provost will appoint these additional full-time faculty on a case-by-case basis. As part of its deliberative process, the departmental faculty shall have access to the candidate’s Self-Report, current C.V., course syllabi, and the products or links to products of scholarly or creative work submitted by the candidate with the Self-Report.  
+
+													After completing its review, the departmental faculty shall meet to discuss the candidate’s performance and cast a vote by secret ballot to determine whether the faculty member should be recommended for reappointment, promotion, merit, or tenure as applicable.  Thereafter, the Department Chair will prepare a written recommendation on behalf of the department to the Faculty Personnel Committee.  The committee’s recommendation must present the majority view of the full-time faculty of the department.  When the departmental vote is divided, the department may submit a minority report.  
+
+Additional Letters
+
+Faculty members undergoing review are encouraged to identify colleagues who can make a material contribution to the review. It is expected that University colleagues outside of the candidate’s department or area group will contribute a letter of evaluation if asked; however, they are not obligated to do so.
+
+Academic Affairs solicits additional peer letters.  When faculty members standing for review submit names of reviewers outside of their department, they should include a brief, specific reason why each peer was chosen. 
+
+Initial Appointment with Tenure 
+
+The University reserves the right, in exceptional cases, to grant tenure to an incoming member of the faculty at the time of initial appointment. This departure from the usual practice is justified only on the basis of extensive prior experience—including a successful tenure review at a comparable regionally accredited four-year college or university—and in consideration of the position to which the person is being appointed (e.g., an endowed chair or some other comparable senior position).  
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+3. Intellectual Property 
+
+Faculty are the copyright owners of all the works they create or prepare in the course of their employment except where a faculty member and the University agree in writing that the copyright to a work (or works) created by the faculty member is owned by the University, or where provided otherwise by University policy or in a written policy implemented by a College, School, Library, or Department after consultation with affected faculty. Additionally, where a faculty member is for any reason unable to perform his/her current or prospective University obligations, for a period of one year the University is privileged to make use, at no cost to the University, of that faculty member’s materials which are necessary to the performance of those obligations. Any interest that a faculty member may have in a patent or other kind of intellectual property (not including copyright) in consequence of the performance of his/her University obligations is governed by the Patent and Intellectual Property Policy, available on the website of the Office of Research Services Administration. 
+
+
+
+In such cases, the Provost will consult with the search committee in determining whether to recommend that tenure accompany the appointment.  If, after such consultation, the Provost recommends the external candidate for tenure, the Provost will submit the nomination to the Faculty Personnel Committee.  Such nomination will be accompanied by supporting documents including, but not limited to:
+
+The candidate’s curriculum vitae;
+
+Documentation that the candidate was granted tenure at a comparable regionally accredited four-year college or university; and
+
+Evidence that the candidate meets the standards for tenure (see Section 3.8.4.6). At minimum, this should include evidence of teaching effectiveness (e.g., course syllabi, student course ratings, classroom observation reports), a record of scholarly or creative contributions, and service activities, and three letters of recommendation from professional colleagues who can speak to the candidate’s qualifications for tenure upon appointment. 
+
+Other supporting evidence may be requested from the candidate by the Provost or the Faculty Personnel Committee as deemed necessary.
+
+The department or program with which the candidate would be associated will review the submitted documents and in writing recommend to the Faculty Personnel Committee either granting or not granting tenure.
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee will review the submitted documents, receive and consider the department’s (or program’s) recommendation, and make to the Provost and President its recommendation regarding the granting of tenure to the candidate.  A positive recommendation to grant tenure will be accompanied by a recommendation regarding faculty rank. The rank will normally be the highest rank the candidate has achieved at the institution where the individual was originally tenured.
+
+The Provost will make a written recommendation to the President, who in turn will make a written recommendation to the Board of Trustees. Neither the Provost nor President shall be bound to accept the recommendation of the Faculty Personnel Committee, but in making a recommendation shall be governed by the same criteria and standards as agreed upon jointly by the Administration and the Faculty.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Prior to making this decision, the Dean will submit the credentials of the candidate to the Faculty Review Committee for its evaluation and recommendation and then will review the matter with the Provost and the President. If the department, Faculty Personnel Committee, the Dean, the Provost, and the President concur, an initial appointment with tenure can be made. Subsequently, the President or, at the President’s request, the Provost or the Dean will review the case with the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board at its next scheduled meeting. 
+
+
+
+Any course may be canceled due to low enrollment (minimum of 5 students). 
+
+Courses at Ohio Wesleyan shall have an enrollment of at least ten (10) students. If fewer than ten (10) students are enrolled, Academic Affairs may choose on the first day of class to cancel the course. 
+
+Courses with fewer than six (6) students enrolled should be cancelled, but responsibility for cancellations rests with the dean. 
+
+In recognition that curriculum needs for individual schools/colleges may vary, deans are provided the option to establish individual course contingency requirements (CCR) for their school/college. School/college CCRs will be established in writing and will include minimum student enrollment per course. Minimum enrollment standards may be in the form of a broad rule for all courses or specific contingencies for individual courses. Schools/colleges will submit CCRs to the Office of the Provost and will make them available to its faculty. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Tenure and Senior Rank Status upon Initial Appointment
+
+On rare occasions, the University may conduct a special search for a distinguished scholar and specify the possibility of tenure and senior rank (i.e., Associate Professor or Full Professor) upon appointment.  If a special search is recommended by the Provost and the Faculty Personnel Committee and approved by the President, the Provost shall meet with the department(s) with which the candidate will be appointed. If, after departmental consultation, it is determined that departmental as well as institutional needs and resources support such a search the position advertisement will note the possibility of tenure and senior rank upon appointment. If the position is not permanently assigned to one particular department, the search committee shall be appointed by the Dean of the Faculty. If the position is permanently assigned to a department, procedures in the Academic Faculty Search Procedure Appendix will be followed. 
+
+To be eligible for consideration for tenure upon appointment and senior rank the candidate must have earned tenure as well as associate or full professor status at a regionally accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution. A tenured appointment will in no case be considered automatic. If the candidate wishes to be considered for tenure, the candidate shall supply evidence that he or she meets the standards for tenure (see Section 2.7.7.3) and associate or full professor (see Section 2.7.8.2c). At minimum, this should include evidence of teaching effectiveness (e.g. course syllabi, student course ratings, classroom observation reports), a record of significant and substantial scholarship, publication, and service activities, and three letters of recommendation from professional colleagues who can speak to the candidate’s qualifications for tenure upon appointment. Other supporting evidence may be requested from the candidate by the Dean of the Faculty or the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure Committee as deemed necessary. 
+
+The search committee for the position shall submit to the Dean of the Faculty its recommendation regarding the candidate’s eligibility for appointment with tenure. Prior to appointment with tenure, the Dean of the Faculty and the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure Committee will review the candidate’s qualifications and a letter written by the department chair (See Section 2.7.5). In a manner similar to the process described in Section 2.7.7.4, the Dean of the Faculty and the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure Committee will each make a recommendation to the President regarding the awarding of tenure and the rank upon appointment of the candidate. If these two recommendations differ, then the President shall meet jointly with the Committee and the Dean of the Faculty to discuss the recommendations before making the final recommendation to the Board of Regents regarding the tenure decision. 
+
+The procedures outlined above will be followed with this exception: If the position is not permanently housed in one particular department, as is the case with certain endowed chairs, the chair of the department most closely associated with the candidate’s area of expertise and teaching responsibilities shall submit to the Dean of the Faculty a letter of evaluation (See Section 2.7.5). 
+
+
+
+Unless an exception has been approved (Section 2.3.5 and 2.7.7.2.1), tenure track faculty with prior service credit shall serve a minimum of three full academic years at the University before being evaluated for tenure. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+A maximum of two years of prior service credit may be awarded; exceptions to this maximum may be approved by the President after receiving and considering a recommendation from the Dean of the Faculty who must first consult with the Appointment, Rank and Tenure Committee (see also Section 2.7.7.2). The amount of credit awarded shall be stated in the initial contract of employment. An exception may also be made in the case of Special Searches (See Section 2.7.7.2.1). 
+
+Denison
+
+Denison normally does not accept more than two years of prior experience either from other institutions or from Denison experience when making tenure-track appointments at the rank of Assistant Professor. The number of years of prior experience to be claimed by a candidate will be negotiated between the candidate and the Provost in consultation with the members of the department at the time of hire. The years of prior credit may be changed during the first nine months of the initial appointment with the concurrence of the new faculty member, the appropriate department chair, and the Provost. Tenure decisions are based primarily upon work done at Denison, particularly with respect to teaching and contributions to the other purposes of the University. Faculty should be aware that sabbatical leaves are awarded only after six years of service at Denison, whether or not prior experience has been claimed 
+
+Appointment of Associate Professors and Professors. 
+
+Ohio Wesleyan normally does not make initial appointments at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor and normally does not make initial appointments with tenure. When extraordinary circumstances make such an appointment desirable, the Provost will seek the advice both of the department affected and the Faculty Personnel Committee prior to making the appointment. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Disability
+
+The decision to terminate a faculty member by reason of disability will be reached by the University only upon the basis of 
+
+a communication from the faculty member indicating that the inability perform the essential duties and responsibility of the position because of disability; or 
+
+the evidence of contemporaneous deficits either in performance of the faculty member’s duties or in skills necessary to perform the faculty member’s duties because of disability, with or without reasonable accommodations by the University, as determined by the Provost. 
+
+If the Provost has evidence that reason for termination based on disability may exist, the following procedures will apply: 
+
+The Provost will request a meeting with the faculty member to discuss the faculty member’s disability and its effects on the performance of the faculty member’s duties. 
+
+To obtain further information to ascertain whether the individual is able to perform the essential or inherent duties and responsibilities of the faculty position, the Provost may require a physical, psychological, or psychiatric examination of the individual at University expense by a licensed professional designated by the University (through the Department of Human Resources). If either the individual or the University desires, a second opinion may be requested from a licensed professional mutually agreed to by both parties and at the expense of the University. Failure of the faculty member to agree to the requested examination, without reasonable cause, will be noted in the Provost's written recommendation to the Provost below). 
+
+If clear and convincing evidence exists to support the conclusion that the faculty member is unable to perform the essential or inherent duties and responsibilities of the faculty member’s position, with or without reasonable accommodations, the Provost will request a meeting with the faculty member to discuss the situation and to develop a resolution that is acceptable both to the faculty member and to the University. 
+
+If an acceptable resolution cannot be achieved through negotiation or if the faculty member fails to attend the requested meeting without reasonable cause, the Provost will prepare a report documenting the findings (including the faculty member’s failure to attend the requested meeting), the basis for those findings, and a recommendation regarding termination. 
+
+Prior to the transmitting the recommendation to the President on termination action, the Provost will notify the faculty member of the proposed termination action; notification of required attendance at a joint meeting with the Provost and the Faculty Personnel Committee shall also be included. This joint meeting shall be scheduled within ten (10) business days after the faculty member's receipt of the Provost's notice. The purpose of this meeting shall be to provide an opportunity for the Faculty Personnel Committee to review the circumstances of the termination action with the faculty member and to hear the faculty member's response to the action. Failure of the faculty member to attend this joint meeting, without reasonable cause, shall be noted in the Provost's written recommendation to the President regarding termination. 
+
+After the Faculty Personnel Committee hears the faculty member's response and consults with the Provost, the Provost will either forward a written recommendation to the President for termination, with a copy to the faculty member, or notify the faculty member that termination action will not be taken. 
+
+If the President concurs with the Provost's recommendation for termination, the President will send written notification of the dismissal action to the faculty member. 
+
+
+
+
+
+The scholarship of application and practice might apply the knowledge, techniques, or technologies of the arts and sciences, business or engineering to the benefit of individuals and groups. This may include translational research, commercialization, start-ups, technology transfer, assistive technologies, learning technologies, or applied research supported by industrial or corporate partners or by government agencies. Contributions to the scholarship of application and practice are shared with stakeholders and open to review and critique by stakeholders and by peers. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Structuring of Courses: Effective teachers demonstrate the ability to select and sequence course content and experiences so that student learning is facilitated, structure course content so that it has integrity within the discipline and reflects the College's academic standards and expectations, and develop and make use of techniques for evaluating student learning. 
+
+Revisions and updates to course content and/or pedagogical approaches: Effective teachers stay informed and current regarding the knowledge base necessary to design and deliver the courses being taught and update their course content as appropriate with major shifts in thinking and emphasis within their discipline and to be consistent with new research on effective teaching.
+
+Advising and mentoring, both formal and informal: Effective teachers advise and mentor their students, both formally and informally.  Hallmarks of quality, effective advising include, but are not limited to, familiarity with curricular requirements, an understanding of special programs and curricular opportunities (e.g., OWU Connections, Off-Campus Study, Sagan National Colloquium, etc.), availability to students by maintaining adequate open office hours and responding in a timely manner to all communications or questions either from a student or from colleagues about a student, helping students select a course of study, referring students to available University resources, accepting a proportionate share of advisees, guiding students to integrate co-curricular and extra-curricular activities into their academic and career planning, and providing students in the faculty member’s classes with additional consultation and guidance outside of class.
+
+In addition to the above, faculty work in any of the following areas may demonstrate evidence of effective teaching.  Faculty, however, are not expected to make contributions in every item listed below, nor are the items listed in any special order.
+
+Provision of assistance to students experiencing difficulties:  Effective teachers support students who are struggling academically. This may include out-of-class help sessions, office hours, or other types of support.
+
+DEI work related to teaching and/or student support: Faculty may demonstrate teaching effectiveness by contributing to Ohio Wesleyan’s goal of building a diverse and inclusive campus community. Examples of DEI work may include, but are not limited to highlighting diversity in reading assignments or course topics, arranging for speakers from diverse backgrounds, supporting and mentoring students from diverse backgrounds, and supporting student clubs and activities that focus on DEI issues.
+
+Stimulation of student interest and achievement: Through their commitment to and enthusiasm for their subject matter, teachers may demonstrate effective teaching by stimulating their students’ intellectual or artistic interest and enabling them to become independent learners.  Examples include, but are not limited to, efforts to support students in the classroom through out of class help sessions; supporting students in special projects or experiences that are outside of traditional courses; taking students to a conference or performance; or helping students bring in a speaker or organize an event that they are interested in.
+
+Contributions to Ohio Wesleyan’s signature academic program(s): Faculty may demonstrate teaching effectiveness by contributing to the University’s signature academic programs.  Such contributions may include, but are not limited to the supervision, facilitation, and support of Connection Experiences, such as student research, internships, travel, and service projects.
+
+Contributions to OWU’s General Education Curriculum: Faculty may demonstrate teaching effectiveness by teaching within the General Education Curriculum, making contributions to service courses such as UC 160 and the First Year Seminar, and structuring departmental courses to contribute to General Education Curriculum competencies.
+
+Encouragement and direction of student honors work: Faculty may demonstrate teaching effectiveness by making contributions to the Honors Program.  Examples include, but are nit limited to, participating in Honors Seminars, Honors Tutorials, mentoring of Honors student research projects, and service on committees for Departmental Distinction in this section.</s>"
+<s>[INST] IRB TEXT REMOVED BY DC.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Issues Raised During Faculty Forums.txt [/INST] Issues Raised During Faculty Forums
+
+
+
+
+
+References to Standards of Professionalism
+
+
+
+I will insert cross-references to Code of Professional Ethics throughout
+
+
+
+Campus Citizenship
+
+
+
+Concern rained regarding the “constructive cooperation”
+
+Focus on Contribution and Professionalism if remains
+
+Jr Faculty may not think they can dissent
+
+Perhaps better addressed in Responsibilities section of Handbook
+
+How going to be measured and by whom?
+
+Responses: 
+
+“Constructive Cooperation” is a term used in the AAUP “Statement On Collegiality as a Criterion for Faculty Evaluation”
+
+Few, if any, responsible faculty members would deny that collegiality, in the sense of collaboration and constructive cooperation, identifies important aspects of a faculty member’s overall performance. A faculty member may legitimately be called upon to participate in the development of curricula and standards for the evaluation of teaching, as well as in peer review of the teaching of colleagues. Much research, depending on the nature of the particular discipline, is by its nature collaborative and requires teamwork as well as the ability to engage in independent investigation. And committee service of a more general description, relating to the life of the institution as a whole, is a logical outgrowth of the Association’s view that a faculty member is an “officer” of the college or university in which he or she fulfills professional duties.
+
+
+Understood in this way, collegiality is not a distinct capacity to be assessed independently of the traditional triumvirate of teaching, scholarship, and service. Evaluation in these three areas will encompass the contributions that the virtue of collegiality may pertinently add to a faculty member’s career….
+
+
+
+Highlight that “respect” is a term used in the Code of Professional Ethics by referencing that policy. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Add additional clarifying examples?  Request examples from Task Force members.
+
+
+
+Task Force issue a memo explaining rational for the clause and incorporation of the AAUP guidance.
+
+
+
+
+
+DEI
+
+Revise clause to better clarify that DEI contributions are expected in at least one of the three evaluation categories. 
+
+Response: Amend clause to state: 
+
+In keeping with its mission, California Lutheran University is committed to maintaining a diverse and inclusive community that strives for equity and equal opportunity.  All faculty members are responsible for helping to ensure that these institutional goals are achieved.  Thus, contributions by faculty that enhance diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) at the University are required, evaluated, and recognized.  Such contributions may be part of teaching, and/or scholarly or creative productivity, and/or service. Such contributions must be demonstrated in at least one of the following areas: teaching, scholarly or creative productivity, and/or service.  
+
+
+
+Administrative Duties
+
+Need to make sure that ART is receiving feedback from non-faculty administrators
+
+Response: Text in Dossier permits a candidate to include “Any additional documentation in support of the personal statement (i.e., optional reference letters solicited by the candidate from people inside or outside the University).”
+
+
+
+Post-Tenure/Post Six-Year Review
+
+Concerns regarding the Professional Development Plan – may be a roadmap to dismissal
+
+Response: 
+
+Policy revisions based in feedback received during campus interviews
+
+Policy incorporates standards outlined in following AAUP documents, as well as the University of Redlands:
+
+https://www.aaup.org/issues/tenure/managing-faculty-productivity-after-tenure-2005
+
+https://www.aaup.org/report/post-tenure-review-aaup-response
+
+For example: 
+
+Process is Formative in nature
+
+Text indicating it’s not a re-evaluation of tenure or rolling contract status or undertaken for purposes of discipline or dismissal:
+
+The post- tenure/post-sixth year review is not a re-evaluation of tenure or rolling contract status and is not undertaken for the purposes of discipline or dismissal. 
+
+Later in the document, the following text:
+
+Note: The procedures for dismissing faculty for cause are separate from these policies and may be invoked, when appropriate, at any time at the discretion of the administration.
+
+Includes a right to file grievance at various stages of the process
+
+Task Force may want to issue a report to FSEC recommending that an award for distinguished teaching or scholarship, additional salary bonuses or increments for excellent performance, or some other institutional recognition should follow such a determination.
+
+See also bullet point regarding President involvement below.
+
+
+
+In the standards clause, what is the definition of a long-term faculty member?
+
+I welcome input from Task Force since this is the University’s original text.
+
+Concern regarding the President deciding dispute between Provost and Faculty member regarding course of action such as reassignment if Professional Development Plan is not followed.
+
+Original text was modeled after the University of Redlands policy.  Suggest clause be revised as follows to better align with AAUP recommended standard above: 
+
+The faculty member and the Provost will then meet to negotiate a mutually acceptable course of action responsive to the issues identified in the committee’s follow-up review report.  Options may include a nonstandard faculty workload profile, reassignment of the faculty member to other duties within the University, some other mutually acceptable plan or course of action, or voluntary separation. If the faculty member and Provost cannot agree upon a mutually acceptable plan or course of action, the President may be consulted, whose decision shall be final then the Provost will consult with the ART Committee regarding any contemplated strategies…
+
+
+
+Service
+
+Request that all three services categories are “holistically” evaluated
+
+
+
+Student Mentoring/Advising Surveys
+
+Remove specific references to graduate faculty and replace with text indicating that surveys will be distributed to students of all faculty with formal advising responsibilities.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Items to Address Next Academic Year.txt [/INST] Items to Address Next Academic Year
+
+
+
+Voting Threshold to Amend Bylaws and Possibility of a Quorum Clause
+
+Procedures for Initial Appointments with Tenure
+
+DEIB Contributions: Should it be a requirement and if so how integrate into faculty evaluations?
+
+Review of Academic Freedom Statement
+
+Develop a Merit Evaluation and/or Post-Tenure Evaluation Process
+
+Extend Cap on Full-time Visiting Faculty Appointments to Three Years?</s>"
+<s>[INST] IU V.4 (Board Approved Version) (4.30.12).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] IU V.4 (Board Approved Version) (5.2.12).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] IWC Governance Reatreat and Handbook Revision Project draft.txt [/INST] II: Retreat on Shared Governance
+
+
+
+In preparation for Pacifica’s upcoming faculty handbook revisions, we will, at your discretion, facilitate a retreat for faculty and administrators that will explore best practices on shared governance. In our experience, this retreat can be particularly valuable when there is disagreement between constituent groups regarding roles and responsibilities on campus. We will ensure that the content of this retreat is aligned with your Board bylaws and will seek formal approval from your administration regarding all content ahead of the retreat. This retreat can be completed in one day, on campus. This retreat typically includes:
+
+	An overview of the Association of Governing Boards and the AAUP guidance on shared governance
+
+	An overview of standards put in place by your accrediting bodies
+
+	A deep dive into common practices as peer, competitor, and aspirant institutions, which we will help you identify
+
+	An overview of the handbook revision process
+
+	Interactive discussions and breakout sessions to determine which model of shared governance is the best fit for Pacifica
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+The goal of this retreat is to prepare constituents on campus for more intensive deliberations about the content of the faculty handbook as its revisions get underway. Thus, this retreat can take place in the spring before handbook revisions begin.
+
+
+
+III: Faculty Handbook Review and Revision
+
+
+
+As outlined below, we propose a three-phase process to complete the objectives of this segment of the project. Stevens Strategy consultants will be available at all times during the process to work with the Provost, Review Team, and other relevant administrators. Virtual, as well as a maximum of three campus meeting sessions will be scheduled throughout the engagement in accordance with a project calendar, which we will develop with you during Phase One as described below. If the Institute determines that additional campus meetings over and above what is described below, we will bill the Institute at cost for any travel-related expenses associated with the additional on-campus meeting.
+
+
+
+Phase One: Introduction, Identifying Needs, and Project Planning
+
+
+
+Phase I is devoted to identifying a Project Manager, appointing Review Team members, developing a detailed Project Calendar, meeting with key stakeholders, and collecting any other relevant documents as follows:
+
+
+
+We will begin the engagement with an initial virtual meeting with the Provost and other appropriate administrators identified by the Institute to select a Project Manager and members of a Review Team that will be charged with vetting the first three drafts of the updated Faculty Handbook during Phase Two.
+
+
+
+Role of Project Manager
+
+The Project Manager is charged with the responsibilities listed below:
+
+
+
+	Sending all applicable Institute Correspondence and Documents to Stevens Strategy
+
+	Receiving and Distributing Stevens Strategy Correspondence and Materials to Appropriate Review Team Members for Review
+
+	Assisting with Client Compliance with the Project Schedule
+
+	Supporting and Coordinating the Review Team Efforts
+
+	Organizing and Scheduling Campus and Virtual Meetings
+
+	Managing Campus-wide Communications Regarding the Project
+
+Note: The above responsibilities may be expanded or diminished to best meet the needs of the Institute.
+
+
+
+Role of Review Team
+
+The Review Team works with the Stevens Strategy consultant(s) to vet the first three drafts of the updated Faculty Handbook during Phase Two. The Review Team’s feedback is critical to the process and helps ensure that proposed model policies and suggested policy changes introduced by Stevens Strategy are tailored to meet Pacifica’s mission, culture, and needs. Ultimately, the policies developed in collaboration with the Review Team will be recommended to the Faculty, President, and Board of Trustees for formal adoption in accordance with Pacifica’s current governance procedures.
+
+
+
+Project Calendar Development
+
+Following the identification of the Project Manager and appointment of the Review Team members, Stevens Strategy will work with the Project Manager to develop a detailed calendar for each project deliverable. In addition, we will work with the Project Manager to obtain a listing of three to five peer or
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+aspirational comparison institutions, as well as copies of any additional Institute documents germane to the project (i.e., faculty governance documents, miscellaneous policies).
+
+
+
+
+
+Initial Meeting
+
+Once these initial tasks are completed, we will schedule an on-campus meeting with the Review Team, President, Provost, and any other key stakeholders identified by the Institute to present a PowerPoint presentation that outlines the various phases and goals of the engagement. Following the presentation, a Q&A and strategy session will be held to answer any questions regarding our process, as well as discuss broadly challenges Pacifica is currently facing with its current Faculty Handbook. This session, in conjunction with a review of the Institute’s comparison peer institution practices and applicable accreditation standards, will help frame the initial content of the first draft of a new Faculty Handbook delivered by Stevens Strategy in Phase Two.
+
+
+
+Phase Two – Document Preparation & Review
+
+
+
+At the beginning of Phase Two, the Stevens Strategy consultant(s) will begin drafting the updated Faculty Handbook. Our drafting will include proposed changes to applicable policies in Pacifica’s current Faculty Handbook, as well as alternative model policies and new model policy recommendations as applicable. All proposed policy will be informed by best practices followed by schools similar in mission and size to Pacifica, including but not limited to the peer and aspirational institutions identified during Phase One. Proposed policy will also address regional accreditation agency standards as necessary.
+
+
+
+All policy proposed by Stevens Strategy will be introduced by utilizing “Track Changes” software. This will allow for complete transparency, permitting reviewers to easily identify when Stevens Strategy is proposing a change to or deletion of current policy or introducing new policy altogether. A “Comment Note” that summarizes why we are suggesting the proposed change or new policy will also be included in the initial draft, including citations to relevant peer institution practices and/or accreditation standards where applicable.
+
+
+
+Stevens Strategy will deliver the initial draft of the updated Faculty Handbook in accordance with the project calendar developed during Phase One, which should then be posted to a Google Drive or other similar application. The Review Team will then be requested to vet the draft and prepare comments in advance of a series of comprehensive review meetings that will be conducted both on campus (one two day visit) and virtually. The review meetings, which are facilitated and led by a Stevens Strategy consultant, are designed to review the document thoroughly and allow Review Team members to engage in open and frank discussion. These discussions will focus on refining, modifying, and tailoring the model policy suggestions provided by Stevens Strategy to ensure they meet Pacifica’s mission, needs, and culture. The goal will be to eventually reach consensus on a final draft that will be presented by the team to their faculty colleagues and administration. In advance of the meetings, Stevens Strategy consultants will be available to answer the team’s questions.
+
+
+
+Following the facilitation meetings, the Stevens Strategy consultant, armed with feedback and comments from the Review Team, will develop a second draft of the handbook. Upon delivery, the Review Team will then be asked to vet the second draft and prepare comments in advance of a series of virtual meetings facilitated by the Stevens Strategy consultant to review the edits and changes introduced in draft two of the document. Following these virtual meetings, the Stevens Strategy consultant will implement all changes and deliver a third draft in accordance with the project calendar.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Following the same process as the second draft review, the Review Team will be requested to address any final open issues during a series of virtual meetings facilitated by the Stevens Strategy consultant so that a fourth draft may be submitted by Stevens Strategy at the onset of Phase Three.
+
+
+
+Phase Three – Faculty Approval Process
+
+
+
+Phase Three begins with the delivery of the fourth draft of the updated Faculty Handbook to the President. If the President requests changes to the fourth draft, these will be shared with the Review Team. Stevens Strategy consultants will facilitate a dialogue between the team and President and ultimately will implement any agreed upon revisions. Once the President and Review Team agree on a final version, the final version of the handbook will be submitted to the Faculty in accordance with current shared governance procedures. A Stevens Strategy consultants will, upon Pacifica’s request, attend in person a Faculty forum to answer any questions regarding the updated handbook. If an additional forum is necessary, the consultant will attend it virtually.
+
+
+
+Following attendance at the faculty forum(s), Phase Three and the engagement will be completed. The administration and Faculty will then work independently from Stevens Strategy towards obtaining Faculty, President, and ultimately Board of Trustees approval of the updated Faculty Handbook in accordance with the College’s current shared governance procedures.
+
+
+
+Note: Stevens Strategy is not a law firm, is not a substitute for an attorney or law firm, and its professional personnel cannot provide legal advice. As such, if Pacifica’s legal counsel is not appointed as a member of the Review Team, a legal review prior to submission to the full Faculty for a final vote should be undertaken.
+
+
+
+We are able to begin work on this engagement in mid to late June 2023 and proceed according to the following timeline, by phase:
+
+
+
+	Phase	Timeline1
+
+	Phase One	Mid to Late June 2023 to Late-July 2023
+
+	Phase Two	August 2023 to Late February 2024
+
+	Phase Three	March 2024 to April 2024
+
+
+
+The fee for this service is $52,500, which includes all consulting and travel fees for three campus visits. If Pacifica would like to schedule any additional drafts or meetings outside of those described in this proposal (e.g., submission of additional drafts and corresponding facilitation, attendance at additional Faculty forums/meetings, attendance at a Board meeting, etc.), the quoted fee will be adjusted to account for additional consulting days and associated travel expenses (if any), which will be billed at our daily rate.
+
+Also, please note that the quote for this service can be adjusted downward depending on several factors. For instance:
+
+
+
+
+
+1 As indicated earlier, we will develop the best possible calendar for the Institute’s approval during Phase One of the project. For example, Phase Three may require adjusted based on the timing of the Board meeting in Spring/Summer 2024. Moreover, it is assumed that Institute reviewers will review and return documents to us with comments in accord with the final calendar so that we may meet stated deadlines. If the Institute does not meet or return documents to us with comments in accord with the calendar, Stevens Strategy reserves the right to adjust the Project Calendar accordingly.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+	Reducing or limiting on-campus meetings
+
+	Targeting specific sections of the handbook for revision
+
+	Completing fewer drafts of the handbook
+
+	Institution-led (rather than consultant-led) faculty forums
+
+	
+
+Retreat on Shared Governance (Spring 2023)
+
+$12,000.00
+
+Faculty Handbook Revision (June 2023 – April 2024)
+
+$52,500.00
+
+
+
+OWU Process
+
+
+
+In the spring of 2021 the Board of Trustees passed a motion requiring a “complete review of the Faculty Handbook.” This review will provide us the opportunity to bring our Faculty Handbook inline with best practice and to ensure that our Handbook enables the great work we envision ourselves doing in the coming years. Clear and well-written policy manuals, such as a Faculty Handbook, create certainty and clarity, allowing all of us to do our best work. Academic Affairs is looking forward to this project.
+
+Fast Information
+
+What Happens Next - This section provides information about what will happen between April 17, 2023 when the Faculty endorsed a draft of the faculty handbook and May 18/19 when the Board approves a Faculty Handbook. 
+
+Blackboard Course - Please visit the Blackboad course titled Faculty Handbook Revision (2023SPRINGACADFHR) to download a copy of the most recent handbook draft, contribute to discussion in the disucssion forum, submit feedback via the Google Form, or review background information. This is our central repository for handbook information distributed to the Faculty. 
+
+Next Steps - These are the steps that remain between the April 17 faculty meeting and final approaval of the Faculty Handbook on May 19. 
+
+Open Meetings - Please visit this Google Document for a listing of open meetings, the subject of each, the audience for each, and the location. 
+
+Process
+
+The process of revising the OWU Faculty Handbook involves seven (7) iterative cycles in which the Faculty Handbook text is reviewed, changes are discussed, and a revised draft is delivered by our consultant. The process includes faculty input at every stage. Input from other constituencies, such as the Administration and Trustees, is solicited at appropriate points in the process. 
+
+This work will be collaborative. We have formed an eight-person Review Team consisting of five faculty, the Provost, the Associate Provost, and an external facilitator. These individuals will review and provide feedback on 7 revised drafts of the Faculty Handbook over the course of the next year. Faculty committees will be consulted, and the input of the Faculty as a whole will also be included. Trustees will be kept informed in a parallel process, and their feedback will be provided to the Review Team at intervals through the external facilitator.
+
+
+
+Milestones
+
+This project will involve at least seven (7) drafts. Each draft is accompanied by a facilitated discussion and a revision. This cycle of facilitation and revision culminates in presenting a handbook draft to the faculty at the April 17 faculty meeting and a draft of the new handbook to the Board soon after for a vote at their May meeting. 
+
+DATE
+
+DELIVERABLE
+
+STATUS
+
+August 17
+
+Draft #1
+
+DONE
+
+October 3
+
+Draft #2 
+
+DONE
+
+November 7
+
+Draft #3 - Delivered to faculty committees
+
+DONE
+
+December 15
+
+Draft #4
+
+DONE
+
+January 17
+
+Draft #5 - Delivered to all faculty
+
+DONE
+
+January
+
+Open Meetings with Faculty
+
+DONE
+
+February 24 (updated)
+
+Draft #6
+
+DONE
+
+March
+
+Open Meetings with Faculty
+
+DONE
+
+March 31
+
+Draft #7
+
+DONE
+
+April 17
+
+Faculty Meeting and Vote on Handbook
+
+DONE
+
+May 18
+
+Board Meeting and Vote on Handbook
+
+DONE
+
+
+
+Why Revise the Faculty Handbook?
+
+A Faculty Handbook is a foundational document that defines the relationship of faculty to the University. It sets the framework for the rights and responsibilities of faculty in the context of what we value as an institution. It provides clarity and certainty about how processes work. A faculty handbook should provide for equity and transparency. It should be possible for a new faculty member to read the Faculty Handbook and completely understand what is expected of them and how they will be evaluated. 
+
+The current Faculty Handbook has not undergone a comprehensive review in decades. It is now a patchwork of revisions that, while well-meaning, lack a sense of cohesion and clarity. This revision allows us an opportunity to align the handbook with what we value. For example, we can include relevant language about the OWU Connection in a revised handbook. 
+
+A Faculty Handbook is reviewed so that it better serves faculty and the institution. A revision provides an opportunity to bring the Faculty Handbook inline with best practice and to ensure that the handbook enables the great work we envision ourselves doing in the coming years. Clear and well-written policy manuals, such as a Faculty Handbook, create certainty and clarity, allowing all of us to do our best work. 
+
+Why revise the Faculty Handbook? Because we can do better work and serve our students better if our organizing document is clear, readable, accurate, and complete. 
+
+Who Is Doing This Work? 
+
+In the Spring 2022 semester, we formed a Faculty Handbook Review Team consisting of the following individuals in collaboration with Stephen Lazarus of Stevens Strategy as facilitator in this process. Please see our communication archive for more detail on how the faculty were selected. 
+
+Phokeng Dailey - Faculty Member in Journalism and Communication
+Sarah Kaka - Faculty Member in Education
+John Krygier - Faculty Member in Environment and Sustainability
+Stephanie Merkel - Faculty Member in English
+Randy Quaye - Faculty Member in Africana, Gender, and Identity Studies
+Karlyn Crowley - Provost
+Dale Brugh - Associate Provost for Academic Affairs
+
+Early in this project, the work will be primarily conducted by this team. As the project progresses to draft #2 and #3, more members of the OWU community will be involved. 
+
+Who Is the Facilitator?
+
+An important member of this group is the facilitator. The facilitator’s role is to help us navigate this challenging task by bringing external best practice examples for us to consider and by drafting, revising, and reorganizing parts of the Handbook when needed. The facilitator is an enabler who relieves us of the responsibility for inventing a process for revising the Handbook. The facilitator will allow us to focus on content and not how we review content. A good facilitator is key to allow us to revise the Faculty Handbook with minimal additional burden on members of the community. 
+
+Ohio Wesleyan has hired Stephen Lazarus, of Stevens Strategy, to serve in the role of facilitator. This decision comes after completing several interviews with potential individuals and companies who do faculty handbook review nationally as well as checking the satisfaction of previous colleges and universities who used their services. We believe we have not only a skilled partner for this important work, but someone considered the best in higher education in faculty handbook review. 
+
+What Has Already Happened?
+
+Adoption by Faculty: The Faculty voted to adopt a new Faculty Handbook at the April 17, 2023 faculty meeting by a vote of 60 to 9. The version adopted by the Faculty is a slightly amended version of draft 7, which was delivered to the Faculty on March 31, 2023. 
+
+Prior Work: This follows over 1000 person-hours of work by members of the Faculty Handbook Review Team (FHRT) in collaboration with our faciliator, Stephen Lazarus. A total of seven (7) drafts were produced. The first was delivered on August 17, 2022. The last was delivered on March 31, 2023. The FHRT held 16 open meetings to gather input from individual faculty to inform revision between drafts 5 and 6 and again between drafts 6 and 7. The FHRT collected written feedback from standing faculty committees, including FPC, UGC, APAC, CWG, and Executive. These committees, in turn, engaged individual faculty in discussion of the handbook drafts. 
+
+What Happens Next? 
+
+The Board of Trustees intends to adopt a new Faculty Handbook at their May meeting. These are the steps that remain between April 17 and the conclusion of the Board meeting on May 19, 2023.
+
+The version of the Faculty Handbook endorsed by the Faculty at the April 17, 2023 faculty meeting will be presented to the Board of Trustees Handbook Oversight Group (BOTHOG) for review. This is the group that has previously reviewed drafts of the handbook and that has met with members of the Faculty Handbook Review Team (FHRT).
+
+The FHRT will meet with BOTHOG to discuss the version of the handbook endorsed by the Faculty and any points of concern along with any questions trustees may have. 
+
+The BOTHOG will make a recommendation to the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees, which is the Board group formally charged with bringing recommendations to the full Board regarding changes to the Faculty Handbook. 
+
+The FHRT will be informed of the BOTHOG’s recommendations, including if there are any places where the recommendations differ from what the Faculty has endorsed. 
+
+The Academic Affairs Committee of the Board will meet at their regular May meeting to discuss the Faculty Handbook recommendation from the BOTHOG. Members of UGC will be present for this meeting as usual. 
+
+If the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board chooses to recommend any changes to the language endorsed by the faculty, the FHRT will be informed. 
+
+Members of the FHRT will present the faculty’s recommendations to the full Board at a plenary session of the May meeting and will have the opportunity to address the faculty's perspective on any matters of disagreement. The Academic Affairs Committee will also make its recommendations to the full Board of Trustees. 
+
+The Board will adopt a new Faculty Handbook no later than May 19, and faculty will be informed of the outcome of the process the following week.
+
+What Are the Opportunities for Input? 
+
+Committee Input: The Faculty Handbook Review Team will review draft #1 and draft #2 of the Handbook with our facilitator. Portions of draft #3 will be shared with key faculty committees such as University Governance and the Faculty Personnel Committee prior to producing draft #4, which will be shared with the University's attorney. Draft #5, will be shared with the faculty has a whole. As a reminder, there will be seven (7) drafts of the faculty handbook.
+
+Open Meetings: We anticipate there will be at least two sets of open meetings with faculty hosted by the Faculty Handbook Review Team to gather feedback. We anticipate that the first set of open meetings will take place in January and/or early February around release of draft #5. We anticipate that our facilitator, Stephen Lazarus, will be in-person for these meetings to answer questions. We anticipate that the second round of open meetings will be held in late February and/or early March around release of draft #6. The Faculty Handbook Review Team may choose to host additional open meetings. Standing faculty committees may also have open meetings at their discretion to gather faculty input and channel thoughts to the Faculty Handbook Review Team. 
+
+Anonmymous Google Feedback Form: The Faculty Handbook Review Team has set up this anonymous Google Feedback Form for faculty to submit feedback or questions. The team encourages faculty to use this form to submit written feedback, rather than email, to ensure that all written feedback is seen by all members of the working group, including our facilitator.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] John's Revisions to Procedures of the Committee on Tenure JBS comment.txt [/INST] Procedures of the Committee on Tenure 
+
+In evaluating a candidate for tenure, the Committee shall follow the then current ""Procedural Guidelines of the Committee on Tenure,"" including the provisions therein with respect to seeking information in writing about the candidate from such sources as professionals in the candidate's field within and beyond the College and from each tenured member of the candidate's department/program from the Provost, and from the President.  The Committee shall also appropriately evaluate student feedback.  Any faculty member may at any time upon request obtain from the Office of the Provost a copy of the then current ""Procedural Guidelines of the Committee on Tenure,"" as reviewed annually by the faculty and in addition the Committee shall furnish a copy thereof to each candidate for tenure six months in advance of its consideration of such candidate or upon learning that the faculty member is a candidate for tenure, whichever is later. 
+
+As part of its hearing deliberations, the Committee shall review and discuss the faculty member’s performance in each category of performance, utilizing the evaluation criteria set forth in Article IV, Section 2.2.1, applicable academic unit criteria, and the criteria standards for tenure (see Article IV, Section 4.2.1).  For a recommendation of tenure, it shall be necessary that at least five three members of the voting members of the Committee affirmatively vote that the candidate 
+
+has met the applicable tenure criteria standards in favor of such a recommendation.  If a member abstains from voting, such abstention shall have the force of a negative vote. 
+
+Immediately following the conclusion of its deliberations, the Committee will email a brief statement to the candidate notifying them of its decision.  If the Committee decides not to recommend tenure is not recommended, the candidate may request, and the Committee shall provide, written clarification of the Committee's decision, including the final vote tally of the individual members of the Committee.  The Committee will also issue a written letter to the President that contains a recommendation as to whether tenure and promotion to Associate Professor should be granted or denied, basing that recommendation upon the evaluation criteria set forth in Article IV, Sections 2.2.1 and 4.2.1. 
+
+The Committee's files with respect to a candidate shall be kept intact after the Committee decides whether to recommend such candidate for tenure.  However, in order to avoid unnecessary harm to the candidate and encourage full and frank expression of opinion, all confidential minutes and records shall be sealed, maintained, and disposed of in accordance with the College’s Record Retention Schedule and inaccessible, except to members of the Committee that heard the case, the President, and the Provost and except as may be otherwise provided by the College's then current ""Review and Appeals Procedures for Certain Faculty Grievances,"" for a period of 30 years.  After 30 years, these records shall be reviewed by the Provost, who shall decide, depending on the sensitivity of the records, whether they should be opened at that time or should be resealed or otherwise restricted for a further period not to exceed 20 years, provided that records regarding the case of an individual still an active member of the faculty, shall not be opened.  Once no longer restricted, the records shall be opened for the use of researchers. [October 7, 1983, p. 3631]
+
+Board of Trustees Review
+
+The President shall submit the Committee on Tenure’s written letter to the Board of Trustees, which shall vote in executive session whether to award the candidate tenure and promotion to Associate Professor.  
+
+The Provost, acting for the Board of Trustees, informs the faculty member in writing of the Board of Trustees’ decision.  The Provost also informs the campus community of all positive tenure cases.  
+
+Tenure, if granted, will become effective with the next academic year.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Key Changes in Final Draft Memo.txt [/INST] 22
+
+
+
+April 3, 2023
+
+
+
+TO:	President Jones
+
+FROM: 	Stephen Lazarus
+Sr. Consultant
+Stevens Strategy
+
+RE: 	Listing of Major Changes
+
+Below is a listing of the major changes included in the seventh and final draft of the Faculty Handbook.  
+
+Chapter One
+
+The University’s Code of Regulations has been removed and replaced with a hyperlink.
+
+
+
+Chapter Two
+
+2.1 - Faculty Bylaws
+
+Article I: Organization
+
+Addition of Parliamentarian 
+
+Article II: Committees of the Faculty
+
+ECF May Appoint Temporary Replacement Committee Members
+
+Article III: Meetings
+
+Faculty meetings generally limited to 90 minutes 
+
+Allowance for Electronic Meetings and Voting
+
+New Agenda Order 
+
+Faculty action within an area of primary responsibility transmitted to the Board of Trustees by the President
+
+
+
+
+Article IV: Nominations and Election Procedures
+
+President May Appoint, After Consultation with ECF, Faculty to University-wide Ad Hoc Committees, Task Forces, and Working Groups
+
+Article V: Amendments
+
+Amendment Clause Modified to Only Address the Bylaws (i.e., Removed Reference to Amendments to Faculty Standing Committees Descriptions)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Chapter Three: Full-time Faculty Personnel Policies
+
+3.2: Faculty Classifications
+
+Updated Faculty Classifications
+
+Replaced Adjunct Faculty Classification with New Faculty in Residence Category
+
+Added Professor Emeriti and Endowed Chair Policies
+
+3.3: Faculty Contracts
+
+New Section Added Addressing Faculty Contract Matters (i.e., Types of Contracts, Contract Period, Contract Terms and Issuance, Area of Appointments, and Joint Appointments).
+
+3.4 – Faculty Recruitment, Initial Appointment and Placement in Rank
+
+New Faculty Recruitment Policy
+
+New Initial Appointment Rank and Salary Policy
+
+Allowance for Initial Appointment to Senior Ranks & Tenure
+
+Starting Salary Set Within a Board-approved Salary Range by Rank & Discipline
+
+New Prior Service Credit Policy
+
+New Faculty Qualification Policy (HLC Assumed Practice B.2)
+
+3.5: Faculty Rights and Standards of Professional Conduct
+
+New Academic Freedom and Free Expression Policy
+
+New Professional Ethics Policy
+
+New Statement on Plagiarism
+
+New Observance of University Mission and Policies Policy
+
+New Confidentiality Policy
+
+New Conflict of Interest – Faculty Specific Activities Policy
+
+New Faculty-Student Relationships Policy (strictly prohibits student/faculty sexual relationships)  
+
+
+
+
+												3.6: Contractual Obligations and Duties of a Faculty Member
+
+New Standard Full-time Teaching Load Policy
+
+Standard Teaching Load Defined
+
+Procedures for Establishing Course Equivalencies
+
+Over and Under-Load Policies
+
+Class Cancellation due to Low Enrollment Policy
+
+Course Cap Policy
+
+New Change in Full-time Status Policy
+
+New Team-Teaching Policy
+
+New Scheduled Class Meeting and Faculty Absences Policy
+
+New Availability to Students and Colleagues Policy
+
+
+
+3.8: Academic Department and Department Chairs
+
+New Appointment and Term of Department Chairs Policy
+
+New Evaluation of Department Chairs Policy
+
+												3.9: Faculty Evaluation
+
+Developed Detailed Criteria for Each Evaluation Category 
+
+OWU Connection Listed as a Teaching Responsibility
+
+Amended Self-Report Section 
+
+Self-Report Must be Submitted for Merit Consideration
+
+Contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Valued and Recognized 
+
+External Reviews Procedures Added to Handbook
+
+Reappointment Standards and Procedures Developed for both Tenure-Track and Visiting Faculty
+
+Tenure Track Faculty Evaluated in Years 2, 4 and 6 (versus annually)
+
+Clear Tenure Standards and Evaluation Procedures Developed
+
+New Procedures for Initial Appointment with Tenure Developed 
+
+Clear Promotion to Full Professor Standards and Evaluation Procedures Developed
+
+New Evaluation for Merit Salary Increments
+
+Updated Confidentiality of the Evaluation System Policy
+
+
+
+
+												3.10: Faculty Professional Development
+
+Updated Sabbatical Leave Policy
+
+Updated Special Released Time for Scholarly Production Policy
+
+Updated Retraining Leave Policy
+
+Updated Academic Leave Policy
+
+New Individual Professional Development Accounts Policy
+
+												3.12: Faculty Compensation, Benefits and Non-Professional Development Leaves
+
+												3.12.1: Faculty Compensation
+
+New Faculty Salary Administration Policy
+
+New Salary Ranges for Initial Appointment Policy (salary ranges by rank & discipline)
+
+												3.12.2: Faculty Benefits
+
+Current Benefit Text Stricken and Replaced with Link to OWU’s HR Benefit Webpage
+
+Statement on Retirement Policy Stricken
+
+												3.12.3: Faculty Leaves
+
+Faculty Parental Leave Policy
+
+Current Family or Exceptional Circumstances Policy Stricken & Replaced with a Family and Medical Leave Policy
+
+New Short-Term Illness and Emergencies Policy
+
+New Extended Unpaid Personal Leave of Absence Policy
+
+												
+
+
+
+
+												3.13: Separation from Service
+
+												3.13.1: Resignation
+
+New Faculty Resignation Policy
+
+3.13.2: Retirement Policy
+
+New Faculty Retirement Policy
+
+3.13.3: Non-Renewal Policy
+
+Updated Nonrenewal of Appointment Policy
+
+3.13.4: Policies and Procedures Governing Dismissal for Cause
+
+Adequate Cause More Thoroughly Defined
+
+Amended Salary for Faculty Members Dismissed for Cause Clause
+
+Other Procedures Amended to Reflect Common Best Practices
+
+3.13.5: Policies and Procedures Governing Imposition of Sanctions Other than Dismissal for Cause
+
+Amended the University’s Policy Addressing the Imposition of Sanctions Other Than Dismissal 
+
+3.13.6: Terminations
+
+Revised Termination Due to Disability Section to Align with the ADA
+
+New Elimination of Faculty Positions Due to Financial Exigency Policy
+
+FHRT Added AAUP Financial Exigency Policy
+
+New Termination Due to Program or Department Discontinuance Due to Educational Decisions Policy
+
+												3.14: Faculty Appeals and Grievances
+
+New General Faculty Grievances Policy
+
+												
+
+
+
+
+												Chapter Four – Part-time Faculty Personnel Policies
+
+												4.1: Academic Titles for Part-time Faculty
+
+New Section Defining Part-time Faculty and Associated Academic Titles (i.e., Part-time Instructor, Part-time Lecturer, Part-time Senior Lecturer).
+
+												4.2: Recruitment and Initial Appointment of Part-time Faculty
+
+New Section Addressing Part-time Faculty Recruitment and Appointment, Rights and Privileges, and Contractual Duties and Responsibilities
+
+4.3: Terms of Part-time Faculty Appointments
+
+												4.3.1: Part-time Instructors
+
+Amended Current Part-time Evaluation and Promotion Policies
+
+												4.3.2: Part-time Lecturers
+
+Amended Current Part-time Lecturer Evaluation and Promotion Policies
+
+Removed Continuity and Requests for Leave Policy
+
+												4.3.3: Senior Lecturers
+
+Amended Current Part-time Lecturer Evaluation and Promotion Policies
+
+Removed Continuity and Requests for Leave Policy
+
+Removed Paid One-Semester Leave Policy
+
+Removed Tuition Remission Benefit Reference
+
+												Appeals Procedures for Part-time Faculty
+
+Removed Appeals Policy (Part-time Faculty Appointments Expire at the End of the Contract Term and renewal is Contingent Upon Curricular Need).
+
+												
+
+
+
+
+												Chapter Five – Allocation and Review of Faculty Positions
+
+												5.2: Authorization of Full-Time Faculty Positions
+
+												5.2.1: Initial Authorization of Positions
+
+Amended Policy to Include Provost Participation
+
+												5.2.2: Re-authorization of Vacant Positions
+
+Section Amended by APAC 
+
+5.2.3: Guidelines for Review and Allocation of Full-time Faculty Positions
+
+Section Amended by APAC 
+
+
+
+
+
+Chapter VI - Amendments to the Faculty Handbook and Sanction of the Board of Trustees
+
+New Amendment to the Faculty Handbook Policy
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com</s>"
+"<s>[INST] KU Evidence Matrix.txt [/INST] KU Benchmarks Rubric: Evidence Matrix, by Teaching Dimension and Source
+
+
+
+Source: 
+
+Instructor (Portfolio Materials)
+
+Peer or Observers
+
+Students
+
+
+
+
+
+Teaching Dimension:
+
+C.V.
+
+Syllabi
+
+Sample course materials
+
+Representation of student work and  student learning
+
+Reflection
+
+Interview/ dialogue with Instructor
+
+Class Observation
+
+Review of student products/ material
+
+COPUS or other Observation Tool
+
+Student Ratings and Comments
+
+Letters from Students
+
+Goals, content, and alignment
+
+What are students expected to learn from the courses taught? Are course goals appropriately challenging? Does content align with curriculum and represent diverse perspectives?
+
+
+
+x
+
+x
+
+
+
+x
+
+x
+
+x
+
+x
+
+
+
+x
+
+x
+
+Teaching practices
+
+How is in-class and out-of-class time used? What assignments, assessments, and learning activities are implemented to help students learn? Are students engaged in the learning process?
+
+
+
+x
+
+x
+
+
+
+x
+
+x
+
+x
+
+x
+
+x
+
+x
+
+x
+
+Achievement of learning outcomes
+
+What impact do these courses have on learners? What is the evidence for student learning? Are there efforts to make achievement equitable?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+x
+
+x
+
+x
+
+
+
+x
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Classroom climate 
+
+What sort of climate for learning does the instructor create? What are students’ views of their learning experience and how has this informed the instructor’s teaching?
+
+
+
+x
+
+
+
+
+
+x
+
+
+
+x
+
+
+
+
+
+x
+
+x
+
+Reflection and iterative growth
+
+How has the instructor’s teaching changed over time? How has this been informed by evidence of student learning?
+
+
+
+x
+
+x
+
+x
+
+x
+
+x
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Mentoring & advising
+
+How effectively has the instructor worked individually with UG or graduate students?
+
+x
+
+(Student awards, achievements)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+x
+
+x
+
+
+
+x
+
+
+
+
+
+x
+
+Involvement in teaching service, scholarship, or community
+
+In what ways has the instructor contributed to the broader teaching community, both on and off campus?
+
+x 
+
+(participation in teaching & learning committees)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+x
+
+x
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+   For summative evaluation, evidence from two or more sources should be used to evaluate dimension. 
+
+   See the KU CTE website for more details about what to look for in a CV, syllabus, or reflection. https://cte.ku.edu/representing-teaching</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Leave of Absences and Benefits.txt [/INST] Leave of Absences and Benefits
+
+
+
+Pacific Lutheran
+
+The faculty shall through the president recommend to the BOT policies for the granting sabbatical leaves and leaves of absence other than sabbatical leaves.
+
+
+
+U of Pacific
+
+Unless otherwise noted, the policies in this chapter are approved by the Administration after notice to and appropriate consultation with the Academic Council. 
+
+Valpo
+
+Valparaiso University provides a variety of benefits to its employees including retirement benefits, insurance and tuition remission/exchange. The Board of Directors of the Lutheran University Association, Inc. d/b/a Valparaiso University reserves to itself and in its sole discretion the right to terminate or amend at any time, with or without cause, any of these employee welfare benefit plans established and maintained by Valparaiso University. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Wartburg
+
+
+
+2.9.1 Compensation 
+
+2.9.1.1 Salary Administration 
+
+Salary administration for academic faculty shall be developed in accordance with the following guidelines: 
+
+The Board of Regents establishes the percentage of the College budget to be used for salaries. The Board bases its decision on the recommendation of the College President, who consults with the President Budget Advisory Council in developing a proposal for salary adjustments and/or increases. 
+
+A method for distributing the salary pool dollars (based on the Board's established percentage) shall be developed by the Dean of the Faculty in consultation with the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure Committee; it shall take into consideration across-the-board increases, promotion increases, equity adjustments, and increases in the Personal Development Fund. This method of distribution shall be established and recommended to the President on or before March 1. The President makes the final decision on salary distribution. 
+
+On or before December 15 of each year, the Dean of the Faculty shall make available to the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure Committee a summary of full-time ranked faculty salaries for the current academic year; at minimum, this summary shall identify the range and median salary of faculty at each rank. 
+
+2.9.1.2 Payroll Period 
+
+Salary payments are made on the twentieth (20th) day of each month on a twelve-month basis. Payment for full-time faculty members begins in September and concludes in August. 
+
+.9.1.4 Per Course Rate of Compensation 
+
+The per course rate of compensation for part-time, overload, and summer school teaching shall be determined annually by the Dean of the Faculty in consultation with the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure Committee, and recommended to the President for approval. This per course rate for the next fiscal year shall be announced on or before March 15. Per course rates may vary depending upon contract status, so long as tenure-track, and tenured faculty do not receive a lower rate than titled faculty. 
+
+2.9.1.4.1 Summer Teaching 
+
+Summer teaching contracts shall be term contracts with compensation based on the announced per course rate. 
+
+2.9.1.5 Salary Guidelines for Initial Appointment 
+
+2.9.1.5.1 Full-time Academic Faculty 
+
+Guidelines for starting salaries for full-time academic faculty shall be established by the Dean of the Faculty in consultation with the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure Committee. These guidelines shall be based on examination of recent national salary data from institutions similar to Wartburg College for various ranks and disciplines; such data are typically reported by the College and University Personnel Association (CUPA), AAUP, and other similar agencies. The Dean of the Faculty recommends to the President initial salary of appointees; the President gives final approval. 
+
+2.9.1.5.2 Faculty Changing from Administrative to Academic Contract 
+
+Faculty employed initially on an administrative contract who change contract status in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.1.2.2 shall receive salary commensurate with their faculty peers who have not held administrative appointments. Other qualifications such as academic rank and previous experience shall also be taken into consideration when making salary decisions for these faculty. 
+
+2.9.1.6 Salary Guidelines for Continuing Appointments 
+
+2.9.1.6.1 Salary Adjustment for Promotion in Rank 
+
+Faculty who are promoted in rank shall receive an increase in their base salary beginning the year in which the promotion takes effect. This increase in base salary is separate from, and in addition to, salary- benefit adjustment(s) accorded to all equivalently ranked faculty members of the college during that academic year. For promotion to associate professor, by academic year 2018-2019 this increase shall be equal to 5.0% of the median salary of the associate professor rank, based upon salary data for the academic year in which the promotion is approved. For promotion to full professor, by academic year 2019-2020 this increase shall be equal to 8.5% of the median salary of the full professor rank, based upon salary data for the academic year in which the promotion is approved. 
+
+2.9.1.6.2 Increases for Completion of the Doctoral Degree 
+
+Full-time ranked faculty shall receive a base salary increase of $1,000 upon completion of the initial doctoral degree in a field directly related to their area of responsibility. The doctorate must be an earned doctorate from an accredited institution, or an acceptable foreign equivalent. 
+
+2.9.1.6.3 Equity Adjustments 
+
+The Dean of the Faculty, in consultation with the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure Committee, shall identify faculty whose salaries are judged to be substantially below those of faculty with similar rank, experience, and qualifications. Such judgment shall be based on comparison with both College and peer institution salary distribution information. Faculty so identified shall be recommended by the Dean for an equity adjustment; the President has final authority in awarding the adjustment. Equity adjustments become part of the base salary for faculty. 
+
+2.9.2 Benefits 
+
+The information included in this Faculty Handbook regarding College-sponsored benefits is a general overview of benefits offered at Wartburg College. Faculty should consult the Human Resources Office, the summary plan descriptions, and the plan documents to determine the terms and conditions of a specific benefit plan. Faculty shall be responsible for seeking necessary information and choosing appropriate benefit plans in accordance with required timelines. The President’s Budget Advisory Council shall be responsible for reviewing the College’s benefits package annually; such a review is to assure that appropriate changes and updates are considered by the College. Annually, the College Board of Regents reviews the benefits package as an integral part of approving the College budget. 
+
+Current College-sponsored benefits (Section 2.9.2.2) and the percent contribution levels of the college and faculty member are summarized in the Benefits Exhibit. This exhibit is provided by the Human Resources Office and is updated each August. Any proposed change(s) to the benefits listed in column 1, 3 or 4 of this Benefits Exhibit shall be submitted by the College President to the Faculty Council for its review and recommendation(s) to the faculty for action. In submitting the proposed change to the Faculty Council, the President shall specify a reasonable time period (not less than 20 class days) within which the faculty response to the proposed change(s) shall be communicated to the President by Faculty Council. The President's final action with respect to the proposed benefits change(s) shall occur after the faculty response is received from Faculty Council or the time period expires. 
+
+2.9.2.1 Statutory Benefits 
+
+The College provides statutory benefits to academic faculty, including Workers' Compensation, Social Security (in accordance with the Federal Insurance Contributions Act, FICA), unemployment insurance, and health care continuation. The Human Resources Office shall make available to faculty information that describes mandatory benefits and shall notify faculty of any substantial modifications in coverage or options for enrollment. 
+
+2.9.2.2 College-sponsored Benefits 
+
+Full-time academic faculty shall receive the following College-sponsored benefits: retirement, major medical/dental, long term disability, accidental death or dismemberment, life insurance, travel and liability insurance, and tuition remission. The Human Resources Office shall make available to faculty information that describes current College-sponsored benefits and shall notify faculty of any substantial modifications in coverage or options for enrollment. 
+
+Information regarding additional benefits for ordained clergy shall be available from the Human Resources Office. 
+
+.9.3 Leaves 
+
+Faculty anticipating a leave for any reason shall consult with the Dean of the Faculty and their Department Chair at the earliest possible date. Leaves related to Faculty Development are described in Section 2.8. 
+
+Within reason, the date of return to service for faculty on any type of extended leave should coincide with the beginning of a term or a time which minimizes interference with the substitute teaching arrangements made. The date of return from leave shall be negotiated with the Dean of the Faculty, in consultation with the appropriate Department Chair. Each Department Chair shall be responsible for establishing a procedure by which department faculty report leave days to the Dean of the Faculty who will forward this information to the Human Resources office (HRO). 
+
+Once a faculty member has negotiated a leave, it may also be necessary to consult with the HRO, especially if the leave involves the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), short-term disability, or long- term disability. The HRO will maintain a record of leaves and assist faculty in completing the necessary paper work.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Lobbying.txt [/INST] Federal, State, and Local Elected Officials Reporting of Lobbying Activities, Expenditures and Gifts
+
+Scope
+
+Faculty and staff
+
+Policy Statement
+
+Federal and state laws govern the use of funds that can be spent on lobbying activities for all levels of government. These laws require the University to register as a lobbying entity and report lobbying activities as well as expenditures. Any violations of these laws could lead to significant penalties for the University ranging from large fines to criminal prosecution.
+
+The Office of Government and Community Relations is the University’s designated point-of-contact for federal, state, and local lobbying and must be contacted and informed of any planned activities that could be interpreted as lobbying by faculty, staff, and/or students prior to taking any action on behalf of the University.
+
+Federal Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995, amended 2007
+
+The University is required to comply with the Federal Lobbying Disclosure Act. On September 14, 2007 President Bush signed in to law the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007, which amends the Lobby Disclosure Act of 1995. The new Act prohibits federal officials and their staff from accepting gifts, including any gratuity, favor, discount, entertainment, hospitality, forbearance, or other item having monetary value. There are a few exceptions, but to ensure Syracuse University is in compliance with federal law, SU employees must consult with the Associate Vice President of Government and Community Relations before offering any gift, meal, goods, or services to a federal official or his/her staff.
+
+Under the guidelines of provisions known as the “Byrd Amendment” [31 U.S. C §1352 (b)], federal grantees, contractors, those with cooperative agreements with the federal government, are prohibited by law from using federal monies to lobby the Congress, federal agencies or their employees with respect to the awarding of specific contracts and grants. Researchers should consult the Vice President for Research and the Associate Vice President of Government and Community Relations before contacts with Congress or federal agencies are made.
+
+Federal Reporting
+Employees must disclose to the Office of Government and Community Relations on a quarterly basis all costs associated with any federal lobbying activities engaged in on behalf of Syracuse University, including but not limited to salary, benefits, travel, and printing. Federal lobbying activity is defined as lobbying contacts and any efforts in support of such contacts including preparation or planning activities, research and other background work that is intended, at the time of its preparation, for use in coordinating with the lobbying activities of others.
+
+Federal lobbying contact is defined as any oral, written, or electronic communication to a Member of Congress; congressional staff; senior federal executive branch employees, such as the President, Vice President, or Cabinet officials regarding the formulation, modification, or adoption of federal legislation; the administration or execution of a federal program or policy; or formulation, modification, or adoption of a federal rule, regulation, executive order, policy or position of the U.S. Government.
+
+Employees must report their lobbying activities and the related costs on the Federal Relations Reporting Form and submit to the Office of Government and Community Relations each calendar year no later than the 10th day of the month following the quarterly period according to the following chart.
+
+Federal Reporting Period
+
+Form due to Government and Community Relations
+
+January 1 to March 31
+
+April 10
+
+April 1 to June 30
+
+July 10
+
+July 1 to September 30
+
+October 10
+
+October 1 to December 31
+
+January 10
+
+New York State Lobbying Act
+
+The New York State Lobbying Act (Chapter 1040, Laws of 1981 and as subsequently amended) requires registration and regular reporting on lobbying activities to the New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics (JCOPE) for both state and local government levels. Under this act, lobbying activities are defined as any activity conducted with the intent to influence the passage or defeat of legislation; the introduction or intended introduction of legislation; the approval or disapproval of legislation by the governor; the adoption or rejection of any rule or regulation having the force and effect of law by a state agency; the outcome of any rate-making proceeding by a state agency; the passage or defeat of any local law, ordinance, or any regulation by any municipality; or adoption or rejection of any rule or regulation having the force and effect of local law, ordinance or regulation of any rate-making procedure by any municipality. The Lobbying Act also provides that lobbying on procurement contracts, Executive Orders and Tribal-State agreements are subject to enforcement by the New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics.
+
+State Reporting
+Employees must disclose to the Office of Government and Community Relations on a bi-monthly basis all costs associated with any state or local lobbying activity engaged in on behalf of Syracuse University, including but not limited to salary, benefits, travel, and printing.
+
+State lobbying activity is defined, in part, as any attempt to influence the passage or defeat of any local or state law, ordinance, resolution or regulation. This includes, but is not limited to, any oral, written or electronic communications to public officials such as the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Comptroller, Attorney General, Members of the State Legislature, state officers and employees, officers and employees of the legislature and municipal officers and employees, paid or unpaid, and any efforts in support of such contacts including preparation or planning activities, research and other background work that is intended, at the time of its preparation, for use in coordinating with the lobbying activities of others to public officials.
+
+Employees must report their lobbying activities and the related costs on the State Relations Reporting Form and submit to the Office of Government and Community Relations each calendar year no later than the 5th day of the month following the bi-monthly period according to the following chart.
+
+State Reporting Period
+
+Form due to Government and Community Relations
+
+January 1 to February 28/29
+
+March 5
+
+March 1 to April 30
+
+May 5
+
+May 1 to June 30
+
+July 5
+
+July 1 to August 31
+
+September 5
+
+September 1 to October 31
+
+November 5
+
+November 1 to December 31
+
+January 5
+
+New York State Public Employees Ethics Reform Act
+
+The 2007 Public Employee Ethics Reform Act and Public Integrity Reform Act of 2011 amended the New York State Lobbying Act and established new ethics and lobbying standards that in part:
+
+Redefine “gift” as anything of “more than nominal value in any form including, but not limited to money, service, loan, travel, lodging, meals, refreshment, entertainment, discount, forbearance or promise, having a monetary value.” This supersedes the former definition of anything of value greater than $75.00.
+
+Prohibit any lobbying entity or its personnel from offering or giving any gift of any value “unless under the circumstances it is not reasonable to infer that the gift was intended to influence” the elected officials.
+
+Tickets to University Sporting and Other Events
+
+To ensure compliance with lobbying laws, gifts of tickets to University sporting and other events are prohibited. All federal, state and local employees and elected officials must purchase tickets/parking passes for any sporting/entertainment events sponsored by the University. Payment must be made at the time the ticket/pass is received, not reimbursed at a later date.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Federal Lobbying -- General The University is required to comply with the Federal Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 and the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007. Per statutory requirements, the University has registered to conduct lobbying activities at the federal level, and must report activities of those personnel considered lobbyists under federal law. A “lobbyist” under federal law is an employee whose services include more than one lobbying contact and whose lobbying activities constitute 20 percent or more of his or her service time on behalf of the University during any three month period. A “lobbying contact” under federal law is defined as any oral, written, or electronic communication to a “covered executive branch official” or a “covered legislative branch official” regarding (1) the formulation, modification, or adoption of federal legislation (including legislative proposals), federal rules, regulations, Executive Orders or any other program, policy or position of the federal government; (2) the administration or execution of a federal program or policy (including the negotiation, award or administration of a federal contract, grant, loan, permit or license); or (3) the nomination or confirmation of a person for a position subject to confirmation by the United States Senate. The term “covered executive branch official” includes (1) the President, (2) the Vice President, (3) any officer or employee in the Executive Office of the President, (4) any officer or employee serving in a position in level I, II, III, IV, or V of the Executive Schedule, as 
+
+designated by statute or Executive Order, (5) any member of the uniformed services whose pay grade is at or above O-7 under 37 U.S.C. § 201, and (6) any officer or employee serving in a position of a confidential, policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating character described in 5 U.S.C. § 7511(b)(2)(B). The term “covered legislative branch official” includes (1) a Member of Congress, (2) an elected officer of either House of Congress, (3) any employee of (a) a Member of Congress, (b) a committee of either House of Congress, (c) the leadership staff of either House of Congress, (d) a joint committee of Congress, or (e) a working group or caucus organized to provide legislative services to Members of Congress, and (4) any other legislative branch employee serving in a policy making position. Federal “lobbying activity” is defined as lobbying contacts and efforts in support of such contacts, including preparation or planning activities, research, and other background work that is intended, at the time of its performance, for use in such contacts or efforts, or coordinating with the lobbying activities of others. Any University employee participating in or supporting lobbying activities described above shall account for his or her time expended on specific legislative and regulatory issues, and any expenditures incurred in this regard, in such detail as required by forms supplied by the Director, Government Relations. The information to be reported includes, but is not limited to, salaries of employees engaging in or supporting lobbying activities, benefits, travel, printing and other administrative costs. Employees must send the reports to the Office of Government Relations on or before the Wednesday after the week during which the reportable activities occurred. Federal Grant Lobbying
+
+Under the statutory provisions known as the ""Byrd Amendment"" [31 U.S.C. § 1352(b)], recipients of federal contracts, grants, and loans, as well as those with cooperative agreements with the federal government, are prohibited from using federal monies to lobby Congress and federal agencies, or their respective employees, with respect to the award, making, entering, extension, renewal or modification of any federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. Any University employee participating in or supporting the University’s lobbying activities to secure federal grants or contracts shall account for his or her time expended on specific grants or contracts, and any expenditures incurred in this regard, in such detail as required by forms supplied by the Director, Government Relations. The information to be reported includes, but is not limited to, salaries of employees engaging in or supporting lobbying activities, benefits, travel, printing and other administrative costs. Employees must send the reports to the Office of Government Relations on or before the Wednesday after the week during which the reportable activities occurred.
+
+New York State and Local Lobbying Pursuant to the Public Integrity Reform Act of 2011, the New York State Lobbying Act of 1981 (as subsequently amended) and other state law, the University has registered to conduct lobbying activities. These activities are reported to the New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics for both state and local government levels. For purposes of this policy, local government levels include municipalities with 50,000 or more residents. Under New York law, the term ""lobbyist"" includes every person or organization retained, employed or designated by any client to engage in lobbying activities. Under New York law, the University is both a “lobbyist” and “client” because the University lobbies for itself. The term “lobbying activities” is defined as any attempt to influence (1) the passage or defeat of legislation, including the approval or disapproval of legislation by the Governor; (2) the adoption, issuance, rescission, modification or terms of a gubernatorial Executive Order; (3) the adoption or rejection of any rule or regulation having the force and effect of law by a state agency; (4) the outcome of any rate-making proceeding by a state agency; (5) the passage or defeat of any local law, ordinance, or any regulation by any municipality; (6) the adoption, issuance, rescission, modification or terms of an Executive Order issued by the chief executive officer of a municipality; (7) the adoption or rejection of any rule or regulation having the force and effect of local law, ordinance or regulation; or (8) the outcome of any rate-making procedure by any municipality. The New York Lobbying Act also provides that lobbying on procurement contracts, Executive Orders and Tribal-State agreements is subject to regulatory oversight and enforcement by the New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics.
+
+The term “attempt to influence” means any activity intended to support, oppose, modify, delay, expedite or otherwise affect any of the above actions, including but not limited to oral, written or electronic communications to the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Comptroller, Attorney General, Members of the State Legislature and their staffs, state officers and employees, and municipal officers and employees, paid or unpaid. Any University employee participating in or supporting the University’s lobbying activities described above shall account for his or her time expended on specific legislative and regulatory issues, and any expenditures incurred in this regard, in such detail as required by forms supplied by the Director, Government Relations. The information to be reported includes, but is not limited to, salaries of employees engaging in or supporting lobbying activities, benefits, travel, printing and other administrative costs. Employees must send the reports to the Office of Government Relations on or before the Wednesday after the week during which the reportable activities occurred.
+
+VI. Gifts to Public Officials Federal law prohibits federal officials and their staff from accepting gifts, including any gratuity, favor, discount, entertainment, hospitality, forbearance, or other item having monetary value. Accordingly, University employees may not offer such gifts to federal officials or their staffs. State law prohibits lobbyists from offering, and state officers and employees from accepting, gifts in excess of “nominal value,” including but not limited to money, services, loans, travel, lodging, meals, refreshments, entertainment, discounts, forbearances, or promises having a monetary value. Exceptions include political contributions, gifts based on personal relationships that are not intended to influence, as well as certain ceremonial items given at events where the official is appearing in his or her official capacity, promotional items, honorary degrees, and food and beverages valued at $15 or less. The rules for determining whether gifts fall within an available exception are technical and complex; accordingly, University employees may not offer gifts to state officers or employees without the prior approval of the President, Provost or Director, Government Relations. In cases where gifts are permitted, the expenses relating to those gifts must be ompiled and reported to the Director, Government Relations on or before the Wednesday after the week during which the gifts were provided.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Lori’s comments on complaint.dismissal sections 5.9.22.txt [/INST] 1
+
+Dismissal and Complaint/Grievance Policy Revisions
+
+Version 3 (2/24 Update)
+
+
+
+Executive Summary: Proposal to revise the Grievance and Dismissal processes in the Faculty Policies Handbook.  This proposal offers five shifts from current policy: 1) disentangle the dismissal and grievance processes; 2) clarify which elected faculty bodies hear and/or adjudicate dismissal and grievance proceedings; 3) incorporate AAUP guidelines and procedural protections in dismissal proceedings; 4) simplify the Complaint/Grievance processes such that the adjudicating committee can gather data and statements without the structure, demands and timeline of an evidentiary hearing, and 5) the creation of a new standing Complaints and Grievance Committee that will hear faculty complaints and grievances (the bar for grievable items has been lowered substantially).  Of these proposed changes, #1 is a matter of good governance policy, #2, #4, and #5 are merely streamlining and clarifying policies and structures that already exist, and #3 is incorporating the policy recommendation regarding academic freedom and tenure that have been considered the standard in higher education since 1968.    
+
+
+
+Context: The Faculty Affairs Committee would be slightly expanded (probably to 6 members) and would be the adjudicating body in the event of faculty dismissals.  The FAC would offer its professional recommendations on dismissal proceedings without its opinion being binding upon the President or Board of Regents.  This would not be a substantial departure from current practices: such faculty hearing committees already exist. In dismissal proceedings, the Faculty Policies Handbook (pg. 79) currently charges ART/FAC as an adjudicating committee: 
+
+
+
+Prior to the implementation of the dismissal, the data supporting the adequate cause for such action will be presented in writing to the ART Committee by the President or the President’s designee. If the ART Committee has engaged in post-tenure review of the faculty member and in monitoring a development plan, the Faculty Affairs Committee will serve as the initial review committee. The committee will obtain a written or oral statement from the faculty member (depending on which is preferred by the faculty member) with regard to the charges, and any other data the committee deems pertinent. The committee as a whole will consider the evidence and render an opinion. The opinion will be given to the faculty member and to the President without the opinion being binding upon the President.
+
+
+
+In addition to the ambiguity of the “development plan” language, there is also the notion that the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure committee is likely to be a party/witness to dismissal cases. Having it also function in an adjudicative capacity, in addition to the presence of the Provost on the ART committee, is procedurally problematic.  
+
+
+
+In the case of Grievance proceedings, the Faculty Policies Handbook (pg. 47) currently charges the Grievance Committee as a hearing committee: 
+
+
+
+The parties shall submit their evidence and witness lists to the Grievance Committee no later than seven calendar days prior to the hearing date. The Grievance Committee will cooperate with the grievant in securing witnesses and making available documentary and other evidence to the extent possible. The Grievance Committee shall promptly provide each party’s submitted evidence and witness lists to the other party. The committee may also request witnesses and documents that it believes would assist members in their deliberation. The Grievance Committee retains the right to exclude evidence if it determines it is irrelevant or prejudicial . . . The Grievance Committee will present its decision in writing within 15 business days of the hearing to the parties, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the President of the University . . . The President shall review the record and respond within 30 business days as to the final disposition of the grievance.
+
+
+
+The grievance proceedings, as currently written, define grievable actions too narrowly and are not sufficiently specific in their charges to the grievance committee and assume a “hearing structure” that is unnecessarily complex for the task.  Expanding the committee charge to hear what were formerly deemed “complaints,” and simplifying the fact-finding process, rightly situates an elected faculty body in a position of responsibility regarding faculty discipline whilst making clearer the relationship between the recommendations of the committee and the decision-making process and power of the university provost and president.
+
+
+
+
+
+Policy Proposals Below
+
+Dismissal is a severance action by which the University, for adequate cause, ends its employment relationship with members of the ranked faculty. Adequate cause for dismissal shall be based upon justifiable reasons (see 1.a below).  The burden of proof that adequate cause exists shall rest with the University.
+
+Dismissal Procedures (with minor modifications from AAUP Statement on Ac. Freedom and Tenure)
+
+a. Adequate cause for a dismissal will be related, directly and substantially, to the fitness of faculty members in their professional capacities as teachers or researchers. Dismissal will not be used to restrain faculty members in their exercise of academic freedom or other rights of American citizens.9
+
+Examples of conduct that may raise questions regarding faculty member’s fitness as a teacher or researcher include, but not necessarily limited to: 
+
+Failure to pass a “fitness of duty assessment” in cases where such an assessment is warranted?
+
+demonstrated professional incompetence or dishonesty in teaching or research;
+
+continued neglect of faculty responsibilities as set forth in this handbook despite oral and/or written warnings; 
+
+serious personal misconduct which substantially impairs the individual’s fulfillment of institutional responsibilities;
+
+deliberate and serious violation of the rights and freedom of fellow faculty members, administrators, or students; 
+
+conviction of any felony; 
+
+conviction of a crime directly related to the faculty member’s fitness to practice their profession; 
+
+theft or willful destruction of property;
+
+serious failure to follow the canons and professional ethics of one’s discipline and those set down in the “Professional Ethics and Relations” section of this handbook; 
+
+falsification of credentials and experience; 
+
+failure to meet the performance standards of the University as set forth in the “Faculty Responsibilities” section of this handbook after oral and written warnings; 
+
+sexual harassment or unlawful discrimination of a student, University employee, or member of the University community (e.g., volunteer, vendor, etc.).*  
+
+* Allegations of unlawful discrimination, harassment, and sexual and gender-based misconduct against a faculty member will be investigated and resolved pursuant to the Policy on Sexual Harassment Prohibited by Title IX, HR Policy 006 - Harassment, Discrimination, Biased Conduct and Retaliation Prohibition or the Freedom from Harassment Policy, as may be applicable.
+
+b. Steps Prior to Dismissal: Dismissal of a faculty member with continuous tenure, or with a probationary or other nontenured appointment before the end of the specified term, will be preceded by (1) discussions, including a documented history thereof, between the faculty member and appropriate administrative officers looking toward a mutual settlement (2) informal inquiry by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, which may, if it fails to effect an adjustment, determine whether in its opinion dismissal proceedings should be undertaken, without its opinion being binding upon the president; (3) a statement of charges, framed with reasonable particularity by the president or the president’s delegate.
+
+(1) The Dean’s Consultation with the Faculty Member 
+
+If the faculty member’s Dean has evidence that the faculty member has demonstrated or is demonstrating conduct that may constitute adequate cause for dismissal as specified above, then the Dean will meet with the faculty member to discuss the concerns and to consider the faculty member’s response.  If requested by the faculty member, the Dean will provide the faculty member with a written statement of concerns. 
+
+The Dean may request further investigation into the matter by other appropriate University personnel (i.e., human resources, Title IX Coordinator, etc.) before or after meeting with the faculty member. However, before moving beyond this stage in these procedures, the Dean will afford the faculty member a reasonable opportunity to respond to any information that the Dean believes would constitute adequate cause for dismissal and, if possible, arrive at a mutually agreeable settlement. 
+
+(2) Informal Consultation with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee 
+
+If the matter cannot be resolved through consultation with the faculty member and if the Dean believes that adequate cause for dismissal exists, the Dean forwards a recommendation for dismissal to the Provost. The Provost may meet with the faculty member, at the Provost’s discretion.  At any time, if the Provost and the faculty member reach a mutually agreeable settlement, the matter will be concluded. 
+
+If the Provost believes that the faculty member has demonstrated or is demonstrating conduct that may constitute adequate cause for dismissal and a mutual settlement is not possible, the Provost will request of the Chair of the Faculty Review Committee that the Faculty Senate Executive Committee informally and confidentially consider the evidence.  The faculty member will be notified of this action by the Provost. The Faculty Senate Executive Committee may recommend a settlement acceptable to both the faculty member and the Administration, administrative disciplinary actions short of dismissal, that no administrative action be taken, or that dismissal proceedings be initiated. 
+
+If the Faculty Senate Executive Committee recommends that dismissal proceedings be initiated or if the Provost, even after considering an alternative recommendation of the committee, determines that dismissal proceedings should be undertaken, action will be initiated under the procedures specified below.  
+
+After considering the recommendations of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, the Provost notifies in writing the faculty member:
+
+that no action will be taken and the matter is concluded, 
+
+that the Provost intends to impose sanctions short of dismissal (see Alternatives to Dismissal section), or 
+
+that the Provost intends to seek dismissal. 
+
+(3)	Statement of Charges
+
+If the Provost intends to seek the faculty member’s dismissal, the Provost will provide the faculty member with a written statement, framed with reasonable particularity, indicating the charges that provide grounds for the proposed dismissal action. At the same time, the Provost will inform the faculty member that a formal review hearing before the Faculty Affairs Committee will be initiated as specified below. 
+
+
+
+c. Referral to Faculty Affairs Committee: A dismissal, as defined in Regulation 1a, will be preceded by a statement of charges, and the individual concerned will have the right to be heard initially by the Faculty Affairs Committee.10 Members of the committee deeming themselves disqualified for bias or interest will remove themselves from the case, either at the request of the chair of the committee or on their own initiative. When assembling the Dismissal Panel from the membership of the Faculty Affairs Committee, each party to the dismissal will have a maximum of one challenge without stated cause.11  After recusals and removals, the remaining members who will be adjudicating the case will hereafter be referred to as the hearing committee or Dismissal Panel.  If there are not enough remaining members to form a panel the chair of the Faculty Affairs Committee will contact the Committee on Committees to request additional members, ideally selected from faculty in elected positions.
+
+(1) Suspension: Pending a final decision by the hearing committee, the faculty member will be suspended, or assigned to other duties in lieu of suspension, by the President (or designee?)only if immediate harm to the faculty member or others is threatened by continuance or the continued functioning of the faculty member in the position would substantially impair or disrupt the regular functions of the University. Before suspending a faculty member, pending an ultimate determination of the faculty member’s status through the institution’s hearing procedures, the administration President (or the President’s designee) will consult with the Provost and Faculty Affairs Committee concerning the propriety, the length, and the other conditions of the suspension. A suspension that is intended to be final is a dismissal and will be treated as such. Salary will continue during the period of the suspension.
+
+(2) The hearing committee may, with the consent of the parties concerned, hold joint prehearing meetings with the parties in order to (i) simplify the issues, (ii) effect stipulations of facts, (iii) provide for the exchange of documentary or other information, and (iv) achieve such other appropriate prehearing objectives as will make the hearing fair, effective, and expeditious.
+
+(3) Service of notice of hearing with specific charges in writing will be made at least twenty days prior to the hearing. The faculty member may waive a hearing or may respond to the charges in writing at any time before the hearing. If the faculty member waives a hearing, but denies the charges or asserts that the charges do not support a finding of adequate cause, the hearing committee will evaluate all available evidence and rest its recommendation upon the evidence in the record. If the faculty member fails to attend the review hearing without reasonable cause and does not deny the charges or assert that the charges do not support a finding of adequate cause, then the hearing will not take place, the chair of the hearing committee will refer the matter to the President for final disposition, and the faculty member will have waived all grievance rights pertaining to the dismissal action.
+
+(4) The hearing committee, in consultation with the President and the faculty member, will exercise its judgment as to whether the hearing should be public or private.
+
+(5) During the proceedings the faculty member will be permitted to have an academic adviser and counsel of the faculty member’s choice.  The President will appoint an administrator to present the case for dismissal. 
+
+(6) At the request of either party or the hearing committee, a representative of a responsible educational association will be permitted to attend the proceedings as an observer.
+
+(7) A verbatim record of the hearing or hearings will be taken, and a copy will be made available to the faculty member without cost, at the faculty member’s request.
+
+(8) The burden of proof that adequate cause exists rests with the institution and will be satisfied only by clear and convincing evidence in the record considered as a whole. Preponderance is the standard we use in student disciple; we will use the same standard with faculty.
+
+
+
+(9) The hearing committee will grant reasonable adjournments to enable either party to investigate evidence as to which a valid claim of surprise is made.
+
+(10) The faculty member will be afforded an opportunity to obtain necessary witnesses and documentary or other evidence. The administration will cooperate with the hearing committee in securing witnesses and in making available documentary and other evidence.
+
+(11) The faculty member and the administration will have the right to confront and cross-examine all witnesses. Where the witnesses cannot or will not appear, but the committee determines that the interests of justice require admission of their statements, the committee will identify the witnesses, disclose their statements, and, if possible, provide for interrogatories.
+
+(12) In the hearing of charges of incompetence, the testimony will include that of qualified faculty members from this or other institutions of higher education.
+
+(13) The hearing committee will not be bound by strict rules of legal evidence and may admit any evidence which is of probative value in determining the issues involved. Every possible effort will be made to obtain the most reliable evidence available.
+
+(14) The findings of fact and the decision will be based solely on the hearing record.
+
+(15) Except for such simple announcements as may be required, covering the time of the hearing and similar matters, public statements and publicity about the case by either the faculty member or administrative officers will be avoided so far as possible until the proceedings have been completed, including consideration by the governing board of the University. The president and the faculty member will be notified of the decision in writing and will be given a copy of the record of the hearing.
+
+(16) If the hearing committee concludes that adequate cause for dismissal has not been established by the evidence in the record, it will so report to the president. If the president rejects the report, the president will state the reasons for doing so, in writing, to the hearing committee and to the faculty member and provide an opportunity for response before transmitting the case to the governing board. If the hearing committee concludes that adequate cause for a dismissal has been established, but that an academic penalty less than dismissal would be more appropriate, it will so recommend, with supporting reasons.
+
+Alternative Text for Consideration
+
+Within [five (5) academic days of conclusion of the hearing, the Chair of the hearing committee will present to the President written findings of fact and recommendations as to the review of the faculty member's dismissal; copies must at the same time be sent to the faculty member and the Provost.
+
+The committee report must contain written findings of fact and a recommendation whether the dismissal for cause action was warranted in light of the documented evidence
+
+The committee’s written findings of fact and recommendation shall be based on a simple majority vote
+
+Any dissenting opinions will be included in the written findings of fact and recommendation
+
+President’s Independent Review and Decision
+
+Within five (5) academic days after receipt of the hearing committee’s findings and recommendations, the President, in light of the documented evidence and hearing record, will issue an independent written decision on the matter, with copies to the committee, the faculty member, and the Provost.
+
+If the President sustains the hearing committee recommendation that adequate cause to dismiss the faculty member does not exist, the matter will be concluded,
+
+If the President determines that additional consideration by the committee is necessary, the President will remand the case back to the committee with specific objections.
+
+If the President concludes that the administration has established adequate cause for a dismissal, but that a sanction(s) less than dismissal would be more appropriate, the sanction(s) and effective date of sanction(s) will be stated in the President’s letter with supporting reasons.
+
+If the President concludes that the administration has established adequate cause for a dismissal and agrees that dismissal is appropriate, the effective date of the dismissal will be stated in the President’s letter with supporting reasons.
+
+Action by the Governing Board
+
+If dismissal or other severe sanction is recommended, the president will, on request of the faculty member, transmit to the governing board the record of the case. The governing board’s review will be based on the record of the committee hearing, and it will provide opportunity for argument, oral or written or both, by the principals at the hearing or by their represen­tatives. The decision of the hearing committee will either be sustained or the proceedings returned to the committee with specific objections. The committee will then reconsider, taking into account the stated objec­tions and receiving new evidence, if necessary. The governing board will make a final decision only after study of the committee’s reconsideration.
+
+Procedures for Imposition of Sanctions other than Dismissal
+
+a. If the administration believes that the conduct of a faculty member, although not constituting adequate cause for dismissal, is sufficiently grave to justify imposition of a severe sanction, such as suspension from service for a stated period, the administration may institute a proceeding to impose such a severe sanction; the procedures outlined in “Dismissal Proceedings” herein will govern such a proceeding.
+
+b. If the administration believes that the conduct of a faculty member justifies imposition of a minor sanction, such as a reprimand, it will notify the faculty member of the basis of the proposed sanction and provide the faculty member with an opportunity to persuade the administration that the proposed sanction should not be imposed. A faculty member who believes that a major sanction has been incorrectly imposed under this paragraph, or that a minor sanction has been unjustly imposed, may, pursuant to Regulation 11, petition the faculty grievance committee for such action as may be appropriate.
+
+Terminal Salary or Notice
+
+If the appointment is terminated, the faculty member will receive salary or notice in accordance with the following schedule: at least three months, if the final decision is reached by March 1 (or three months prior to the expiration) of the first year of probationary ser­vice; at least six months, if the decision is reached by December 15 of the second year (or after nine months but prior to eighteen months) of probationary service; at least one year, if the decision is reached after eigh­teen months of probationary service or if the faculty member has tenure.12
+
+This provision for terminal notice or salary need not apply if the termination was for cause or in the event that there has been a finding that the conduct which justified dismissal involved moral turpitude. On the recommendation of the faculty hearing committee or the president, the governing board, in determining what, if any, payments will be made beyond the effective date of dismissal, may take into account the length and quality of service of the faculty member.
+
+Academic Freedom and Protection against Discrimination
+
+a. All members of the faculty, whether tenured or not, are entitled to academic freedom as set forth in the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, formulated by the Association of American Colleges and Universities and the American Association of University Professors.
+
+b. All members of the faculty, whether tenured or not, are entitled to protection against illegal or unconstitutional discrimination by the institution, or discrimination on a basis not demonstrably related to the faculty member’s professional performance, including but not limited to race, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation.
+
+Complaints of Violation of Academic Freedom or of Discrimination in Nonreappointment
+
+If a faculty member on probationary or other non­tenured appointment alleges that a decision against reappointment was based significantly on considerations that violate (a) academic freedom or (b) govern­ing policies on making appointments without prejudice with respect to race, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation, the allegation will be given preliminary consideration by the Faculty Affairs Committee, which will seek to settle the matter by informal methods. The allegation will be accompanied by a statement that the faculty member agrees to the presentation, for the consideration of the faculty committee, of such reasons and evidence as the institution may allege in support of its decision. If the difficulty is unresolved at this stage and if the committee so recommends, the matter will be heard in the manner set forth in “Dismissal Proceedings” above, except that the faculty member making the complaint is responsible for stating the grounds upon which the allegations are based and the burden of proof will rest upon the faculty member. If the faculty member succeeds in establishing a prima facie case, it is incumbent upon those who made the decision against reappointment to come forward with evidence in support of their decision. Statistical evidence of improper discrimination may be used in establishing a prima facie case.
+
+An allegation that that a decision against reappointment was based on unlawful discrimination will be referred to the Assistant Director of Human Resources or Title IX Coordinator to be investigated according to the provisions of Policy on Sexual Harassment Prohibited by Title IX, HR Policy 006 - Harassment, Discrimination, Biased Conduct and Retaliation Prohibition or the Freedom from Harassment Policy, as may be applicable.  Allegations of unlawful discrimination will be considered and resolved before the case is presented to the Faculty Affairs Committee. Any resolution reached via the applicable policy above on the basis of an investigation into charges of unlawful discrimination related to a proposed non-reappointment will be provided to the Faculty Affairs Committee if the case is presented to it. 
+
+Administrative Personnel
+
+The foregoing regulations apply to administrative personnel who hold academic rank, but only in their capacity as faculty members. Administrators who allege that a consideration that violates academic freedom or governing policies against improper discrimination, as stated in Regulation 6, significantly contributed to a decision to terminate their appoint­ment to an administrative post or not to reappoint them are entitled to the procedures set forth in Regulation 6.
+
+Political Activities of Faculty Members
+
+Faculty members, as citizens, are free to engage in political activities. Where necessary, leaves of absence may be given for the duration of an election cam­paign or a term of office, on timely application, and for a reasonable period of time. The terms of such leave of absence will be set forth in writing, and the leave will not affect unfavorably the tenure status of a faculty member, except that time spent on such leave will not count as probationary service unless otherwise agreed to.13
+
+Part-Time Faculty Appointments 
+
+a. After having been reappointed beyond an initial term, a part-time faculty member who is subsequently notified of nonreappointment will be advised upon request of the reasons that contributed to the decision. Upon the faculty member’s further request, the reasons will be confirmed in writing. The faculty member will be afforded opportunity for review of the deci­sion by the Faculty Affairs Committee].
+
+b. For part-time faculty members who have served for three or more terms within a span of three years, the following additional protections of academic due process apply:
+
+(1) Written notice of reappointment or non­reappointment will be issued no later than one month before the end of the existing appointment. If the notice of reappointment is to be conditioned, for example, on suffi­ciency of student enrollment or on financial considerations, the specific conditions will be stated with the issuance of the notice.
+
+(2) When the part-time faculty member is denied reappointment to an available assignment (one with substantially identical responsibilities assigned to another part-time faculty member with less service), if the nonreappointed faculty member alleges that the decision was based on inadequate consideration, the allegation will be subject to review by the Faculty Affairs Committee. If this body, while not providing judgment on the merits of the decision, finds that the consideration has been inadequate in any substantial respects, it will remand the matter for fur­ther consideration accordingly.15
+
+c. Prior to consideration of reappointment beyond a seventh year, part-time faculty members who have taught at least twelve courses or six terms within those seven years shall be provided a comprehensive review with the potential result of (1) appointment with part-time tenure [where such exists], (2) appointment with part-time con­tinuing service, or (3) nonreappointment. Those appointed with tenure shall be afforded the same procedural safeguards as full-time tenured faculty. Those offered additional appointment without tenure shall have continuing appoint­ments and shall not be replaced by part-time appointees with less service who are assigned substantially identical responsibilities without having been afforded the procedural safeguards associated with dismissal.
+
+Other Academic Staff 
+
+a. In no case will a member of the academic staff who is not otherwise protected by the preceding regulations that relate to dismissal proceedings be dismissed without having been provided with a statement of reasons and an opportunity to be heard before a duly constituted committee.20 (A dismissal is a termination before the end of the period of appointment.)
+
+b. With respect to the nonreappointment of a member of such academic staff who establishes a prima facie case to the satisfaction of a duly constituted committee that considerations that violate academic freedom, or of governing poli­cies against improper discrimination as stated in “Complaints of Violation of Academic Freedom or of Discrimination in Nonreappointment,” significantly contributed to the nonreappointment, the academic staff member will be given a statement of reasons by those responsible for the nonreappointment and an opportunity to be heard by the committee.
+
+Grievance Procedures
+
+
+a. Before pursuing a formal grievance procedure, if the grievant feels comfortable in doing so, they should appeal to the person or official body responsible for the actions to which the grievant has objection or to the immediate supervisor, if any, of that person or body to determine if the complaint or problem may be resolved without resorting to formal action. This would normally be the department chair, program director or the dean, and such a meeting, including suggested remedies and points of discussion, should be documented by both parties. If the complainant is not comfortable addressing it with an immediate supervisor, they may address the issue with the next highest administrator or supervisor.  Formal grievance procedures may be initiated when a complainant has been unsuccessful in resolving the matter informally. 
+
+
+
+b. If any faculty member alleges cause for grievance in any matter not covered by the procedures described in the foregoing regulations, the faculty member may petition the elected Faculty Grievance Committee for redress. Such grievable issues include, but are not limited to: 
+
+workload, 
+
+teaching assignments, 
+
+annual evaluation, 
+
+disputes among faculty members, 
+
+infringement of academic freedom, 
+
+disciplinary actions, 
+
+retaliation,
+
+ improper scheduling, 
+
+denial of sabbatical, 
+
+denial of reappointment, 
+
+denial of promotion, or 
+
+prejudicial denial of salary increases. 
+
+
+
+c. The faculty grievant will prepare a petition that sets forth in detail the nature of the grievance and shall state against whom the grievance is directed. It shall contain any data which the grievant deems pertinent to the case.  The grievance consists of a written appeal, and any supporting documentation, which is transmitted by the faculty member to the Grievance Committee and to the University Provost, or where the grievance is against the action of the University Provost or President, to the President.  The grievance petition should include the following:
+
+A clear statement of facts upon which the grievance is based, including an explanation of how the faculty member alleges he or she has been adversely affected and the specific relief requested
+
+An identification of the person(s) or the college or University policy or procedure considered responsible for the alleged adverse condition, action, or inaction upon which the grievance is based and an explanation of why the person(s) is considered responsible or why the college or University policy or procedure is considered improper
+
+d. Upon receiving a grievance petition, any member of the Grievance Committee should recuse themselves from the case if they have or could be perceived to have a bias or a conflict of interest.
+
+e. The Grievance Committee (absent any recused members) will decide whether the grievance merits further investigation. The submission of a petition will not automatically result in an investigation or detailed consideration of the grievance. If the Grievance Committee determines that a further investigation is not warranted, it shall report that finding to the grievant within thirty days of receipt of the grievance. If the Grievance Committee determines that further action is warranted, it will be provided with all relevant information and will seek, in consultation with the Provost, or where the grievance is against the action of the University Provost the President, to bring about a settlement of the issue. The Provost or President shall indicate in writing their proposed terms of settlement.
+
+f. If such a settlement is not possible or is inappropriate, the Grievance Committee Panel can request further information on the matters relevant to the grievance petition. Upon receipt of the statement of charges, the person(s) against whom, or representing the unit against which, the grievance is lodged shall, if they wish to reply, have twenty (20) business days to present a response to the charges to the chair of the Grievance Committee.  The response must be in writing, and should include any relevant information, argumentation, or evidence that bears upon the matters relevant to the grievance. 
+
+g. Within five (5) business days after receipt of the response to the statement of charges from the party(ies) against whom the grievance has been lodged, the chair of the Grievance Committee shall have prepared and distributed to the grievant and to each member of the committee a complete copy of the response.  The Grievance Committee shall, within twenty (20) days of receipt of the response, deliver its final recommendation and/or position to the faculty member and Provost, or if the Provost if party to the Grievance, to the University President.  
+
+Appeal to the President    Ordinarily the decision of the Provost shall be final and conclusive. However, an affected party may present a request, in writing, to the President within ten (10) business days after receipt of the Provost’s decision, asking to review the record of the process.  Within twenty (20) business days after receipt of a request from an affected party, the President will either affirm the decision of the Provost or make additional or different determinations. The decision of the President is final.
+
+Membership of the Grievance Committee: The Grievance Committee should be a standing committee, elected by the faculty from within its ranks, with the charge of representing and governing the business of the faculty. If, after recusals and removals there are not enough remaining members to assemble at least a 3-member panel, the Grievance Committee chair should contact the Committee on Committees chair to request the temporary appointment of additional members for the purpose of constituting a sufficient committee.  No officer of the administration will serve on the committee (including Deans, Associate Deans, and Assistant Deans). 
+
+Conflict of Interest and Recusal. Conflicts of Interest include situations in which an individual’s financial, professional, or other personal considerations may directly or indirectly affect, or have the appearance of affecting, an individual’s professional judgment in exercising any University duty or responsibility. In both grievance and dismissal proceedings members should recuse themselves from a grievance or dismissal proceeding if they deem themselves unable to exercise professional judgment. 
+
+Confidentiality: It is expected that confidentiality will be maintained in the conduct of the all committee deliberations. The mere suspicion of wrongdoing, even if totally unjustified, is potentially damaging. Information concerning any grievance and/or dismissal proceedings must be held in strictest confidence and should be available only to those with a right or a need to know.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Lynn University Annual IWPM Update Service Pro.txt [/INST] 3
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+28
+
+
+
+
+
+2
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+June 5, 2015
+
+
+
+
+
+Michael Antonello
+
+General Counsel
+
+Lynn University
+
+601 North Military Trail
+
+Boca Raton, FL 33431
+
+
+
+Dear Mike,
+
+
+
+We are pleased to offer this contract for Lynn University’s subscription to Stevens Strategy’s Annual Institution-wide Policy Manual Update Service.  Stevens Strategy, in June of each year, will gather from the University all new and updated policies.  All new and updated policies should be emailed by the University in Microsoft Word format to Stephen Lazarus, SLazarus@StevensStrategy.com by June 31 of each year.  We will also analyze changes in the University’s accreditor standards and higher education best practices as of June and suggest amendments to University policies based upon these changes.  We will send our suggested modifications to the University in the Microsoft Word template by July 15 in each year for your review and approval.  All of our document editing will utilize Microsoft’s “Track Changes” software.  The University will respond with a list of approved changes by July 31 each year also utilizing Microsoft word and Microsoft’s “Track Changes” software.  By the end of August in each year, we will send to you a completely updated Institution-Wide Policy Manual.   In 2015, the University will provide in mid-summer any new and updated policies since the Institution-Wide Policy Manual was completed by Stevens Strategy in 2010.
+
+
+
+This contract for Stevens Strategy’s Annual Institution-wide Policy Manual Update Service is for a five-year period.  The first payment of $10,000 is due upon the signing of this contract.  The college will be billed $10,000, plus inflation, annually beginning in June of 2016 and ending after the invoice submitted in June of 2019.  Payments are due on a net 15 day basis.  
+
+
+
+Should you find this contract acceptable, please sign two copies and return one to our headquarters at:  PO Box 72, 12 Island View, Grantham, NH 03753.  
+
+
+
+If you should wish to make this and all future payments by check, please forward the first payment of $10,000 to Stevens Strategy, LLC along with the signed contract.   
+
+
+
+If you should wish to make this and all future payments for this project by credit card, please fill out the following information ($10,000 plus a small transaction fee equal to our cost for the transaction will be added to your charges):
+
+
+
+I wish to make payment by: ____Visa ____MasterCard ____American Express
+
+
+
+
+
+	Credit Card Number: _____________________________
+
+	3 or 4 Digit Security Code: _____
+
+
+
+	Expiration Date: __/__
+
+
+
+	Print Name(s) on Card: _________________________________________________
+
+	____ Personal Card ____ Corporate Card
+
+
+
+	Cardholder Address:	________________________________________________
+
+				________________________________________________
+
+
+
+If you should wish to make this and all future payments by wire, please wire the first payment of $10,000 as follows:
+
+
+
+Stevens Strategy, LLC
+
+PO Box 72
+
+Grantham, NH 03753
+
+
+
+Bank:  Lake Sunapee Bank
+
+9 Main Street
+
+Newport, New Hampshire
+
+Acct#: 8236782210
+
+ABA#:  211770200
+
+
+
+We are exceptionally good at this work.  Our clients consistently give our work high ratings, and they also rate very highly the value of our work compared to the price for our services.  
+
+
+
+We will exceed your expectations.
+
+
+
+
+
+Offered for:						Accepted for:
+
+Stevens Strategy®, LLC					Lynn University
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+_________________________				__________________________
+
+John A. Stevens						Michael Antonello
+
+President						General Counsel
+
+
+
+
+Attachment One, Service Portfolio:
+
+Stevens Strategy offers an array of strategic management consulting services to the leaders of colleges, universities and schools.  
+
+
+
+Strategic Planning
+
+
+
+Effective strategic planning is the lynchpin for successful management of educational institutions in our rapidly-changing world.  The Stevens Strategy 5-phased strategic planning process has been proven successful at numerous colleges, universities and schools, whether they are large or small, public or independent.  
+
+
+
+Our process encourages the president and board to lead their institution in developing its vision and strategy, yet it also provides a process that allows the whole campus community—its faculty, staff, students, alumni and others—to take ownership of the plan through extensive involvement in its development.  The consistent achievement of both of these objectives (executive leadership and broad ownership) while producing a sound and compelling strategic plan is a feat that distinguishes the Stevens Strategy process.  
+
+
+
+The five strategic planning phases include:
+
+
+
+I. 	 Process Design
+
+II. 	 Responses to Strategic Issues
+
+III.   Strategic Agenda Development
+
+IV.	 Operational Planning
+
+V.	 Implementation
+
+
+
+Strategic Governance
+
+
+
+Governing your institution strategically starts at the top of the organization...and the bottom… and everywhere else.  We can help your Board learn to govern strategically, focusing on high level policy and the measurement of key areas of institutional performance.  And we can work with your whole institution to determine what internal governance and management structures and systems for collaboration, communication, and decision-making will serve it most effectively.  We help boards of trustees, senior administrators, faculty and staff understand their domains of authority and roles in a sound system of shared governance.  Our experienced consultants can help your institution improve its capacity for making big strategic decisions effectively and quickly, as required by a rapidly-changing marketplace.
+
+
+
+Focused Strategic Analysis
+
+ 
+
+In addition to comprehensive strategic planning, we work closely with our clients in providing a variety of strategic analyses that focus on selected areas within the institution, specific issues or unique planning scenarios.  We apply the principles of our comprehensive strategic planning process to particular institutional needs to enable institutional leadership to evaluate the environment, think strategically and make significant decisions about the future with confidence and alacrity.  These projects include:
+
+ 
+
+Strategic Mission Review
+
+ 
+
+We lead institutions through the process of reconsideration of basic elements of their mission, helping them to determine the answers to critical questions: Should they provide co-educational or single-sex educational programming? Should they remain or become a liberal arts or comprehensive college or university, or should they merge with another institution?  We help the whole campus community—board, executive team, faculty, staff, students and alumni—work together to determine and share ownership of the course that will best allow the institution to sustain its mission and thrive in the future.
+
+ 
+
+Programs and Resource Optimization (PRO)
+
+ 
+
+Stevens Strategy has developed Programs and Resource Optimization (PRO), a new transformational academic program review process.  PRO is an analytical review of academic programs that engages the institution and involves faculty, staff, alumni and trustees.  The academic program review process has four key analytic components: Mission-Centeredness, Quality, Marketability, and Responsibility Center Data-based Analysis.  Each academic program is reviewed and measured based upon Mission, Quality, Marketability, and Net Income and ranked within three tiers from extremely successful to extremely unsuccessful.  With the analytical output of PRO, institutions can shift resources and develop goals that optimize academic program offerings and strategically manage change.  These findings can drive transformational decisions that result in significant shifts in institutional quality and financial performance.
+
+ 
+
+Strategic Organizational Review
+
+ 
+
+Are your key organizational units operating efficiently and effectively?  How do you know if you are getting the most from your resources, whether you are taking appropriate advantage of the latest technology, or if there are better ways to deliver institutional services?  We can help your institution to review processes, analyze expected and realized results, and assess customer satisfaction.  Then, based on these findings, we can help you to develop and implement changes to increase your organizational effectiveness and efficiency.  With major change efforts such as process redesign or organizational restructuring, we work closely with your staff to ensure that those who will be most affected by changes in the work environment are deeply involved in the process of analysis, assessment, and work redesign.  
+
+ 
+
+Candidate Identification Search
+
+ 
+
+Our Candidate Identification Search process focuses on providing just back-room search support—securing qualified candidates for our clients in an expedited fashion and costing about half as much as a traditional search process.  Unlike a traditional search, the client determines the job description, job classification and desired salary range for the open position, manages its internal search decision-making process, conducts on its own off-site or campus visits with semi-finalists and finalists, addresses candidate negotiations and is responsible for the appointment process.  By taking institutional ownership of these elements of the search process and relying on Stevens Strategy for back-room search support, considerable savings are realized.
+
+ 
+
+Accelerated or Abridged Planning
+
+ 
+
+In cases where significant planning efforts have already been initiated but require expert input and/or guidance to move forward or where time or resource constraints make the full strategic planning process impractical, we can introduce an abridged version of our traditional planning process to help your institution achieve success.  We can also focus our efforts on aspects of one of our time-tested phases of strategic planning, like strategic issue identification or operational planning.
+
+
+
+Strategic Enrollment Management, including Survey Research
+
+ 
+
+We guide institutions though the consideration of what their markets for students should be, how they should position and price themselves in those markets, what the quality, size and mix of their student body should be, and what they should do to recruit and retain that student body.  We conduct a thorough program and organizational evaluation and develop with you a research plan that relies upon internal and market-based focused group discussions and random sample surveys to determine student satisfaction with your current programs and how these programs and new ones might appeal to the marketplace.  Typically we work with a cross-functional team to develop an enrollment management plan based upon our evaluation and the results of our research.
+
+ 
+
+Strategic Infrastructure Review
+
+ 
+
+We help institutions determine how their physical campus should be developed and physical spaces should be allocated to achieve their mission; what mechanisms for planning, resource allocation, and delivering quality services will enable them to achieve their vision; and what uses of technology, in and out of the classroom, by faculty and administrators, and across programs and sites, will best enable them to deliver services and programs that meet the needs of their stakeholders and support their mission.
+
+ 
+
+Strategic Technology Assessment and Implementation
+
+ 
+
+Change is difficult and technology can be confusing—together they can bring an institution to its knees.  We have the people, the expertise, and the implementation processes to bring your systems on-line successfully and with as little disruption as possible.  We can help you assess which administrative computer system is best for your institution, when you should upgrade, what features are most important for you, and how much can you afford.  We can help your institution address these key questions during the all-important systems selection process.  Then we can manage the implementation of your selected information systems smoothly, efficiently, and in the context of your institutional culture and needs.
+
+ 
+
+Compensation System and Salary Equity Analyses
+
+ 
+
+Our compensation and equity studies help our clients determine the competitive rates of pay at peer higher education institutions.  The studies serve to provide timely information regarding compensation programs—including detailed information related to wages, salaries and employee benefits—offered to faculty and administrative personnel at comparable higher education institutions.  We also provide strategies for simplifying an institution’s employee classification and organizational systems as part of this product.  
+
+
+
+Regional Workforce Analysis
+
+ 
+
+Our Regional Workforce Analysis service identifies those industries in your institution’s state or region that are critical to the economy; determines through a tested process realistic predictions of each industry’s labor needs and the gap between supply and demand in these areas of need; and then develops a plan for your institution or system of institutions to fill the gap.
+
+
+
+
+
+Financial Analysis and Planning
+
+
+
+Through financial planning, we guide you in the preparation of comprehensive plans for financial operations, reporting systems, benchmarking and other methods to manage your finances more effectively.  Our Financial Planning Model predicts institutional income and expense over periods of five years.  It is a fixed and variable income/cost model that is designed to respond to all the relevant financial planning assumptions at your campus.  We design and test the model, using your historical audited financial information.  Our Revenue Center Analysis System identifies the divisions or schools that generate cash for your institution and those that use it, showing the way to making thoughtful resource allocation decisions.
+
+
+
+Institution-Wide Policy Development 
+
+
+
+Our Policy Manual service consists of the organization and preparation of a systematized and comprehensive policy manual suitable for searchable use on an institution's Intranet.  This allows all members of the campus community to have access to a consistent, ""living"" policy manual in which there is only one policy on each addressed topic.  An institution-wide policy manual gives an institution a greater ability to mitigate risk, enhance stakeholder relationships and otherwise allow for smooth administrative operations. Stevens Strategy also offers these related policy development services:
+
+
+
+Comprehensive Facilitation of the Policy Manual Preparation Process
+
+
+
+We also provide a comprehensive facilitation service during Policy Manual preparation for an additional fee.  As part of the facilitation service, Stevens Strategy representatives schedule regular bi-weekly on-campus visits, meeting with school representatives and campus governance bodies to ensure that national best practices are thoroughly considered and time-lines for the drafting process are adhered to.   While off-site, Stevens Strategy representatives are in constant communication with your institution to determine areas that need most of our facilitation attention.  Our campus visits focus on areas that need the most support to complete the drafts effectively.
+
+
+
+Best Practice Faculty Governance Policy Development 
+
+
+
+Stevens Strategy is a leader in drafting and formulating faculty related governance practices and policies that incorporate current industry best practices.  We offer expertise in developing modern definitions and practices regarding faculty rank and contract terms, appropriate faculty hiring procedures, faculty evaluation criteria and procedures, development and/or enhancement of appropriate faculty committees, tenure and post tenure faculty review procedures, and policies regarding advancement in rank.  Our comprehensive facilitation service is included with the Faculty Governance Policy Development product.  And our Faculty Governance Policy Development service is included in the Institution-Wide Policy Development and Facilitation products but can be purchased separately depending on the individual needs of the institution.
+
+
+
+
+Attachment Two, Biographical Sketches:
+
+
+
+Wanda Durrett Bigham, Stevens Strategy Senior Consultant, is a seasoned higher education administrator and leader. She served for ten years as President of Huntingdon College and six years as President at Marycrest College.  Prior to those appointments, she was Vice President for Development at Emerson College and Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Acting Graduate Dean at Morehead State University.  More recently, she has served for seven years as the Associate General Secretary (Interim) for the General Board of Higher Education, responsible for the Division of Higher Education, and as Assistant General Secretary of the Office of Schools, Colleges, and Universities for the General Board of Higher Education and Ministry of the United Methodist Church.  In those roles, she provided educational services, including evaluation of performance and professional development, for Methodist institutions in the United States and around the world.  Dr. Bigham has been a consultant to higher education in the areas of leadership, strategic planning, governance, team building, and executive searches.  She has been an ACE Fellow and holds a certificate from the Institute for Educational Management at Harvard University.  She earned her Ed.D. degree at the University of Kentucky, her M.H.E. and M.M. at Morehead State University, and her B.M.E. at Murray State University.
+
+
+
+Keiko Broomhead has nearly 15 years of higher education experience focusing on enrollment management, student services, and student affairs.  Currently she serves as Vice President of Enrollment Management and Student Affairs at Wentworth Institute of Technology.  At Wentworth she led the integration of Enrollment Management and Student Affairs divisions and oversees a staff of 88.  She has spearheaded the college’s enrollment management efforts for over a decade with a solid record of success in meeting and exceeding institutional goals.  Ms. Broomhead has played a leading role in the college’s strategic planning effort, serving as co-chair of the Planning Committee.  She is a Contributing Writer for Color, a multicultural magazine for professionals of color.  She has experience in international education and taught for two years in Japan.  Her written work has appeared in the publication Study in the USA.  She is certified as a College Planning Specialist.  She holds a B.A. from Oberlin College, an Ed.M. from Harvard University, and an Ed.D. from Northeastern University.
+
+
+
+Elise Burton is a senior consultant and is an affiliate faculty member with the Master of Nonprofit Management Program at Regis University.  She has extensive experience in higher education and nonprofit legal issues with a focus on higher education policy, compliance and governance.  Elise teaches Legal Issues for Nonprofit Organizations, both in the classroom and online for Regis.  She is also a co-creator and frequent teacher of the Service Oriented Field Experience (SOFE) described in her chapter, ""Distance and Service Learning in the Accelerated Format,"" in New Directions in Adult and Continued Education, Jossey-Bass (Spring, 2003).  Elise has co-authored and is currently updating a reference text for Colorado nonprofit organizations, Colorado Nonprofit Management: Understanding The Legal Issues, Bradford Publishing Company, Denver, Colorado. (May, 2004). Elise is a member of the National Association of College and University Attorneys and serves on its Publications Committee.  She received her A.B. in Political Science from Barnard College; holds a Masters in Nonprofit Management from Regis University, which she obtained as a Fellow of The Colorado Trust; and has a J.D. from the University of Virginia School of Law.
+
+
+
+Charles Collier has provided strategic and operational recommendations, insight into consumer decision-making, and online strategy services to colleges and universities for the last 15 years.  He has worked with both not-for-profit and for-profit higher education institutions on projects related to competitive analysis, brand development, and strategic planning.  His higher education clients include Stanford University, Tufts University, Boston University, Duke University, Northwestern University, Rice, Nova Southeastern University, Barry University, Miami-Dade College, Babson College, Career Education Corporation, and Kaplan University.  Mr. Collier founded Mount Vernon Strategies, a market research and strategic consulting company in Boston, MA.  His clients also include Private Equity firms, Fortune 1000 firms, and start-ups.  He holds a B.A. from Tufts University and an M.A. in International Relations from Boston University.
+
+
+
+Robert DeColfmacker has over 30 years of experience in higher education, entrepreneurship and nonprofit governance.  His higher education experience includes time spent as a faculty member, administrator, college president, trustee and board chairman.  He also has significant entrepreneurial experience in both the proprietary and nonprofit sectors of postsecondary education and in the formation and development of private business enterprises.  He has successfully guided turnarounds of schools and colleges and private businesses.  Bob also has significant nonprofit governance experience, having spent time as trustee and commissioner in both higher education and healthcare related enterprises.  His interest and expertise lies in strategic management and financial planning for colleges and universities, as well as board development.  Prior to joining Stevens Strategy, he was Chairman of the Board of Learning Tools, a diversified education company in which he continues to have an interest.  Bob also recently served as Interim President of The Landing School in Maine.  Bob is a member (and former board chairman) of the Board of Trustees of Southern New Hampshire University & currently chairs the university’s Audit and Compliance Committee.  He is also a member of the National Association of Corporate Directors. Bob holds a B.S. degree in Economics and Finance from Southern New Hampshire University and an M.P.A. from the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.
+
+
+
+Dale Hamel has over 20 years of experience in higher education administration, predominantly in public higher education financing, policy, and planning. He has spent the last 15 years in senior policy and finance positions in Massachusetts public higher education, at both the institutional and state levels, and prior to that worked at three prestigious private higher education institutions in the Boston area. His areas of expertise include strategic, capital, and operational planning; financial modeling; and accreditation preparation. Dale has participated in numerous college accreditation, institutional charter, and program approval teams. He joined Stevens Strategy in 2009 and continues to hold the position of Senior Vice President for Administration, Finance and Technology at a Massachusetts college. Dale has undergraduate degrees in business administration (B.A.) and computer information systems (B.S.) from Ferris State University, an MBA from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, an Ed.M. from Boston University, and a doctorate in Higher Education Administration (Ph.D.) with a focus on college finance from Boston College.
+
+
+
+Ellen Hurwitz is an award winning professor of history, author and past president of three institutions of higher learning: Albright College, New England College, and American University of Central Asia in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan where she is President Emerita and Executive Director of its Foundation.  She also served as Acting President at Pine Manor College. She is a Senior Fellow at the Institute of International Liberal Education at Bard College, scholar in residence at the Winter Park Institute of Rollins College, and senior consultant with Stevens Strategy.  Dr. Hurwitz has been at the forefront of interdisciplinary learning in the humanities and social sciences and has developed seminal programs at five universities. She has brought her international, multilingual communication skills to the development of learning partnerships and dialogues across diverse political, national, and religious climates.  Since her return to the United States in August, 2011 she has been speaking and writing about  leadership at an American style university located at the crossroads of civilization, where efforts to develop democratic institutions are challenged by habits of mind and relationships with Russia, Iran, Turkey, China, Afghanistan and the United States. She is also engaged in the development of a cutting edge university, leadership coaching in the US and abroad, and in reflective writing on leadership and the liberal arts in the United States and overseas.  She holds a BA from Smith College and an M.A. and Ph.D. in Russian and Byzantine Studies from Columbia University, where she was appointed Chair of the University Seminar on Slavic History and Culture.
+
+
+
+Bob Johnson is an IT professional with over 25 years of experience in both higher education and the private sector.  Having directed efforts for universities such as Hofstra University, University of New Hampshire, Dartmouth College, and Duke University, Bob has experience in the transformation of both the business and technical aspects of information technology.  With demonstrated expertise in the areas of networking, data centers, classroom technologies, security, physical infrastructure, unified communications, and RF technologies (cell and radio), he is a recognized global leader in convergence efforts.  His focus is on positioning the correct technologies to forward an institution’s business needs and maximize resources in doing so.  In addition, he has experience in realigning technical staff and establishing funding and cost recovery models to ensure these efforts are sustainable and right sized.  Bob has an A.A. degree in liberal arts from the State University of New York at Farmingdale and a B.A. degree in economics from SUNY Stony Brook.
+
+
+
+Susan C. Lane has more than 30 years of experience in Massachusetts higher education and has been active in national, regional and state education organizations, working consistently to improve access to higher education, build quality programs responsive to changing student needs and to support students of all ages, levels and disciplines in achieving their educational goals. She has extensive experience in strategic planning at institutional and policy levels including the establishment of multi-site campus locations. Most recently she has consulted with both public and independent institutions to establish a new continuing education model and to create a national teacher education center. Dr. Lane has a strong and active commitment to team building and to the development of collaborate teams across internal and external entities to accomplish stated goals and ensure long-term success.  Prior to her current consulting work, Dr. Lane served as President of The New England Institute of Art. She served for seven years at The University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth, as Associate Vice Chancellor for Professional and Continuing Education, as an Adjunct Professor in Education,
+
+and was Interim Chair in the Education Department. Dr. Lane held the positions of Associate Dean and Associate Professor of Education at Lesley University and Senior Officer and Acting Dean of Graduate and Continuing Education at the Massachusetts College of Art. Dr. Lane also has served as Deputy for Higher Education in the Massachusetts Governor's Office for Education Affairs and was Staff Associate for Academic Affairs for the Massachusetts Board of Regents for Higher Education.  Dr. Lane earned her EdD in Administration, Planning and Social Policy from the Harvard University Graduate School of Education, an MBA from University of Massachusetts, Boston, an MEd degree from Boston University's School of Education and BA in Government and International Relations from Clark University. 
+
+
+
+Stephen Lazarus, a senior consultant with Stevens Strategy, has over ten years of higher education experience with a focus on higher education policy, compliance, and governance matters.  Stephen has worked with the following higher education clients in developing their policies and procedures: Flagler College, Gwynedd-Mercy College, Lynn University, Immaculata University, Paine College, Southern California University of Health Sciences, Voorhees College, Khalifa University (U.A.E), Dominican College, Pacific Oaks College, Saybrook University, Wentworth Institute of Technology, Nebraska Methodist College, University of San Diego, Emerson College, Friends University, Bethany College, D’Youville College, Fontbonne University, Gannon University, Huston-Tillotson University, Caldwell College, Lourdes College, Medaille College, Saint Leo University, Spalding University, Saint Joseph College, Saint Xavier University, and Thiel College.  Prior to joining Stevens Strategy in 2007, Stephen worked as a consultant with Higher Education Executive Associates.  He also spent 6 years practicing law in South Florida with a focus on healthcare law and insurance defense litigation.  He holds a B.A. degree from Loyola University, New Orleans and a J.D. from the Catholic University of America in Washington, DC.
+
+
+Brendan Leonard has over 20 years of management experience in the higher education and health care industries.  He has spent the last 16 years consulting primarily in the higher education industry, focusing on strategic planning, process redesign, systems implementation, and human resources systems assessment and design.  He has worked as a senior consultant with Stevens Strategy since its founding more than ten years ago and now serves as Senior Advisor and Consultant with the firm.  He is Stevens Strategy’s expert in its strategic planning stakeholder conference and operational planning process.  His higher education clients include Barry University, Berklee College of Music, Colorado Mountain College, Drexel University, Eastern Michigan University, Gwynedd-Mercy College, Holy Family University, Howard University, Immaculata University, Ithaca College, LaGuardia Community College, Marian Court College, New England College, Penn State College of Medicine, Rollins College, Rosemont College, Southern California University of Health Sciences, University of Montana, Vaughn College of Aeronautics and Technology, Vermont State College System.  In addition, Brendan spent 7 years working in health care financial planning, financial reporting and analysis, and systems implementation.  Prior to joining Stevens Strategy, in 2003, Brendan served as Senior Associate at Kaludis Consulting and Senior Consultant for HCm, Inc.  He is former Vice Chair of the Board of Trustees at Saybrook University and served as Chair of the Trusteeship Committee.  He holds a B.A. degree from Haverford College and an M.B.A. from the Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley.
+
+
+
+Susan Leonard has nearly 20 years of human resources experience, including 6 in higher education specifically.  She has actively practiced and provided direct oversight for all human resources functions in both academic and business settings.  Her most recent institutional position was Interim Assistant Vice President and Executive Director of Human Resources at Eastern Michigan University.  In that position, she managed a staff of 20 professionals providing HR consultation and service to 2,200 employees at a 24,000-student institution.  Susan successfully directed the implementation of the human resources/payroll module of the SCT Banner ERP systems.  She has achieved the highest professional designation in the field of human resources, Senior Professional in Human Resources (SPHR) from the Society of Human Resource Management.  Her Stevens Strategy clients have included Colorado Mountain College, Holy Family University, and Immaculata University.  She holds a B.S. degree in Organizational Communications and Psychology from Eastern Michigan University.
+
+
+
+Christina McFarlane comes to Stevens Strategy after having worked in administration at Harvard College.  She has experience in academic advising, curricular policy, student affairs services, support services and mentoring for international and at-risk students, study abroad advising, and residential life. In addition, she is experienced in conducting quantitative and qualitative research and performing financial analyses.  Christina has worked both domestically and internationally, across a range of institutions including governmental agencies, secondary schools, nonprofit organizations and another higher education consulting firm.  She holds a B.A. degree in Psychology and Political Science from University of Notre Dame and an Ed.M. degree in Education Policy and Management from Harvard University.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Kelli Rainey has 10 years of higher education experience in institutional effectiveness, operational planning, and assessment.  Dr. Rainey is a Senior Consultant with Stevens Strategy and leads our Succession Planning service area.  She also serves as the Dean of Academic Support Services at Johnson C. Smith University where she oversees the management of information technology, library services, and institutional research.  She serves as a key advisor to senior administrators on strategies and initiatives to support student learning, service delivery, workplace efficiencies and organizational effectiveness. Moreover, as an accreditation liaison, Dr. Rainey is well versed in regional accreditation standards, regulations and procedures for effective demonstration of institutional compliance.  Dr. Rainey holds an Ed.D. in higher education and organizational change from Benedictine University, M.A. in applied psychology from Fairfield University, and an B.A. in communication from Lynchburg College.  She also has a graduate certification in institutional research from Pennsylvania State University.  Dr. Rainey’s doctoral dissertation explored the subject of succession planning in higher education.
+
+
+
+Mark Schulman was appointed President of Saybrook University in San Francisco in 2010, his third presidency.  He has extensive background in communications and education consulting and higher education administration.  He was President of Goddard College in Plainfield, Vermont from 2003 to 2010 and led the successful turn-around of the institution.  His prior leadership positions include President and Professor of Humanities at Antioch University Southern California; Academic Dean/Vice President, Dean of the College, and Professor at Pacific Oaks College; Chairperson, Communication Department/Director, Graduate Media Studies/Lead Faculty, Distance Learning/ Distinguished Lecturer in Communications at the New School for Social Research; Chairperson/Deputy Chairperson, Communications, Film and Video Department, and Associate Professor at City College of New York.  Dr. Schulman's extensive academic experience also includes positions at Saint Mary's College of California, Antioch College, and Mount Vernon College.  Dr. Schulman's work has been published in a number of reports, journals and texts relevant to his areas of interest. He has made numerous presentations and lectures, most recently as part of the Panel on Administrative Issues at the Symposium on Progressive Education at Goddard College and the Vermont Leadership Institute Panel on Leadership.  He served as the President of the Vermont Higher Education Council in 2006-2007; on the Executive Committee of the Association of Vermont Independent Colleges from 2005 to 2010; and on the Board of Directors of Vermont Businesses for Social Responsibility from 2005 to 2010.  Dr. Schulman received his Doctor of Philosophy in Communications from The Union Institute and University.
+
+
+
+Ryne A. Sherman is a recognized expert in psychological assessment with over 10 years of experience working in the field. Dr. Sherman is a Senior Consultant with Stevens Strategy and leads our Applicant Success Assessment service.  He is also President of Sherman Assessment and Projections, Inc. and Assistant Professor of psychology at Florida Atlantic University. Dr. Sherman is a nationally recognized expert in predicting academic achievement in higher education. He has over 20 publications in peer-reviewed academic journals and is currently the principal investigator on a National Science Foundation grant examining the joint roles of personality and environments on behavior. Our Applicant Success Assessment service is grounded on the science of personality and can be used to measure non-cognitive (i.e., personality; motivation) factors that are related to school and career success. This assessment tool goes beyond what traditional cognitive ability tests (e.g., SAT, ACT) can tell us to identify students who are likely to achieve in higher education. Moreover, unlike traditional cognitive ability tests, scores on our tool have virtually no adverse impact based on sex, race, or ethnicity. Stevens Strategy’s Applicant Success Assessment service can be used to (a) select high achieving students that other tests miss, (b) identify students who may struggle with secondary education, but may otherwise be successful in life (i.e., high risk / high potential students), (c) develop programs and interventions for these high risk / high potential students, and (d) fit students with colleges and universities where they are more likely to thrive. Ryne received his B.A. in Psychology and History at Monmouth College in 2006 and his M.A. and Ph.D. in personality/social psychology from the University of California, Riverside in 2011.
+
+
+
+John A. Stevens is Founder and President of Stevens Strategy, LLC, a full-service consulting firm specializing in managing the process of strategic change in colleges, universities and schools.  He also serves as a Founder and Principal of Chronos Company, LLC, organized to design, oversee the development of, raise and disburse capital for and engage in other activities related to the creation of Chronos UniversityTM.  Chronos UniversityTM will be the first residential institution to provide an individualized and completely technology-based instructional program to traditional undergraduate students.  He has more than 40 years of higher education experience in strategic planning, institutional organization and governance, process redesign, financial planning, information system selection and implementation, collective bargaining and executive search.  He has provided consulting service to approximately 100 independent and public institutions from our nation’s largest universities to its smallest colleges and schools, specializing in small to mid-sized institutions and the process of strategic change within them.  In 2003, after 17 years at another higher education consulting firm, Dr. Stevens began Stevens Strategy.  At his previous firm, he served as its Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer and the head of its Strategy Consulting Practice.  He has served as Assistant to the Chancellor of the Massachusetts Board of Higher Education, Vice President for Administration of Rhode Island School of Design, Assistant to the President of Boston University and President and Chairman of the Board of Little Red Schoolhouse, Inc.  He has also served as a representative of the Board of Higher Education on the Massachusetts Community College System and the Massachusetts State College System Boards of Trustees; as a member of the University of Massachusetts Political Science Advisory Board; as a member of the New School Jazz Program Board of Governors and the International Board of Advisors to the Shala Valley Project, an effort to trace the origins and evolution of settlement in Northern Albania from the earliest times to the present; as Vice Chairman of the Board of the Urban League of Eastern Massachusetts and as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of New England College, a small residential, liberal arts college in Henniker, New Hampshire.  He served there as interim president on a pro bono basis, as well.  Dr. Stevens currently serves periodically as a mentor at Harvard University Graduate School of Education.  He holds the B.A. degree from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst and the Ed.M. and Ed.D. degrees from Harvard University.
+
+
+
+Michael Townsley has more than 20 years of experience in academic services, financial systems, budgets, marketing strategy, payment plans, IT administration, ancillary operations, and site management.  Mike is Senior Consultant with Stevens Strategy and former President of Pennsylvania Institute of Technology.  During his 20 years as Senior Vice President for Finance and Administration at Wilmington College, he played a key role in making it one of the fastest growing private colleges in the country.  He is the author of The Small College Guide to Financial Health:  Beating the Odds and CD’s entitled The Financial Toolbox for Colleges and Universities and The Strategic Turnaround Toolbox, all published by NACUBO between 2002 and 2005.  His newest book, Financial Strategy and Management Guidebook For Presidents, Chief Administrative Officers, and Boards of Trustees in Higher Education, will be published shortly by Stevens Strategy.   Dr. Townsley holds a Ph.D. from the University of Pennsylvania. His dissertation analyzed the impact of market share on pricing policies.  He also holds degrees from University of Delaware and Purdue University.  His additional training includes work with Lilly Endowment and Columbia University. Dr. Townsley has published widely and conducted studies on the financial structure of colleges, universities and for-profit institutions.
+
+
+
+Jeanie Watson has held positions of leadership and responsibility at a broad spectrum of institutions and organizations: president for nine years at Nebraska Wesleyan University; dean at Tulane University, Hamline University, and Southwestern University; teaching faculty at Rhodes College, Gustavus Adolphus College, Stonehill College, the University of Nebraska, and Marshall University; director and higher education specialist at TIAA-CREF; and associate vice president of development at the University of Minnesota Medical Foundation.  As president of Nebraska Wesleyan, she oversaw the restructuring of the Board of Trustees; academic program development and growth to include masters degrees and a pre-collegiate concurrent enrollment program; the design and implementation of a forward-looking strategic plan; a doubling of the student headcount; and the construction of new campus facilities, as well as the establishment of a satellite campus in Omaha.  Dr. Watson has also been active professionally on multiple national higher education boards and committees, e.g., American Council on Education (ACE); Board of Directors of the Council of Independent Colleges (CIC); the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities (NAICU); University Senate of the United Methodist Church; Board of Directors of the National Association of Schools and Colleges of the United Methodist Church; the Executive Board of Higher Education Resource Services (HERS); and the NCAA Division III Presidents Council. She has also consulted at colleges and universities across the country. She was post-doctoral Visiting Scholar at Columbia University and studied at an NEH Summer Seminar at Princeton and the New Presidents Program at Harvard.  She received her Ph.D. from Ohio, M.A. from Midwestern State, and B.A. from Baylor.  She is the author or editor for six books and numerous articles.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Attachment Three, Clients:
+
+
+
+Dr. Stevens’ and Stevens Strategy Clients (Stevens Strategy Clients are italicized):
+
+
+
+
+
+Albright College
+
+American University of Central 
+
+  Asia, Kyrgyzstan
+
+Ancilla College
+
+Association of Adventist 
+
+  Colleges And Universities
+
+Association of Private 
+
+  Universities of Japan
+
+Association of Theological 
+
+  Schools
+
+The Austen Group (A CIC 
+
+  Project)
+
+Barry University
+
+Bellarmine University
+
+Bob Jones University
+
+Berklee College of Music
+
+Brandeis University
+
+Butler University
+
+Cabrini College
+
+Cedar Crest College
+
+Chester College
+
+Clearwater Christian College
+
+College of Notre Dame of 
+
+  Maryland
+
+College of Saint Scholastica
+
+Colleges of the Fenway
+
+Colorado Mountain College
+
+Dar Al-Hekma University, Saudi 
+
+  Arabia
+
+Davis and Elkins College
+
+Dominican College
+
+Drexel University
+
+Drew University
+
+Earlham College
+
+Emerson College
+
+Flagler College
+
+Fei Tian Academy
+
+Foreman Christian College, 
+
+  Pakistan
+
+Franklin College, The 
+
+  American College in 
+
+  Switzerland
+
+Gallaudet University
+
+Gannon University
+
+Georgian Court University
+
+Gerson Lehrman Group
+
+Gettysburg College
+
+Goddard College
+
+Goodwin College
+
+Gwynedd-Mercy College
+
+Graduate Theological Union
+
+Hellenic College
+
+Hiram College
+
+Holy Family University
+
+Immaculata University
+
+Indiana University
+
+Jackson State University
+
+Johnson C. Smith University
+
+Keene State College
+
+Kentucky Wesleyan College
+
+Khalifa University of Science and 
+
+  Technology, United Arab 
+
+  Emirates
+
+LaGuardia Community College
+
+Linfield College
+
+Lewis University
+
+Lynn University
+
+Maine College of Art
+
+Marian Court College
+
+Mid-Continent University
+
+Mount Aloysius College
+
+Mount Holyoke College 
+
+Myers University
+
+Neumann College
+
+New England Association of 
+
+  Schools and Colleges
+
+New England College
+
+New Hampshire Institute of 
+
+  Art
+
+New School Jazz and 
+
+  Contemporary Music 
+
+  Program
+
+New York Chiropractic College
+
+New York University
+
+North Bennet Street School
+
+Northeastern University
+
+Northfield Mount Hermon 
+
+  School
+
+Nyack College
+
+Pacific Oaks College and 
+
+  Children’sSchool
+
+Paine College
+
+Peirce College
+
+Pine Manor College
+
+Polytechnic of Namibia
+
+Presbyterian College
+
+Pro Arts Consortium
+
+Radford University
+
+Regis College
+
+Rosemont College
+
+Saint Joseph College
+
+Seton Hall University
+
+Smith College
+
+South Dakota School of Mines 
+
+  and Technology
+
+Southern California University   
+
+  of Health Sciences
+
+Southern New Hampshire 
+
+  University
+
+Springfield College
+
+St. Mary-of-the-Woods College
+
+Stevens Institute of Technology
+
+Thomas University
+
+Thunderbird Graduate School
+
+Tiffin University
+
+Unity College
+
+Universidad del Sur, Chiapas, 
+
+  Mexico
+
+University of Alaska
+
+University of Baltimore
+
+University of Delaware
+
+University of Evansville
+
+University of Indianapolis
+
+University of Maine
+
+University of Mary Hardin-
+
+  Baylor
+
+University of Massachusetts 
+
+  At Amherst
+
+University of Medicine and 
+
+  Dentistry of New Jersey
+
+University of Mount Union
+
+University of Nebraska, Lincoln, 
+
+  Boros Center
+
+University of New Hampshire
+
+University of Pennsylvania
+
+University of St. Thomas
+
+Vaughn College of Aeronautics 
+
+  and Technology
+
+Voorhees College
+
+Virginia Five Consortium
+
+Wayne State University
+
+Webster University
+
+Wentworth Institute of 
+
+  Technology
+
+West Virginia University
+
+Wheelock College
+
+Wilmington College
+
+Wilson College
+
+Woods Hole Oceanographic 
+
+  Institute
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com</s>"
+<s>[INST] Lynn University IWPM Update Proposal 7.1.21 to 6.30.22.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Memo on Provost Evaluation, 2-4-6 Policy 2023-03-20.txt [/INST] To: The Handbook Review Team
+
+From: The Faculty Personnel Committee
+
+Date: Mar 20, 2023
+
+Subject: Comments on proposed policies for the evaluation of the Provost and 2-4-6 pre-tenure review
+
+Overall, the Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC) is in favor of the following approach for evaluating the Provost, with the amendments suggested below.
+
+Evaluation of Provost
+
+To assist the President’s evaluation of the Provost, the faculty shall be called upon to periodically provide feedback on the administrative performance of the Provost.  
+
+Schedule
+
+Faculty participate in the periodic evaluation of the Provost’s administrative performance during the third year of initial appointment, and every fourth year thereafter. The President may request a review more frequently, if desired. The initial appointment means the date the Provost begins to serve in a position, whether in an interim or permanent appointment. When a Provost who has served in an interim capacity is selected for the permanent position as the result of a search, the time for the review shall be counted from the date of permanent appointment. If appointment to the Provost position is made later than the start of the academic year, the first review shall take place in the first academic year that begins after the second anniversary date of the appointment.
+
+Procedures
+
+Materials Submitted
+
+The Provost will upload to the online web portal the following materials: 
+
+The Provost’s job description
+
+The Academic Affairs Office’s strategic plan
+
+A current curriculum vitae
+
+A brief self-report listing the accomplishments of the Academic Affairs Office since the last evaluation cycle.
+
+Creation and Distribution of Survey Instrument
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee, in consultation with the President, is responsible for creating the survey instrument used for including faculty in the evaluation process for the Provost and oversees the administration of the instrument. The President shall identify for the Faculty Personnel Committee those aspects of the following areas that are most relevant to the Provost’s performance assessment: the mission of the office, the Provost’s administrative responsibilities as delineated in the job description, and the Provost’s impact on the faculty, students, and the University.
+
+All full-time faculty members are invited to complete the evaluation survey prepared and distributed by the Faculty Personnel Committee, with the understanding that each faculty member will undertake evaluation in a responsible and professional manner, responding only to questions about which the individual faculty member has personal knowledge.  Moreover, survey responses should be fair and directed at improving performance and serving the mission of the University.  
+
+
+
+Faculty Personnel Committee Report to President 
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee is responsible for compiling the results of the survey responses and submitting a report to the President at the end of the academic year. The report shall summarize the survey results, and address both things the Provost is perceived as doing well and areas in which the Provost is perceived as needing to improve. As with documents relating to faculty evaluation, the report and the results of the survey are confidential and are not shared outside of the committee and its correspondence with the President.
+
+
+
+2-4-6 Policy
+
+
+
+The FPC provided feedback to the Handbook Review Team (HRT) on Handbook Draft 6 regarding a proposal to change the evaluation of pre-tenure faculty from annually pre-tenure starting in year 2 to a less frequent model of evaluations in years 2, 4 and 6. The new policy also allows for FPC to request evaluations in year 3 or 5 if needed. In its feedback, the FPC suggested delaying this change until fuller discussion could take place in the next academic year. The Handbook Review Team (HRT) responded to FPC with a strong interest in changing the evaluation of pre-tenure faculty to 2-4-6 during the current handbook review process. 
+
+
+
+The rationale presented by the HRT was that annual evaluations seemed too frequent to allow much progress to be made between evaluations and that time spent preparing evaluations could be better spent on Category 2 work, for example. In addition, the HRT had confidential meetings with pre-tenure faculty members that indicated support for the shift to 2-4-6. Finally, the shift to 2-4-6 would reduce workload for FPC and peer evaluators of the pre-tenure faculty.
+
+
+
+At the request of the HRT, the FPC revisited the 2-4-6 proposal. This is the outcome of FPC’s deliberations:
+
+
+
+Five of the six faculty members on FPC who are not on the Handbook Review Team lean in favor of the 2-4-6 Review Policy. The reasons are:
+
+
+
+Reduced workload for pre-tenure faculty, peer evaluators, and FPC
+
+The HRT information suggesting support for this change among pre-tenure faculty members
+
+FPC’s earlier survey results that showed slightly over 50% of faculty members in favor of the shift to 2-4-6
+
+These members agree that the annual review doesn’t allow much time to see significant changes in faculty work, particularly in Category 2, although they also have seen annual feedback be of significant benefit to some faculty.
+
+These members note that 5th year feedback may be too late to provide much assistance to a pre-tenure faculty member who will submit their tenure packet at the start of year 6.
+
+
+
+One of the six faculty members on FPC was against this change to 2-4-6. The reasons are:
+
+
+
+Concern that years 3 and 5 are valuable times to receive feedback, particularly before the 4th year sabbatical, and in the time just before tenure.
+
+Concern that annual evaluation is reassuring to many pre-tenure faculty and could be cited as an advantage of our institution over others.
+
+Concern that asking for year 3 and 5 evaluations for only certain faculty could create stigma for those faculty.
+
+Concern that the plan doesn’t result in a significant workload reduction, particularly if year 3 and/or 5 evaluations are requested.
+
+Concern that the decision feels rushed.
+
+
+
+The members of FPC in favor of 2-4-6 acknowledge the concerns raised above. One amendment to the 2-4-6 policy that would address the concern about the pre-tenure faculty member receiving feedback that would inform the 4th year leave is the following:
+
+
+
+By the Friday of the second week of the semester before the 4th year sabbatical, each pre-tenure faculty member will submit to FPC a one page leave plan and a current CV. FPC will review the leave plan and provide a letter of feedback to the pre-tenure faculty member.
+
+The FPC members in favor of 2-4-6 are also concerned about the stigma of having an extra 3rd or 5th year review request. It may be best to strike the additional requests from the policy - FPC is uncertain on this point.
+
+
+
+In summary, the majority of FPC members lean in favor of the 2-4-6 policy, with one amendment:
+
+Full pre-tenure reviews in years 2, 4, and 6 with a leave plan and CV submitted to FPC within the first two weeks of the semester before the 4th year sabbatical. 
+
+The HRT is invited to consult further with FPC on the value of requesting year 3 and 5 reviews for some faculty.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Mentoring.txt [/INST] Mentoring, advising, and supervision. 
+
+
+
+Faculty are expected to engage individually to guide students at the undergraduate and graduate levels. This might include mentoring/advising of undergraduate students, mentoring/advising of graduate students and postdoctoral researchers (including service on PhD committees), directing undergraduate major projects, advising student teams or clubs, supervising UROP students, and supervision of field work, clinical, or practicum experiences.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Merit Evaluation (removed from Draft 3).txt [/INST] Merit Evaluation
+
+Depending and based on the financial abilities of the College, full-time teaching faculty at Wheaton College are evaluated for merit increases on a periodic basis as set forth below.  
+
+Tenure-Line Faculty are determined through this review process to be “meeting expectations,” “exceeding expectations,” or “not meeting expectations” in each of the three areas of teaching, scholarly or creative work, and service.  Professors of the Practice are determined to be “meeting expectations,” “exceeding expectations,” or “not meeting expectations” in each of the areas of teaching and service.  Each category for the respective faculty classification receives equal weighting. 
+
+A percentage increase to the base salary is attached each year to each of the ratings, based upon the size of the salary pool. The same merit rating may not necessarily result in the same percentage increase during the years in which the merit rating applies: if the pool is larger, the percentage increase may be larger; if the pool is smaller, the percentage increase may be smaller. The merit rating remains in place until the faculty member’s next merit evaluation.
+
+1.	Tenure-Track Faculty
+
+Tenure-track faculty members will be evaluated for merit salary increase by the department/program faculty in the third year of appointment at Wheaton as part of the annual reappointment evaluation process (see Article IV, Section 2.2).  Tenure-track faculty whose initial appointment acknowledges years of service at another institution will be evaluated for merit increases at the mid-point of their probationary service at Wheaton.
+
+Evaluation Criteria
+
+The department/program uses the following criteria to determine if faculty member is meeting, exceeding, or not meeting expectations in each of the three areas of teaching, scholarly or creative work, and service. 
+
+a. Teaching 
+
+Meeting Expectations: Tenure-track faculty are expected to maintain effective teaching and the promise of continued progress toward meeting the following:
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content is current and appropriate for topic, students, and curriculum
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are articulated and appropriate for the curriculum; courses have appropriate range and are well-planned and organized; standard course practices are used; standard, intellectually sound course materials are used; assessments/assignments are appropriately challenging and tied to course goals; standards for evaluating the quality of student understanding are clear.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are presented effectively and complex concepts are explained clearly; students are consistently engaged, learning environment encourage students to participate and enable critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching engenders enthusiasm and appreciation in students to participate actively in the process of learning; class climate is inclusive and encourages student intellectual curiosity; teaching models standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is timely and substantive. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: A tenure-track faculty member’s teaching is considered exceeding expectations if, in addition to meeting expectations, the faculty member accomplishes much of the following: 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content is challenging and innovative and related to current issues and developments in the field.
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are well-articulated, high quality, relevant to all students and clearly connected to program or curricular goals; course topics are well-integrated and of appropriate range and depth; courses are well-planned and organized and reflect commitment to providing meaningful assignments and assessments; uses effective or innovative methods to support student learning; assessments/assignments are varied and allow students to demonstrate knowledge through multiple modalities; standards for evaluating understanding are clear and connected to program, curriculum, or professional expectations.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are presented effectively and complex concepts explained clearly; students are consistently engaged; the learning environment encourage students to participate and enable critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching fosters motivation, self-efficacy, and ownership of learning; class climate is inclusive and encourages student intellectual curiosity; students show high levels of engagement; teaching models standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is timely and substantive. 
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: A tenure-track faculty member’s teaching does not meet expectations if the evaluation indicates any of the following: 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content and materials are outdated or unsuitable for students in the course.
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are not articulated or are unclear; range of course is too narrow or too broad; courses are not sufficiently planned or organized; practices are not well-executed and show little development over time; assessments/assignments are at inappropriate difficulty level or not well-aligned with course goals; insufficient attention to student understanding; quality of learning is not analyzed with clear standards.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are not presented effectively, and complex concepts are not explained clearly; students are not consistently engaged; the learning environment does not encourage students to participate and or engage in critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching does not foster motivation, self-efficacy, and ownership of learning; class climate does not promote respect or sense of belonging among all students; class climate discourages student motivation; teaching does not model standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is not regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is not timely or substantive. 
+
+b. Scholarly or Creative Work
+
+Meeting Expectations: A tenure-track faculty member’s scholarly or creative work is considered meeting expectations, if the faculty member accomplishes the following: 
+
+Engagement in scholarship or creative activity appropriate to the discipline or interdisciplinary field and active involvement in the discipline or interdisciplinary field. 
+
+Articulation of a cogent agenda of scholarly research or creative activity for the years leading to the tenure review. This includes an agenda that will demonstrate continued scholarly/creative activity and productivity of work begun after employment at Wheaton.
+
+Significant and identifiable progress on work that will lead to a peer-reviewed or publicly critiqued body of scholarship or creative work at the time of tenure. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: A tenure-track faculty member’s scholarly or creative work is considered exceeding expectations, if the faculty member accomplishes the following: 
+
+		Presentation of a high quality scholarly and creative work relevant to the candidate’s disciplinary or interdisciplinary field in a peer-reviewed or critiqued publication or other appropriate public or professional forum while at Wheaton.
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: A tenure-track faculty member would be considered not meeting expectations if: 
+
+The candidate lacks a coherent scholarly research or creative agenda.
+
+The candidate demonstratives minimal progress in successfully pursuing a research or creative agenda.
+
+There is insufficient evidence of a trajectory that would meet scholarship or creative work expectations at time of tenure review. 
+
+b. Service 
+
+Meeting Expectations: A tenure-track faculty member’s service activity is considered meeting expectations, if the faculty member accomplishes the following:
+
+		Attends department/program and faculty meetings. 
+
+		Demonstrates the promise of becoming an effective student academic advisor.
+
+		Assumes service responsibilities at the department/program level and possibly at the College level. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: A tenure-track faculty member’s service activity may exceed expectations for service if the faculty member takes an effective and meaningful role in the life of the College and effectively advises assigned students: 
+
+		This may involve taking an active role on College-wide committees as elected or appointed; serving as faculty sponsor for student activities; supporting admissions efforts; or serving in professional organizations beyond Wheaton. 
+
+		Faculty member demonstrates leadership in disciplinary/professional organization(s). 
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: 
+
+The candidate does not assume service responsibilities at the department/program level. 
+
+The candidate does not assume a fair share of student advisees. 
+
+The candidate does not attend department/program and faculty meetings.
+
+
+
+The Department/Program Evaluation
+
+The tenured members of each department/program or, if a department/program has no tenured members, the Provost will review the record of the faculty member under review utilizing the criteria above, as well as any supplemental criteria established by the faculty member’s academic area and vote on whether the faculty member is meeting, exceeding, or not meeting expectations in each of three individual categories (teaching, scholarship/creative work, service).
+
+The department/program will make recommendations to the Provost, who makes the final decision regarding salary increases on the basis of those recommendations. 
+
+The merit evaluation will conclude with a letter from the Provost to the faculty member recording the results of the review. This salary decision holds until the tenure review. 
+
+Development Plan
+
+If a faculty member does not meet expectations in teaching, scholarship, or service at the time of the review, the faculty member will discuss with the Provost issues of concern and develop a plan to improve the faculty member’s work. The plan should be grounded in the feedback from the most recent review conducted by the department/program. A written copy of the plan will be included in the review materials for the faculty member’s next regularly scheduled review. 
+
+
+
+Tenured Faculty
+
+Tenured faculty members will be evaluated for merit salary increase by the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion every three years following the initial awarding of tenure.  
+
+Submission of Dossier
+
+The candidate shall submit a dossier to the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion that includes the following materials: 
+
+A curriculum vitae that highlights by shading publications, service, and all other pertinent activities during the review period.
+
+Course syllabi for the past three years as well as any others that demonstrate the candidate's range of teaching during the review period. 
+
+A list of all peer-reviewed publications, exhibitions, performances, or other scholarship and professional activities completed during the review period. 
+
+Any unpublished material considered relevant during the review period (e.g., manuscripts under review; works in progress; grant proposals; a list of lectures given; summaries of extracurricular activities, including organization of lecture series, exhibits, colloquia; reports of scholarly or creative activities both on and off campus, etc.).
+
+A listing of all service activities during the review period. 
+
+A succinct narrative of the success of the candidate's continuing engagement and innovation in teaching, scholarly or creative activity and service. This narrative should be based on documented evidence of the candidate's trajectory as a scholar or artist, teacher and community member, with special emphasis on how the candidate has set and met goals during the review period. The statement should include a summary of student evaluations for the most recent six semesters of teaching. 
+
+Evaluation Criteria
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion evaluates the faculty member’s performance since the last merit cycle (or initial tenure appointment), using the following criteria to determine if the tenured faculty member is meeting, exceeding, or not meeting expectations in each of the three areas of teaching, scholarly or creative work, and service.
+
+a. Teaching 
+
+Meeting Expectations: Tenured faculty are expected to maintain excellence in teaching, as demonstrated by the following: 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content is current and appropriate for topic, students, and curriculum
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are articulated and appropriate for the curriculum; courses have appropriate range and are well-planned and organized; standard course practices are used; standard, intellectually sound course materials are used; assessments/assignments are appropriately challenging and tied to course goals; standards for evaluating the quality of student understanding are clear.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are presented effectively, and complex concepts are explained clearly; students are consistently engaged; the learning environment encourage students to participate and enable critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching engenders enthusiasm and appreciation in students to participate actively in the process of learning; class climate is inclusive and encourages student intellectual curiosity; teaching models standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is timely and substantive. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: To exceed expectations of excellence in teaching, tenured faculty will demonstrate a commitment to their continuing development as teachers, which may take many forms. 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content is challenging and innovative and related to current issues and developments in the field.
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are well-articulated, high quality, relevant to all students and clearly connected to program or curricular goals; course topics are well-integrated and of appropriate range and depth; courses are well-planned and organized and reflect commitment to providing meaningful assignments and assessments; uses effective or innovative methods to support student learning; assessments/assignments are varied and allow students to demonstrate knowledge through multiple modalities; standards for evaluating understanding are clear and connected to program, curriculum, or professional expectations.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are presented effectively and complex concepts explained clearly; students are consistently engaged, learning environment encourage students to participate and enable critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching fosters motivation, self-efficacy and ownership of learning; class climate is inclusive and encourages student intellectual curiosity; students show high levels of engagement; teaching models standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is timely and substantive. 
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: A tenured faculty member’s teaching does not meet expectations if the evaluation indicates any of the following: 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content and materials are outdated or unsuitable for students in the course.
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are not articulated or are unclear; range of course is too narrow or too broad; courses are not sufficiently planned or organized; practices are not well-executed and show little development over time; assessments/assignments are at inappropriate difficulty level or not well-aligned with course goals; insufficient attention to student understanding; quality of learning is not analyzed with clear standards.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are not presented effectively and complex concepts are not explained clearly; students are not consistently engaged, learning environment does not encourage students to participate and or engage in critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching does not foster motivation, self-efficacy, and ownership of learning; class climate does not promote respect or sense of belonging among all students; class climate discourages student motivation; teaching does not model standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is not regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is not timely or substantive. 
+
+b. Scholarly or Creative Work
+
+Meeting Expectations: A tenured faculty member’s scholarly or creative work is considered meeting expectations, if the faculty member accomplishes the following: 
+
+Continued growth and engagement in scholarship or creative activity appropriate to the discipline or interdisciplinary field and active involvement in the discipline or interdisciplinary field during the review period. 
+
+Scholarship or creative work should reflect a degree of originality in the generation, application, or reinterpretation of concepts, methods, or creative works. 
+
+Unpublished work is poised to progress toward peer-reviewed publications, performances, juried exhibits, screenings, etc. A faculty member should not submit the same work-in-progress materials for multiple review cycles. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: A tenured faculty member’s scholarly or creative work is considered exceeding expectations, if the faculty member accomplishes the following: 
+
+		Presentation of a high quality scholarly and creative work relevant to the candidate’s disciplinary or interdisciplinary field in a peer-reviewed or critiqued publication or other appropriate public or professional forum while at Wheaton.
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: A tenured faculty member would be considered not meeting expectations if the individual: 
+
+Does not articulate a coherent scholarly or creative agenda.
+
+Does not provide evidence of scholarly or creative growth.
+
+c. Service 
+
+Meeting Expectations: A tenured faculty member’s service activity is considered meeting expectations, if the faculty member accomplishes the following:
+
+		Attends department/program and faculty meetings. 
+
+		Is an effective student academic advisor
+
+		Assumes service responsibilities at the department/program and/or College level. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: A tenured faculty member’s service activity will be considered to exceed expectations if, in addition to meeting expectations, the faculty member accomplishes some combination of the following: 
+
+		Demonstrates leadership and active involvement in the governance of the College.
+
+		Contributes to initiatives that facilitate the growth and development of the College. 
+
+		Demonstrates leadership in disciplinary/professional organization(s). 
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: A tenured faculty member’s service activity is considered to not meet expectations, if the faculty member:
+
+Does not assume governance service responsibilities. 
+
+Does not assume a fair share of student advisees. 
+
+Does not participate in department/program and faculty meetings.
+
+
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion Evaluation
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion will review the record of the faculty member under review utilizing the criteria above, as well as any supplemental criteria established by the faculty member’s academic area and vote on whether the faculty member is meeting, exceeding, or not meeting expectations in each of three individual categories (teaching, scholarship/creative work, service). 
+
+The members of the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion will make recommendations to the Provost, who makes the final decision regarding salary increases on the basis of those recommendations. 
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions shall be composed of those members described in Article I, Section 5.2.8.  Any member of the Committee so constituted who is a member of the same department or program as a candidate for merit, who is a member of the candidate's immediate family or household, or has any other relationship that would make reaching a sound, unbiased decision difficult shall be disqualified for conflict of interest or bias, will remove themselves from the case, and be replaced according to the replacement member guidelines in Article I, Section 5.1(3) of these Faculty Bylaws.
+
+The merit evaluation will conclude with a letter from the Provost to the faculty member recording the results of the review. This salary decision holds until the next merit review. 
+
+Development Plan
+
+A conference between the faculty member and the Provost will be scheduled if the faculty member does not meet expectations in teaching, scholarly or creative work, or service at the time of the review. During the meeting, the Provost and faculty member will discuss issues of concern and develop a plan to improve the faculty member’s performance. The plan should be grounded in the feedback from the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion. A written copy of the plan will be included in the dossier for the faculty member’s next regularly scheduled merit evaluation. 
+
+3.	Professors of the Practice
+
+Professors of the Practice faculty members will be evaluated for an initial merit salary increase by the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion in the fourth year of appointment at Wheaton as part of the summative evaluation process (see Article IV, Section 2.3.2).  Thereafter, Senior Professors of the Practice will be evaluated for merit every three years (see Section 4 below).
+
+Evaluation Criteria
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion evaluates the faculty member’s performance since the initial appointment at Wheaton using the following criteria to determine if the faculty member is meeting, exceeding, or not meeting expectations in the areas of teaching and service.
+
+a. Teaching 
+
+Meeting Expectations: Professors of the Practice are expected to maintain effective teaching and the promise of continued progress toward meeting the following:
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content is current and appropriate for topic, students, and curriculum
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are articulated and appropriate for the curriculum; courses have appropriate range and are well-planned and organized; standard course practices are used; standard, intellectually sound course materials are used; assessments/assignments are appropriately challenging and tied to course goals; standards for evaluating the quality of student understanding are clear.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are presented effectively and complex concepts are explained clearly; students are consistently engaged, learning environment encourage students to participate and enable critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching engenders enthusiasm and appreciation in students to participate actively in the process of learning; class climate is inclusive and encourages student intellectual curiosity; teaching models standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is timely and substantive. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: A Professor of the Practice’s teaching is considered exceeding expectations if, in addition to meeting expectations, the faculty member accomplishes much of the following: 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content is challenging and innovative and related to current issues and developments in the field.
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are well-articulated, high quality, relevant to all students and clearly connected to program or curricular goals; course topics are well-integrated and of appropriate range and depth; courses are well-planned and organized and reflect commitment to providing meaningful assignments and assessments; uses effective or innovative methods to support student learning; assessments/assignments are varied and allow students to demonstrate knowledge through multiple modalities; standards for evaluating understanding are clear and connected to program, curriculum, or professional expectations.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are presented effectively and complex concepts explained clearly; students are consistently engaged; the learning environment encourage students to participate and enable critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching fosters motivation, self-efficacy, and ownership of learning; class climate is inclusive and encourages student intellectual curiosity; students show high levels of engagement; teaching models standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is timely and substantive. 
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: A Professors of the Practice’s teaching does not meet expectations if the evaluation indicates any of the following: 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content and materials are outdated or unsuitable for students in the course.
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are not articulated or are unclear; range of course is too narrow or too broad; courses are not sufficiently planned or organized; practices are not well-executed and show little development over time; assessments/assignments are at inappropriate difficulty level or not well-aligned with course goals; insufficient attention to student understanding; quality of learning is not analyzed with clear standards.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are not presented effectively, and complex concepts are not explained clearly; students are not consistently engaged; the learning environment does not encourage students to participate and or engage in critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching does not foster motivation, self-efficacy, and ownership of learning; class climate does not promote respect or sense of belonging among all students; class climate discourages student motivation; teaching does not model standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is not regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is not timely or substantive. 
+
+b. Service 
+
+Meeting Expectations: A Professors of the Practice’s service activity is considered meeting expectations, if the faculty member accomplishes the following:
+
+		Attends department/program and faculty meetings. 
+
+		Demonstrates the promise of becoming an effective student academic advisor.
+
+		Assumes service responsibilities at the department/program level and possibly at the College level. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: A Professors of the Practice’s service activity may exceed expectations for service if the faculty member takes an effective and meaningful role in the life of the College and effectively advises assigned students: 
+
+		This may involve taking an active role on College-wide committees as elected or appointed; serving as faculty sponsor for student activities; supporting admissions efforts; or serving in professional organizations beyond Wheaton. 
+
+		Faculty member demonstrates leadership in disciplinary/professional organization(s). 
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: 
+
+The candidate does not assume service responsibilities at the department/program level. 
+
+The candidate does not assume a fair share of student advisees. 
+
+The candidate does not attend department/program and faculty meetings.
+
+
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion Evaluation
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion will review the record of the faculty member under review utilizing the criteria above, as well as any supplemental criteria established by the faculty member’s academic area and vote on whether the faculty member is meeting, exceeding, or not meeting expectations in each of three individual categories (teaching, scholarship/creative work, service). 
+
+The members of the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion will make recommendations to the Provost, who makes the final decision regarding salary increases on the basis of those recommendations. 
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions shall be composed of those members described in Article I, Section 5.2.8.  Any member of the Committee so constituted who is a member of the same department or program as a candidate for merit, who is a member of the candidate's immediate family or household, or has any other relationship that would make reaching a sound, unbiased decision difficult shall be disqualified for conflict of interest or bias, will remove themselves from the case, and be replaced according to the replacement member guidelines in Article I, Section 5.1(3) of these Faculty Bylaws.
+
+The merit evaluation will conclude with a letter from the Provost to the faculty member recording the results of the review. This salary decision holds until the next merit review. 
+
+Development Plan
+
+A conference between the faculty member and the Provost will be scheduled if the faculty member does not meet expectations in teaching or service at the time of the review. During the meeting, the Provost and faculty member will discuss issues of concern and develop a plan to improve the faculty member’s performance. The plan should be grounded in the feedback from the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion. A written copy of the plan will be included in the dossier for the faculty member’s next regularly scheduled merit evaluation. 
+
+4.	Senior Professor of the Practice
+
+Senior Professors of the Practice faculty members will be evaluated for merit salary increase by the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion every three years following the initial awarding of Senior Professor of the Practice status.
+
+Evaluation Criteria
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion evaluates the faculty member’s performance since the last merit cycle (or initial Senior Professor of the Practice appointment), using the following criteria to determine if the faculty member is meeting, exceeding, or not meeting expectations in the areas of teaching and service.
+
+a. Teaching 
+
+Meeting Expectations: Senior Professors of the Practice are expected to maintain excellence in teaching, as demonstrated by the following: 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content is current and appropriate for topic, students, and curriculum
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are articulated and appropriate for the curriculum; courses have appropriate range and are well-planned and organized; standard course practices are used; standard, intellectually sound course materials are used; assessments/assignments are appropriately challenging and tied to course goals; standards for evaluating the quality of student understanding are clear.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are presented effectively, and complex concepts are explained clearly; students are consistently engaged; the learning environment encourage students to participate and enable critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching engenders enthusiasm and appreciation in students to participate actively in the process of learning; class climate is inclusive and encourages student intellectual curiosity; teaching models standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is timely and substantive. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: To exceed expectations of excellence in teaching, Senior Professors of the Practice will demonstrate a commitment to their continuing development as teachers, which may take many forms. 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content is challenging and innovative and related to current issues and developments in the field.
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are well-articulated, high quality, relevant to all students and clearly connected to program or curricular goals; course topics are well-integrated and of appropriate range and depth; courses are well-planned and organized and reflect commitment to providing meaningful assignments and assessments; uses effective or innovative methods to support student learning; assessments/assignments are varied and allow students to demonstrate knowledge through multiple modalities; standards for evaluating understanding are clear and connected to program, curriculum, or professional expectations.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are presented effectively and complex concepts explained clearly; students are consistently engaged, learning environment encourage students to participate and enable critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching fosters motivation, self-efficacy and ownership of learning; class climate is inclusive and encourages student intellectual curiosity; students show high levels of engagement; teaching models standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is timely and substantive. 
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: A Senior Professor of the Practice’s teaching does not meet expectations if the evaluation indicates any of the following: 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content and materials are outdated or unsuitable for students in the course.
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are not articulated or are unclear; range of course is too narrow or too broad; courses are not sufficiently planned or organized; practices are not well-executed and show little development over time; assessments/assignments are at inappropriate difficulty level or not well-aligned with course goals; insufficient attention to student understanding; quality of learning is not analyzed with clear standards.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are not presented effectively and complex concepts are not explained clearly; students are not consistently engaged, learning environment does not encourage students to participate and or engage in critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching does not foster motivation, self-efficacy, and ownership of learning; class climate does not promote respect or sense of belonging among all students; class climate discourages student motivation; teaching does not model standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is not regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is not timely or substantive. 
+
+b. Service 
+
+Meeting Expectations: A Senior Professors of the Practice’s service activity is considered meeting expectations, if the faculty member accomplishes the following:
+
+		Attends department/program and faculty meetings. 
+
+		Demonstrates effectiveness as a student academic advisor.
+
+		Assumes service responsibilities at the department/program level and possibly at the College level. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: A Senior Professors of the Practice’s service activity may exceed expectations for service if the faculty member takes an effective and meaningful role in the life of the College and effectively advises assigned students: 
+
+		This may involve taking an active role on College-wide committees as elected or appointed; serving as faculty sponsor for student activities; supporting admissions efforts; or serving in professional organizations beyond Wheaton. 
+
+		Faculty member demonstrates leadership in disciplinary/professional organization(s). 
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: 
+
+The candidate does not assume service responsibilities at the department/program level. 
+
+The candidate does not assume a fair share of student advisees. 
+
+The candidate does not attend department/program and faculty meetings.
+
+
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion Evaluation
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion will review the record of the faculty member under review utilizing the criteria above, as well as any supplemental criteria established by the faculty member’s academic area and vote on whether the faculty member is meeting, exceeding, or not meeting expectations in each of three individual categories (teaching, scholarship/creative work, service). 
+
+The members of the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion will make recommendations to the Provost, who makes the final decision regarding salary increases on the basis of those recommendations. 
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions shall be composed of those members described in Article I, Section 5.2.8.  Any member of the Committee so constituted who is a member of the same department or program as a candidate for merit, who is a member of the candidate's immediate family or household, or has any other relationship that would make reaching a sound, unbiased decision difficult shall be disqualified for conflict of interest or bias, will remove themselves from the case, and be replaced according to the replacement member guidelines in Article I, Section 5.1(3) of these Faculty Bylaws.
+
+The merit evaluation will conclude with a letter from the Provost to the faculty member recording the results of the review. This salary decision holds until the next merit review. 
+
+Development Plan
+
+A conference between the faculty member and the Provost will be scheduled if the faculty member does not meet expectations in teaching or service at the time of the review. During the meeting, the Provost and faculty member will discuss issues of concern and develop a plan to improve the faculty member’s performance. The plan should be grounded in the feedback from the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion. A written copy of the plan will be included in the dossier for the faculty member’s next regularly scheduled merit evaluation.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Merit Evaluation Text Removed.txt [/INST] Merit Evaluation Text Removed
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee evaluates the faculty member’s performance since the last merit cycle (or initial appointment) in each of the three categories of performance – teaching, scholarly or creative work, and University and community service based on the information in the faculty member’s Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file and using the three-level scale set forth below.
+
+The three-level scale—merit, high merit, and superior merit—is based on comparative accomplishment in the following categories: 
+
+Effective Teaching
+
+Superior Merit (Tier I): teaching is distinguished among colleagues, for instance by development of program curricula, re-training in a new discipline, or is otherwise remarkable for a particular year.
+
+High Merit (Tier II): teaching is outstanding among colleagues.
+
+Merit (Tier III): teaching exhibits the effectiveness normally associated with the Ohio Wesleyan professoriate, generally across all courses or modes of teaching.  May also reflect work on early career teaching development or development of new courses. 
+
+Scholarly or Creative Contributions
+
+Superior Merit (Tier I): research or creative contributions are distinguished among colleagues.  
+
+High Merit (Tier II): scholarly or creative contributions are outstanding among colleagues. 
+
+Merit (Tier III): scholarly or creative contributions meet the expectations normally associated with the Ohio Wesleyan professoriate. 
+
+Service
+
+Superior Merit (Tier I): in addition to departmental duties, service on several (four or more) minor committees or other college-wide service duties, or service on a major campus-wide committee such as the Faculty Personnel Committee or the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee, which may be accompanied by other, minor University service. 
+
+High Merit (Tier II): in addition to typical departmental duties, service includes two or three college-wide responsibilities, such as participation on minor committees as described above.
+
+Merit (Tier I): includes both departmental work and minor University-wide service, such as on a committee that meets less than weekly and which carries lesser administrative responsibility than some major committees such as the Faculty Personnel Committee or the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee. 
+
+Note: The above characteristics are not an exhaustive listing of all faculty activities which can be recognized in merit increases. In addition, any one particular course or curricular endeavor, or article, or service contribution that is of extraordinary value may propel recognition to a higher merit level. Each individual’s Self Report and peer input help to inform merit increases.
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee shall use the criteria in Section 3.9.1 (and any applicable departmental criteria delineated in an approved memorandum of understanding) to evaluate the faculty member’s comparative accomplishments in each of the three categories of performance to assign a rating using the scale above.  After assigning final merit ratings for each faculty member in the cohort, the Faculty Personnel Committee submits the individual ratings to the Provost.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Merit Models.txt [/INST] Model 1
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee evaluates the faculty member’s performance in each of the three categories of performance - teaching, scholarly or creative work, and University and community service, which are weighted on a basis of 60, 30, 10, respectively - on the basis of the information in the faculty member’s Faculty Personnel committee evaluation file and using the 5-point scale set forth below: 
+
+
+
+Points
+
+Does not meet minimum expectation 
+
+0
+
+Needs Improvement
+
+1
+
+Good Performance 
+
+2
+
+Very Good Performance 
+
+3
+
+Excellent Performance
+
+4
+
+The committee shall use the evaluation criteria in Section 3.9.1 to evaluate the faculty member’s performance since the last merit cycle (or initial appointment) in each of the three categories of performance to assign a rating using the scale above.
+
+2. Determining the Merit Category 
+
+The individual faculty member receives a rating of 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4 in each of the three categories. For each category, the rating is multiplied by the weight of the category. The weighted scores are then summed to produce an overall total points score that ranges between 0.0 and 4.0. The faculty member’s final score determines the merit award category, as follows: 
+
+Total Points
+
+Merit Category
+
+000 – 1.39
+
+No Merit
+
+0.00 – 1.99
+
+No Merit
+
+2.00 – 2.79
+
+Merit 1
+
+2.8 – 3.79
+
+Merit 2
+
+3.80 – 4.00
+
+Merit 3
+
+
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee then submits the merit determinations for all faculty to the Provost. 
+
+Awarding of Merit Pay 
+
+Total Merit Scores from all submitted merit evaluations are tabulated and ordered from highest to lowest score, and then grouped into three tiers of similar scores so as to indicate three orders of merit pay. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Model 2
+
+
+
+Salary Adjustments for Merit 
+
+Permanent salary increases may be awarded to faculty members who have reached the maximum salary step for their rank and whose teaching, scholarly activity and service to the College continue to be commendable. 
+
+1. Eligibility 
+
+Eligibility for a merit raise begins three years from a faculty member’s most recent merit evaluation. 
+
+		Determining Merit 
+
+The criterion for determining merit shall be continued performance at a level appropriate for the rank held. An applicant’s performance is evaluated utilizing the evaluation criteria in Section 3.9.1 in the three areas of teaching, service, and scholarship, which are weighted on a basis of 60, 30, 10, respectively.
+
+		Determining the Level of a Merit Raise 
+
+The level of a merit increase is determined by the areas in which an applicant’s performance has been judged commendable. An applicant can be awarded the Merit Tier 3 level for commendable performance in all three areas, Merit Tier 2 for commendable teaching and either service or scholarship, or Merit Tier 1 for commendable teaching. The award of a merit raise, regardless of the level, shall not be construed as indicating performance deserving of promotion. 
+
+		Application Procedure 
+
+An applicant for a merit raise should submit a letter of application and supporting documentation to the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs & Dean of Arts and Sciences before November 1 of the academic year preceding that in which the award would take effect. Evidence of merit should be in a format resembling that used for promotion. 
+
+		Evaluation Procedure 
+
+The Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs & Dean of Arts and Sciences shall discuss the applicant’s case for merit with the applicant, with the applicant’s department chair, the appropriate dean, and with any others deemed necessary by Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs & Dean of Arts and Sciences and/or the applicant. 
+
+
+
+6 Recommendation 
+
+The Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs & Dean of Arts and Sciences shall inform the applicant of his or her decision and the reasons for it by December 1. 
+
+7. Appeals 
+
+An applicant who disagrees with the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs & Dean of Arts and Sciences’ recommendation may appeal for reconsideration of the case. If the applicant feels that the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs & Dean of Arts and Sciences has failed to follow the proper procedures in reaching his or her decision, the applicant may ask the Procedural Review Committee to consider the case and make a separate recommendation to the Provost & Vice President for Academic Affairs. Any appeal should be made by December 15. 
+
+Awarding of Merit Raise 
+
+The Provost & Vice President for Academic Affairs grants all merit raises with the approval of the President. The Provost &Vice President for Academic Affairs’ decision is based on the recommendation of the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs & Dean of Arts and Sciences, as well as his or her own evaluation of the candidate’s performance. By February 15, the Vice President communicates the final decision directly to the applicant, stating reasons if that decision disagrees with the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs & Dean of Arts and Sciences’ recommendation. 
+
+Reapplication 
+
+An applicant denied a merit raise may reapply after two years. 
+
+Present and Future Value of a Merit Raise 
+
+A merit raise is permanent.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Merit.txt [/INST] Merit Evaluation
+
+Depending and based on the financial abilities of the College, full-time teaching faculty at Wheaton College are evaluated for merit increases on a periodic basis as set forth below.  
+
+Tenure-Line Faculty are determined through this review process to be “meeting expectations,” “exceeding expectations,” or “not meeting expectations” in each of the three areas of teaching, scholarly or creative work, and service.  Professors of the Practice are determined to be “meeting expectations,” “exceeding expectations,” or “not meeting expectations” in each of the areas of teaching and service.  Each category for the respective faculty classification receives equal weighting. 
+
+A percentage increase to the base salary is attached each year to each of the ratings, based upon the size of the salary pool. The same merit rating may not necessarily result in the same percentage increase during the years in which the merit rating applies: if the pool is larger, the percentage increase may be larger; if the pool is smaller, the percentage increase may be smaller. The merit rating remains in place until the faculty member’s next merit evaluation.
+
+1.	Tenure-Track Faculty
+
+Tenure-track faculty members will be evaluated for merit salary increase by the department/program faculty in the third year of appointment at Wheaton as part of the annual reappointment evaluation process (see Article IV, Section 2.2).  Tenure-track faculty whose initial appointment acknowledges years of service at another institution will be evaluated for merit increases at the mid-point of their probationary service at Wheaton.
+
+Evaluation Criteria
+
+The department/program uses the following criteria to determine if faculty member is meeting, exceeding, or not meeting expectations in each of the three areas of teaching, scholarly or creative work, and service. 
+
+a. Teaching 
+
+Meeting Expectations: Tenure-track faculty are expected to maintain effective teaching and the promise of continued progress toward meeting the following:
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content is current and appropriate for topic, students, and curriculum
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are articulated and appropriate for the curriculum; courses have appropriate range and are well-planned and organized; standard course practices are used; standard, intellectually sound course materials are used; assessments/assignments are appropriately challenging and tied to course goals; standards for evaluating the quality of student understanding are clear.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are presented effectively and complex concepts are explained clearly; students are consistently engaged, learning environment encourage students to participate and enable critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching engenders enthusiasm and appreciation in students to participate actively in the process of learning; class climate is inclusive and encourages student intellectual curiosity; teaching models standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is timely and substantive. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: A tenure-track faculty member’s teaching is considered exceeding expectations if, in addition to meeting expectations, the faculty member accomplishes much of the following: 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content is challenging and innovative and related to current issues and developments in the field.
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are well-articulated, high quality, relevant to all students and clearly connected to program or curricular goals; course topics are well-integrated and of appropriate range and depth; courses are well-planned and organized and reflect commitment to providing meaningful assignments and assessments; uses effective or innovative methods to support student learning; assessments/assignments are varied and allow students to demonstrate knowledge through multiple modalities; standards for evaluating understanding are clear and connected to program, curriculum, or professional expectations.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are presented effectively and complex concepts explained clearly; students are consistently engaged; the learning environment encourage students to participate and enable critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching fosters motivation, self-efficacy, and ownership of learning; class climate is inclusive and encourages student intellectual curiosity; students show high levels of engagement; teaching models standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is timely and substantive. 
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: A tenure-track faculty member’s teaching does not meet expectations if the evaluation indicates any of the following: 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content and materials are outdated or unsuitable for students in the course.
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are not articulated or are unclear; range of course is too narrow or too broad; courses are not sufficiently planned or organized; practices are not well-executed and show little development over time; assessments/assignments are at inappropriate difficulty level or not well-aligned with course goals; insufficient attention to student understanding; quality of learning is not analyzed with clear standards.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are not presented effectively, and complex concepts are not explained clearly; students are not consistently engaged; the learning environment does not encourage students to participate and or engage in critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching does not foster motivation, self-efficacy, and ownership of learning; class climate does not promote respect or sense of belonging among all students; class climate discourages student motivation; teaching does not model standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is not regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is not timely or substantive. 
+
+b. Scholarly or Creative Work
+
+Meeting Expectations: A tenure-track faculty member’s scholarly or creative work is considered meeting expectations, if the faculty member accomplishes the following: 
+
+Engagement in scholarship or creative activity appropriate to the discipline or interdisciplinary field and active involvement in the discipline or interdisciplinary field. 
+
+Articulation of a cogent agenda of scholarly research or creative activity for the years leading to the tenure review. This includes an agenda that will demonstrate continued scholarly/creative activity and productivity of work begun after employment at Wheaton.
+
+Significant and identifiable progress on work that will lead to a peer-reviewed or publicly critiqued body of scholarship or creative work at the time of tenure. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: A tenure-track faculty member’s scholarly or creative work is considered exceeding expectations, if the faculty member accomplishes the following: 
+
+		Presentation of a high quality scholarly and creative work relevant to the candidate’s disciplinary or interdisciplinary field in a peer-reviewed or critiqued publication or other appropriate public or professional forum while at Wheaton.
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: A tenure-track faculty member would be considered not meeting expectations if: 
+
+The candidate lacks a coherent scholarly research or creative agenda.
+
+The candidate demonstratives minimal progress in successfully pursuing a research or creative agenda.
+
+There is insufficient evidence of a trajectory that would meet scholarship or creative work expectations at time of tenure review. 
+
+b. Service 
+
+Meeting Expectations: A tenure-track faculty member’s service activity is considered meeting expectations, if the faculty member accomplishes the following:
+
+		Attends department/program and faculty meetings. 
+
+		Demonstrates the promise of becoming an effective student academic advisor.
+
+		Assumes service responsibilities at the department/program level and possibly at the College level. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: A tenure-track faculty member’s service activity may exceed expectations for service if the faculty member takes an effective and meaningful role in the life of the College and effectively advises assigned students: 
+
+		This may involve taking an active role on College-wide committees as elected or appointed; serving as faculty sponsor for student activities; supporting admissions efforts; or serving in professional organizations beyond Wheaton. 
+
+		Faculty member demonstrates leadership in disciplinary/professional organization(s). 
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: 
+
+The candidate does not assume service responsibilities at the department/program level. 
+
+The candidate does not assume a fair share of student advisees. 
+
+The candidate does not attend department/program and faculty meetings.
+
+
+
+The Department/Program Evaluation
+
+The tenured members of each department/program or, if a department/program has no tenured members, the Provost will review the record of the faculty member under review utilizing the criteria above, as well as any supplemental criteria established by the faculty member’s academic area and vote on whether the faculty member is meeting, exceeding, or not meeting expectations in each of three individual categories (teaching, scholarship/creative work, service).
+
+The department/program will make recommendations to the Provost, who makes the final decision regarding salary increases on the basis of those recommendations. 
+
+The merit evaluation will conclude with a letter from the Provost to the faculty member recording the results of the review. This salary decision holds until the tenure review. 
+
+Development Plan
+
+If a faculty member does not meet expectations in teaching, scholarship, or service at the time of the review, the faculty member will discuss with the Provost issues of concern and develop a plan to improve the faculty member’s work. The plan should be grounded in the feedback from the most recent review conducted by the department/program. A written copy of the plan will be included in the review materials for the faculty member’s next regularly scheduled review. 
+
+
+
+Tenured Faculty
+
+Tenured faculty members will be evaluated for merit salary increase by the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion every three years following the initial awarding of tenure.  
+
+Submission of Dossier
+
+The candidate shall submit a dossier to the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion that includes the following materials: 
+
+A curriculum vitae that highlights by shading publications, service, and all other pertinent activities during the review period.
+
+Course syllabi for the past three years as well as any others that demonstrate the candidate's range of teaching during the review period. 
+
+A list of all peer-reviewed publications, exhibitions, performances, or other scholarship and professional activities completed during the review period. 
+
+Any unpublished material considered relevant during the review period (e.g., manuscripts under review; works in progress; grant proposals; a list of lectures given; summaries of extracurricular activities, including organization of lecture series, exhibits, colloquia; reports of scholarly or creative activities both on and off campus, etc.).
+
+A listing of all service activities during the review period. 
+
+A succinct narrative of the success of the candidate's continuing engagement and innovation in teaching, scholarly or creative activity and service. This narrative should be based on documented evidence of the candidate's trajectory as a scholar or artist, teacher and community member, with special emphasis on how the candidate has set and met goals during the review period. The statement should include a summary of student evaluations for the most recent six semesters of teaching. 
+
+
+
+Evaluation Criteria
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion evaluates the faculty member’s performance since the last merit cycle (or initial tenure appointment), using the following criteria to determine if the tenured faculty member is meeting, exceeding, or not meeting expectations in each of the three areas of teaching, scholarly or creative work, and service.
+
+a. Teaching 
+
+Meeting Expectations: Tenured faculty are expected to maintain excellence in teaching, as demonstrated by the following: 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content is current and appropriate for topic, students, and curriculum
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are articulated and appropriate for the curriculum; courses have appropriate range and are well-planned and organized; standard course practices are used; standard, intellectually sound course materials are used; assessments/assignments are appropriately challenging and tied to course goals; standards for evaluating the quality of student understanding are clear.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are presented effectively, and complex concepts are explained clearly; students are consistently engaged; the learning environment encourage students to participate and enable critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching engenders enthusiasm and appreciation in students to participate actively in the process of learning; class climate is inclusive and encourages student intellectual curiosity; teaching models standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is timely and substantive. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: To exceed expectations of excellence in teaching, tenured faculty will demonstrate a commitment to their continuing development as teachers, which may take many forms. 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content is challenging and innovative and related to current issues and developments in the field.
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are well-articulated, high quality, relevant to all students and clearly connected to program or curricular goals; course topics are well-integrated and of appropriate range and depth; courses are well-planned and organized and reflect commitment to providing meaningful assignments and assessments; uses effective or innovative methods to support student learning; assessments/assignments are varied and allow students to demonstrate knowledge through multiple modalities; standards for evaluating understanding are clear and connected to program, curriculum, or professional expectations.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are presented effectively and complex concepts explained clearly; students are consistently engaged, learning environment encourage students to participate and enable critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching fosters motivation, self-efficacy and ownership of learning; class climate is inclusive and encourages student intellectual curiosity; students show high levels of engagement; teaching models standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is timely and substantive. 
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: A tenured faculty member’s teaching does not meet expectations if the evaluation indicates any of the following: 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content and materials are outdated or unsuitable for students in the course.
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are not articulated or are unclear; range of course is too narrow or too broad; courses are not sufficiently planned or organized; practices are not well-executed and show little development over time; assessments/assignments are at inappropriate difficulty level or not well-aligned with course goals; insufficient attention to student understanding; quality of learning is not analyzed with clear standards.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are not presented effectively and complex concepts are not explained clearly; students are not consistently engaged, learning environment does not encourage students to participate and or engage in critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching does not foster motivation, self-efficacy, and ownership of learning; class climate does not promote respect or sense of belonging among all students; class climate discourages student motivation; teaching does not model standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is not regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is not timely or substantive. 
+
+b. Scholarly or Creative Work
+
+Meeting Expectations: A tenured faculty member’s scholarly or creative work is considered meeting expectations, if the faculty member accomplishes the following: 
+
+Continued growth and engagement in scholarship or creative activity appropriate to the discipline or interdisciplinary field and active involvement in the discipline or interdisciplinary field during the review period. 
+
+Scholarship or creative work should reflect a degree of originality in the generation, application, or reinterpretation of concepts, methods, or creative works. 
+
+Unpublished work is poised to progress toward peer-reviewed publications, performances, juried exhibits, screenings, etc. A faculty member should not submit the same work-in-progress materials for multiple review cycles. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: A tenured faculty member’s scholarly or creative work is considered exceeding expectations, if the faculty member accomplishes the following: 
+
+		Presentation of a high quality scholarly and creative work relevant to the candidate’s disciplinary or interdisciplinary field in a peer-reviewed or critiqued publication or other appropriate public or professional forum while at Wheaton.
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: A tenured faculty member would be considered not meeting expectations if the individual: 
+
+Does not articulate a coherent scholarly or creative agenda.
+
+Does not provide evidence of scholarly or creative growth.
+
+c. Service 
+
+Meeting Expectations: A tenured faculty member’s service activity is considered meeting expectations, if the faculty member accomplishes the following:
+
+		Attends department/program and faculty meetings. 
+
+		Is an effective student academic advisor
+
+		Assumes service responsibilities at the department/program and/or College level. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: A tenured faculty member’s service activity will be considered to exceed expectations if, in addition to meeting expectations, the faculty member accomplishes some combination of the following: 
+
+		Demonstrates leadership and active involvement in the governance of the College.
+
+		Contributes to initiatives that facilitate the growth and development of the College. 
+
+		Demonstrates leadership in disciplinary/professional organization(s). 
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: A tenured faculty member’s service activity is considered to not meet expectations, if the faculty member:
+
+Does not assume governance service responsibilities. 
+
+Does not assume a fair share of student advisees. 
+
+Does not participate in department/program and faculty meetings.
+
+
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion Evaluation
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion will review the record of the faculty member under review utilizing the criteria above, as well as any supplemental criteria established by the faculty member’s academic area and vote on whether the faculty member is meeting, exceeding, or not meeting expectations in each of three individual categories (teaching, scholarship/creative work, service). 
+
+The members of the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion will make recommendations to the Provost, who makes the final decision regarding salary increases on the basis of those recommendations. 
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions shall be composed of those members described in Article I, Section 5.2.8.  Any member of the Committee so constituted who is a member of the same department or program as a candidate for merit, who is a member of the candidate's immediate family or household, or has any other relationship that would make reaching a sound, unbiased decision difficult shall be disqualified for conflict of interest or bias, will remove themselves from the case, and be replaced according to the replacement member guidelines in Article I, Section 5.1(3) of these Faculty Bylaws.
+
+The merit evaluation will conclude with a letter from the Provost to the faculty member recording the results of the review. This salary decision holds until the next merit review. 
+
+Development Plan
+
+A conference between the faculty member and the Provost will be scheduled if the faculty member does not meet expectations in teaching, scholarly or creative work, or service at the time of the review. During the meeting, the Provost and faculty member will discuss issues of concern and develop a plan to improve the faculty member’s performance. The plan should be grounded in the feedback from the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion. A written copy of the plan will be included in the dossier for the faculty member’s next regularly scheduled merit evaluation. 
+
+
+
+3.	Professors of the Practice
+
+Professors of the Practice faculty members will be evaluated for an initial merit salary increase by the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion in the fourth year of appointment at Wheaton as part of the summative evaluation process (see Article IV, Section 2.3.2).  Thereafter, Senior Professors of the Practice will be evaluated for merit every three years (see Section 4 below).
+
+Evaluation Criteria
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion evaluates the faculty member’s performance since the initial appointment at Wheaton using the following criteria to determine if the faculty member is meeting, exceeding, or not meeting expectations in the areas of teaching and service.
+
+a. Teaching 
+
+Meeting Expectations: Professors of the Practice are expected to maintain effective teaching and the promise of continued progress toward meeting the following:
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content is current and appropriate for topic, students, and curriculum
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are articulated and appropriate for the curriculum; courses have appropriate range and are well-planned and organized; standard course practices are used; standard, intellectually sound course materials are used; assessments/assignments are appropriately challenging and tied to course goals; standards for evaluating the quality of student understanding are clear.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are presented effectively and complex concepts are explained clearly; students are consistently engaged, learning environment encourage students to participate and enable critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching engenders enthusiasm and appreciation in students to participate actively in the process of learning; class climate is inclusive and encourages student intellectual curiosity; teaching models standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is timely and substantive. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: A Professor of the Practice’s teaching is considered exceeding expectations if, in addition to meeting expectations, the faculty member accomplishes much of the following: 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content is challenging and innovative and related to current issues and developments in the field.
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are well-articulated, high quality, relevant to all students and clearly connected to program or curricular goals; course topics are well-integrated and of appropriate range and depth; courses are well-planned and organized and reflect commitment to providing meaningful assignments and assessments; uses effective or innovative methods to support student learning; assessments/assignments are varied and allow students to demonstrate knowledge through multiple modalities; standards for evaluating understanding are clear and connected to program, curriculum, or professional expectations.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are presented effectively and complex concepts explained clearly; students are consistently engaged; the learning environment encourage students to participate and enable critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching fosters motivation, self-efficacy, and ownership of learning; class climate is inclusive and encourages student intellectual curiosity; students show high levels of engagement; teaching models standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is timely and substantive. 
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: A Professors of the Practice’s teaching does not meet expectations if the evaluation indicates any of the following: 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content and materials are outdated or unsuitable for students in the course.
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are not articulated or are unclear; range of course is too narrow or too broad; courses are not sufficiently planned or organized; practices are not well-executed and show little development over time; assessments/assignments are at inappropriate difficulty level or not well-aligned with course goals; insufficient attention to student understanding; quality of learning is not analyzed with clear standards.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are not presented effectively, and complex concepts are not explained clearly; students are not consistently engaged; the learning environment does not encourage students to participate and or engage in critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching does not foster motivation, self-efficacy, and ownership of learning; class climate does not promote respect or sense of belonging among all students; class climate discourages student motivation; teaching does not model standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is not regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is not timely or substantive. 
+
+b. Service 
+
+Meeting Expectations: A Professors of the Practice’s service activity is considered meeting expectations, if the faculty member accomplishes the following:
+
+		Attends department/program and faculty meetings. 
+
+		Demonstrates the promise of becoming an effective student academic advisor.
+
+		Assumes service responsibilities at the department/program level and possibly at the College level. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: A Professors of the Practice’s service activity may exceed expectations for service if the faculty member takes an effective and meaningful role in the life of the College and effectively advises assigned students: 
+
+		This may involve taking an active role on College-wide committees as elected or appointed; serving as faculty sponsor for student activities; supporting admissions efforts; or serving in professional organizations beyond Wheaton. 
+
+		Faculty member demonstrates leadership in disciplinary/professional organization(s). 
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: 
+
+The candidate does not assume service responsibilities at the department/program level. 
+
+The candidate does not assume a fair share of student advisees. 
+
+The candidate does not attend department/program and faculty meetings.
+
+
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion Evaluation
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion will review the record of the faculty member under review utilizing the criteria above, as well as any supplemental criteria established by the faculty member’s academic area and vote on whether the faculty member is meeting, exceeding, or not meeting expectations in each of three individual categories (teaching, scholarship/creative work, service). 
+
+The members of the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion will make recommendations to the Provost, who makes the final decision regarding salary increases on the basis of those recommendations. 
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions shall be composed of those members described in Article I, Section 5.2.8.  Any member of the Committee so constituted who is a member of the same department or program as a candidate for merit, who is a member of the candidate's immediate family or household, or has any other relationship that would make reaching a sound, unbiased decision difficult shall be disqualified for conflict of interest or bias, will remove themselves from the case, and be replaced according to the replacement member guidelines in Article I, Section 5.1(3) of these Faculty Bylaws.
+
+The merit evaluation will conclude with a letter from the Provost to the faculty member recording the results of the review. This salary decision holds until the next merit review. 
+
+Development Plan
+
+A conference between the faculty member and the Provost will be scheduled if the faculty member does not meet expectations in teaching or service at the time of the review. During the meeting, the Provost and faculty member will discuss issues of concern and develop a plan to improve the faculty member’s performance. The plan should be grounded in the feedback from the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion. A written copy of the plan will be included in the dossier for the faculty member’s next regularly scheduled merit evaluation. 
+
+4.	Senior Professor of the Practice
+
+Senior Professors of the Practice faculty members will be evaluated for merit salary increase by the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion every three years following the initial awarding of Senior Professor of the Practice status.
+
+Evaluation Criteria
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion evaluates the faculty member’s performance since the last merit cycle (or initial Senior Professor of the Practice appointment), using the following criteria to determine if the faculty member is meeting, exceeding, or not meeting expectations in the areas of teaching and service.
+
+a. Teaching 
+
+Meeting Expectations: Senior Professors of the Practice are expected to maintain excellence in teaching, as demonstrated by the following: 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content is current and appropriate for topic, students, and curriculum
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are articulated and appropriate for the curriculum; courses have appropriate range and are well-planned and organized; standard course practices are used; standard, intellectually sound course materials are used; assessments/assignments are appropriately challenging and tied to course goals; standards for evaluating the quality of student understanding are clear.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are presented effectively, and complex concepts are explained clearly; students are consistently engaged; the learning environment encourage students to participate and enable critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching engenders enthusiasm and appreciation in students to participate actively in the process of learning; class climate is inclusive and encourages student intellectual curiosity; teaching models standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is timely and substantive. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: To exceed expectations of excellence in teaching, Senior Professors of the Practice will demonstrate a commitment to their continuing development as teachers, which may take many forms. 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content is challenging and innovative and related to current issues and developments in the field.
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are well-articulated, high quality, relevant to all students and clearly connected to program or curricular goals; course topics are well-integrated and of appropriate range and depth; courses are well-planned and organized and reflect commitment to providing meaningful assignments and assessments; uses effective or innovative methods to support student learning; assessments/assignments are varied and allow students to demonstrate knowledge through multiple modalities; standards for evaluating understanding are clear and connected to program, curriculum, or professional expectations.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are presented effectively and complex concepts explained clearly; students are consistently engaged, learning environment encourage students to participate and enable critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching fosters motivation, self-efficacy and ownership of learning; class climate is inclusive and encourages student intellectual curiosity; students show high levels of engagement; teaching models standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is timely and substantive. 
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: A Senior Professor of the Practice’s teaching does not meet expectations if the evaluation indicates any of the following: 
+
+		Content Expertise: Course content and materials are outdated or unsuitable for students in the course.
+
+		Course Design: Course goals are not articulated or are unclear; range of course is too narrow or too broad; courses are not sufficiently planned or organized; practices are not well-executed and show little development over time; assessments/assignments are at inappropriate difficulty level or not well-aligned with course goals; insufficient attention to student understanding; quality of learning is not analyzed with clear standards.
+
+		Course Conduct: Ideas are not presented effectively and complex concepts are not explained clearly; students are not consistently engaged, learning environment does not encourage students to participate and or engage in critical discourse. 
+
+		Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Teaching does not foster motivation, self-efficacy, and ownership of learning; class climate does not promote respect or sense of belonging among all students; class climate discourages student motivation; teaching does not model standards of performance and professionalism expected of students.
+
+		Course Management: Faculty member is not regularly accessible to students; feedback to students on their work is not timely or substantive. 
+
+b. Service 
+
+Meeting Expectations: A Senior Professors of the Practice’s service activity is considered meeting expectations, if the faculty member accomplishes the following:
+
+		Attends department/program and faculty meetings. 
+
+		Demonstrates effectiveness as a student academic advisor.
+
+		Assumes service responsibilities at the department/program level and possibly at the College level. 
+
+Exceeding Expectations: A Senior Professors of the Practice’s service activity may exceed expectations for service if the faculty member takes an effective and meaningful role in the life of the College and effectively advises assigned students: 
+
+		This may involve taking an active role on College-wide committees as elected or appointed; serving as faculty sponsor for student activities; supporting admissions efforts; or serving in professional organizations beyond Wheaton. 
+
+		Faculty member demonstrates leadership in disciplinary/professional organization(s). 
+
+Not Meeting Expectations: 
+
+The candidate does not assume service responsibilities at the department/program level. 
+
+The candidate does not assume a fair share of student advisees. 
+
+The candidate does not attend department/program and faculty meetings.
+
+
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion Evaluation
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion will review the record of the faculty member under review utilizing the criteria above, as well as any supplemental criteria established by the faculty member’s academic area and vote on whether the faculty member is meeting, exceeding, or not meeting expectations in each of three individual categories (teaching, scholarship/creative work, service). 
+
+The members of the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion will make recommendations to the Provost, who makes the final decision regarding salary increases on the basis of those recommendations. 
+
+The Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions shall be composed of those members described in Article I, Section 5.2.8.  Any member of the Committee so constituted who is a member of the same department or program as a candidate for merit, who is a member of the candidate's immediate family or household, or has any other relationship that would make reaching a sound, unbiased decision difficult shall be disqualified for conflict of interest or bias, will remove themselves from the case, and be replaced according to the replacement member guidelines in Article I, Section 5.1(3) of these Faculty Bylaws.
+
+The merit evaluation will conclude with a letter from the Provost to the faculty member recording the results of the review. This salary decision holds until the next merit review. 
+
+Development Plan
+
+A conference between the faculty member and the Provost will be scheduled if the faculty member does not meet expectations in teaching or service at the time of the review. During the meeting, the Provost and faculty member will discuss issues of concern and develop a plan to improve the faculty member’s performance. The plan should be grounded in the feedback from the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion. A written copy of the plan will be included in the dossier for the faculty member’s next regularly scheduled merit evaluation.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Mock-Up - Termination of Appointments by the College.txt [/INST] Termination of Appointments by the College
+
+Termination of an appointment with tenure, or of a  tenure track, Professor of the Practice, or  Visiting Faculty appointment before the end of a specified term may be effected by the College  for adequate cause (Article IV, Section 8.2.1), financial exigency (Article IV, Section 8.2.2), or a formal discontinuation of a program or department of instruction (Article IV, Section 8.2.3).  If the College seeks to dismiss a faculty member for adequate cause, including but not limited to medical cause, the procedures specified in Article IV, Section 8.2.1 below shall be followed. 
+
+Subject to the following policies, the Board of Trustees shall have final authority for termination of tenured appointments by the College.
+
+Dismissal for Adequate Cause
+
+The College, subject to the procedures set forth below, reserves the right to terminate a contract of a tenured faculty member or a tenure track, Professor of the Practice, Senior Professor of the Practice, or Visiting Faculty member during the term of the faculty member’s contract for adequate cause.  Termination, or the threat of termination, for adequate cause may not be used by the College to restrain faculty members in their exercise of academic freedom.  Moreover, the conduct at issue must be related, directly and substantially, to the fitness of a faculty member to continue in their professional capacity with Wheaton College.  The burden of proof that adequate cause exists to terminate a faculty member’s appointment rests with the College.
+
+Examples of conduct that may constitute adequate cause include, but are not necessarily limited to: 
+
+Demonstrated professional incompetence: the long-term failure, after relevant, targeted developmental opportunities have been provided, to perform contractual obligations duties as described in these Faculty Bylaws or meet the expectations associated with the faculty member’s specific responsibilities as delineated in the faculty member’s appointment contract.
+
+Plagiarism or  research misconduct.
+
+Serious neglect of basic duties or responsibilities as set forth in Article IV, Section 1.
+
+Gross personnel misconduct rendering the faculty member unfit for association with students or colleagues (e.g., physical assault, sexual harassment, or unlawful discrimination, violation of standards of professional conduct, workplace bullying, threats of violence or violent actions, etc.).
+
+Inability to perform the essential or inherent duties and responsibilities of a faculty position, with or without reasonable accommodation(s) by the College, upon exhaustion or declination of all authorized leaves.
+
+Deliberate and serious violation of the rights and academic freedom of fellow faculty members, administrators, or students. 
+
+Conviction of a crime directly related to the faculty member’s fitness to practice their profession.
+
+
+
+Procedures for Cases in Which the Professional Fitness of a Faculty Member Under Contract is Being Questioned 
+
+These procedures will apply when the professional fitness of a faculty member under contract is questioned on any grounds.  
+
+Prior to initiating the proceedings set forth below, the President (or the President’s designee) and the party/parties who have questioned a faculty member’s professional fitness may hold a meeting to discuss the allegation(s) and allow the President (or the President’s designee) to form an initial assessment of the merits before the preliminary proceedings described below are undertaken.  Such an assessment may include, but is not limited to, further investigation into the matter by other appropriate College personnel.. 
+
+a. Preliminary Proceedings 
+
+When reason arises to question the professional fitness of a faculty member who has tenure or whose term appointment has not expired, the President or other appropriate administrative officer(s) should discuss the matter with the faculty member in personal conference.  Prior to this initial meeting the President (or designee) will provide the faculty member with a written statement of the general nature of the issues involved and with a copy of this document, ""Procedures for Cases in Which the Professional Fitness of a Faculty Member under Contract Is Being Questioned,"" advising the faculty member of the procedures.  Furthermore, the President (or designee) is encouraged to discuss the matter with the Provost prior to this initial meeting.  The faculty member is expected to cooperate fully by meeting with the President or other administrative officers in an attempt to determine the relevant facts in the matter.  At no time during or prior to the initial meeting should the faculty member in question be asked to resign, nor should any other  disciplinary sanctions be imposed at this time.  The faculty member may, however, be suspended with pay if the conditions set forth in subsection b. Formal Proceeding, paragraph 2 are met.  
+
+The parties should be allowed to have an advisor, who may be an attorney, present during any meeting, interview, or hearing during the termination for cause proceedings.  
+
+After due consideration the President and the faculty member in question may  resolve the matter by mutual consent. 
+
+If the matter is not terminated by mutual consent, the President and the Advisory Committee will begin preliminary proceedings.  During these proceedings the role of the President (or the President’s delegate) is to represent the College as it brings possible charges against the faculty member; the role of the Advisory Committee is to consider the interests of the College, assist the parties in finding a resolution, and if such a resolution is not forthcoming, providing a recommendation to the President whether formal proceedings should commence. 
+
+If the President believes that there are reasonable grounds to terminate the faculty member for adequate cause, the preliminary proceedings begin with the President presenting a written summary of the College's reasons therefore to both the Advisory Committee and faculty member.  The Committee then undertakes an inquiry consisting of an informal meeting with the President (or President’s designee), an informal meeting (without the presence of College administrative officers) with the faculty member unless the faculty member declines, and informal meetings with any others the Committee deems necessary.  
+
+Any member of the Advisory Committee who is a member of the same department or program as the faculty member may not participate in the meetings.  Moreover, members of the Advisory Committee shall be disqualified for conflict of interest and will remove themselves from the case.  In such an event, replacement of the disqualified member shall be made by the Committee on Committees and Agenda according to the replacement member guidelines set forth in Article I, Section 5.1(3) of these Faculty Bylaws.  
+
+The Advisory Committee shall observe full confidentiality about the matter.  
+
+The completion of the preliminary inquiry will result in a resolution of the matter agreeable to all parties or, failing a resolution, a written recommendation to the President whether formal proceedings should commence.  The Advisory Committee’s recommendation is not binding on the President.  
+
+After reviewing the Advisory Committee’s recommendations, the President will either notify in writing the faculty member that no formal proceedings will be brought or communicate to the faculty member that formal proceedings will be instituted as described in (b) formal proceeding, paragraph (1) below.  Except where there is disagreement about instituting proceedings, a statement with reasonable particularity of the basis for undertaking formal proceedings and the proposed penalties should then be jointly formulated by the President and the Advisory Committee; if there is disagreement, the President or the President’s representative will formulate the statement.
+
+An effort should be made by all parties concerned to resolve the matter as soon as possible.  Normally, the time between the initiation of the case, as described as in Paragraph 1 and the beginning of Formal Proceedings (see Section b – Formal Proceedings below) should be no more than three months. 
+
+b. Formal Proceedings 
+
+The formal proceedings shall be commenced by a communication sent by registered mail or personal delivery to the faculty member by the President, informing the faculty member of the statement formulated.  If the faculty member refuses to acknowledge the personal delivery or registered mailing by signature, the College will email the notice to the faculty member’s University email address, which shall be considered receipt of the notice.
+
+This statement will inform the faculty member of the right to a hearing, if requested, to determine the validity of the grounds for the intended termination, and the appropriate penalties, if any.  The faculty member should reply in writing whether a hearing is desired.  If a hearing has been requested, it will be conducted by the Appeals and Hearing Committee at a time and place specified by the President in consultation with the faculty member and the Appeals and Hearing Committee.  In setting the date of the hearing, sufficient time should be allowed the faculty member to prepare a defense, but the faculty member should answer in writing the statement of grounds for termination contained in the President’s letter not less than one week before the date set for the hearing.  If, during this period, there is a mutually agreed upon resolution, the proceedings will end and the matter concluded.  If the faculty member does not request a hearing and the President wishes to continue the action, the President will so inform the Appeals and Hearing Committee.  The Appeals and Hearing Committee shall consider the case on the basis of the obtainable information and decide what penalties, if any, shall be recommended. 
+
+Suspension of the faculty member during the proceedings involving them is justified only if immediate harm to the faculty member or others is threatened by the faculty member’s continuance or if the continued functioning of the faculty member in the position will substantially impair or disrupt the regular functions of the College.  Unless legal considerations forbid, any such suspension should be with pay.   
+
+The Appeals and Hearing Committee shall be constituted in the manner prescribed in Article IV, Section 9.1 of the “Review and Appeals Procedures for Certain Faculty Grievances.”  
+
+If a hearing has been requested, the Appeals and Hearing Committee shall consider the statement of  grounds for dismissal already formulated, and the faculty member’s response written before the time of the hearing.  The Appeals and Hearing Committee, in consultation with the President (or the President’s designee) and the faculty member, shall exercise its judgment as to whether the hearing should be public or private, and if private, shall decide whether a representative of a responsible educational association shall be permitted to attend as an observer.  If any facts are in dispute, the testimony of witnesses and other evidence concerning the matter set forth in the President’s letter to the faculty member shall be received. 
+
+The Appeals and Hearing Committee may, with the consent of the parties concerned, hold joint pre-hearing meetings with the parties in order to (i) simplify the issues, (ii) effect stipulations of facts, (iii) provide for the exchange of documentary or other information, and (iv) achieve such other appropriate prehearing objectives as will make the hearing fair, effective, and expeditious, including but not limited to setting additional time for the gathering of documentary or other evidence.
+
+The President shall have the option of attendance during the hearing.  The President may designate an appropriate representative to assist in developing and presenting the case.  The Appeals and Hearing Committee shall determine the order of proof, should normally conduct the questioning of witnesses, and, if necessary, should secure the presentation of evidence important to the case. 
+
+The faculty member shall have the option to be assisted by an advisor, at the faculty member’s own expense, who may be an attorney and whose functions shall be similar to those of the representative chosen by the President.  
+
+The faculty member shall have the additional procedural rights set forth in the AAUP 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, and shall have the aid of the Appeals and Hearing Committee, when needed, in securing the attendance of witnesses.  
+
+The faculty member or the faculty member’s advisor and the representative designated by the President shall have the right, within reasonable limits, to question all witnesses who testify orally.  The faculty member should have the opportunity to  question all adverse witnesses.  Where unusual and urgent reasons move the Appeals and Hearing Committee to withhold this right, or where the witness cannot appear, the identity of the witness, as well as the statements of the witness, shall nevertheless be disclosed to the faculty member.  Subject to these safeguards, statements may when necessary be taken outside the hearing and reported to it.  All of the evidence should be duly recorded by either a stenographer provided by the College or a video or audio recording of the proceedings.  
+
+The burden of proof that adequate cause exists rests with the College and will be satisfied only by the preponderance of the evidence in the record considered as a whole. 
+
+Unless special circumstances warrant, it should not be necessary to follow formal rules of court procedure.
+
+The Appeals and Hearing Committee shall reach its decision in conference by a majority vote, solely on the basis of the proceedings.  Before doing so, it shall give the opportunity to the faculty member (or the faculty member’s advisor) and the representative designated by the President to argue orally before it.  If written briefs would be helpful, the Appeals and Hearing Committee may request them.  The Committee may proceed to a decision promptly, without having the record of the hearing transcribed, where it feels that a just decision can be reached by this means; or it may await the availability of a transcript or recording of the hearing if its decision would be aided thereby.  It shall make explicit findings in writing with respect to each of the charges presented, and it shall provide a reasoned opinion including minority opinions, if any.  If the Appeals and Hearing Committee concludes that adequate cause for a dismissal has not been established, but that a penalty less than dismissal would be more appropriate, it will so recommend, with supporting reasons.  Publicity concerning the Committee’s decision may properly be withheld until consideration has been given to the case by the Board of Trustees.  The President, Provost, and the faculty member shall be notified of the decision in writing and shall be given a copy of the record of the hearing. 
+
+The President shall transmit to the Board of Trustees the full report of the Appeals and Hearing Committee, stating its action; acceptance of the Committee’s decision would normally be expected.  If the Board chooses to review the case, its review should be based on the record of the previous hearing, accompanied by opportunity for argument, oral or written or both, by the principles at the hearing or their representatives.  The decision of the Appeals and Hearing Committee shall be sustained or the case returned to the Appeals and Hearing Committee with objections specified. In such a situation the Appeals and Hearing Committee shall reconsider, taking account of the stated objections and receiving new evidence, if necessary.  It shall frame its decision and communicate it in the same manner as before.  Only after study of the Committee’s reconsideration shall the Board of Trustees make a final decision overruling the Appeals and Hearing Committee. 
+
+Except for such simple announcements as may be required, covering the time of the hearing and similar matters, public statements about the case by either the faculty member or administrative officers should be avoided as far as possible until the proceedings have been completed.  Announcement of the final decision should include a statement of the Appeals and Hearing Committee’s original recommendation, if this has not previously been made known. [March 20, 1972, pp. 3047-50; February 3, 1978, p. 3342]</s>"
+<s>[INST] Model Annual Security and Fire Safety Report (Clery Compliance).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Model Data Backup Policy.txt [/INST] PURPOSE 
+
+The purpose of this standard is to safeguard the college's Information Systems, prevent loss of College Data due to accidental deletion or corruption, and to facilitate timely restoration of College Data and business process should a system failure occur.
+
+POLICY 
+
+Information Technology Services (ITS) will provide policy-based, system level, network-based backups of essential College Information Systems. Backups of all Canisius College data and software must be retained such that server information systems and applications are fully recoverable.  Exceptions to this policy must be approved by the information system Data Owner and ITS.  Backups may be achieved using a combination of image copies, incremental backups, differential backups, transaction logs, or other techniques.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Data Owners—the owner of a collection of College Data is usually the manager responsible for the creation of that data or the primary user of that information. This role often corresponds with the management of department. In this context, ownership does not signify proprietary interest, and ownership may be shared. By definition, Data Owners are also Authorized Users.
+
+College Data— any information collected, manipulated, stored, reported, or presented in any format, on any medium, at any location by any department, program or office of the college in support of the college’s mission.
+
+College Information System—a set of information resources organized expressly for the collection, processing, maintenance, use, sharing, dissemination, or disposition of information. The term system is used throughout this policy to represent all types of computing platforms that can process, store, or transmit College Data.
+
+Media—includes, but is not limited to, paper, hard drives, random access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), disks, flash drives, memory devices, phones, Mobile Devices, networking devices, and all-in-one printers.
+
+
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+Data backups are performed by authorized ITS personnel only.
+
+The frequency of backups and data retention requirements is determined by the application Data Owner, in consultation with ITS. Requirements are established when a new information system is brought online and reviewed as needed. The frequency of backups and the retention period for backup copies is determined by the criticality of the College Data and systems as defined in Data Classification Policy and set forth classification.
+
+Unless an information system supporting an application or business function requires a custom schedule, ITS will backup systems using a default schedule of full backups and subsequent incremental backups. Versions at the file level are maintained based on information system requirements. Version retention and archiving policies associated with file versions are dictated by system requirements and criticality of the entire information system.  Current information systems backups are scheduled in Groups (savegroups) consisting of clients.  The listing of clients and the backup start time is available in the NetWorker Management Console.  When an Group completes a backup either successfully, or with failures, a notification is sent to ITS, which contains a summary of the backup process.
+
+Data Owners and ITS must approve of a default or custom backup schedule of a system and any emergency backup and operations restoration plans.
+
+Full backups will back up all files specified within an information system's backup program, regardless of when they were last modified or backed up. Incremental backups will back up all files that have changes since the last successful incremental or full backup.
+
+Through the use of full backups and incremental backups, backup windows (time period required to perform backups of one or more systems) will be minimized, as will be the storage space (disk or tape) required to store the backed-up data.
+
+Full system backups can be ensured prior to major upgrades to recover system in case of failures during change management. In case of virtual server environments, additional point-in-time backups are taken automatically before any scheduled operating system change management jobs. Those point-in-time backups are retained short term to allow for immediate rapid restoration.
+
+All College Data accessed from workstations, laptops, or other portable devices should be stored on networked file server drives or on University cloud storage to allow for backup (see the College’s Acceptable Use of College Computer and Network Systems and Cloud Computing policies).
+
+Backup Verifications
+
+On a daily basis, logged information generated from each backup job will be reviewed by ITS for errors, monitoring of job duration, and to optimize backup performance where possible.
+
+ITS staff will take corrective actions to reduce any risks associated with failed backups.
+
+Test restores will be performed periodically by ITS and problems will be identified and corrected.
+
+Recovery Overview
+
+Data recovery is handled by the Data Owner for the source of the backup data.  
+
+Retention Overview
+
+The retention periods of College Data contained within system level backups are designed for recoverability and provide data as it existed on ITS-maintained information systems during the time period defined by system backup program.
+
+ITS maintains a retention spreadsheet, which lists the retention periods for the various information systems maintained by ITS.  Generally, data is retained for a period of 1 month.
+
+Backup retention periods are different from records management retention periods for information defined by legal or business requirements.
+
+Archiving Overview
+
+Certain types of College Data are archived once a month and maintained for a period of 1 or 5 years.  For the most part, the following is true:
+
+Administrative and Banner data is archived for 5 years
+
+CBord data is archived for 5 years
+
+Academic data is archived for 5 years
+
+AD/LDAP data is archived for 1 year
+
+
+
+Off-Site Storage
+
+At a minimum, one fully recoverable version of all Private-Highly Restricted and Restricted College Data must be stored in a secure, off-site location. An off-site location may be in a secure space in a separate college building, or with an off-site storage vendor, or a partner higher education institution approved by ITS.
+
+Documentation must include the authorization and logging of deposits and withdrawals of all physical media that is stored off-site.
+
+Recovery Test
+
+Recovery procedures must be tested on an annual basis.
+
+Media Management/Documentation
+
+Backup College Data is stored on both disk-based and taped-based storage solutions dependent upon the nature and criticality of the data.  In case of disk-based storage, a complete replica of the backed-up data is maintained in a secure off-site location. Data replication between the primary and secondary backup units is encrypted in transit as well as at rest. In the case of tape media, the media are clearly labeled, and logs are maintained identifying the location and content of backup media.
+
+Backup images on assigned media (tape and disk) will be tracked throughout the retention period defined for that particular data type. When all data on the backup media have expired, the tape media will be securely re-incorporated and reused whereas in case of disk media the storage space will be reallocated and reused.
+
+Periodically and according to the recommended lifetime defined for the backup media utilized, ITS will retire and dispose of media so as to avoid media failures. In case of disk-based solution, industry best practices are followed to permanently remove the data from the backup units before they are decommissioned.
+
+Restoration Requests
+
+In the event of accidental deletion or corruption of information, requests for restoration of information will be made to the ITS Help Desk.
+
+ITS will carefully verify that the request for restoration of information is authorized by the Data Owners of the College Data prior to performing the restoration and ensure that the College Data restored is restored to a file system location with access controls appropriate to the information being restored.
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Acceptable Use of College Computer and Network Systems
+
+Cloud Computing Policy
+
+Data Classification Policy
+
+Information Security Program Policy
+
+Audit and Accountability Control Policy
+
+Configuration Management Policy
+
+
+
+Not Applicable.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Model Discipline Policies.txt [/INST] The College encourages a supportive problem-solving approach to workplace problems.  The process in this section will be implemented when a faculty member exhibits behavior that impose a significant adverse impact on members of the College community, on institutional educational goals, or on the mission of Wheaton College.  Corrective measures are intended to provide faculty with notice of deficiencies and an opportunity to improve.  Some violations of College policies and procedures, or continued negative behavior, may be of such serious nature that suspension or dismissal pursuant to the Procedures for Cases in Which the Professional Fitness of a Faculty Member Under Contract is Being Questioned (see Article --, Section --) may be appropriate and the College reserves the right to proceed with severe sanctions or dismissal for cause proceeding, without corrective measure, even if the action constitutes a first offense.
+
+Any member of the Teaching Faculty, including any serving as an academic administrator, who violates a published College or departmental policy or is in violation of the faculty member’s contractual responsibilities may be subject to corrective action. 
+
+The procedures specified in this policy provide for the consideration and determination of proposed corrective measures against faculty members short of severe sanction or dismissal for adequate cause.  Consideration and determination of disciplinary actions that may result in a proposed suspension or dismissal of a faculty member are governed by Procedures for Cases in Which the Professional Fitness of a Faculty Member Under Contract is Being Questioned (see Article --, Section --) and are not covered by these procedures.  In addition, teaching, scholarship/creative works, and/or service deficiencies previously identified as part of the annual evaluation processes are not covered by these procedures.
+
+In the case of allegations against a faculty member that appear to be within the scope of another specific College policy that has its own procedures for investigation and resolution (e.g., discrimination or sexual misconduct, etc.), the Department Chair or Provost as applicable shall forward such allegations to the appropriate person or department for handling pursuant to the applicable policy.  
+
+In all cases other than those set forth in paragraphs 2 and 3 above, when evidence of a faculty member’s actions suggest that uncorrected behavior may ultimately lead to grounds for dismissal, the College Dean(s) and Department Chair shall discuss the perceived shortcomings with the faculty member.  The meeting is intended to be collegial and may result in a resolution mutually acceptable to the parties.  
+
+If matters are not resolved as a result of the meeting, the Provost after consultation with the faculty member’s College Dean(s) and Department Chair, shall provide the faculty member with written notification of needed improvement that:
+
+Identifies the problem area(s), with specific evidence of the conduct in question;
+
+Identifies the corrective action to be taken within a specified time period; and
+
+Indicate that if the problem is not corrected, dismissal for cause may result. 
+
+Copies of the notification shall be placed in the faculty member's personnel file. The faculty member has the option of providing a written response for the personnel file.  
+
+Evaluation of Attempted Corrective Measures
+
+After the specified period for corrective action expires, the faculty member shall meet with the faculty member’s College Dean(s) and Department Chair to discuss performance during the period. 
+
+If the College Dean(s), after consultation with the Department Chair, determines that the problem has been resolved, notification will be provided to the faculty member and kept in the faculty member’s personnel file. 
+
+If the College Dean(s), after consultation with the Department Chair, determines that the faculty member will be provided further opportunity to complete corrective measures, the expectations regarding the corrective measures will be conveyed to the faculty member in writing by the Provost College Dean and placed in the faculty member’s personnel file. 
+
+If the College Dean(s), after consultation with the Department Chair, determines that corrective efforts were not successful and a sanction short of dismissal or suspension is warranted (e.g., ineligibility for promotion in rank; ineligibility for salary increase for an academic year; fines; teaching modifications; limitations in teaching, etc.), the College Dean(s) and Department Chair will consult with the Provost.
+
+If the Provost, after consultation with the College Dean(s) and Department Chair, determines that corrective efforts were not successful and suspension or dismissal is necessary, the Provost will forward a written letter of recommendation for suspension or dismissal to the President and faculty member.
+
+The Provost’s letter shall include a full and complete statement of the charge(s) upon which dismissal recommendation is based, together with the faculty member’s personnel file.  
+
+The faculty member shall be afforded five (5) academic days to file a written response to the Provost’s recommendation with the President.
+
+Grievance Rights
+
+Any faculty member whose rights as specified in the Faculty Policy Manual, have allegedly been violated as a result of the above process may file a formal grievance to the extent provided in Section 2.12.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+2.10.7.1 Warnings 
+
+If the Provost has evidence that a faculty member is demonstrating continued serious neglect of professional standards, duties, and/or responsibilities stated in these Bylaws, then the Provost may issue a written warning to the faculty member.  This written notice shall specify the basis upon which the warning is warranted, suggest appropriate remedial action(s), and invite the faculty member to respond in writing or in a meeting with the Provost.  The written warning and, if submitted, the faculty member's written response shall be entered into the permanent personnel file. 
+
+Following two such written warnings, and, in the presence of evidence that the faculty member's conduct has not substantially changed, the Provost shall consult with the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure Committee regarding the proposed disciplinary action.  The Provost may then either issue another warning letter or recommend to the President that specific sanction(s) be imposed.  If the Provost recommends sanction(s) and the President concurs, then the President shall send written notice to the faculty member specifying the sanction(s) being applied. 
+
+Sanctions 
+
+When disciplinary action involves the imposition of a sanction--such as an oral reprimand, a written reprimand, denial of specific faculty privileges, reassignment of teaching duties, or removal from assignments or administrative duties--the faculty member may grieve the imposition of the sanction in accordance with the policies and procedures in Section--. 
+
+If the President believes that the conduct of a faculty member is sufficiently grave to justify suspension or dismissal, the faculty member shall have an opportunity of a hearing in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section --. 
+
+
+
+It may become necessary from time to time for the College to respond to actions of faculty members that violate standards of professional conduct, duties and/or responsibilities stated in these Faculty Bylaws, or a College or department policy.  In addressing cases of alleged faculty misconduct, the first remedial action falls to other faculty colleagues who frequently can assist an individual through informal discussion and mentoring.  If such informal interventions fail, faculty colleagues may ask a Department Chair or other faculty colleague to act more formally (e.g., to remind the faculty member of applicable responsibilities or the expectations of the College faculty).  If the problem remains unresolved, it may be appropriate for a faculty colleague to file a grievance against the individual or to bring the problem to the attention of the Provost. 
+
+The Provost’s Consultation with the Faculty Member 
+
+If the Provost has evidence that a faculty member is demonstrating continuous neglect of duties or is in violation of the standards of professional conduct or College or department policy and the Provost believes that the situation will not be improved without administrative intervention, then the Provost will meet with the faculty member to discuss the concerns, to consider the faculty member’s response, and if possible to arrive at a resolution that is acceptable to the faculty member, to other involved parties (if any), and to the College.  The College expects that in the vast majority of cases problems will be resolved through such consultation and that further administrative action will be unnecessary. 
+
+Written Reprimand 
+
+If the matter cannot be resolved through consultation, the Provost may issue a written reprimand to the faculty member. The Provost’s letter will specify the basis for the reprimand, identify appropriate remedial action(s), and invite the faculty member to respond in writing. Based upon that response, the Provost may modify the letter, withdraw it, or let it stand.  The Provost will communicate the decision in writing to the faculty member. 
+
+If a final written reprimand is issued, it, the faculty member’s response (if any), and comments by the Provost (if any) will be placed in the faculty member’s file, review dossier file, and, in the case of a tenure-track faculty member, in the dossier file for the tenure review (whenever it occurs). 
+
+A faculty member who believes that a written reprimand is not justified may petition the Faculty Grievance Committee for redress, according to the policies and procedures described in Article III, Section - . 
+
+Note: Allegations of unlawful discrimination, harassment, and sexual and gender-based misconduct against a faculty member will be investigated and resolved pursuant to the Sexual and Gender-based Misconduct Policy for Faculty [INSERT LINK] or the Unlawful Discrimination and Harassment Policy [INSERT LINK], as may be applicable.
+
+Minor Administrative Sanctions 
+
+If the Provost believes that the matter cannot be resolved through consultation and that it is serious enough to warrant disciplinary action beyond a written reprimand, the Provost impose a minor administrative sanction. Such sanctions may include but are not necessarily limited to mandatory counseling or training, removal from an appointed position, or denial of specific faculty privileges.  The Provost’s letter will specify the basis for the disciplinary action and invite the faculty member to respond in writing.  Based upon that response, the Provost may modify the letter, withdraw it, or let it stand.  The Provost will communicate the decision in writing to the faculty member. 
+
+If a final minor administrative sanction is issued, it, the faculty member’s response (if any), and comments by the Provost (if any) will be placed in the faculty member’s file, review dossier file, and, in the case of a tenure-track faculty member, in the dossier file for the tenure review (whenever it occurs). 
+
+A faculty member who believes that a written reprimand is not justified may petition the Faculty Grievance Committee for redress, according to the policies and procedures described in Article III, Section - . 
+
+Note: An allegation that a minor sanction represents an instance of unlawful discrimination will be investigated and resolved pursuant to the Sexual and Gender-based Misconduct Policy for Faculty [INSERT LINK] or the Unlawful Discrimination and Harassment Policy [INSERT LINK], as may be applicable. 
+
+Major Administrative Sanctions 
+
+If the Provost has reason to believe that the conduct of a faculty member justifies the imposition of a major sanction, the Provost may initiate proceedings as described in Article --, Section . Major sanctions include but are not limited to renegotiation of workload, administrative leave without pay, or reduction in salary. The institution of a proceeding to impose a major sanction need not be preceded by steps described above. 
+
+Summary Suspension 
+
+In response to an extraordinary situation, a faculty member may be summarily suspended upon a finding by the President, in consultation with the Provost and others as appropriate, of good cause to believe that the continued presence of the faculty member on the campus would:
+
+constitute a serious threat to the safety of the faculty member, students, other faculty members, staff, or other members of the College community, or 
+
+substantially and unreasonably impair the ability of students, other faculty members, staff, or other members of the community to fulfill their duties or carry out their normal functions within the College. 
+
+A summary suspension is not a sanction. It is a temporary response to an urgent problem while the administration seeks to resolve the situation through either informal or formal means. Thus, a summary suspension may extend for no longer than five (5) working days. Unless legal considerations prohibit, a faculty member suspended in accordance with this policy will continue to receive full pay and benefits for the duration of the summary suspension. 
+
+Within the time of the suspension, the Provost will consult with the faculty member involved and with others as appropriate concerning the possibility of the faculty member’s returning to service, the need to place the faculty member on administrative leave, or other options as required within the policies and procedures of this Handbook. In the course of such consultation, the Provost will present to the faculty member a written statement indicating the reasons for the summary suspension and its duration and terms, with a copy to the Academic Affairs file. The faculty member may respond in writing. A copy of that statement and the faculty member’s response (if any) will also be forwarded to the Faculty Grievance Committee as part of any action relating to the case at hand. 
+
+A faculty member who believes that a summary suspension has been incorrectly imposed under this policy may petition the Faculty Grievance Committee for redress, according to the policies and procedures described in §3.11.1. However, if the Provost institutes proceedings that would require a hearing before the Grievance Committee (§§3.11.2.4 or 3.12.5), then the faculty member’s grievance concerning the summary suspension (if any) will be considered by the Committee as part of its hearing of the case. 
+
+An allegation that a summary suspension represents an instance of unlawful discrimination will be referred to the University's Equal Employment Opportunity Manager to be investigated according to the provisions of the University's Policy Prohibiting Unlawful Discrimination or Harassment (§3.5.5, Appendix 3-A). Allegations of unlawful discrimination will be considered and resolved before any matter is considered by the Grievance Committee. Any conclusion(s) reached by the Equal Employment Opportunity Manager based upon an investigation into charges of unlawful discrimination related to a summary suspension will be provided to the Grievance Committee if the case is presented to it.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Model Faculty Sick Leave.txt [/INST] Faculty Sick Leave
+
+To assist eligible faculty in active pay status when a non-work-related medical condition or illness within the faculty member's immediate family necessitates an absence from work, the University provides to eligible faculty 30 work days of paid sick leave per academic year.  
+
+Eligible faculty may be granted accrued paid sick time when they are unable to perform duties because of:
+
+A non-work-related illness, injury, pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical condition that prevents the faculty member from being able to perform his or her professional duties. An elective procedure, such as cosmetic surgery, that is not intended to diagnose, treat, or correct a physical or mental impairment is not considered an illness or related medical condition under this policy;
+
+The need to obtain personal health-related services not available outside of the faculty member’s regular working hours; or
+
+An illness within the faculty member's immediate family or established household or in situations that place primary responsibility for care of an employee's Immediate Family Member on the employee.  
+
+An “immediate family member” is defined as the faculty member’s spouse, parent(s), minor child(ren), and any other individual whose relationship with the employee is similar to that of a relationship described herein.
+
+Note: Parental leave (see the University Parental Leave Policy in the Employee Policy Manual) must be exhausted prior to the use of sick leave for the purpose of the birth of a child.  Parents (fathers, domestic partners, adoptive parents, or parents using a surrogate) may not use sick leave for a birth or adoption event. 
+
+Eligibility and Accrual for Faculty Sick Leave Benefits
+
+Ranked and Part-time Faculty who have completed of a full year of service at Thomas More University are eligible for paid sick as outlined below.  In addition, the sick leave benefit is made available to Special Appointment Faculty appointed to full-time appointment contracts who have completed of a full year of service at Thomas More University.   Adjunct Faculty are not eligible for sick leave.  
+
+When an eligible faculty member has exhausted all his/her paid sick days, eligibility for days will be restored, after the faculty member returns to work, at the rate of 30 days of paid leave, at regular base salary, per fiscal year beginning the next July 1.  Faculty members are not permitted to roll over unused sick leave year to year.
+
+Description of Sick Leave Benefit
+
+Ranked and Special Appointment Faculty appointed to full-time appointment contracts accrue 30 work days of paid sick leave per academic year after the completion of a full year of service at Thomas More University. Part-time Faculty carrying between a 50% and a 75% teaching load will be granted 15 days of paid sick leave for the associated academic year after the completion of a full year of service at Thomas More University.   
+
+Coordination with Family and Medical Leave 
+
+Time away from work for sick leave will be designated as Family and Medical Leave if the faculty member qualifies for such leave based on the University's Family and Medical Leave Act Policy (see the Employee Policy Manual).   If a faculty member qualifies for both paid sick leave and Family and Medical Leave, the two benefits will run concurrently.  If paid sick leave is exhausted, the faculty member may qualify for additional unpaid time off work per the Family and Medical Leave Act Policy.  Human Resources will supply information and forms necessary to apply for Family and Medical Leave, if applicable.
+
+														Fraudulent Use of Sick Leave
+
+														Sick leave may not be used for paid time off when the faculty member needs time off for something other than anything not covered under this Policy.  Faculty members who use paid sick leave fraudulently may incur discipline up to and including termination.
+
+														Protection from Discrimination, Harassment or Retaliation
+
+														No faculty member will face discrimination, harassment, or retaliation as a result of the faculty member’s use of paid sick leave consistent with this Policy. 
+
+														Benefits
+
+														During a sick leave, all benefits remain in effect, except if a holiday falls during the leave.  Faculty will not receive holiday pay if a holiday occurs when an employee is on sick leave, unless otherwise approved by supervisor in consultation with the faculty member’s College Dean and Director of Human Resources.  
+
+														Voluntary Termination
+
+														The University considers a voluntary termination by the faculty member when the following incidents occur:
+
+																	If the faculty member fails to return from the sick leave at the specified time without approval from the faculty member’s Department Chair and College Dean.
+
+																	If the faculty member seeks or accepts any work with another employer during the sick leave.
+
+																	If the faculty member operates his/her own business during the sick leave.
+
+														Forfeiture Upon Separation or Termination
+
+Sick leave days are forfeited if unused upon separation or termination of employment.
+
+Reporting Procedures
+
+In the case of an unscheduled sick leave absence, the faculty member who is absent or late because of illness (or any other reason set forth in this Policy) must call the faculty member’s Department Chair prior to the regular scheduled starting time of the faculty member’s class to report the absence, the reason for the absence and the expected date of return to work.  If, because of an emergency, the faculty member cannot call in advance, he or she must call the Department Chair as soon as possible, with the same information and the reason why he or she was not able to give advance notice for the absence.
+
+														In the case of a scheduled absence, the faculty member is expected notify in writing the faculty member’s Department Chair as far in advance as possible and, if the faculty member will be absent from work for multiple days, the faculty member must also give the expected date of return to work.  For scheduled absences, the University’s general expectation is that faculty will endeavor to arrange scheduled time away (e.g., for medical appointments) during non-instruction and scheduled office hour time and, if that is not possible, at such times as are least disruptive to the department.  
+
+														Certification from a physician is required at least 2 weeks prior to the scheduled leave.  If the leave is not foreseeable, medical documentation is needed as soon as practically feasible.
+
+The faculty member is expected to keep the Department Chair informed about his or her status and expected date of return to work.  If the faculty member cannot return to work on the expected date of return, the faculty member must notify the Department Chair in writing as much in advance as possible and include a new expected date of return.  The faculty member should explain the reason for the absence (e.g., a medical appointment for the employee, a medical appointment for the employee’s child), but is not required to explain the nature of the condition (e.g., the medical diagnosis).
+
+In general, the Department Chair must manage the absence of faculty who report to the Department Chair, including reporting sick leave absences for payroll purposes and notifying Human Resources if the faculty member will be out for four consecutive days and if the faculty member, without notification, does not return to work on their expected date of return and/or has no new expected date of return.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Model Faculty Status- Types of Faculty Appointments.txt [/INST] Faculty Status – Types of Faculty Appointments
+
+The College appoints faculty members to one of the following types of faculty appointments:
+
+Full-time Teaching Faculty 
+
+Tenure-Track Teaching Faculty
+
+Tenured Teaching Faculty
+
+Regular Term Teach Faculty
+
+Professor of the Practice
+
+Associate Faculty
+
+Non-Tenure Track Continuing Faculty
+
+Adjunct Faculty
+
+Faculty-in-Residence
+
+Visiting Faculty
+
+Per Course Faculty
+
+The College also reserves the right to assign faculty rank to certain administrators (Section 1.5) and to acknowledge faculty members who have separated from service with the College following distinguished careers with the honorary designation of Associate Professor or Professor Emeritus (Emerita) (see Section 1.4).
+
+Full-Time Teaching Faculty
+
+The Full-time Teaching Faculty is comprised of those individuals with either Tenured, Tenure-Track, or Regular Term faculty appointments having full-time teaching appointments.  
+
+Members of the Full-time Teaching Faculty enjoy the rights and protections set forth in these Faculty Bylaws.  Moreover, Full-Time Teaching Faculty are afforded full voting privileges at Faculty and academic department or programmatic meetings.  They are also eligible to serve on standing Faculty and College standing committees; however, Regular Term Faculty are not eligible to serve on committees for which tenure is a requirement.
+
+Tenure-Track Teaching Faculty 
+
+Tenure-Track teaching faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who hold tenure-track probationary appointments (see Article II, Section 2.1) to one of four academic ranks: Instructor, Assistant Professor, or Professor, and are eligible to stand for tenure (see Article III, Section 5) at the conclusion of the probationary period.  
+
+Tenured Teaching Faculty
+
+Tenured teaching faculty members are full-time teaching faculty members who hold tenured appointments to the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.  
+
+Regular Term Teaching Faculty
+
+Regular Term Faculty are members of the full-time teaching faculty who hold renewable term appointments, but are not eligible for tenure.  Regular Term Teaching Faculty titles approved by the College include Professor of the Practice (Section 1.3.1.1), Associate Faculty (Section 1.3.1.2), Non-Tenure Track Continuing Faculty (Section 1.3.1.3) and Lecturers (Section 1.3.1.4).
+
+Regular Term Faculty may expect their appointment to be renewed unless otherwise notified pursuant to the schedule detailed in the Non-Reappointment Policy (see Article III, Section 3.5).  Moreover, Regular Term Faculty enjoy all the rights enumerated in these Faculty Bylaws.  Those rights include, but are not limited to:
+
+Voting rights in department and faculty meetings
+
+Protection under the standards of notification for non-reappointment
+
+Eligibility for service on committees
+
+Access to and protection under the grievance procedures
+
+Academic freedom
+
+Faculty benefits and raises as determined by the faculty salary plan 
+
+Access to faculty scholarship funds
+
+Opportunity to apply for sabbatical leave, which will be granted on a case-by-case basis in keeping with standard College policy
+
+In all instances, Regular Term Faculty must possess the appropriate academic credentials or equivalent professional experience to teach assigned courses in their academic discipline and are subject to the evaluation policies and procedures described in Article III, Section 3.4. 
+
+Regular Term Faculty may request to make the position tenure-track.  If the request is supported by the applicable academic department or program, the Provost will consider the requested conversion based on the fiscal and curricular needs of the College.  Tenure-track appointments, for which Professors of the Faculty in post may apply, will follow national searches, and all current hiring criteria pertaining to tenure-track faculty will obtain.   If the tenure-track position is awarded, the manner of counting the probationary period will be determined by the Provost in consultation with the Chair of the candidate's department or academic program and stated in the initial tenure-track appointment contract.
+
+Professor of the Practice
+
+Professors of the Practice are non-tenure track, full-time teaching faculty who possess the expertise and achievements in a relevant field of professional practice to provide effective, practice-oriented instruction in areas that supplement the core pedagogical instruction provided by the tenured and tenure-track teaching faculty.  While teaching and service are the primary areas of responsibility, Professors of the Practice may have additional obligations as delineated in their appointment contract.
+
+Professor of the Practice appointments are for one, two, or three years, subject to renewal and with the provision that the position does not lead to tenure or a tenure-track position.  Initial appointments are normally for one year.  The renewal of all contracts will be subject to periodic reviews and the curricular needs of the College and departments or programs.  Written notice that an appointment is not to be renewed will be given to the faculty member in advance of the expiration of the appointment in accordance with Article III, Section 3.5.  Upon appointment for a third term, Professors of the Practice may be promoted to Senior Professors of the Practice.
+
+Associate Faculty
+
+Eight full-time positions, which carry a significant teaching commitment but are currently classified as “staff,” will be re-classified as “Associate Faculty.”  Associate Faculty carry responsibilities in the areas of teaching and service.  Associate Faculty positions will not be tenure-track but will have all other faculty rights as enumerated in these Faculty Bylaws and by AAUP.  Those rights include, but are not limited to:
+
+Voting rights in department and faculty meetings;
+
+Protection under the standards of notification for non-reappointment; 
+
+Eligibility for service on committees;
+
+Access to and protection under the grievance procedures;
+
+Academic freedom;
+
+Faculty benefits and raises as determined by the faculty salary plan; 
+
+Access to faculty scholarship funds;
+
+Opportunity to apply for sabbatical leave, which will be granted on a case-by-case basis in keeping with standard College policy. 
+
+Associate Faculty will receive two-year contracts until they have completed six years of service in their current positions.  Upon completion of their sixth year of service, Associate Faculty will receive five-year contracts.  The renewal of all contracts will be subject to periodic reviews and the curricular needs of the College and departments. 
+
+Associate Faculty will submit annual evaluations to their departments through the first six years of service, followed by evaluations in the fourth year of subsequent contractual periods. Associate Faculty will be eligible for promotion to “Senior Associate Faculty” after completing their first five-year contracts. 
+
+The College will hire no new faculty in the category of Associate Faculty.  No new staff will be hired to carry primary or majority responsibility in instruction. 
+
+When an Associate Faculty leaves Wheaton or relinquishes the faculty member’s position as Associate Faculty, the position itself will terminate, but the total monies allocated to this position will be used to fund additional tenure-track faculty appointments not necessarily in the department of the Associate Faculty. 
+
+To protect individuals holding Associate Faculty positions, only an Associate Faculty may request to make the position tenure-track.  If the Associate Faculty’s request is supported by the department, the Provost will consider the requested conversion based on the fiscal and curricular needs of the College.  Tenure-track appointments, for which Associate Faculty in post may apply, will follow national searches, and all current hiring criteria pertaining to tenure-track faculty will obtain.  If the tenure-track position is awarded, the manner of counting the probationary period will be determined by the Provost in consultation with the Chair of the candidate's department or academic program and stated in the initial tenure-track appointment contract.
+
+This legislation stands alongside recognition that there are, in the view of AAUP, legitimate short-term needs for contingent faculty.  These “should be limited to specialized fields and emergency situations” such as sabbatical replacements, substitutes for leaves of absence, lab instructors, or limited artist-in-residence’ appointments. [November 3, 2006, pp. 4608-4609] 
+
+Non-Tenure Track Continuing Faculty
+
+This section pertains Non-Tenure Track Continuing Faculty include the seven non-tenure-track faculty members as of 2006-2007 (one in each of the following departments: Biology, English, Hispanic & Italian Studies, Music, Psychology, Religion, Theatre Studies and Dance) who are full-time employees of the College and have either full-time or part-time appointments. 
+
+This proposed legislation seeks to recognize formally the rights and protections of the seven faculty members who hold these positions while reducing and, ultimately, eliminating the College’s reliance on non-tenure-track continuing faculty who work full-time at Wheaton.   These seven faculty positions are not tenure-track but have all other faculty rights as enumerated in Faculty Legislation and by AAUP.  Those rights include, but are not limited to: 
+
+Voting rights in department and faculty meetings
+
+Protection under the standards of notification for non-reappointment
+
+Eligibility for service on committees
+
+Access to and protection under the grievance procedures
+
+Academic freedom
+
+Faculty benefits and raises as determined by the faculty salary plan
+
+Access to faculty scholarship funds and, 
+
+The opportunity to apply for sabbatical leave, which will be granted on a case-by-case basis in keeping with standard College policy. 
+
+These seven faculty members, in keeping with current College practices and articles enumerated in Faculty Legislation, will receive five-year contracts beginning in 2008-2009. The renewal of all contracts will be subject to periodic reviews and the curricular needs of the College and departments. 
+
+These seven faculty members will be evaluated by their departments at the end of 2007-2008 and again in the fourth year of subsequent 5-year contractual periods.  Departmental annual evaluation forms will be used for these evaluations.  Those who are already on five-year contracts may choose to have their first evaluation conducted in the fourth year of their current contracts. 
+
+The College will hire no new full-time employees with full or part-time teaching appointments as non-tenure-track continuing faculty beyond three years. 
+
+When these seven faculty members leave Wheaton or relinquish their positions, the positions themselves will terminate, but the total monies allocated to the positions will fund tenure-track faculty appointments based on curricular and programmatic needs, but not necessarily in the department of the faculty members. 
+
+This legislation stands alongside recognition that there are, in the view of AAUP, legitimate short-term needs for non-tenure-track faculty. These needs “should be limited to specialized fields and emergency situations” such as lab instruction, limited ‘artist-in-residence’ appointments, sabbatical replacements, and substitutes for leaves of absence. [March 2, 2007, pp. 4625-4628] 
+
+Lecturers
+
+Lecturers are non-tenure track faculty who teach courses limited to a specific area of expertise and do not include the normal expectations for research or creative activity and College service.  On occasion, Lecturers may be assigned other faculty responsibilities.
+
+Adjunct Faculty 
+
+Adjunct faculty members make a substantial contribution to the academic activities of the College’s various academic departments and programs, but whose professional activities do not span the full range of responsibilities of the Full-time Teaching Faculty.  Adjunct titles approved by the College include Faculty-in Residence (Section 1.2.1), Visiting Faculty (Section 1.2.2), and Per Course Faculty (Section 1.2.3).  
+
+Adjunct Faculty are appointed via Term appointment contracts (see Article II, Section 2.4) on either a full or part-time teaching load basis.  They perform those duties and responsibilities as stated in their respective appointment contracts.  In all instances, Adjunct Faculty must possess the appropriate academic credentials or equivalent professional experience to teach assigned courses in the academic discipline.  Reappointment of Adjunct Faculty is at the discretion of the College and successive reappointments do not confer continuing employment status and imply no employment rights beyond the duration of the term of employment set forth in the appointment contract.  
+
+Adjunct faculty members are not eligible to apply for promotion in academic rank or tenure and have voting rights at faculty and department meetings and committee responsibilities only as delineated in Article IV.  They do, however, enjoy such other rights and responsibilities as are specifically indicated in these Faculty Bylaws, including but not limited to academic freedom.  Benefits are dependent upon whether the faculty member is appointed on a full-time or part-time teaching load basis.  
+
+In all cases where a faculty member is retained for more than one year on a full-time basis – whether the individual has a multiple year contract or a one-year contract that is being renewed – the Department Chair or Program Director shall annually review the individual’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to do (see Article IV).  A copy of this evaluation shall be shared with the faculty member and placed in the individual’s faculty personnel file.  [November 5, 2004, p. 4486]
+
+Adjunct Faculty may apply for a posted Full-time Teaching Faculty position with the College in accordance with the procedures set forth in Article III, Section 3.1.  If an Adjunct Faculty member applies for a Full-time Teaching Faculty position and is offered the position, the individual may negotiate credit for full-time time service at Wheaton College as may be applicable. 
+
+Faculty in Residence
+
+The title of Faculty-in-Residence shall be accorded to a person who is associated with the College to perform specific limited duties within an area of special expertise or training.  Examples of Faculty-in-Residence include, but are not limited to, Scholar-in-Residence, Writer-in-Residence, and Artist-in-Residence.
+
+Visiting Faculty
+
+CURRENT COLLEGE TEXT
+
+A faculty member is considered visiting when the individual’s appointment (full-time) is for a period normally not to exceed one year.  [November 5, 2004, p. 4486; May 4, 2007, p. 4640]  
+
+For such appointments, the Department Chair may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73]  
+
+In all cases where a faculty member is retained for more than one year on a full-time basis – whether the individual has a multiple year contract or a one-year contract that is being renewed – the Department Chair shall annually review the individual’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to do. A copy of this evaluation shall be shared with the faculty member and placed in the individual’s faculty personnel file.  [November 5, 2004, p. 4486] 
+
+ALTERNATIVE MODEL
+
+Visiting appointments are reserved for individuals who either hold a full-time position at another institution of higher education and are associated with the College while on leave from such other institutions or are distinguished individuals in their fields.  Visiting appointments are often made to replace voting faculty who have sabbaticals or leaves of absence, to fill spots left open while a search is being conducted, or when the College is experimenting with a new program.
+
+Visiting faculty are appointed to Term appointment contracts.  Only in unusual circumstances will a visiting appointment exceed a total of [INSERT years].  
+
+Visiting Faculty are assigned the rank they hold from their most recent employer with the descriptor “visiting” (i.e., Visiting Instructor, Visiting Assistant Professor, Visiting Associate Professor, Visiting Professor, and Visiting Professor of the Practice).  In the event the faculty member does not carry a rank, the Provost has the discretion to assign an appropriate rank at the time of initial appointment.
+
+Per-Course Faculty
+
+Per-course appointments are reserved for non-salaried individuals (renumerated on a per-course basis) who teach either one or two courses during any given semester or teaching period pursuant to a Term appointment contract.  Faculty assigned to teach courses on a per-course basis who have previously been assigned an academic rank at Wheaton College or another regionally accredited institution retain the highest academic rank that they possessed at Wheaton or their prior institution.  Other per-course faculty are assigned the rank of Adjunct Instructor.  
+
+Faculty Emeritus, Faculty Emerita
+
+Emerita or emeritus status honors a faculty member's distinguished service and contributions during a career at the College, as well as the faculty member’s interest in an ongoing and meaningful connection with Wheaton.  
+
+A retiring faculty member’s department/program may request emerita or emeritus status for that colleague via a letter from the Department Chair or Program Director to the Provost.  That letter should indicate that the full department or program supports the request and outline the reasons why the department believes the faculty member’s contributions merit emeritus status.
+
+Following the recommendation of the department/program, the Provost will request that the Board of Trustees grant emeritus status to the faculty member will review the received nomination and make a written recommendation to the Board of Trustees to either confer/not confer emerita/emeritus status.  This recommendation shall not be subject to appeal.  The Board of Trustees officially confers emeritus status.  Generally, the honor is conferred at a formal academic ceremony.  
+
+Faculty who retire at the Associate Professor level may, at the Provost’s discretion, be recommended for the status of Professor Emerita/Emeritus.  The Chair or Program Director’s letter to the Provost may make such a request, along with any recommendations for title.
+
+Emeritae/emeriti faculty are not considered employees of the College and therefore are not entitled to fringe benefits.  They are considered members of the broader Wheaton community.  However, emeriti faculty are expected to conduct themselves in accordance with the expectations for all Wheaton faculty College policy.  As members of the broader Wheaton community, emeritae/emeriti faculty are welcome to advise the College community in all College assemblies, colloquia, and other academic events.  However, they are not afforded voting privileges in faculty governance.
+
+Emeritae/emeriti faculty are entitled to the following recognitions:
+
+Award of an inscribed seal of the College;
+
+Listing in the College Catalog and other College publications that collectively list the Faculty; and
+
+The right to participate in formal and informal academic events and other College events and social functions with other faculty colleagues.
+
+Access to Resources
+
+Emeriti faculty may maintain their Wheaton photo ID.  The Wheaton ID can be used to access the Wallace Library, as well as recreational and dining facilities.  With their Wheaton ID, emeriti faculty are eligible for any faculty discounts that the Wheaton bookstore offers.
+
+Emeritae/emeriti may keep their Wheaton email account, and have access to InsideWheaton and the Wheaton network, with the proviso that these services be used within the limits of Wheaton’s acceptable use policy, and for Wheaton-related business, academic, and professional purposes.  The full acceptable use policy may be found here. 
+
+Emeritae/emeriti faculty may have borrowing privileges from local Wheaton collections upon request, and may request interlibrary loan services via the Wallace Library. Emeriti faculty will also have off-campus access to online library resources. 
+
+Emeritae/emeriti faculty will continue to have access to OnCourse.  OnCourse provides online access for up to three academic years of courses.
+
+Emeritae/emeriti faculty, with the approval of their home department or program, may maintain a faculty profile on the departmental website.
+
+A campus mailbox will not be provided, though correspondence can be directed in care of the appropriate faculty assistant. 
+
+The College does not fund special software or computing needs.
+
+Any human subjects research carried out is subject to IRB approval.
+
+Any animal research carried out is subject to IACUC approval.
+
+Office Space
+
+Emeritae/emeriti faculty may request office space on campus.  Office space will be granted at the discretion of the Office of the Provost, and may depend upon space availability, and the faculty member’s need for regular use of the space.  Emeritae/emeriti faculty who are granted office space will commonly receive the following:
+
+A working phone, if requested
+
+A standard Wheaton desktop or laptop, if requested. (Emeriti faculty may transfer an existing computer from the faculty member’s old office)
+
+Wheaton College Microsoft licenses for OS and Offic
+
+Technical support services, as available
+
+Any emeritae/emeriti faculty who are teaching as adjunct faculty members will have access to office space through the department’s regular processes for accommodation of adjuncts.
+
+For considerations of safety, the office should be used during business hours only. 
+
+The use of office space may be withdrawn at any time. 
+
+Should an emeritae/emeriti faculty member be granted office space, the College cannot provide moving or packing services. 
+
+Please note that these benefits and services are subject to change, and may end at any time, at the College’s sole discretion. 
+
+Revocation
+
+Once awarded, emeritae/emeriti status continues in perpetuity unless the recipient either requests to have status rescinded or violates the intent and spirit of emeritus status by engaging in serious dishonorable conduct in violation of law, rule, or policy and/or causes harm to the College’s reputation. 
+
+In order to revoke emeritae/emeriti status without the consent of the individual, a petition must be made by a member of the College to the President, and subsequently to the Board of Trustees, which has the final authority to revoke the individual’s emeritus status.  Actions or conduct protected by academic freedom and unlawful discrimination shall not be used to revoke emeritae/emeriti status.
+
+Faculty Contracts and Terms of Appointment
+
+A faculty contract is a written mutual agreement between an individual granted faculty status and the College.  The contractual terms (appointment classification, location of appointment, rank, salary, length of appointment, and tenure status) of every faculty appointment will be stated in writing only by the President or the Provost to the faculty member.  No other person is authorized to offer an appointment or to enter into a faculty appointment contract.  Any subsequent extensions or modifications of an appointment, and any special understandings, or any notices incumbent upon either party to provide, will be stated or confirmed in writing, and a copy will be given to the faculty member.  
+
+The following types of contracts are issued to individuals granted faculty status at Wheaton College:
+
+Tenure Track Contracts, Probationary Appointments
+
+Faculty members eligible for tenure receive tenure-track contracts and hold probationary appointments until they either receive tenure or separate from the College.  A probationary appointment is made with the understanding that both the College and the probationary faculty member will engage in a period of mutual evaluation—the probationary period—leading to the tenure decision.
+
+Faculty members eligible for tenure may be appointed to the rank of Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor, upon consideration of their qualifications and experience relative to the standards for appointment in rank. 
+
+A tenure-track appointment is normally renewable up to a total of seven (7) years—i.e., a maximum of six (6) years prior to and including the year of the tenure decision, plus one (1) additional terminal year in the case of a negative tenure decision.  A tenure-track faculty member’s time to the tenure decision will be stated in the initial letter of appointment.  
+
+Faculty members holding tenure-track contracts undergo annual reappointment review as specified in Article III, Section 3.5.  A faculty member undergoing an unsuccessful tenure review will receive notice and will be allowed to complete the final year of the probationary appointment. 
+
+Tenured Contracts
+
+Tenure contracts are issued to Full-time Tenure Track Teaching Faculty who have attained tenured status (see Article III, Section 5).  The granting of tenure can only be effected by the procedures specified in the College’s Tenure Policy and upon the affirmative vote of the Board of Trustees.  De facto tenure is not awarded at Wheaton College.
+
+A Tenure contract is subject only to annual modifications pertaining to academic rank, salary, and academic and/or administrative assignments in accordance with the provisions of these Faculty Bylaws.  A tenured faculty member has the contractual right to continuous appointments until the faculty member resigns, is dismissed for adequate cause, or is terminated as a result of a reduction in force due to a bona fide financial exigency or program discontinuation (see Article III, Section 3.10).
+
+Regular Term (Continuing) Contracts
+
+The College offers one-, two- or three-year contracts to full-time teaching faculty members appointed to one of the faculty titles set forth in Section – above.  These are never tenure-track appointments.  Full-time teaching faculty members with Regular Term contract appointments may expect the appointment to be renewed unless otherwise notified pursuant to the schedule detailed in the Non-Renewal of Contract Policy (see Section 4.11.1.2).
+
+Term Contracts
+
+Term contracts are given to Adjunct Faculty and are limited to the term of employment outlined in the contract.  These are never tenure-track appointments.  A Term contract automatically terminates upon the expiration of that period.  No notice or action by the College is required to effectuate such termination.  In subsequent years, subject to College need, another term appointment may be offered subject to the limitations set forth in these Faculty Bylaws.  Issuance of another term appointment is solely within the discretion of the College and no other procedures apply.
+
+Terminal Contracts
+
+A Terminal contract is the final annual contract issued to Full-time Teaching Faculty whose contracts will not be renewed or who have been denied tenure (see Section 4.9.3).
+
+Primary Area of Appointment
+
+All faculty appointment contracts designate a department or academic program as the faculty member’s primary faculty appointment location.  It is from this department(s) or program(a) that recommendations for appointment, promotion, tenure, and other actions concerning a Full-Time Teaching Faculty member are initiated.  A Full-Time Teaching Faculty member’s primary faculty appointment may be changed by the President (or President’s designee) to meet the curricular and organizational needs of the College.  
+
+Joint Appointments 
+
+When a faculty member’s contractual responsibilities require a significant portion of teaching and professional activity responsibilities be devoted to either multiple departments or an interdisciplinary program in fields in which the College currently offers a major or minor, the faculty member may receive a joint appointment to a department and a specified program or to two departments.  A joint appointment may be established at any stage of faculty employment. 
+
+In making a joint appointment, a primary and secondary department or program will be clearly designated by the Provost in the faculty member’s appointment contract.  The primary department or program will serve as the faculty member’s administrative home, which will take the lead responsibility on personnel issues, central human resources reporting, appointment, promotions, tenure, coordination of annual performance review, conflict resolution, and changes in employment.  Often, but not always, the administrative home will be the department or program with the higher appointment fraction.
+
+The nature of a joint appointments varies and the assignment of duties in the secondary department or program will differ by department/program and candidate.  The details of the assignment of duties, the allocation of salary, departmental/program governance rights, and provision for office and laboratory space as applicable to both the primary and secondary departments/program will be communicated in a signed written memorandum of understanding signed by the two Department Chairs/Program Directors, the faculty member, and the Provost.  Additionally, negotiated changes to those details will be evidenced in a signed memorandum of understanding.
+
+The Department Chair/Program Director of the secondary department/program must provide input for every evaluation for a jointly appointed faculty member.  In the case of promotion or tenure review, the secondary Department Chair/Program Director must provide a written evaluation describing the nature and extent of the candidate’s involvement in, and contribution to, the secondary department/program.  In the faculty member’s tenure application, it is important to document how the candidate’s time is being spent, and contributions to each department/program need to be clearly documented.
+
+It is recognized that new opportunities, changes in faculty interest, faculty performance, or other issues with the joint appointment may require review, renegotiation, or discontinuation of the original joint appointment.  If possible, a faculty member with a joint appointment will have the option of retreating to a full appointment at the primary department or program.  If retreat is not a possibility, the Provost is responsible for ensuring that the faculty member is made fully aware of the existing options.  Further, a short-term plan must be put in place to ensure a smooth transition with minimum disruption to the initiatives, projects, and teaching, that were the responsibility of the faculty member with the joint appointment.</s>"
+<s>[INST] Model Non-Sex Based Discrimination and Harassment Policy (Draft 1).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Model Ownership of Copyrightable Materials and Intellectual Property-(Draft 1).txt [/INST] Model Ownership of Copyrightable Materials and Intellectual Property 
+
+
+
+The purpose of this policy is to describe the University’s policies and associated administrative procedures regarding the ownership of patentable and copyrightable works created by Ohio Wesleyan University (“OWU”) employees and students, as well as other individuals conducting activities under the supervision of OWU employees.  
+
+POLICY STATEMENT
+
+The University endorses the development of Patentable and Copyrightable works and, through this policy, endeavors to assist its employees and students to utilize their talent and knowledge to realize discoveries and inventions for the benefit of themselves, OWU, and the general public.  Ownership of Patentable and Copyrightable works created by OWU employees and students, as well as other individuals conducting activities under the supervision of OWU employees, will be determined in accordance with policies set forth in the Procedures/Guidelines section below.  Additionally, the revenues from patentable and copyrightable works owned by OWU will be distributed according to the formula set forth in the Procedures/Guidelines below.  If any portion of this policy conflicts with a signed agreement between OWU and a Creator (an inventor or any other person who assists in the creation of patentable and copyrightable works) or between the OWU and an external funding agency or other entity, the terms of the signed agreement will prevail. 
+
+							OWU may grant a waiver of any provision of this policy on a case-by-case basis.  All waivers must be approved in writing and signed by the President of the University or the President’s authorized designee. Any decision by the President to grant a waiver will take into account the best interests of OWU and the facts of the particular situation involved.  Any waiver granted pursuant to this paragraph will apply only to obligations imposed on the Creator of the Patentable and Copyrightable work, unless otherwise agreed to by the Creator. 
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+							Copyright: an original work of authorship that has been fixed in any tangible medium of expression from which it can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.  Copyright includes a bundle of rights: the right to make reproductions of the work, the right to distribute copies of it, the right to make derivative works that borrow substantially from a copyrighted work, and the right to make public performances or displays of most works.
+
+Creator: any inventor, developer, or author, of Intellectual Property covered by this policy, including faculty, students, and staff of the University. 
+
+Directed Works: include works that are specifically funded by OWU (including, but not limited to, Works for Hire).
+
+							Employee: any individual employed by OWU, including any faculty member, administrator, staff member, or student employee. 
+
+Intellectual Property: any original work created by an individual or group of individuals that is or may be patentable, copyrightable, or otherwise marketable.  Examples include, but are not limited to, inventions, books, articles, study guides, syllabi, workbooks or manuals, bibliographies, instructional packages, tests, video or audio productions, films, charts, digital materials, graphic materials, photographic or similar visual materials, multi-media materials, three-dimensional materials, exhibits, and digital files and software. 
+
+Invention: means any new and useful process, art, method, technique, machine, device, manufacture, software, composition of matter, or improvement thereof.
+
+							Patent: The exclusive right granted by a government to a Creator to manufacture, use, or sell an Invention for a certain number of years. To be patentable, the Invention or discovery must have utility, novelty, and be non-obvious. The U.S. Patent & Trademark Office has determined that software which meets certain technical and legal criteria may be patentable. In the event that software originally disclosed as a copyrightable work is subsequently determined to be patentable subject matter, and the University choose to seek patent protection for the software, such software shall be managed under this policy as patentable Intellectual Property. 
+
+							Personal Time: time other than that devoted to normal or assigned functions in teaching, University service, or direction or conduct of research on OWU premises or utilizing OWU facilities or assets.
+
+							Royalties: all compensation of whatever kind received from the sale, license, or other transfer of intellectual property rights by OWU to a third party. This includes, but is not limited to, percentage payments, up-front fees, milestone payments, shares of stock, and any other financial or in-kind consideration.
+
+Sponsored or Externally Contracted Works: any type of intellectual property developed using funds supplied under a contract, grant, or other arrangement between OWU and third parties, including sponsored research agreements.
+
+Student Works: papers, computer programs, theses, artistic and musical works, photographs, film and video projects, graphic design, and other artistic works made by OWU students as part of their academic responsibilities.
+
+Traditional Works or Non-Directed Works: a pedagogical, scholarly, literary, or aesthetic (artistic) work originated by a faculty or other employee resulting from non-directed effort.  (Such works may include textbooks, manuscripts, scholarly works, fixed lecture notes, works of art or design, musical scores, poems, films, videos, audio recordings, or other works of the kind that have historically been deemed in academic communities to be the property of their creator.)
+
+							University Facilities or Assets: any facility or asset, including equipment, resources and material, available to the inventor as a direct result of the inventor's affiliation with OWU, and which would not be available to a non-OWU individual on the same basis. 
+
+Work for Hire: a legal term defined in the Copyright Act as “a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment” or a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work, as a part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, as a translation, as a supplementary work, as a compilation, as an instructional text, as a test, as answer material for a test, or as an atlas, if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire.
+
+POLICY AND PROCEDURES
+
+I.	Copyright Ownership 
+
+							The OWU policy determines Copyright ownership by categorizing works into one of the following categories: Traditional or Non-Directed Works, Directed Works, Sponsored or Externally Contracted Works. Copyrighted subject matter is owned depending on which category of work and which author is associated with the work.
+
+A.	Works by Faculty:
+
+Traditional Works or Non-Directed Works: The Creator of Traditional Works or Non-Directed Works is entitled to ownership of copyright and royalties, unless it is a Directed Work, Sponsored Work, or a Work for Hire.  OWU does not claim ownership to pedagogical, scholarly or artistic works, regardless of their form of expression, and such works are not considered to be Directed Works.  These copyrighted works include, but are not limited to, textbooks, presentations, course materials, refereed literature, etc.  Furthermore, OWU does not claim ownership in popular nonfiction, novels, poems, musical compositions, digital media, software, games, or other works of artistic imagination. 
+
+Electronic Courses: With respect to faculty materials produced for online instructions, copyright ownership is treated no differently than faculty materials produced for the classroom.  If the materials are not directed works, the faculty member owns the copyright for those materials created for online use.
+
+Licensing of Traditional Works or Non-Directed Works for OWU Courses: In cases of ownership by the Creator or a Traditional Work or Non-Directed Work, the University shall have a non-exclusive, non-transferable, royalty-free license to use, reproduce, modify and create derivatives of such works, for all traditional, customary or reasonable academic purposes of the University (also known as a “Shop Right”).  When the University proposes to exercise this right and license for academic purposes, the University will make reasonable efforts to consult with the Creator(s); any conflicts between the University and the Creator(s) regarding such exercise will be resolved as set forth in Section I.E (below).
+
+Directed Works: The ownership of Directed Works rests with OWU.  This includes all copyrighted works, including but not limited to educational software and electronic courses, that are specifically funded by the University under either a formal contractual arrangement between the faculty member and OWU to develop and/or revise courses or as a result of the terms of the individual’s employment or hiring agreement.  Authorship rights may be released or transferred by OWU to the Creator under a written agreement with the Creator. The parties may also negotiate joint ownership of such works, with the written approval of the President or the President’s designee.
+
+							Sponsored or Externally Contracted Works: Ownership of a Sponsored or Externally Contracted Work will be determined by the applicable contract.  
+
+							For an agreement that expressly requires copyright ownership by OWU, the University may release or transfer its rights to the Creator subject to (a) the implementation of a licensing agreement, and/or (b) the University’s right to require reimbursement and/or a share of any income.  The Creator and OWU may negotiate for joint ownership of such works. 
+
+							For an agreement that does not expressly require copyright ownership by OWU or a third party, the Creator of the work shall own the work. In cases of ownership by the Creator, OWU may require a non-exclusive, nontransferable “shop right” license.
+
+B.	Works by Staff/Administrators
+
+With the following exceptions, whenever Copyrightable work is created by a member of the staff or administration as part of the individual’s University responsibilities, the work will generally be treated as a Work-for-Hire and ownership will be retained by OWU: 
+
+OWU may enter into an agreement in advance that the staff/administrative employee shall own the copyright.  In addition, the President may waive institutional ownership.
+
+In the event the work was created through a Sponsored Project, ownership will be determined by the sponsored project agreement.  For an agreement that does not expressly require copyright ownership by OWU or a third party, the creator of the work shall own the work unless it is a directed work.
+
+							Scholarly writings – including articles, contributions to edited volumes, and books – that are authored by a non-faculty staff or administrator will be wholly owned by the staff/administrative employee. 
+
+C.	Works by Independent Contractors
+
+Works by independent contractors engaged by OWU will be owned in accordance with the contract under which the work was created.  If the written contract for work by an independent contractor does not specify institutional ownership, then ownership will vest with the independent contractor.
+
+D.	Works by Students
+
+It is the general policy of OWU that a Copyrightable work created by a student other than in the course of employment by the University is owned by the student, subject to the terms of any applicable Sponsored Project agreement.  These protected works include, but are not limited to, papers, computer programs, theses, artistic and musical works, photographs, film and video projects, graphic design, and other artistic works. 
+
+Rights in student works may be transferred between the student and OWU.  In such cases, a written assignment agreement will specify the respective rights and obligations of the parties.  The parties may also negotiate for joint ownership of such works, with the approval of the President (or designee). 
+
+E.	 Dispute Resolution 
+
+A dispute concerning application of any aspect of this copyright ownership policy must be submitted in writing to the appropriate area vice president for distribution to the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property. The dispute will be reviewed by Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property, which will prepare a report of its findings and make a recommendation to the Provost.  See Section IV below for additional information. 
+
+II.	Intellectual Property Ownership
+
+A.	Ownership of Patentable Inventions 
+
+University Ownership 
+
+							Any Patentable Invention conceived, developed, or put into practice by OWU employees or students under either of the following conditions will remain the property of OWU worldwide:
+
+During normal or assigned activities related to the Creator’s employment or student responsibilities (e.g., teaching, performing OWU service, pursuing coursework/academic responsibilities, directing or conducting research, etc.); or 
+
+With the support of OWU facilities or assets, including equipment, material, personnel, or any other resource available to the Creator as a direct result of the Creator’s affiliation with OWU and which would not be available to a non-OWU community member on the same basis.  
+
+							As a condition of employment or enrollment, all OWU employees and students assign ownership of all inventions (or parts thereof) described above to the University. OWU has the sole right to determine the disposition of Intellectual Property in which the University has a proprietary interest.  A decision to exercise this right will be transmitted in writing to the creator within 60 days of the date of disclosure of the invention (or parts thereof).  If OWU decides to pursue a Patent, it may recommend that OWU alone, or with the assistance of an external organization such as a technology transfer company, make applications for letters of Patent.  Title to all such Patent applications and resulting Patents will be held by the OWU Board of Trustees; however, OWU will share licensing revenues with the Creator(s) according to Section III below.  If, however, OWU decides not to Patent an Invention, or not to commercialize a Patented Invention, OWU will release to the Creator its interest in the Invention.
+
+Inventions Made on Personal Time
+
+Intellectual property made OWU employees or students on their Personal Time and not involving the use of OWU facilities or assets are the property of the Creator except in case of conflict with any applicable agreement between OWU and a Sponsoring Agency.  
+
+Creators who claim that Intellectual Property is made on Personal Time have the responsibility to demonstrate that intellectual property was invented based on Personal Time.  All such Intellectual Property must be disclosed in accordance with the disclosure procedures set forth below (see Section II.B) and demonstrate the basis of the Creator’s claim that only Personal Time was utilized.  
+
+Inventions Arising from Sponsored Research 
+
+When Intellectual Property is developed through a sponsored grant or contract, the provision set forth in the grant or contract will prevail.  In the absence of a provision, the University’s policy will apply.  Generally, while OWU is assigned the rights to Intellectual Property generated during the course of sponsored research activities, the sponsor retains the option to claim ownership under certain circumstances.  In the event that the sponsor does not exercise its option and regardless of ownership, the government agency retains a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable, royalty-free, worldwide license to the Intellectual Property produced under government sponsorship. 
+
+Consulting Agreements
+
+OWU employees engaged in consulting work must use care to ensure that their consulting agreement(s) is not in conflict with this policy.  Such agreements may include provisions as to the licensing or assignment of Intellectual Property and may come into conflict with this policy.  OWU employees are therefore obligated to make it clear to those with whom they make such agreements of their existing obligations to the University and may not obligate the use of, divulge, or transfer any Intellectual Property in which OWU may claim an ownership interest.  OWU’s rights and the individual’s obligations may not be abrogated or limited by the terms of any third-party consulting agreement unless a waiver is provided in writing by the President of the University.
+
+B.	Procedures for Reporting Intellectual Property 
+
+							OWU employees and students are obligated to promptly and fully report to [INSERT OFFICE] any discovery, invention, possible device, etc. the individual has made and has reason to believe might be patentable or otherwise protectable.  This is to be done regardless of whether OWU funds or funds from an external source provided the immediate support for the work from which the invention resulted or if the Intellectual Property was developed on Personal Time.  In addition, current and former employees remain obligated to disclose to OWU any Inventions or discoveries made while employed by the University but which are made during outside consulting, or during a sabbatical or other extended leave, notwithstanding their employment by or association with another institution or organization that would itself claim ownership of such Invention or discovery.
+
+C.	 Dispute Resolution 
+
+A dispute concerning application of any aspect of this Intellectual Property Ownership policy must be submitted in writing to the appropriate area vice president for distribution to the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property Provost. The dispute will be reviewed by the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property, which will prepare a report of its findings and make a recommendation to the Provost. See Section IV below for additional information. 
+
+III.	Royalties and Revenue Sharing 
+
+OWU assumes financial responsibility for Intellectual Property (copyright or patent) to which it takes ownership.  Royalties and other income from work subject to Copyright or Patent held by OWU will first be used to reimburse all direct and indirect expenditures (i.e., documented out of pocket expenses paid by the Creator, direct costs paid by OWU in conjunction with the processing of patent applications/marketing or licensing/legal costs, and costs associated with equipment, materials, staff services, etc.).  After all expenditures are reimbursed, the remaining royalties and other income will be disbursed as follows: 
+
+Creator								50%	 		
+Creator’s Department					15%		
+Provost Office						10%
+General Fund						25%
+
+
+
+Where there is more than one Creator, distribution shall be prorated according to the contribution of each as may be agreed in writing between the parties, or, if an agreement cannot be reached, then according to the applicable area vice president Provost, after considering the recommendation of the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property.  Final appeals may be filed with the President.
+
+Royalties are payable to Creators only upon actual receipt by OWU and after expenses have been paid, however, the applicable area vice president Provost will provide detail and evidence of the expenses upon request to the Creator. After all costs are fully recovered, royalty distribution payments will be paid to the Creator. In the case of the death of a Creator, all royalty distributions which would have been due to such a person shall be paid to the Creator’s estate. The Creators’ share will continue even if the individual(s) have left the employ OWU or is no longer a student at OWU.
+
+							If legal action is taken or OWU receives a claim of Patent invalidity during the life of a Patent, revenue distribution attributable to the Patent may, at OWU's discretion, be suspended pending final resolution of the dispute.  Additionally, if there is a legal challenge to the validity of a Copyright, payment of royalties may, at OWU’s discretion, be suspended pending final resolution.
+
+IV.	Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property
+
+									Although the ultimate authority in deciding whether or not to invest in an employee or student’s Intellectual Property resides with the President, the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property (“the committee”) is charged with reviewing provisional Copyrights, Patents or possible Intellectual Property (if it can be disclosed) and advising the President.  The committee also serves as a forum for the receipt and discussion of proposals to change this policy and/or to provide recommendations for contract negotiations.  
+
+									In addition, the committee is charged with making recommendations to the applicable area vice president Provost with regard to disputes over ownership, and its attendant rights, of Intellectual Property.  The committee will make an initial recommendation of whether OWU, the Creator, or any other party has ownership rights, and, if so, the basis and extent of those rights.  The committee will also make a recommendation on resolving competing employee or student claims to ownership when the parties cannot reach an agreement on their own.  The committee will review the merits of provisional Patents and other creations and make recommendations for the management of the Invention, including development, patenting, and exploitation.  Recommendations of the committee will be forwarded in writing to the appropriate area vice president for distribution to the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property Provost.  The decision of the area vice president Provost may be appealed to the President.
+
+							The committee will be composed of rotating and permanent members. The rotating members consist of [INSERT MEMBERSHIP], and the Provost, who will serve as a non-voting member and chair. At the time of initial appointment or election, each non-permanent member shall be designated as serving a one-, two-, or three-year term, staggered so that the term of one committee member will expire each year. After the first appointment subsequent members shall serve staggered three-year terms, commencing July 1 and terminating on June 30. Committee members may serve one additional three-year term consecutively. The committee may also appoint additional faculty, staff, administrators, or students on an ad hoc, non-voting basis with observer status.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Model Ownership of Copyrightable Materials and Intellectual Property-1 djb comments.txt [/INST] Model Ownership of Copyrightable Materials and Intellectual Property 
+
+
+
+The purpose of this policy is to describe the University’s policies and associated administrative procedures regarding the ownership of patentable and copyrightable works created by Ohio Wesleyan University (“OWU”) employees and students, as well as other individuals conducting activities under the supervision of OWU employees.  
+
+POLICY STATEMENT
+
+The University endorses the development of Patentable and Copyrightable works and, through this policy, endeavors to assist its employees and students to utilize their talent and knowledge to realize discoveries and inventions for the benefit of themselves, OWU, and the general public.  Ownership of Patentable and Copyrightable works created by OWU employees and students, as well as other individuals conducting activities under the supervision of OWU employees, will be determined in accordance with policies set forth in the Procedures/Guidelines section below.  Additionally, the revenues from patentable and copyrightable works owned by OWU will be distributed according to the formula set forth in the Procedures/Guidelines below.  If any portion of this policy conflicts with a signed agreement between OWU and a creator (an inventor or any other person who assists in the creation of patentable and copyrightable works) or between the OWU and an external funding agency or other entity such as another university with a collaborative research agreement with OWU, the terms of the signed agreement will prevail. 
+
+							OWU may grant a waiver of any provision of this policy on a case-by-case basis.  All waivers must be approved in writing and signed by the President of the University or the President’s authorized designee. Any decision by the President to grant a waiver will take into account the best interests of OWU and the facts of the particular situation involved.  Any waiver granted pursuant to this paragraph will apply only to obligations imposed on the Creator of the Patentable and Copyrightable work, unless otherwise agreed to by the Creator. 
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+							Copyright: an original work of authorship that has been fixed in any tangible medium of expression from which it can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.  Copyright includes a bundle of rights: the right to make reproductions of the work, the right to distribute copies of it, the right to make derivative works that borrow substantially from a copyrighted work, and the right to make public performances or displays of most works.
+
+Creator: any inventor, developer, or author, of Intellectual Property covered by this policy, including faculty, students, and staff of the University. 
+
+Directed Works: include works that are specifically funded by OWU (including, but not limited to, Works for Hire).
+
+							Employee: any individual employed by OWU, including any faculty member, administrator, staff member, or student employee. 
+
+Intellectual Property: any original work created by an individual or group of individuals that is or may be patentable, copyrightable, or otherwise marketable.  Examples include, but are not limited to, inventions, books, articles, study guides, syllabi, workbooks or manuals, bibliographies, instructional packages, tests, video or audio productions, films, charts, digital materials, graphic materials, photographic or similar visual materials, multi-media materials, three-dimensional materials, exhibits, and digital files and software. 
+
+Invention: means any new and useful process, art, method, technique, machine, device, manufacture, software, composition of matter, or improvement thereof.
+
+							Patent: The exclusive right granted by a government to a Creator to manufacture, use, or sell an Invention for a certain number of years. To be patentable, the Invention or discovery must have utility, novelty, and be non-obvious. The U.S. Patent & Trademark Office has determined that software which meets certain technical and legal criteria may be patentable. In the event that software originally disclosed as a copyrightable work is subsequently determined to be patentable subject matter, and the University choose to seek patent protection for the software, such software shall be managed under this policy as patentable Intellectual Property. 
+
+							Personal Time: time other than that devoted to normal or assigned functions in teaching, University service, or direction or conduct of research on OWU premises or utilizing OWU facilities or assets.
+
+							Royalties: all compensation of whatever kind received from the sale, license, or other transfer of intellectual property rights by OWU to a third party. This includes, but is not limited to, percentage payments, up-front fees, milestone payments, shares of stock, and any other financial or in-kind consideration.
+
+Sponsored or Externally Contracted Works: any type of intellectual property developed using funds supplied under a contract, grant, or other arrangement between OWU and third parties, including sponsored research agreements.
+
+Student Works: papers, computer programs, theses, artistic and musical works, photographs, film and video projects, graphic design, and other artistic works made by OWU students as part of their academic responsibilities.
+
+Traditional Works or Non-Directed Works: a pedagogical, scholarly, literary, or aesthetic (artistic) work originated by a faculty or other employee resulting from non-directed effort.  (Such works may include textbooks, manuscripts, scholarly works, fixed lecture notes, works of art or design, musical scores, poems, films, videos, audio recordings, or other works of the kind that have historically been deemed in academic communities to be the property of their creator.)
+
+							University Facilities or Assets: any facility or asset, including equipment, resources and material, available to the inventor as a direct result of the inventor's affiliation with OWU, and which would not be available to a non-OWU individual on the same basis. 
+
+Work for Hire: a legal term defined in the Copyright Act as “a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment” or a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work, as a part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, as a translation, as a supplementary work, as a compilation, as an instructional text, as a test, as answer material for a test, or as an atlas, if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire.
+
+POLICY AND PROCEDURES
+
+I.	Copyright Ownership 
+
+							The OWU policy determines Copyright ownership by categorizing works into one of the following categories: Traditional or Non-Directed Works, Directed Works, Sponsored or Externally Contracted Works. Copyrighted subject matter is owned depending on which category of work and which author is associated with the work.
+
+A.	Works by Faculty:
+
+Traditional Works or Non-Directed Works: The Creator of Traditional Works or Non-Directed Works is entitled to ownership of copyright and royalties, unless it is a Directed Work, Sponsored Work, or a Work for Hire.  OWU does not claim ownership to pedagogical, scholarly or artistic works, regardless of their form of expression, and such works are not considered to be Directed Works.  These copyrighted works include, but are not limited to, textbooks, presentations, course materials, refereed literature, etc.  Furthermore, OWU does not claim ownership in popular nonfiction, novels, poems, musical compositions, digital media, software, games, or other works of artistic imagination. 
+
+Electronic Courses: With respect to faculty materials produced for online instructions, copyright ownership is treated no differently than faculty materials produced for the classroom.  If the materials are not directed works, the faculty member owns the copyright for those materials created for online use.
+
+Licensing of Traditional Works or Non-Directed Works for OWU Courses: In cases of ownership by the Creator or a Traditional Work or Non-Directed Work, the University shall have a non-exclusive, non-transferable, royalty-free license to use, reproduce, modify and create derivatives of such works, for all traditional, customary or reasonable academic purposes of the University (also known as a “Shop Right”).  When the University proposes to exercise this right and license for academic purposes, the University will make reasonable efforts to consult with the Creator(s); any conflicts between the University and the Creator(s) regarding such exercise will be resolved as set forth in Section I.E (below).
+
+Directed Works: The ownership of Directed Works rests with OWU.  This includes all copyrighted works, including but not limited to educational software and electronic courses, that are specifically funded by the University under either a formal contractual arrangement between the faculty member and OWU to develop and/or revise courses or as a result of the terms of the individual’s employment or hiring agreement.  Authorship rights may be released or transferred by OWU to the Creator under a written agreement with the Creator. The parties may also negotiate joint ownership of such works, with the written approval of the President or the President’s designee.
+
+							Sponsored or Externally Contracted Works: Ownership of a Sponsored or Externally Contracted Work will be determined by the applicable contract.  
+
+							For an agreement that expressly requires copyright ownership by OWU, the University may release or transfer its rights to the Creator subject to (a) the implementation of a licensing agreement, and/or (b) the University’s right to require reimbursement and/or a share of any income.  The Creator and OWU may negotiate for joint ownership of such works. 
+
+							For an agreement that does not expressly require copyright ownership by OWU or a third party, the Creator of the work shall own the work. In cases of ownership by the Creator, OWU may require a non-exclusive, nontransferable “shop right” license.
+
+B.	Works by Staff/Administrators
+
+With the following exceptions, whenever Copyrightable work is created by a member of the staff or administration as part of the individual’s University responsibilities, the work will generally be treated as a Work-for-Hire and ownership will be retained by OWU: 
+
+OWU may enter into an agreement in advance that the staff/administrative employee shall own the copyright.  In addition, the President may waive institutional ownership.
+
+In the event the work was created through a Sponsored Project, ownership will be determined by the sponsored project agreement.  For an agreement that does not expressly require copyright ownership by OWU or a third party, the creator of the work shall own the work unless it is a directed work.
+
+							Scholarly writings – including articles, contributions to edited volumes, and books – that are authored by a non-faculty staff or administrator will be wholly owned by the staff/administrative employee. 
+
+C.	Works by Independent Contractors
+
+Works by independent contractors engaged by OWU will be owned in accordance with the contract under which the work was created.  If the written contract for work by an independent contractor does not specify institutional ownership, then ownership will vest with the independent contractor.
+
+D.	Works by Students
+
+It is the general policy of OWU that a Copyrightable work created by a student other than in the course of employment by the University is owned by the student, subject to the terms of any applicable Sponsored Project agreement.  These protected works include, but are not limited to, papers, computer programs, theses, artistic and musical works, photographs, film and video projects, graphic design, and other artistic works. 
+
+Rights in student works may be transferred between the student and OWU.  In such cases, a written assignment agreement will specify the respective rights and obligations of the parties.  The parties may also negotiate for joint ownership of such works, with the approval of the President (or designee). 
+
+E.	 Dispute Resolution 
+
+A dispute concerning application of any aspect of this copyright ownership policy must be submitted in writing to the appropriate area vice president for distribution to the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property. The dispute will be reviewed by Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property, which will prepare a report of its findings and make a recommendation to the Provost.  See Section IV below for additional information. 
+
+II.	Intellectual Property Ownership
+
+A.	Ownership of Patentable Inventions 
+
+University Ownership 
+
+							Any Patentable Invention conceived, developed, or put into practice by OWU employees or students under either of the following conditions will remain the property of OWU worldwide:
+
+During normal or assigned activities related to the Creator’s employment or student responsibilities (e.g., teaching, performing OWU service, pursuing coursework/academic responsibilities, directing or conducting research, etc.); or 
+
+With the support of OWU facilities or assets, including equipment, material, personnel, or any other resource available to the Creator as a direct result of the Creator’s affiliation with OWU and which would not be available to a non-OWU community member on the same basis.  
+
+							As a condition of employment or enrollment, all OWU employees and students assign ownership of all inventions (or parts thereof) described above to the University. OWU has the sole right to determine the disposition of Intellectual Property in which the University has a proprietary interest.  A decision to exercise this right will be transmitted in writing to the creator within 60 days of the date of disclosure of the invention (or parts thereof).  If OWU decides to pursue a Patent, it may recommend that OWU alone, or with the assistance of an external organization such as a technology transfer company, make applications for letters of Patent.  Title to all such Patent applications and resulting Patents will be held by the OWU Board of Trustees; however, OWU will share licensing revenues with the Creator(s) according to Section III below.  If, however, OWU decides not to Patent an Invention, or not to commercialize a Patented Invention, OWU will release to the Creator its interest in the Invention.
+
+Inventions Made on Personal Time
+
+Intellectual property made OWU employees or students on their Personal Time and not involving the use of OWU facilities or assets are the property of the Creator except in case of conflict with any applicable agreement between OWU and a Sponsoring Agency.  
+
+Creators who claim that Intellectual Property is made on Personal Time have the responsibility to demonstrate that intellectual property was invented based on Personal Time.  All such Intellectual Property must be disclosed in accordance with the disclosure procedures set forth below (see Section II.B) and demonstrate the basis of the Creator’s claim that only Personal Time was utilized.  
+
+Inventions Arising from Sponsored Research 
+
+When Intellectual Property is developed through a sponsored grant or contract, the provision set forth in the grant or contract will prevail.  In the absence of a provision, the University’s policy will apply.  Generally, while OWU is assigned the rights to Intellectual Property generated during the course of sponsored research activities, the sponsor retains the option to claim ownership under certain circumstances.  In the event that the sponsor does not exercise its option and regardless of ownership, the government agency retains a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable, royalty-free, worldwide license to the Intellectual Property produced under government sponsorship. 
+
+Consulting Agreements
+
+OWU employees engaged in consulting work must use care to ensure that their consulting agreement(s) is not in conflict with this policy.  Such agreements may include provisions as to the licensing or assignment of Intellectual Property and may come into conflict with this policy.  OWU employees are therefore obligated to make it clear to those with whom they make such agreements of their existing obligations to the University and may not obligate the use of, divulge, or transfer any Intellectual Property in which OWU may claim an ownership interest.  OWU’s rights and the individual’s obligations may not be abrogated or limited by the terms of any third-party consulting agreement unless a waiver is provided in writing by the President of the University.
+
+B.	Procedures for Reporting Intellectual Property 
+
+							OWU employees and students are obligated to promptly and fully report to [INSERT OFFICE] any discovery, invention, possible device, etc. the individual has made and has reason to believe might be patentable or otherwise protectable.  This is to be done regardless of whether OWU funds or funds from an external source provided the immediate support for the work from which the invention resulted or if the Intellectual Property was developed on Personal Time.  In addition, current and former employees remain obligated to disclose to OWU any Inventions or discoveries made while employed by the University but which are made during outside consulting, or during a sabbatical or other extended leave, notwithstanding their employment by or association with another institution or organization that would itself claim ownership of such Invention or discovery.
+
+C.	 Dispute Resolution 
+
+A dispute concerning application of any aspect of this Intellectual Property Ownership policy must be submitted in writing to the appropriate area vice president for distribution to the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property Provost. The dispute will be reviewed by the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property, which will prepare a report of its findings and make a recommendation to the Provost. See Section IV below for additional information. 
+
+III.	Royalties and Revenue Sharing 
+
+OWU assumes financial responsibility for Intellectual Property (copyright or patent) to which it takes ownership.  Royalties and other income from work subject to Copyright or Patent held by OWU will first be used to reimburse all direct and indirect expenditures (i.e., documented out of pocket expenses paid by the Creator, direct costs paid by OWU in conjunction with the processing of patent applications/marketing or licensing/legal costs, and costs associated with equipment, materials, staff services, etc.).  After all expenditures are reimbursed, the remaining royalties and other income will be disbursed as follows: 
+
+Creator								50%	 		
+Creator’s Department					15%		
+Provost Office						10%
+General Fund						25%
+
+
+
+Where there is more than one Creator, distribution shall be prorated according to the contribution of each as may be agreed in writing between the parties, or, if an agreement cannot be reached, then according to the applicable area vice president Provost, after considering the recommendation of the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property.  Final appeals may be filed with the President.
+
+Royalties are payable to Creators only upon actual receipt by OWU and after expenses have been paid, however, the applicable area vice president Provost will provide detail and evidence of the expenses upon request to the Creator. After all costs are fully recovered, royalty distribution payments will be paid to the Creator. In the case of the death of a Creator, all royalty distributions which would have been due to such a person shall be paid to the Creator’s estate. The Creators’ share will continue even if the individual(s) have left the employ OWU or is no longer a student at OWU.
+
+							If legal action is taken or OWU receives a claim of Patent invalidity during the life of a Patent, revenue distribution attributable to the Patent may, at OWU's discretion, be suspended pending final resolution of the dispute.  Additionally, if there is a legal challenge to the validity of a Copyright, payment of royalties may, at OWU’s discretion, be suspended pending final resolution.
+
+IV.	Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property
+
+									Although the ultimate authority in deciding whether or not to invest in an employee or student’s Intellectual Property resides with the President, the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property (“the committee”) is charged with reviewing provisional Copyrights, Patents or possible Intellectual Property (if it can be disclosed) and advising the President.  The committee also serves as a forum for the receipt and discussion of proposals to change this policy and/or to provide recommendations for contract negotiations.  
+
+									In addition, the committee is charged with making recommendations to the applicable area vice president Provost with regard to disputes over ownership, and its attendant rights, of Intellectual Property.  The committee will make an initial recommendation of whether OWU, the Creator, or any other party has ownership rights, and, if so, the basis and extent of those rights.  The committee will also make a recommendation on resolving competing employee or student claims to ownership when the parties cannot reach an agreement on their own.  The committee will review the merits of provisional Patents and other creations and make recommendations for the management of the Invention, including development, patenting, and exploitation.  Recommendations of the committee will be forwarded in writing to the appropriate area vice president for distribution to the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property Provost.  The decision of the area vice president Provost may be appealed to the President.
+
+							The committee will be composed of rotating and permanent members. The rotating members consist of [INSERT MEMBERSHIP], and the Provost, who will serve as a non-voting member and chair. At the time of initial appointment or election, each non-permanent member shall be designated as serving a one-, two-, or three-year term, staggered so that the term of one committee member will expire each year. After the first appointment subsequent members shall serve staggered three-year terms, commencing July 1 and terminating on June 30. Committee members may serve one additional three-year term consecutively. The committee may also appoint additional faculty, staff, administrators, or students on an ad hoc, non-voting basis with observer status.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Model Ownership of Copyrightable Materials and Intellectual Property-1.txt [/INST] Model Ownership of Copyrightable Materials and Intellectual Property 
+
+
+
+The purpose of this policy is to describe the University’s policies and associated administrative procedures regarding the ownership of patentable and copyrightable works created by Ohio Wesleyan University (“OWU”) employees and students, as well as other individuals conducting activities under the supervision of OWU employees.  
+
+POLICY STATEMENT
+
+The University endorses the development of patentable and copyrightable works and, through this policy, endeavors to assist its employees and students to utilize their talent and knowledge to realize discoveries and inventions for the benefit of themselves, OWU, and the general public.  Ownership of patentable and copyrightable works created by OWU employees and students, as well as other individuals conducting activities under the supervision of OWU employees, will be determined in accordance with policies set forth in the Procedures/Guidelines section below.  Additionally, the revenues from patentable and copyrightable works owned by OWU will be distributed according to the formula set forth in the Procedures/Guidelines below.  If any portion of this policy conflicts with a signed agreement between OWU and a creator (an inventor or any other person who assists in the creation of patentable and copyrightable works) or between the OWU and an external funding agency or other entity such as another university with a collaborative research agreement with OWU, the terms of the signed agreement will prevail. 
+
+							OWU may grant a waiver of any provision of this policy on a case-by-case basis.  All waivers must be approved in writing and signed by the President of the University or the President’s authorized designee. Any decision by the President to grant a waiver will take into account the best interests of OWU and the facts of the particular situation involved.  Any waiver granted pursuant to this paragraph will apply only to obligations imposed on the creator of the patentable and copyrightable work, unless otherwise agreed to by the creator. 
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+							Copyright: an original work of authorship that has been fixed in any tangible medium of expression from which it can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.  Copyright includes a bundle of rights: the right to make reproductions of the work, the right to distribute copies of it, the right to make derivative works that borrow substantially from a copyrighted work, and the right to make public performances or displays of most works.
+
+Creator: any inventor, developer, or author, of Intellectual Property covered by this policy, including faculty, students, and staff of the University. 
+
+Directed Works: include works that are specifically funded by OWU (including, but not limited to, Works for Hire).
+
+							Employee: any individual employed by OWU, including any faculty member, administrator, staff member, or student employee. 
+
+Intellectual Property: any original work created by an individual or group of individuals that is or may be patentable, copyrightable, or otherwise marketable.  Examples include, but are not limited to, inventions, books, articles, study guides, syllabi, workbooks or manuals, bibliographies, instructional packages, tests, video or audio productions, films, charts, digital materials, graphic materials, photographic or similar visual materials, multi-media materials, three-dimensional materials, exhibits, and digital files and software. 
+
+Invention: means any new and useful process, art, method, technique, machine, device, manufacture, software, composition of matter, or improvement thereof.
+
+							Personal Time: time other than that devoted to normal or assigned functions in teaching, University service, or direction or conduct of research on OWU premises or utilizing OWU facilities or assets.
+
+							Royalties: all compensation of whatever kind received from the sale, license, or other transfer of intellectual property rights by OWU to a third party. This includes, but is not limited to, percentage payments, up-front fees, milestone payments, shares of stock, and any other financial or in-kind consideration.
+
+Sponsored or Externally Contracted Works: any type of intellectual property developed using funds supplied under a contract, grant, or other arrangement between OWU and third parties, including sponsored research agreements.
+
+Student Works: papers, computer programs, theses, artistic and musical works, photographs, film and video projects, graphic design, and other artistic works made by OWU students as part of their academic responsibilities.
+
+Traditional Works or Non-Directed Works: a pedagogical, scholarly, literary, or aesthetic (artistic) work originated by a faculty or other employee resulting from non-directed effort.  (Such works may include textbooks, manuscripts, scholarly works, fixed lecture notes, works of art or design, musical scores, poems, films, videos, audio recordings, or other works of the kind that have historically been deemed in academic communities to be the property of their creator.)
+
+							University Facilities or Assets: any facility or asset, including equipment, resources and material, available to the inventor as a direct result of the inventor's affiliation with OWU, and which would not be available to a non-OWU individual on the same basis. 
+
+Work for Hire: a legal term defined in the Copyright Act as “a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment” or a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work, as a part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, as a translation, as a supplementary work, as a compilation, as an instructional text, as a test, as answer material for a test, or as an atlas, if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire.
+
+POLICY AND PROCEDURES
+
+I.	Copyright Ownership 
+
+With respect to determining ownership of copyright, OWU’s policy addresses works by category of copyrightable work (including Traditional or Non-Directed Works, Directed Work, and Sponsored or Externally Contracted Works).  Ownership of copyrighted subject matter is dependent on which category of work and which category of author, pertain to the copyrightable work at issue.
+
+A.	Works by Faculty:
+
+Traditional Works or Non-Directed Works: The creator of traditional works or non-directed works is entitled to ownership of copyright and royalties, unless it is a directed work, sponsored work, or a work for hire described in a written agreement between the work’s creator and OWU (see below).  OWU does not claim ownership to pedagogical, scholarly or artistic works, regardless of their form of expression, and such works are not directed works.  These copyrighted works include, but are not limited to, textbooks, presentations, course materials, refereed literature, etc.  Furthermore, OWU claims no ownership in popular nonfiction, novels, poems, musical compositions, digital media, software, games, or other works of artistic imagination. 
+
+Electronic Courses: With respect to faculty materials produced for online instructions, copyright ownership is treated no differently than faculty materials produced for the classroom.  If the materials are not directed works, the faculty member owns the copyright for those materials created for online use.
+
+Licensing of Traditional Works or Non-Directed Works for OWU Courses: Faculty members who create teaching and classroom materials (including electronic courses), such as class notes, syllabi, curriculum guides, or laboratory notebooks, or online learning modules shall grant OWU a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use, display, copy, distribute, and prepare derivative works for administrative use, as well as use in educational programs and courses provided directly by OWU to its students for the duration of time that the faculty member is employed by OWU.  The details of the licensing agreement will specify, among other things, the end of the licensing agreement; for example, when an originator of traditional works or non-directed works used in an online course retires or ceases to be employed by OWU.
+
+							Directed Works: Ownership of directed works resides with OWU.  This includes all copyrighted works, including but not limited to educational software and electronic courses, that are specifically funded by the University under a formal contractual arrangement with OWU to develop and/or revise courses or as a result of the terms of the individual’s employment or hiring agreement.  OWU may release or transfer its authorship rights to the work’s creator under a written agreement negotiated between the creator and OWU.  The parties may also negotiate for joint ownership of such works, with the written approval of the President or the President’s designee.
+
+							Sponsored or Externally Contracted Works: Ownership of a sponsored or externally contracted work will be determined by the contract.  In negotiating with sponsors or contractors, project directors and OWU should strive to obtain the greatest latitude and rights for the individual author and OWU consistent with the public interest and this policy.
+
+							For an agreement that expressly requires copyright ownership by OWU, the university may release or transfer its rights to the creator subject to (a) the implementation of a licensing agreement, and/or (b) the university’s right to require reimbursement and/or a share of any income.  The creator and OWU may negotiate for joint ownership of such works. 
+
+							For an agreement that does not expressly require copyright ownership by OWU or a third party, the creator of the work shall own the work. In cases of ownership by the creator, OWU may require a non-exclusive, nontransferable license for its own educational, promotional, research, and creative works.
+
+B.	Works by Staff/Administrators
+
+With the following exceptions, whenever copyrightable work is created by a member of the staff or administration as part of the individual’s university responsibilities, the work will generally be treated as a work-for-hire and ownership will be retained by OWU: 
+
+OWU may enter into an agreement in advance that the staff/administrative employee shall own the copyright.  In addition, the President may waive institutional ownership.
+
+In the event the work was created through a sponsored project, ownership will be determined by the sponsored project agreement.  For an agreement that does not expressly require copyright ownership by OWU or a third party, the creator of the work shall own the work unless it is a directed work.
+
+							Scholarly writings – including articles, contributions to edited volumes, and books – that are authored by a non-faculty Employee will be wholly owned by the staff/administrative employee. 
+
+C.	Works by Independent Contractors
+
+Works by independent contractors engaged by OWU will be owned in accordance with the contract under which the work was created.  If the written contract for work by an independent contractor does not specify institutional ownership, then ownership will vest with the independent contractor.
+
+D.	Works by Students
+
+It is the general policy of OWU that a work created by a student other than in the course of employment by the university is owned by the student, subject to the terms of any applicable Sponsored Project agreement.  These protected works include, but are not limited to, papers, computer programs, theses, artistic and musical works, photographs, film and video projects, graphic design, and other artistic works. 
+
+Rights in student works may be transferred between the student and OWU.  In such cases, a written assignment agreement will specify the respective rights and obligations of the parties.  The parties may also negotiate for joint ownership of such works, with the approval of the President (or designee). 
+
+E.	 Dispute Resolution 
+
+A dispute concerning application of any aspect of this copyright ownership policy must be submitted in writing to the Provost. The dispute will be reviewed by the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property, which will prepare a report of its findings and make a recommendation to the Provost.  See Section IV below for additional information. 
+
+II.	Intellectual Property Ownership
+
+A.	Ownership of Patentable Inventions 
+
+University Ownership 
+
+Ownership on a worldwide basis in any patentable invention conceived, developed, or reduced to practice by OWU employees and students under either of the following conditions will reside with OWU:
+
+During normal or assigned activities related to the creator’s employment or student responsibilities (e.g., teaching, performing OWU service, pursuing coursework/academic responsibilities, directing or conducting research, etc.); or 
+
+With the support of OWU facilities or assets, including equipment, material, personnel, or any other resource available to the creator as a direct result of the creator’s affiliation with OWU and which would not be available to a non-OWU community member on the same basis.  
+
+							As a condition of employment or enrollment, all OWU employees and students assign ownership of all inventions (or parts thereof) described above to the University. OWU has the sole right to determine the disposition of intellectual property in which the University has a proprietary interest.  A decision to exercise this right will be transmitted in writing to the creator within 60 days of the date of disclosure of the invention (or parts thereof).  If OWU decides to pursue a patent, it may recommend that OWU alone, or with the assistance of an external organization such as a technology transfer company, make applications for letters of patent.  Title to all such patent applications and resulting patents will be held by the OWU Board of Trustees; however, OWU will share licensing revenues with the creator(s) according to Section III below.   If, however, OWU decides not to patent an invention, or not to commercialize a patented invention, OWU will release to the creator its interest in the invention.
+
+Inventions Made on Personal Time
+
+Intellectual property made OWU employees or students on their personal time and not involving the use of OWU facilities or assets are the property of the creator except in case of conflict with any applicable agreement between OWU and a sponsoring agency.  
+
+Creators who claim that intellectual property is made on personal time have the responsibility to demonstrate that intellectual property was invented based on personal time.  All such intellectual property must be disclosed in accordance with the disclosure procedures set forth below (see Section II.B) and demonstrate the basis of the creator’s claim that only personal time was utilized.  
+
+Inventions Arising from Sponsored Research 
+
+When intellectual property is developed through a sponsored grant or contract, the provision set forth in the grant or contract will prevail.  In the absence of a provision, the university’s policy will apply.  Generally, while OWU is assigned the rights to intellectual property generated during the course of sponsored research activities, the sponsor retains the option to claim ownership under certain circumstances.  In the event that the sponsor does not exercise its option and regardless of ownership, the government retains a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable, royalty-free, worldwide license to the Intellectual Property produced under government sponsorship. 
+
+Consulting Agreements
+
+OWU employees engaged in consulting work must use care to ensure that their consulting agreement(s) is not in conflict with this policy or OWU’s policy on outside activities.  Such agreements may include provisions as to the licensing or assignment of intellectual property and may come into conflict with this policy.  OWU employees are therefore obligated to make it clear to those with whom they make such agreements of their existing obligations to the University and may not obligate the use of, divulge, or transfer any intellectual property in which OWU may claim an ownership interest.  OWU’s rights and the individual’s obligations may not be abrogated or limited by the terms of any third-party consulting agreement unless a waiver is provided in writing by the President of the University.
+
+B.	Procedures for Reporting Intellectual Property 
+
+							OWU employees and students are obligated to promptly and fully report to OWU in a manner stipulated by the Provost any discovery, invention, possible device, etc. the individual has made and has reason to believe might be patentable or otherwise protectable.  This is to be done regardless of whether OWU funds or funds from an external source provided the immediate support for the work from which the invention resulted or if the intellectual property was developed on personal time.  In addition, current and former employees remain obligated to disclose to OWU any inventions or discoveries made while employed by the University but which are made during outside consulting, or during a sabbatical or other extended leave, notwithstanding their employment by or association with another institution or organization that would itself claim ownership of such invention or discovery.
+
+C.	 Dispute Resolution 
+
+A dispute concerning application of any aspect of this Intellectual Property Ownership policy must be submitted in writing to the Provost. The dispute will be reviewed by the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property, which will prepare a report of its findings and make a recommendation to the Provost. See Section IV below for additional information. 
+
+III.	Royalties and Revenue Sharing 
+
+OWU assumes financial responsibility for intellectual property (copyright or patent) to which it takes ownership.  Royalties and other income from work subject to copyright or patent held by OWU will first be used to reimburse all direct and indirect expenditures (i.e., documented out of pocket expenses paid by the creator, direct costs paid by OWU in conjunction with the processing of patent applications/marketing or licensing/legal costs, and costs associated with equipment, materials, staff services, etc.).  After all expenditures are reimbursed, the remaining royalties and other income will be disbursed as follows: 
+
+Creator								50%	 		
+
+Creator’s Department					15%		
+
+Provost Office						10%
+General Fund						25%
+
+Where there is more than one creator, distribution shall be prorated according to the contribution of each as may be agreed in writing between the parties, or, if an agreement cannot be reached, then according to the Provost, after considering the recommendation of the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property.  Final appeals may be filed with the President.
+
+Royalties are payable to creators only upon actual receipt by OWU and after expenses have been paid, however, the Provost will provide detail and evidence of the expenses upon request to the creator. After all costs are fully recovered, royalty distribution payments will be paid immediately to the creator. In the case of the death of a creator, all royalty distributions which would have been due to such a person shall be paid to the creator’s estate. The creators’ share will continue even if the individual(s) have left the employ OWU or is no longer a student at OWU.
+
+							If legal action is taken or OWU receives a claim of patent invalidity during the life of a patent, revenue distribution attributable to the patent may, at OWU's discretion, be suspended pending final resolution of the dispute.  Additionally, if there is a legal challenge to the validity of a copyright, payment of royalties may, at OWU’s discretion, be suspended pending final resolution.
+
+IV.	Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property
+
+									Although the ultimate authority in deciding whether or not to invest in an employee’s intellectual property resides with the President, the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property (“the committee”) is charged with reviewing provisional copyrights, patents or possible intellectual property (if it can be disclosed) and advising the President.  The committee also serves as a forum for the receipt and discussion of proposals to change this policy and/or to provide recommendations for contract negotiations.  
+
+									In addition, the committee is charged with making recommendations to the Provost with regard to disputes over ownership, and its attendant rights, of intellectual property.  The committee will make an initial recommendation of whether OWU, the creator, or any other party has ownership rights, and, if so, the basis and extent of those rights.  The committee will also make a recommendation on resolving competing employee or student claims to ownership when the parties cannot reach an agreement on their own.  The committee will review the merits of provisional patents and other creations and make recommendations for the management of the invention, including development, patenting, and exploitation.  Recommendations of the committee will be forwarded in writing to the Provost.  The decision of the Provost may be appealed to the President.
+
+							The committee will be composed of rotating and permanent members. The rotating members consist of [INSERT MEMBERSHIP], and the Provost, who will serve as a non-voting member and chair. At the time of initial appointment or election, each non-permanent member shall be designated as serving a one-, two-, or three-year term, staggered so that the term of one committee member will expire each year. After the first appointment subsequent members shall serve staggered three-year terms, commencing July 1 and terminating on June 30. Committee members may serve one additional three-year term consecutively. The committee may also appoint additional faculty, staff, administrators, or students on an ad hoc, non-voting basis with observer status.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Model Ownership of Copyrightable Materials and Intellectual Property.txt [/INST] Model Ownership of Copyrightable Materials and Intellectual Property 
+
+
+
+The purpose of this policy is to describe Bob Jones University’s policies and associated administrative procedures regarding the ownership of patentable and copyrightable works created by Bob Jones University (“BJU”) employees and students, as well as other individuals conducting activities under the supervision of BJU employees.  
+
+POLICY STATEMENT
+
+The University endorses the development of patentable and copyrightable works and, through this policy, endeavors to assist its employees and students to utilize their talent and knowledge to realize discoveries and inventions for the benefit of themselves, BJU, and the general public.  Ownership of patentable and copyrightable works created by BJU employees and students, as well as other individuals conducting activities under the supervision of BJU employees, will be determined in accordance with policies set forth in the Procedures/Guidelines section below.  Additionally, the revenues from patentable and copyrightable works owned by BJU will be distributed according to the formula set forth in the Procedures/Guidelines below.  If any portion of this policy conflicts with a signed agreement between BJU and a creator (an inventor or any other person who assists in the creation of patentable and copyrightable works) or between the BJU and an external funding agency or other entity such as another university with a collaborative research agreement with BJU, the terms of the signed agreement will prevail. 
+
+							BJU may grant a waiver of any provision of this policy on a case-by-case basis.  All waivers must be approved in writing and signed by the President of the University or the President’s authorized designee. Any decision by the President to grant a waiver will take into account the best interests of BJU and the facts of the particular situation involved.  Any waiver granted pursuant to this paragraph will apply only to obligations imposed on the creator of the patentable and copyrightable work, unless otherwise agreed to by the creator. 
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+							Copyright: an original work of authorship that has been fixed in any tangible medium of expression from which it can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.  Copyright includes a bundle of rights: the right to make reproductions of the work, the right to distribute copies of it, the right to make derivative works that borrow substantially from a copyrighted work, and the right to make public performances or displays of most works.
+
+Creator: any inventor, developer, or author, of Intellectual Property covered by this policy, including faculty, students, and staff of the University. 
+
+Directed Works: include works that are specifically funded by BJU (including, but not limited to, Works for Hire).
+
+							Employee: any individual employed by BJU, including any faculty member, administrator, staff member, or student employee. 
+
+Intellectual Property: any original work created by an individual or group of individuals that is or may be patentable, copyrightable, or otherwise marketable.  Examples include, but are not limited to, inventions, books, articles, study guides, syllabi, workbooks or manuals, bibliographies, instructional packages, tests, video or audio productions, films, charts, digital materials, graphic materials, photographic or similar visual materials, multi-media materials, three-dimensional materials, exhibits, and digital files and software. 
+
+Invention: means any new and useful process, art, method, technique, machine, device, manufacture, software, composition of matter, or improvement thereof.
+
+							Personal Time: time other than that devoted to normal or assigned functions in teaching, University service, or direction or conduct of research on BJU premises or utilizing BJU facilities or assets.
+
+							Royalties: all compensation of whatever kind received from the sale, license, or other transfer of intellectual property rights by BJU to a third party. This includes, but is not limited to, percentage payments, up-front fees, milestone payments, shares of stock, and any other financial or in-kind consideration.
+
+Sponsored or Externally Contracted Works: any type of intellectual property developed using funds supplied under a contract, grant, or other arrangement between BJU and third parties, including sponsored research agreements.
+
+Student Works: papers, computer programs, theses, artistic and musical works, photographs, film and video projects, graphic design, and other artistic works made by BJU students as part of their academic responsibilities.
+
+Traditional Works or Non-Directed Works: a pedagogical, scholarly, literary, or aesthetic (artistic) work originated by a faculty or other employee resulting from non-directed effort.  (Such works may include textbooks, manuscripts, scholarly works, fixed lecture notes, works of art or design, musical scores, poems, films, videos, audio recordings, or other works of the kind that have historically been deemed in academic communities to be the property of their creator.)
+
+							University Facilities or Assets: any facility or asset, including equipment, resources and material, available to the inventor as a direct result of the inventor's affiliation with BJU, and which would not be available to a non-BJU individual on the same basis. 
+
+Work for Hire: a legal term defined in the Copyright Act as “a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment” or a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work, as a part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, as a translation, as a supplementary work, as a compilation, as an instructional text, as a test, as answer material for a test, or as an atlas, if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire.
+
+POLICY AND PROCEDURES
+
+I.	Copyright Ownership 
+
+With respect to determining ownership of copyright, BJU’s policy addresses works by category of copyrightable work (including Traditional or Non-Directed Works, Directed Work, and Sponsored or Externally Contracted Works).  Ownership of copyrighted subject matter is dependent on which category of work and which category of author, pertain to the copyrightable work at issue.
+
+A.	Works by Faculty:
+
+Traditional Works or Non-Directed Works: The creator of traditional works or non-directed works is entitled to ownership of copyright and royalties, unless it is a directed work, sponsored work, or a work for hire described in a written agreement between the work’s creator and BJU (see below).  BJU does not claim ownership to pedagogical, scholarly or artistic works, regardless of their form of expression, and such works are not directed works.  These copyrighted works include, but are not limited to, textbooks, presentations, course materials, refereed literature, etc.  Furthermore, BJU claims no ownership in popular nonfiction, novels, poems, musical compositions, digital media, software, games, or other works of artistic imagination. 
+
+Electronic Courses: With respect to faculty materials produced for online instructions, copyright ownership is treated no differently than faculty materials produced for the classroom.  If the materials are not directed works, the faculty member owns the copyright for those materials created for online use.
+
+Licensing of Traditional Works or Non-Directed Works for BJU Courses: Faculty members who create teaching and classroom materials (including electronic courses), such as class notes, syllabi, curriculum guides, or laboratory notebooks, or online learning modules shall grant BJU a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use, display, copy, distribute, and prepare derivative works for administrative use, as well as use in educational programs and courses provided directly by BJU to its students for the duration of time that the faculty member is employed by BJU.  The details of the licensing agreement will specify, among other things, the end of the licensing agreement, for example when an originator of traditional works or non-directed works used in an online course retires or ceases to be employed by BJU.
+
+							Directed Works: Ownership of directed works resides with BJU.  This includes all copyrighted works, including but not limited to educational software and electronic courses, that are specifically funded by the University under a formal contractual arrangement with BJU to develop and/or revise courses or as a result of the terms of the individual’s employment or hiring agreement.  BJU may release or transfer its authorship rights to the work’s creator under a written agreement negotiated between the creator and BJU.  The parties may also negotiate for joint ownership of such works, with the written approval of the President or the President’s designee.
+
+							Sponsored or Externally Contracted Works: Ownership of a sponsored or externally contracted work will be determined by the contract.  In negotiating with sponsors or contractors, project directors and BJU should strive to obtain the greatest latitude and rights for the individual author and BJU consistent with the public interest and this policy.
+
+							For an agreement that expressly requires copyright ownership by BJU, the university may release or transfer its rights to the creator subject to (a) the implementation of a licensing agreement, and/or (b) the university’s right to require reimbursement and/or a share of any income.  The creator and BJU may negotiate for joint ownership of such works. 
+
+							For an agreement that does not expressly require copyright ownership by BJU or a third party, the creator of the work shall own the work. In cases of ownership by the creator, BJU may require a non-exclusive, nontransferable license for its own educational, promotional, research, and creative works.
+
+B.	Works by Staff/Administrators
+
+With the following exceptions, whenever copyrightable work is created by a member of the staff or administration as part of the individual’s university responsibilities, the work will generally be treated as a work-for-hire and ownership will be retained by BJU: 
+
+BJU may enter into an agreement in advance that the staff/administrative employee shall own the copyright.  In addition, the President may waive institutional ownership.
+
+In the event the work was created through a sponsored project, ownership will be determined by the sponsored project agreement.  For an agreement that does not expressly require copyright ownership by BJU or a third party, the creator of the work shall own the work unless it is a directed work.
+
+							Scholarly writings – including articles, contributions to edited volumes, and books – that are authored by a non-faculty Employee will be wholly owned by the staff/administrative employee. 
+
+C.	Works by Independent Contractors
+
+Works by independent contractors engaged by BJU will be owned in accordance with the contract under which the work was created.  If the written contract for work by an independent contractor does not specify institutional ownership, then ownership will vest with the independent contractor.
+
+D.	Works by Students
+
+It is the general policy of BJU that a work created by a student other than in the course of employment by the university is owned by the student, subject to the terms of any applicable Sponsored Project agreement.  These protected works include, but are not limited to, papers, computer programs, theses, artistic and musical works, photographs, film and video projects, graphic design, and other artistic works. 
+
+Rights in student works may be transferred between the student and BJU.  In such cases, a written assignment agreement will specify the respective rights and obligations of the parties.  The parties may also negotiate for joint ownership of such works, with the approval of the President (or designee). 
+
+E.	 Dispute Resolution 
+
+A dispute concerning application of any aspect of this copyright ownership policy must be submitted in writing to the Provost. The dispute will be reviewed by the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property, which will prepare a report of its findings and make a recommendation to the Provost.  See Section IV below for additional information. 
+
+II.	Intellectual Property Ownership
+
+A.	Ownership of Patentable Inventions 
+
+University Ownership 
+
+Ownership on a worldwide basis in any patentable invention conceived, developed, or reduced to practice by BJU employees and students under either of the following conditions will reside with BJU:
+
+During normal or assigned activities related to the creator’s employment or student responsibilities (e.g., teaching, performing BJU service, pursuing coursework/academic responsibilities, directing or conducting research, etc.); or 
+
+With the support of BJU facilities or assets, including equipment, material, personnel, or any other resource available to the creator as a direct result of the creator’s affiliation with BJU and which would not be available to a non-BJU community member on the same basis.  
+
+							As a condition of employment or enrollment, all BJU employees and students assign ownership of all inventions (or parts thereof) described above to the University. BJU has the sole right to determine the disposition of intellectual property in which the University has a proprietary interest.  A decision to exercise this right will be transmitted in writing to the creator within 60 days of the date of disclosure of the invention (or parts thereof).  If BJU decides to pursue a patent, it may recommend that BJU alone, or with the assistance of an external organization such as a technology transfer company, make applications for letters of patent.  Title to all such patent applications and resulting patents will be held by the BJU Board of Trustees; however, BJU will share licensing revenues with the creator(s) according to Section III below.   If, however, BJU decides not to patent an invention, or not to commercialize a patented invention, BJU will release to the creator its interest in the invention.
+
+Inventions Made on Personal Time
+
+Intellectual property made BJU employees or students on their personal time and not involving the use of BJU facilities or assets are the property of the creator except in case of conflict with any applicable agreement between BJU and a sponsoring agency.  
+
+Creators who claim that intellectual property is made on personal time have the responsibility to demonstrate that intellectual property was invented based on personal time.  All such intellectual property must be disclosed in accordance with the disclosure procedures set forth below (see Section II.B) and demonstrate the basis of the creator’s claim that only personal time was utilized.  
+
+Inventions Arising from Sponsored Research 
+
+When intellectual property is developed through a sponsored grant or contract, the provision set forth in the grant or contract will prevail.  In the absence of a provision, the university’s policy will apply.  Generally, while BJU is assigned the rights to intellectual property generated during the course of sponsored research activities, the sponsor retains the option to claim ownership under certain circumstances.  In the event that the sponsor does not exercise its option and regardless of ownership, the government retains a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable, royalty-free, worldwide license to the Intellectual Property produced under government sponsorship. 
+
+Consulting Agreements
+
+BJU employees engaged in consulting work must use care to ensure that their consulting agreement(s) is not in conflict with this policy or BJU’s policy on outside activities.  Such agreements may include provisions as to the licensing or assignment of intellectual property and may come into conflict with this policy.  BJU employees are therefore obligated to make it clear to those with whom they make such agreements of their existing obligations to the University and may not obligate the use of, divulge, or transfer any intellectual property in which BJU may claim an ownership interest.  BJU’s rights and the individual’s obligations may not be abrogated or limited by the terms of any third-party consulting agreement unless a waiver is provided in writing by the President of the University.
+
+B.	Procedures for Reporting Intellectual Property 
+
+							BJU employees and students are obligated to promptly and fully report to BJU in a manner stipulated by the Provost any discovery, invention, possible device, etc. the individual has made and has reason to believe might be patentable or otherwise protectable.  This is to be done regardless of whether BJU funds or funds from an external source provided the immediate support for the work from which the invention resulted or if the intellectual property was developed on personal time.  In addition, current and former employees remain obligated to disclose to BJU any inventions or discoveries made while employed by the University but which are made during outside consulting, or during a sabbatical or other extended leave, notwithstanding their employment by or association with another institution or organization that would itself claim ownership of such invention or discovery.
+
+C.	 Dispute Resolution 
+
+A dispute concerning application of any aspect of this Intellectual Property Ownership policy must be submitted in writing to the Provost. The dispute will be reviewed by the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property, which will prepare a report of its findings and make a recommendation to the Provost. See Section IV below for additional information. 
+
+III.	Royalties and Revenue Sharing 
+
+BJU assumes financial responsibility for intellectual property (copyright or patent) to which it takes ownership.  Royalties and other income from work subject to copyright or patent held by BJU will first be used to reimburse all direct and indirect expenditures (i.e., documented out of pocket expenses paid by the creator, direct costs paid by BJU in conjunction with the processing of patent applications/marketing or licensing/legal costs, and costs associated with equipment, materials, staff services, etc.).  After all expenditures are reimbursed, the remaining royalties and other income will be disbursed as follows: 
+
+Creator								50%	 		
+
+Creator’s Department					15%		
+
+Provost Office						10%
+General Fund						25%
+
+Where there is more than one creator, distribution shall be prorated according to the contribution of each as may be agreed in writing between the parties, or, if an agreement cannot be reached, then according to the Provost, after considering the recommendation of the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property.  Final appeals may be filed with the President.
+
+Royalties are payable to creators only upon actual receipt by BJU and after expenses have been paid, however, the Provost will provide detail and evidence of the expenses upon request to the creator. After all costs are fully recovered, royalty distribution payments will be paid immediately to the creator. In the case of the death of a creator, all royalty distributions which would have been due to such a person shall be paid to the creator’s estate. The creators’ share will continue even if the individual(s) have left the employ BJU or is no longer a student at BJU.
+
+							If legal action is taken or BJU receives a claim of patent invalidity during the life of a patent, revenue distribution attributable to the patent may, at BJU's discretion, be suspended pending final resolution of the dispute.  Additionally, if there is a legal challenge to the validity of a copyright, payment of royalties may, at BJU’s discretion, be suspended pending final resolution.
+
+IV.	Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property
+
+									Although the ultimate authority in deciding whether or not to invest in an employee’s intellectual property resides with the President, the Committee on Copyright and Intellectual Property (“the committee”) is charged with reviewing provisional copyrights, patents or possible intellectual property (if it can be disclosed) and advising the President.  The committee also serves as a forum for the receipt and discussion of proposals to change this policy and/or to provide recommendations for contract negotiations.  
+
+									In addition, the committee is charged with making recommendations to the Provost with regard to disputes over ownership, and its attendant rights, of intellectual property.  The committee will make an initial recommendation of whether BJU, the creator, or any other party has ownership rights, and, if so, the basis and extent of those rights.  The committee will also make a recommendation on resolving competing employee or student claims to ownership when the parties cannot reach an agreement on their own.  The committee will review the merits of provisional patents and other creations and make recommendations for the management of the invention, including development, patenting, and exploitation.  Recommendations of the committee will be forwarded in writing to the Provost.  The decision of the Provost may be appealed to the President.
+
+							The committee will be composed of rotating and permanent members. The rotating members consist of [INSERT MEMBERSHIP], and the Provost, who will serve as a non-voting member and chair. At the time of initial appointment or election, each non-permanent member shall be designated as serving a one-, two-, or three-year term, staggered so that the term of one committee member will expire each year. After the first appointment subsequent members shall serve staggered three-year terms, commencing July 1 and terminating on June 30. Committee members may serve one additional three-year term consecutively. The committee may also appoint additional faculty, staff, administrators, or students on an ad hoc, non-voting basis with observer status.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Model Ranks.txt [/INST] It is understood that evidence that the candidate is successfully performing assigned duties should emerge as the department/program or the candidate's advocate addresses (1) – (4) in the review. Unless evidence to the contrary is presented, it will be assumed that the candidate has exhibited conduct in accordance with professional standards. 
+
+
+
+The department/program or the candidate's advocate, as the case may be, shall decide in each case what balance of merits warrants recommendation for promotion.
+
+a. Instructor 
+
+At minimum, a master's degree in the subject field in which the faculty member teaches. 
+
+Pursuit of continued graduate study toward a doctorate or other terminal degree. Upon completion of requirements for the terminal degree, an instructor who meets the requirements for assistant professor may be recommended for promotion to the rank of assistant professor. 
+
+Tenure normally will not be granted at the rank of instructor. The institution will determine the standard for granting tenure in exceptional circumstances. 
+
+Evidence of potential for effective university teaching. 
+
+Willingness to participate in the activities of the academic community. 
+
+b. Assistant Professor 
+
+The earned doctorate, or recognized terminal degree in the field of specialization from a regionally accredited or internationally reputable foreign institution. In extraordinary circumstances, the president, after consultation with the appropriate faculty committee at the institution, may waive the criterion of the earned doctorate. 
+
+Evidence of effective teaching. 
+
+Evidence of scholarly contribution in the area of specialization including, but not limited to, activities such as research, publication, participation in the programs of professional societies, or professionally recognized performance in the arts. 
+
+Participation in the activities of the academic community at the department, school, and university levels including, but not limited to, such activities as performing assigned administrative duties, assuming committee responsibilities, effective academic advising of students, working actively with student organizations, and evidencing interest in external community activities related to the faculty member's area of specialization. In cases where service is not specifically discipline-related, the candidate should describe the service and address how it could be of professional benefit to the candidate and/or to Salisbury University’s role in the community since the faculty member is representing the University positively. Volunteerism related to one’s family, hobbies, or special interests may be laudable but may not be weighted heavily if it appears to be more personal than professional. 
+
+c. Associate Professor 
+
+The earned doctorate, or recognized terminal degree in the field of specialization from a regionally accredited or internationally reputable foreign institution. In extraordinary circumstances, the president, after consultation with the appropriate faculty committee at the institution, may waive the criterion of the earned doctorate. 
+
+A minimum of six years of full-time university/college teaching experience with at least five years in assistant professor rank. Exceptions may be made by the provost for comparable professional activity or research. 
+
+Excellence in teaching. 
+
+Evidence of scholarly contribution in the area of specialization including, but not limited to, such activities as research, publication, participation in the programs of professional societies, or professionally recognized performance in the arts. 
+
+Participation in the activities of the academic community at the department, school, and university levels including, but not limited to, such activities as performing assigned administrative duties, assuming committee responsibilities, effective academic advising of students, working actively with student organizations, and evidencing interest in external community activities related to the faculty member's area of specialization. In cases where service is not specifically discipline-related, the candidate should describe the service and address how it could be of professional benefit to the candidate and/or to Salisbury University’s role in the community since the faculty member is representing the University positively. Volunteerism related to one’s family, hobbies, or special interests may be laudable but may not be weighted heavily if it appears to be more personal than professional. 
+
+d. Professor 
+
+The earned doctorate or recognized terminal degree in the field of specialization from a regionally accredited or internationally reputable foreign institution. In extraordinary circumstances, the president, after consultation with the appropriate faculty committee at the institution, may waive the criterion of the earned doctorate. 
+
+A minimum of ten years of full-time university/college teaching experience and at least seven years in the associate professor rank. Exceptions may be made for faculty who have attained national distinction for comparable professional activity or research by the provost. 
+
+Excellence in teaching. 
+
+Evidence of scholarly contribution in the area of specialization including, but not limited to, such activities as research, publication, participation in the programs of professional societies, or professionally recognized performance in the arts. 
+
+Participation in the activities of the academic community at the department, school, and university levels, including, but not limited to, performing assigned administrative duties, assuming committee responsibilities, effective academic advising of students, working actively with student organizations, and evidencing interest in external community activities related to the faculty member's area of specialization. In cases where service is not specifically discipline- related, the candidate should describe the service and address how it could be of professional benefit to the candidate and/or to Salisbury University’s role in the community since the faculty member is representing the University positively. Volunteerism related to one’s family, hobbies, or special interests may be laudable but may not be weighted heavily if it appears to be more personal than professional.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Model Sponsored Program Conflict of Interest Policy (Draft 1).txt [/INST] SPONSORED PROGRAMS CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY
+
+The purpose of this policy is to promote objectivity in research and to foster compliance with federal regulations requiring the disclosure of Significant Financial Interests and the management and reporting of a financial Conflicts of Interest with respect to research conducted at Ohio Wesleyan University that is funded by the Public Health Service (PHS), the National Science Foundation (NSF), or other federal agencies (“Externally Sponsored Program”).
+
+APPLICABILTY
+
+Principal Investigators (PI) or Project Managers (PM), as well as University employees assigned to participate on an Externally Sponsored Program (i.e., federally sponsored grant, cooperative agreement, or contract).
+
+POLICY STATEMENT
+
+It is the policy of Ohio Wesleyan University that Investigators disclose any Significant Financial Interest that may present an actual or potential Conflict of Interests in relationship with research or an Externally Sponsored Program requiring such disclosure. University employees receiving sponsored funds must also comply with the policies of their sponsoring agencies.
+
+When the University determines that such an interest might reasonably appear to be directly and significantly affected by the Externally Sponsored Program, the University will take steps either to manage or to eliminate the Conflict of Interest.
+
+An Investigator who fails to make disclosures required by this policy, or who otherwise violates any of the provisions in this policy or in a management plan, may be subject to appropriate sanctions, including but not limited to, corrective action for misconduct under University policies, practices and procedures, up to and including dismissal.
+
+NOTE: This policy supplements, but does not replace, other University policies addressing conflicts of interest (see e.g., Article II, Section 4 of the Code of Regulations and the Employee Handbook’s Conflicts of Interest Policy).  This policy is directed toward disclosure of any Significant Financial Interest that would reasonably appear to be affected by the work performed under an Externally Sponsored Program.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Conflict of Interest (COI): an actual or potential interest that could directly and substantially affect the design, conduct, or reporting of funded research, or of scholarly and/or educational activities funded under an external grant, contract or cooperative agreement. COIs can be financial (FCOI) or obligatory (OCOI) in nature. 
+
+Financial Conflict of Interest (FCOI): a financial interest that could directly and substantially affect the design, conduct, or reporting of funded research or scholarly and/or educational activities funded under external grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements. 
+
+Obligatory Conflict of Interest (OCOI): a relationship (regardless of compensation) that involves a responsibility or commitment to an external entity, including but not limited to being a founding member of that entity, or holding scientific advisory or governing board membership.
+
+Externally Sponsored Program: a research program conducted at Ohio Wesleyan University that is funded by the Public Health Service (PHS), the National Science Foundation (NSF), or other federal agency.
+
+Institutional Responsibilities: an Investigator’s professional responsibilities on behalf of the University, which may include but are not limited to, activities such as research, research consultation, teaching, professional practice, institutional committee memberships, and service on panels such as the Institutional Review Board.
+
+Management Plan: a written plan for the management, reduction, or elimination of a potential Conflict of Interest relating to research arising from a Significant Financial Interest.
+
+Investigator: A Project Director, Principal Investigator, and any other University community member, regardless of title or position, who is responsible for the design, conduct, or reporting of federally-funded research, or proposed for such funding, and which may include, for example, collaborators or consultants.
+
+Significant Financial Interest: means: 
+
+							A financial interest consisting of one or more of the following interests of the Investigator (and those of the Investigator’s spouse and dependent children) that reasonably appears to be related to the Investigator’s institutional responsibilities: 
+
+							With regard to any publicly traded entity, a Significant Financial Interest exists if the value of any remuneration received from the entity in the twelve months preceding the disclosure and the value of any equity interest in the entity as of the date of disclosure, when aggregated, exceeds $5,000. For purposes of this definition, remuneration includes salary and any payment for services not otherwise identified as salary (e.g., consulting fees, honoraria, paid authorship); equity interest includes any stock, stock option, or other ownership interest, as determined through reference to public prices or other reasonable measures of fair market value; 
+
+							With regard to any non-publicly traded entity, a Significant Financial Interest exists if the value of any remuneration received from the entity in the twelve months preceding the disclosure, when aggregated, exceeds $5,000, or when the Investigator (or the Investigator’s spouse or dependent children) holds any equity interest (e.g., stock, stock option, or other ownership interest); or 
+
+							Intellectual property rights and interests (e.g., patents, copyrights), upon receipt of income related to such rights and interests. The National Science Foundation (NSF), and other funding sources have higher de minimis thresholds for disclosure of Significant Financial Interests. 
+
+The University disclosure requirements is the same as required by the Public Health Service (PHS) Significant Financial Interest de minimis threshold of $5,000. 
+
+							Investigators also must disclose the occurrence of any reimbursed or sponsored travel (i.e., that which is paid on behalf of the Investigator and not reimbursed to the Investigator so that the exact monetary value may not be readily available), related to their institutional responsibilities; provided, however, that this disclosure requirement does not apply to travel that is reimbursed or sponsored by a Federal, state, or local government agency, an Institution of higher education, an academic teaching hospital, a medical center, or a research institute that is affiliated with an institution of higher education.
+
+The term Significant Financial Interest does not include:
+
+							Salary, royalties, or other remuneration paid by the institution to the Investigator if the Investigator is currently employed or otherwise appointed by the Institution, including intellectual property rights assigned to the institution and agreements to share in royalties related to such rights; any ownership interest in the institution held by the Investigator, if the institution is a commercial or for profit organization; income from investment vehicles, such as mutual funds and retirement accounts, as long as the Investigator does not directly control the investment decisions made in these vehicles; 
+
+							Income from seminars, lectures, or teaching engagements sponsored by a Federal, state, or local government agency, an institution of higher education as defined at 20 U.S.C. 1001(a), an academic teaching hospital, a medical center, or a research institute that is affiliated with an institution of higher education; or 
+
+							Income from service on advisory committees or review panels for a Federal, state, or local government agency, an Institution of higher education as defined at 20 U.S.C. 1001(a), an academic teaching hospital, a medical center, or a research institute that is affiliated with an institution of higher education. 
+
+							Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program means the extramural research program for small businesses that is established by the Awarding Components of the Public Health Service and certain other Federal agencies under Public Law 97–219, the Small Business Innovation Development Act, as amended. For purposes of this subpart, the term SBIR Program also includes the Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Program, which was established by Public Law 102–564.
+
+Related Financial Interest: When the work to be performed under the Externally Sponsored Program and the results of the undertaking would reasonably appear to affect the financial interest, the financial interest is ""related"" to the sponsored program and must be disclosed.  The following are examples of financial interests that are ""related"" to a sponsored project: 
+
+							The Investigator is carrying out a project whose results would be relevant to the development, manufacturing, or improvement of the products or services of the entity in which there is a financial interest; 
+
+							The Investigator has a financial interest in an entity which might manufacture or commercialize a drug, device, procedure, or any other product used in the project or that will predictably result from the project; 
+
+							The Investigator has consulting income in the Investigator’s professional field (Consulting activities in the professional field of the Investigator are considered ""related"" interests and all income must be disclosed if it meets the threshold for a financial interest); 
+
+							The Investigator has a financial interest in an entity and the Externally Sponsored Program proposes to subcontract a portion of the work, or lease property, or make referral of participants to, or make purchases from the entity; 
+
+							The Investigator has a financial interest in an entity that is part of a consortium or that will otherwise participate in the Externally Sponsored Program. Financial interests which are not ""related"" to the Externally Sponsored Program do not need to be disclosed.
+
+POLICY AND PROCEDURES
+
+	Disclosures of Financial Interests for Externally Sponsored Programs
+
+	All University Investigators receiving federal or external funds are required to disclose to the [IDENTIFY OFFICE OR OFFICER] the following Significant Financial Interests:
+
+								Any Significant Financial Interest of the Investigator that would reasonably appear to be affected by the research or educational activities funded, or proposed for funding, by an external sponsor; or
+
+								Any Significant Financial Interest of the Investigator in an entity whose financial interest would reasonably appear to be affected by the research or educational activities funded, or proposed for funding, by an external sponsor.
+
+								Regardless of the above minimum requirements, an Investigator may choose to disclose any other financial or related interest that could present an actual Conflict of Interest or be perceived to present a Conflict of Interest.
+
+								As required by Federal regulation, a Significant Financial Interest must be disclosed prior to the time a proposal is submitted, as well as be updated by Investigators during the period of the award on an annual basis or as new reportable significant financial interests are obtained. New reportable significant financial interests must be reported with thirty (30) days of discovering or acquiring the Significant Financial Interest.
+
+								Before any federal grant or contract or a subcontract where there are federal flow through funds is submitted by the University, each Investigator is required to certify that any Significant Financial Interest related to that proposal, including significant financial interests that would reasonably appear to be affected by the proposal activities and Significant Financial Interest in any entity whose financial interests would reasonably appear to be affected by the proposal activities, has been appropriately disclosed.  This certification is required to be submitted by all Investigators to the [IDENTIFY OFFICE OR OFFICER].
+
+	Disclosure of Sponsored Travel (PHS-Funded Research Only)
+
+	Investigators engaged in PHS funded research must disclose any reimbursed or sponsored travel undertaken by the Investigator related to his or her Institutional Responsibilities, and for the University to determine if the travel has the potential to bias PHS funded research. Such disclosures are made annually to the [IDENTIFY OFFICE OR OFFICER] and must be updated within thirty (30) days following reimbursement or within thirty (30) days following the completion of the trip if Lynn funds the travel directly.  The details of this disclosure will include, at a minimum:
+
+								The dollar amount or value,
+
+								The purpose of the trip;
+
+								The identity of the sponsor/organizer;
+
+								The destination, and
+
+								The duration.
+
+The [IDENTIFY OFFICE OR OFFICER] will determine if further information is needed, including a determination or disclosure of monetary value, in order to determine whether the travel constitutes a Conflict of Interest with the PHS-funded research.
+
+Disclosure Review
+
+The [IDENTIFY OFFICER OR COMMITTEE] will review all disclosures to determine whether a Conflict of Interest exists.  If the [IDENTIFY OFFICER OR COMMITTEE] determines that there is a potential for Conflict of Interest covered by this policy, then the [IDENTIFY OFFICER OR COMMITTEE] will determine what conditions or restrictions, if any, should be imposed by to eliminate, reduce or manage actual or potential conflicts.
+
+The review of the disclosure(s) and adoption of conditions or restrictions to manage, reduce, or eliminate the Conflict of Interest must be complete within sixty (60) days of receipt of the award, (unless the sponsor requires action by an earlier date) and prior to expenditure of funds. 
+
+Following the disclosure, the Investigator should discuss with the [IDENTIFY OFFICER OR COMMITTEE] proposed measures that will be taken to manage, reduce, or eliminate any actual or potential Conflict of Interest presented by the Significant Financial Interest. Such measures may include:
+
+							Public disclosure of significant financial interests;
+
+							Review of the research protocol by an independent reviewer(s);
+
+							Monitoring of the research by an independent reviewer(s);
+
+							Modification of the research plan.
+
+Following review of the disclosure materials, the [IDENTIFY OFFICER OR COMMITTEE] may impose additional conditions or restrictions, including the following:
+
+							Modification of the research plan;
+
+							Disqualification from participation in all or a portion of the research funded;
+
+							Divestiture of significant financial interests; or
+
+							Severance of relationships that create actual or potential conflicts.
+
+The [IDENTIFY OFFICER OR COMMITTEE] will require that a Management Plan for reducing or eliminating Conflicts of Interest be developed.  To address complex situations, the University may utilize an ad hoc committee to periodically review the ongoing activity, to monitor the conduct of the activity (including use of students and postdoctoral appointees), to ensure open and timely dissemination of the research results, and to otherwise oversee compliance with the Management Plan.
+
+Management Plans
+
+Management Plans must be approved by the [IDENTIFY OFFICE OR OFFICER] and may include a single element or several elements such as:
+
+							Monitoring of the sponsored program by independent researchers or reviewers;
+
+							Modifications to the research or program plan;
+
+							Isolating the individual from involvement in research or decision-making regarding research;
+
+							Requiring the individual to reduce, modify, defer, waive, or eliminate the financial interest that is the source of the conflict, such as equity holdings, royalty income, stock options and milestone payments;
+
+							If recusal would preclude the individual from fulfilling the responsibilities of a University position, requiring the individual to eliminate the holdings or vacate the position;
+
+							Requiring the individual to self-recuse from institutional decisions regarding the outside entity that is source of conflict;
+
+							Requiring the individual to make periodic written disclosure of the conflict to all administrators, faculty, non-faculty employees, and students under individual's supervision, to IRBs, IACUCs, subjects, state and federal officials, research sponsors, co-investigators, colleagues, students, trainees, members and prospective members of the individual's research laboratory, journals to which manuscripts about the research are submitted, and media, lay, and professional audiences with whom the research or other activity is discussed orally or in writing;
+
+							Appointing independent individuals or committees to oversee high-level administrative decisions (e.g., financial decisions, space allocations, appointments and promotions) in which the individual participates;
+
+							Prohibiting the research from taking place at the University;
+
+							Eliminating, reducing, or modifying the University's financial stake in an outside entity or research project;
+
+							Transfer of purchasing authority;
+
+							Other arrangements that manage, reduce, or eliminate a potential Financial Conflict of Interest.
+
+Reporting to PHS
+
+Should any reported conflict or non-compliance require reporting to PHS, the [INDENTIFY OFFICER] will report in accordance with PHS regulations and provide the following information:
+
+							Grant number
+
+							Project Director/Principle Investigator
+
+							Name of Investigator with FCOI
+
+							Name of Entity with which the investigator has a FCOI
+
+							Nature of FCOI (e.g., consulting fees, travel, equity, etc.)
+
+							Value of financial interest
+
+							A description of how the financial interest relates to PHS-funded research and the basis for the Institution’s determination that the financial interest conflicts with such research
+
+							Key elements of the Institution’s management plan
+
+Annual reports to PHS must include the above and the status of the FCOI and changes to management plan.
+
+Violations of Conflict of Interest Policy
+
+Failure to file a disclosure or update or to comply with any conditions or restrictions imposed on the conduct of the project under this policy will be grounds for discipline of the Investigator, up to and including termination for adequate cause. 
+
+In addition, Federal regulations may require reports to the Federal sponsor regarding any violations of this policy.  Sponsors may suspend or terminate the award and/or debar an Investigator from receiving future awards in the event of failure to comply with applicable Federal regulations on disclosure, review, and management of Significant Financial Interest related to Externally Sponsored Programs.
+
+Retrospective Review 
+
+Whenever a Financial Conflict of Interest is not identified or managed in a timely manner, including:
+
+							Failure by the Investigator to disclose a significant financial interest that is determined by the University to constitute a Financial Conflict of Interest;
+
+							Failure by the University to review or manage such a Financial Conflict of Interest; or
+
+							Failure by the Investigator to comply with a Financial Conflict of Interest management plan;
+
+The University will, within 120 days of the University’s determination of noncompliance, complete a “retrospective review” of the Investigator’s activities and the NIH-funded research project to determine whether any NIH-funded research, or portion thereof, conducted during the time period of the noncompliance was biased in the design, conduct, or reporting of such research.
+
+The University is required to document the retrospective review; such documentation shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, all of the following key elements:
+
+							Project number;
+
+							Project title;
+
+							PD/PI or contact PD/PI if a multiple PD/PI model is used;
+
+							Name of the Investigator with the FCOI;
+
+							Name of the entity with which the Investigator has a Financial Conflict of Interest;
+
+							Reason(s) for the retrospective review;
+
+							Detailed methodology used for the retrospective review (e.g., methodology of the review process, composition of the review panel, documents reviewed);
+
+							Findings of the review; and
+
+							Conclusions of the review.
+
+Training (Investigators)
+
+Each Investigator, including Co-Investigators must complete Conflict of Interest training prior to engaging in research related to any federally funded grant or contract and at least every four years. In addition, training must be completed immediately under the following circumstances:
+
+							Institutional COI policies change in a manner that affects Investigator requirements;
+
+							An Investigator is new to an institution;
+
+							The University finds an Investigator noncompliant with this policy or a Management Plan.
+
+The training course can be taken online at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/coi/fcoi-training.htm.
+
+Additional Responsibilities 
+
+The University shall, for any federal research funding from the Public Health Service or any other federal funding agency that imposes these requirements:
+
+							Require subgrantees, contractors, and collaborators working under PHS funded subagreements from the University to comply with the PHS regulations (42 CFR Part 50 Subpart F, § 50.604 [grants] and 45 CFR Part 94, § 94.4 [contracts]) by following this policy or by providing the appropriate assurances of compliance to the University;
+
+							Maintain the records of and related to COI disclosures according to the University’s record retention policies and schedules and sponsor requirements;
+
+							Report to the awarding component of the funding agency any significant financial interest identified as conflicting, subsequent to the initial disclosure, and that the interest has been managed, reduced, or eliminated, within sixty (60) days of that identification;
+
+							Make information available, upon request, to the sponsoring agency regarding all identified conflicting interests and how those interests have been managed, reduced, or eliminate;
+
+							Make available, either by a publicly-accessible website or by a written response within five business days to a request for an institution’s financial conflict of interest policy, an Investigator’s financial conflict of interest management plan related to PHS-funded research. This includes providing certain information regarding any key personnel whose significant financial interests are related to such research.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Model Stakeholder Team Intro Document.txt [/INST] 2
+
+
+
+FACULTY LEGISLTATION STAKEHOLDER TEAM
+
+
+ROLE OF STAKEHOLDER TEAM & OVERVIEW OF PROCESS
+
+______________________________________________________________________________
+
+
+
+Thank you for agreeing to be a member of the stakeholder team.  Members of the stakeholder team collaboratively work with the Stevens Strategy consultant(s) to vet the first three drafts of the updated Faculty Legislation (Bylaws) document during Phase Two of our engagement. The team’s feedback is critical to the process and helps ensure that model policies and suggested policy changes introduced by Stevens Strategy are tailored to meet the College’s mission, culture, and academic programming needs.  Ultimately, the policies developed in collaboration with members of the stakeholder team will be recommended to the Wheaton College Faculty as whole, the President, and Board of Trustees for formal adoption in accordance with the College’s current shared governance procedures.
+
+Below is a brief overview of our three-phase process:
+
+	Phase One – Introduction, Identify Needs, and Document Collection
+
+Phase One is devoted to identifying a Project Manager, appointing Review Team members, and developing a detailed Project Calendar and agreed upon Table of Contents for the updated Faculty Legislation (Bylaws) document, as well as meeting with key stakeholders and collecting any other relevant documents.
+
+	Initial Virtual Meeting
+
+	Following the development of Project Calendar, a virtual meeting with the Stakeholder Team, President, Provost, and any other key stakeholders identified by the College will be scheduled.  During the meeting, the Stevens Strategy consultant(s) will present a PowerPoint presentation to the Review Team (and any other stakeholders identified by the College) that outlines the various phases and goals of the engagement, as well as review a proposed Table of Contents for the updated Faculty Legislation (Bylaws) document.  
+
+	Following the presentation, a Q&A and strategy session will be held to answer any questions regarding our process and the proposed Table of Contents.  We will also discuss broadly any challenges the College is currently facing with its current Faculty Legislation document.  This session, in conjunction with interviews with the President, Provost, and any other key stakeholders identified by the College, as well as a review of the College’s comparison peer institution practices, will frame the initial content and organization of the first draft of a new Faculty Legislation (Bylaws) document delivered by Stevens Strategy in Phase Two.  Please note that if any revisions to the proposed Table of Contents are requested during the Q&A session, we will modify the Table of Contents following the meeting and send the revised table to the Stakeholder Team for final approval.
+
+	Phase Two – Document Preparation & Review
+
+At the beginning of Phase Two, the Stevens Strategy consultant(s) will begin drafting the new Faculty Legislation (Bylaws) document, which will be organized in accordance with the Table of Contents discussed with the Stakeholder Team during our initial virtual meeting. Drafting will include proposed changes to applicable policies in the College’s current Faculty Legislation document, as well as alternative model policies and new model policy recommendations as applicable.  All proposed policy will be informed by best practices followed by schools similar in mission and size to Wheaton College, including but not limited to the peer and aspirational institutions identified during Phase One.  Proposed policy will also address regional accreditation agency standards.
+
+All policy proposed by Stevens Strategy will be accompanied by a “Comment Note” that summarizes the suggested change or new policy, including citations to relevant peer institution practices and/or accreditation standards where applicable.  
+
+	Stevens Strategy will deliver the initial draft of the updated Faculty Legislation (Bylaws) document in accordance with the project calendar developed during Phase One.  The Stakeholder Team will then be requested to vet the draft and prepare individual comments in advance of a series of comprehensive review meetings that will be conducted virtually.  The review meetings, which are facilitated and led by a Stevens Strategy consultant, are designed to review the document thoroughly and allow team members to engage in open and frank discussion regarding the proposes policies.  These discussions will focus on refining, modifying, and tailoring the model policy suggestions provided by Stevens Strategy to ensure they meet the College’s mission, needs, and culture.  The goal will be to eventually reach consensus on a final draft that will be presented by the team to faculty colleagues.  In advance of the meetings, Stevens Strategy consultants will be available to answer the team member’s questions.
+
+	Following the facilitation meetings, the Stevens Strategy consultant, armed with feedback and comments from the team, will develop a second draft of the updated Faculty Legislation (Bylaws) document.  Upon delivery, team members will then be asked to vet the second draft and prepare comments in advance of a series of virtual meetings facilitated by the Stevens Strategy consultant to review the edits and changes introduced in draft two of the document.  Following these virtual meetings, the Stevens Strategy consultant will implement all changes and deliver a third draft in accordance with the project calendar.  
+
+	Following the same process as the second draft review, the team will be requested to address any final open issues during a series of virtual meetings facilitated by the Stevens Strategy consultant so that a fourth draft may be submitted by Stevens Strategy at the onset of Phase Three.
+
+	Phase Three – Faculty Approval Process
+
+	Phase Three begins with the delivery of the fourth draft of the updated Faculty Legislation document to the President.  If the President requests changes to the fourth draft, these will be shared with the Stakeholder Team.  Stevens Strategy consultants will facilitate a dialogue between the team and President and ultimately will implement any agreed upon revisions.  Once the President and team agree on a final version, the final version of the Faculty Legislation (Bylaws) document will be submitted to the Faculty as a whole in accordance with current College shared governance procedures. A Stevens Strategy consultants will, upon the College’s request, virtually attend a Faculty forum or meeting to answer any questions regarding the updated Faculty Legislation (Bylaws) document.  Following attendance at the faculty forum or meeting, Phase Three and the engagement will be completed.  The administration and Faculty will then work independently from Stevens Strategy towards obtaining Faculty, President, and ultimately Board of Trustees approval of the updated Faculty Legislation (Bylaws) document in accordance with the College’s current shared governance procedures.
+
+
+
+
+
+Documenting Comments and Recommendations
+
+When reviewing the various drafts on an independent basis, we request that team members document their respective comments and recommendation in a written memorandum separate from the draft document itself so that they may be shared with the full team during our facilitation meetings.  We request that changes or edits not be made directly to the “master” document.  Once consensus is reached regarding a particular section of the handbook, the consultant will incorporate the revision into the master document.
+
+Virtial Meetings, Process
+
+Virtual facilitation meetings with the consultant(s) will be scheduled throughout Phase Two of the engagement to review drafts of the documents.  During the facilitation meetings, the team is requested to work towards developing a consensus response to new and revised policies.  The goal is to develop a set of policies which will ultimately be recommended to the faculty, the President and, if applicable, the Board of Trustees for final adoption.  
+
+Deadlines
+
+Deadline for your comments will be communicated via e-mail the Project Manager in accordance with our Project Calendar, which will be finalized during Phase One. 
+
+
+
+
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Model Teaching Load Model.txt [/INST] Alternative Teaching Load Model
+
+Teaching during the academic fall and spring semesters is a substantial portion of a faculty member’s overall workload.  Wheaton College has created these policies to ensure an equitable distribution of teaching load across faculty within a given department and between different departments. This ensures that faculty do not regularly have unduly high or low teaching loads. High teaching loads can impair faculty effectiveness and their ability to contribute in other areas. Low teaching loads deprive the College of skilled services that could be used to support students and forces others faculty to carry a higher teaching load to compensate. 
+
+Equity of Teaching Load
+
+Wheaton College believes that teaching responsibilities should be distributed equitably across all faculty. In evaluating equity of teaching load, the College will consider such factors as number of courses assigned, total enrolled students, number of contact hours, number of distinct course preparations, and scheduled course times.  Such factors are considered for the individual faculty member in comparison to colleagues within the faculty member’s department and the norm across all departments at the College.  
+
+Standard Teaching Load
+
+	The standard teaching load for full-time faculty is five courses or its equivalent during the normal academic year of two semesters.  This load is accompanied by such other annual professional activities as student advising, scholarly or creative work, and service. Deviations from the standard teaching load require approval from the Provost or the Provost’s designee.  
+
+Developing the load distribution for individual faculty members within a department or program is the responsibility of the Department Chair/Program Coordinator, subject to the approval of the Provost (or the Provost’s designee).
+
+All classes regularly scheduled for between 150 and 220 minutes/week for the entire semester count as 1.0 course. This includes courses that may meet three times per week for 50 minutes, courses that meet four times a week for 50 minutes, and courses that may meet twice per week for 110 minutes. Many of these courses will provide 1.0 student credits, but some will provide 1.25. Regardless of the number of student credits, the course load is the same. 
+
+Teaching Load Equivalencies
+
+For purposes of comparison, teaching loads of full-time faculty teaching courses other than standard lecture/discussion courses are adjusted in the following ways:
+
+Laboratories typically meet 120 to 180 minutes per week in a single block and include substantial hands-on activities for the students. Laboratories are typically zero or 0.25 credit courses for the students. Regardless of the student credits, laboratory courses will count as 0.5 courses for the purpose of determining teaching load. 
+
+Multiple related course sections meeting at the same time in the same place and taught by the same instructor will be counted as a single course for the purpose of teaching load determination. These are typically referred to as stacked courses. For example, several levels of studio art courses meeting together simultaneously will be counted as one course for the purpose of computing teaching load.
+
+Classes regularly scheduled for 75 minutes/week for the entire semester count as 0.5 course. 
+
+Classes regularly scheduled for 120 to 220 minutes/week for half the semester calendar count as 0.5 course. These are considered modular courses. 
+
+Directing a major production in the performing arts, e.g., Theatre and Dance or Music, counts as 1.0 course. 
+
+Directed readings, independent studies, and supervision of internships will not be counted in the normal teaching load. These assignments are compensated under the Faculty Workload Plan. 
+
+Faculty teaching Music courses - [TBD]. 
+
+Faculty teaching Theatre courses – [TBD]. 
+
+
+
+Increase in the Standard Teaching Load
+
+Teaching assignments may, due to extenuating circumstances, be higher than the standard teaching load to meet unexpected department/program or student needs. In such a situation, the College will evaluate the other work performed by the faculty member. This will include the faculty member’s academic advising load, their committee or College service of significant weight, the total number of student credit hours taught, and their scholarly agenda.  In determining solutions with regard to optimizing class schedules and managing faculty load. Department Chairs/ Program Coordinators must confer with departmental faculty and Academic Affairs to best determine which of the available options, such as: assigning overloads, reassigning curses, collapsing and combining low enrollment sections, or recruiting a part-time faculty would be most appropriate in any given situations.  In all cases, emphasis must be on which solution(s) will provide the best student course outcomes with regard to scheduling, success, retention, and procession to degree. 
+
+An overload may be paid to a faculty member when the work is carried in addition to the standard load, no qualified person is available to carry the work as part their standard load, the work meets department needs and priorities as determined by the Provost, and the additional duties are not so heavy as to interfere with the faculty member’s performance of regular duties.
+
+Adjustments in Teaching Loads
+
+Adjustments in a full-time faculty member’s teaching load may be made to perform administrative, engage in grant-related research, perform other College-related activities (e.g., personnel coaching varsity athletic teams, directing plays, musical organizations, debate teams, and similar activities), etc.  Such adjustment must be approved by the Provost (or the Provost’s designee), following consultation with the appropriate Department Chair(s)/ Program Coordinator(s) and the Faculty Personnel Committee.
+
+Overloads
+
+When a full-time faculty member desires to teach more than the standard teaching load in an academic year, the faculty member must seek the prior approval of the Department Chair/Program Coordinator and Provost.  Approved overloads are compensated on a per course basis in accordance with the current rate approved by the Board of Trustees.
+
+Underloads
+
+If an underload from the standard teaching load occurs, whether due to a course cancellation due to low enrollment or other cause, the faculty member may be assigned alternative teaching responsibilities, possibly in a subsequent semester, or may be granted release time for other duties at the discretion of the Provost.
+
+Department Chair/Program Coordinator Reduction in Standard Teaching Load
+
+As compensation for their administrative duties, in accordance with the size of the department or academic program and the associated administrative workload, Department Chairs/Program Coordinators may receive course reassignment to administrative duty, a stipend, or both at the discretion of the Provost.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Model Volume Review Team Charge.txt [/INST] 2
+
+
+
+CHARGE TO THE CANISIUS COLLEGE INSTITUTIONAL-WIDE POLICY MANUAL REVIEW TEAMS
+
+______________________________________________________________________________
+
+
+
+
+
+Charge to the Review Team  
+
+Your charge is to review the assigned volume drafts of the Canisius College Policy Manual presented by Stevens Strategy and develop recommendations whether the volume should ultimately be recommended to appropriate governance bodies, the President and, if applicable, the Board of Trustees for final adoption.  
+
+Specifically:
+
+In the case of existing College policies, examine the policies to insure they are accurately reflected in the draft volumes provided by Stevens Strategy.  Any proposals for changes to current policy should be included in your recommendations.
+
+
+
+In the case of a suggested Stevens Strategy model policy where none exists currently, please review the suggested policy and recommend whether the College should consider the policy for final adoption and/or propose revisions to the suggested policy as deemed appropriate.
+
+
+
+In the case where Stevens Strategy has supplemented current College policy with suggested best practice language, please review the suggested supplemental policy language and recommend whether the College should consider the supplemented text for final adoption and/or propose revisions to the suggested text as deemed appropriate.
+
+
+
+In the case where Stevens Strategy has identified where the College has multiple versions of the same policy, review all versions and recommend one for final adoption.
+
+
+
+In the event a current College policy has not been included in the first volume drafts of the Canisius College Policy Manual, please identify the missing policy and bring a copy of it with you to the January facilitation meetings with the Stevens Strategy consultants.  Similarly, unwritten practices that reflect current College that have not been included in the first volume drafts of the Canisius College Policy Manual should be identified and brought to the attention of the Stevens Strategy consultants during the facilitation meetings.
+
+
+
+In the event neither current College policy nor suggested Stevens Strategy model policies address an area of perceived need, please identify the area of need and discuss your recommendations with the Stevens Strategy consultants.
+
+
+
+
+
+Your Response to this Charge
+
+Your recommendations should be presented electronically in a memorandum separate from the draft document itself.  Please do not type in changes or make deletions to an electronic version of a Stevens Strategy document unless the changes and comments reflect a final decision of the Review Team as a whole.  When changes are made to any draft document it is important that it be renamed and that all additions and deletions be tracked using the “track changes” function in Microsoft WORD.
+
+Meetings, Process
+
+Individual members of the review teams should review the assigned first volume drafts of Canisius College Policy Manual during the weeks of [TBD].  A facilitation meeting with the Stevens Strategy consultants will be scheduled during the week of [TBD].  During the facilitation meeting, the review team is requested to work towards developing a consensus response to each of the charges noted above.  The goal is to develop a set of policies which will ultimately be recommended to appropriate governance bodies, the President and, if applicable, the Board of Trustees for final adoption.  Subsequent drafts of the volumes will be delivered by Stevens Strategy, and you will be asked for further recommendations at that time.
+
+Deadlines
+
+The deadline for your comments to specifically assigned volumes or sections of the 1st draft of the Canisius College Policy Manual will be communicated via e-mail by Ms. Linda Walleshauser when the initial draft is sent. 
+
+
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Model Workplace Bullying (Draft 1).txt [/INST] Model Workplace Bullying, Intimidation and Violence
+
+The purpose of this policy is to promote a safe workplace environment by prohibiting bullying, intimidation, and violence in the workplace and at University sponsored program and activities.
+
+SCOPE AND APPLICABILITY
+
+This policy applies to all Ohio Wesleyan University employees, volunteers, and contractors. Moreover, the application of this policy includes Ohio Wesleyan University programs and activities, both on and off-campus.
+
+POLICY STATEMENT
+
+Ohio Wesleyan University is committed to providing a workplace that is free from bullying, intimidation, and violence.  Accordingly, behaviors that a reasonable person would perceive to be intimidating, bullying, or violent enough to significantly impair the ability of a community member to learn, work, or live in the University environment depart from the standard for civility and respect and are prohibited, whether they occur on University property or at a University sponsored program or activity.  Moreover, bullying, intimidation, and threats of violence made via the telephone, electronic or conventional mail, or any other communication medium against a fellow employee or member of the University community are similarly prohibited.
+
+Violations of this policy may be cause for disciplinary action, up to and including dismissal.  Any person who makes threats, exhibits threatening behavior or engages in violent acts in violation of this policy may be removed from campus pending the outcome of an investigation. 
+
+Retaliation against anyone for reporting an actual or suspected violation of this policy in good faith will not be tolerated and will subject the individual engaging in the retaliation to disciplinary action up to and including dismissal. Any complaints about retaliation may be reported in the same manner as violations of this policy are to be reported.
+
+Confidentiality of individuals reporting violations of this policy will be protected to the extent deemed reasonable and appropriate by the administration.  Only those people with a legitimate need to know will be informed, which may include persons who are potential targets of acts that violate this policy.
+
+Nothing in this policy should be construed to infringe upon the academic freedom of members of the University community and their right to use the academic forum provided by the University to discuss controversial subjects or to express ideas with which some or most members of the University community strongly disagree.
+
+Note: If the bullying, intimidation, or violent conduct is sexual in nature or if it is based on a category protected by law, reporting parties are required to follow the procedures set forth in either the University’s Title IX and Sexual Harassment Policy, Non-Title IX, Sexual Misconduct Policy, or Non-sex Based Discrimination and Harassment Policy as applicable.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Intimidation: engaging in actions that include but are not limited to behavior intended to frighten, coerce, or induce duress.
+
+Property Damage: intentional damage to property and includes property owned by the University or by employees, students, clients, visitors, or vendors.
+
+Workplace: any location owned, leased, or rented by Ohio Wesleyan University, or any location where a University employee is acting in the course and scope of employment.  This includes, but is not limited to, buildings, grounds, and surrounding perimeters, including parking lots, field locations, classrooms, and residence halls. It also includes vehicles when those vehicles are used for University business.
+
+Workplace Bullying: Repeated and deliberate physical, verbal or written conduct directed towards an individual or group in the workplace intended to intimidate, harass, degrade, humiliate, and/or undermine or create a risk to the health or safety of the individual or group in the workplace. It includes both physical and psychological abuse. 
+
+The following are some examples of bullying:
+
+Abusive, insulting, or offensive language or comments that is outside the range of commonly accepted disagreement, disapproval or critique in academic culture and professional setting; 
+
+Violent, aggressive or intimidating conduct;
+
+Repeated belittling or humiliating comments; 
+
+Persistent or egregious use of abusive, insulting, or offensive language;
+
+Spreading false and malicious rumors, gossip, or innuendo;
+
+Deliberately excluding someone from normal work-related activities for the purpose of degrading or harming another person’s reputation in the workplace; 
+
+Withholding information that is vital for effective work performance;
+
+Repeatedly stealing or taking credit for work done by others;
+
+Undermining or impeding another person’s work;
+
+Withholding information that is vital for effective work performance and other forms of deliberate work interference.
+
+The above examples are not an exhaustive list of bullying behaviors. 
+
+Criticism, complaints, and negative feedback are not considered bullying when they are reasonable and directly address issues of workplace performance and/or conduct.
+
+Workplace Violence: any behavior that inflicts or threatens to inflict damage to property, serious mental or physical harm, injury, or death to others at the workplace. 
+
+Retaliation: Retaliation occurs when an individual is harassed, intimidated, bullied, or discriminated against because they have chosen to make a complaint under this policy, participate in the investigation/adjudication of a complaint under this policy, or make a complaint to a local, state, or federal entity. For an act to be considered retaliation, it must have an impact that limits or denies an individual’s rights to their participation in workplace activities or other benefits. While the University cannot control all expression and reserves the right to assess the impact on an individual, retaliation is prohibited and is a serious violation of University policy.
+
+PROCEDURES
+
+Reporting Resources
+
+All members of the Ohio Wesleyan community have an obligation to help maintain a safe work environment.  Instances or threats of workplace intimidation, bullying, or violence must be reported. The University shall maintain the confidentiality of investigations to the extent possible.  If there is an immediate threat of violence, call the Department of Public Safety at 40-368-2222 or dial ext. 2222 from any campus phone or call 911 immediately.  The Department of Public Safety also maintains emergency call boxes throughout campus.
+
+If you are concerned for your immediate safety or need medical attention, please call Public Safety or 911.
+
+If the threat of workplace intimidation, bullying, or violence is not immediate, please notify your immediate supervisor or one of the following: 
+
+Imogene Johnson
+Director of Human Resources
+University Hall 003
+igjohnson@owu.edu
+740-368-3394
+
+Karlyn Crowley
+Provost
+107 University Hall
+kacrowley@owu.edu
+740-368-3101
+
+All conduct prohibited under this policy that is sexual in nature may also be reported to the University’s Title IX Coordinator or Deputy Coordinators:
+
+Title IX Coordinator
+Dwayne Todd
+dktodd@owu.edu
+HWCC 210
+(740) 368-3138
+
+Deputy Title IX Coordinator
+Jess Ettell Irvine
+jlettell@owu.edu
+HWCC 225
+(740) 368-3175
+
+Deputy Title IX Coordinator
+Doug Koyle
+dmkoyle@owu.edu
+HWCC 206
+(740) 368-3139
+
+Note: Any complaint that may constitute sexual misconduct will be immediately referred to the University’s Title IX Coordinator.
+
+False Reports
+
+The University will not tolerate intentional false reporting of intimidation, bullying, or violence. It is a violation of University policies to make an intentionally false report of any policy violation, and it may also violate state criminal statutes and civil defamation laws. 
+
+Investigation and Discipline
+
+All reports of workplace intimidation, bullying, or violence will be reviewed by Human Resources to determine whether further investigation is necessary. Human Resources may conduct an investigation based on the nature of the allegation, which may include interviews with the victim, alleged perpetrator, and all relevant witnesses.  Employees have a duty to cooperate with such an investigation and to be forthright.  Any employee who attempts to impede an investigation will be disciplined up to, and including, termination. 
+
+At the conclusion of the investigation, Human Resources will determine whether reasonable cause exists to believe that conduct in violation of this policy has occurred.  If reasonable cause does not exist, case will be closed.  If, however, reasonable cause does exist, the matter will proceed in accordance with the University’s disciplinary practices as follows:
+
+If the accused is an administrator/staff member or volunteer, the matter will be referred to the Human Resources pursuant to the procedures set forth in the Staff Corrective Discipline Policy;
+
+If the accused is a faculty member, the matter will be forwarded to the Provost for resolution pursuant to disciplinary procedures set forth in the Faculty Handbook; and
+
+In addition, if illegal activity is suspected, the case will be referred to local law enforcement.
+
+Employee Assistance Program (EAP)
+
+Counseling for employees may be available through the EAP for both the victim and any others within the campus community affected by a violent or traumatic incident.
+
+Protective Orders
+
+Members of the campus community who have obtained a protective order should supply a copy of the order to the Department of Public Safety. Other parties may also be informed when deemed necessary for the safety of the campus community.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] MOVING EXPENSES POLICY.txt [/INST] MOVING EXPENSES POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+May 8, 2017
+
+Policy Number:
+
+III – 3.5.7
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President, Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+All full-time exempt new hires.
+
+History:
+
+ 
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to define the college’s moving expenses benefit program.
+
+POLICY
+
+It is the policy of Canisius College to pay for the following costs for new full-time exempt hires requiring moving assistance and meeting the distance limitation requirement (see Section III below), up to a maximum of $2,000, for the following expenses:
+
+Transporting household goods;
+
+Cartons necessary for packing;
+
+Insurance (not to exceed $1.25 per pound*), and
+
+Packing and unpacking of mattresses and box springs.
+
+The college will not contribute to the payment of any other packing and unpacking costs, extra stops, storage, appliance service, etc.
+
+Invoices for using the college’s moving agent will be sent directly to the college for payment. Any unauthorized overage will be billed to the new hire by the Business Office.
+
+*Individuals may obtain as much insurance coverage as they wish; the college will simply bill the employee for the difference.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Moving/Relocation Expenses: Expenses associated with packing, loading, hauling, insuring or temporarily storing property (no more than 30 days), unpacking, transportation and lodging during the move.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+The name (including spouse’s), address, and telephone number (home and business) of all full-time exempt new hires (faculty, librarian & administrative) who will require moving assistance should be sent to Human Resources, which will then notify the college’s moving agent to arrange an estimate and scheduling of the move.
+
+New hires that choose to move themselves (that is, via U-Haul or other self-drive moving service) will have the same dollar limitation and restrictions. Those who move themselves will submit an itemization of expenses (attaching the corroborating receipts) to the Human Resources for reimbursement.
+
+I.	Eligible Moving Expenses
+
+Expenses for travel from the former residence to the new residence are typically eligible for reimbursement from the college (subject to associated dollar limitations) as moving expenses. Such reimbursements are treated as compensation and subject to tax withholding (see Section IV below). Travel expenses are limited to one trip, one way, per dependent family member. The actual costs of transportation and lodging incurred en-route are considered eligible moving expenses. Mileage reimbursement will be made based on IRS guidelines.
+
+II.	Ineligible Expenses 
+
+The following expenses fall outside the scope of the Moving Expense Policy and associated dollar limitations and will not be reimbursed by the college:
+
+Storage and related expenses outside the allowable 30 days mentioned above;
+
+Meals consumed during the time of travel;
+
+Meals and travel costs incurred by laborers;
+
+Pre-move house hunting expenses;
+
+Temporary living expenses;
+
+Return trips to former residence;
+
+Travel expenses related to side-trips or vacation stops on the way from the former residence to the new residence;
+
+Other expenses per IRS guidelines such as, security deposits, lease-breaking fees, expense of selling existing residence, mortgage penalties, and other home improvements; and
+
+Cost of unpacking personal items;
+
+Payments to non-professional movers (e.g. friends or family members) who assist the employee with the move;
+
+Expenses incurred by persons not considered to be dependents for tax purposes;
+
+Costs of cleaning a new or former residence; 
+
+Costs related to immigration; 
+
+Utility, internet, cable/satellite, and telephone installation charges; 
+
+Personal telephone calls, tips, movies or other entertainment; 
+
+Extraordinary items requiring special handling (e.g., boats, non-household animals, non-household items); 
+
+Any other expenses not explicitly permitted by this policy or prohibited by the college Procurement Policy and Purchasing Procuderes.
+
+Expenses that are not covered by this policy are the responsibility of the employee.
+
+III.	Distance Limitation
+
+The move of the residence must meet the minimum IRS distance requirements; the distance from the prior residence to the new job location must be 50 miles more than the distance from the prior residence to the former job location.
+
+IV.	Tax Reporting
+
+All employee moving expenses paid by the college are subject to withholding of federal income, Social Security (or FICA Alternative), and Medicare taxes, and will be reported on the employee’s annual Form W-2. This applies whether the college is reimbursing the employee or paying the moving company directly on the employee’s behalf. For further clarification/information contact the Human Resources at (716) 888-2240.
+
+Employees receiving a payment and/or reimbursement of relocation and moving expenses by the university should consult with their tax advisor or the Internal Revenue Service for information about moving-related expenses.
+
+
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Procurement Policy and Purchasing Procuderes</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Needs of the College.txt [/INST] Needs of the College
+
+Each Fall, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, in consultation with the appropriate Dean(s) and the Committee on Faculty Status, shall examine the needs of the College for all Tenure Track positions for the following academic year.  The examination will take into account such factors as direction and viability of an academic program or department; student enrollment patterns and projections; regulatory matters that impact a program’s status; strategic institutional plans; and financial resources and projections, and any other information deemed relevant to this process by the Vice President for Academic Affairs, the College Budget Committee, and the Committee on Faculty Status.
+
+In the event that the Vice President for Academic Affairs, after such consultation with the appropriate Dean(s) and the Committee on Faculty Status, finds a seriously diminished College need for the position, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will submit, on or before September 15, a written recommendation on College need for the position to the College President, where the final decision rests.  The President’s decision on non-reappointment due to lack of College need will be sent in writing to the appropriate Dean(s), the faculty member in the position, and the Chair of the Committee on Faculty Status on or before October 1st.  If a position is eliminated due to lack of institutional need, then the faculty member in the position will not undergo evaluation for reappointment.
+
+Needs of the College
+
+The Vice President for Academic Affairs, in consultation with the appropriate Dean(s), the College Budget Committee and the Committee on Faculty Status, shall examine the institutional need for all Tenure Track positions each year.  The monitoring process itself shall take into account such factors as overall student enrollment, course enrollment patterns, numbers of majors and minors, departmental, general education and other program staffing needs, the role of the department or program in fulfilling the College’s mission, and any other information deemed relevant to this process by the Vice President for Academic Affairs, the College Budget Committee, and the Committee on Faculty Status.
+
+On or before October 15, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will send written notification to those Deans who have Tenure Track positions located in their department; faculty in these positions shall also receive a copy of this notification.  This notification shall describe the Vice President for Academic Affairs’ finding with respect to continuing institutional need for the position.
+
+If it is a finding of diminishing need, but not serious enough to require non-reappointment, then the Vice President for Academic Affairs’ notification will also describe the signs or evidence of diminishing need.  In the event that the Vice President for Academic Affairs finds a seriously diminished institutional need for the position, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will recommend to the President that no subsequent contract be offered on the basis of lack of need.  In either of these instances, the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the Committee on Faculty Status shall meet jointly with the Dean in which the position is located; this meeting will occur prior to the November 1 deadline date for the Vice President for Academic Affairs to submit a recommendation to the College President.  The purpose of this meeting with the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the Committee on faculty Status is to give the Dean an opportunity to respond to and discuss the implications of a finding of diminished institutional need.
+
+Following this meeting, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, in consultation with the Committee on Faculty Status, will review the initial finding.  In cases where the Vice President for Academic Affairs had given notice of diminishing need which was not serious enough to require non-reappointment, the Dean shall receive, on or before November 10, written feedback from the Vice President for Academic Affairs regarding the outcome of the meeting.  In cases where the Vice President for Academic Affairs has given notice of seriously diminished need which required non-reappointment, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will submit, on or before November 1, a written recommendation on institutional need for the position to the College President, where the final decision rests.  The President's decision on non-reappointment due to lack of College need will be sent in writing to the appropriate Dean(s), the faculty member in the position, and the Chair of the Committee on Faculty Status on or before November 10.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] NEW STAFF DISCIPLINARY ACTION AND TERMINATION POLICY.txt [/INST] STAFF DISCIPLINARY ACTION AND TERMINATION POLICY
+
+
+
+PURPOSE 
+
+The purpose of this policy is to provide an effective and equitable process for the issuance of discipline up to and including termination to non-faculty employees that is the result of misconduct, unsatisfactory performance, attendance, and/or behavioral issues.
+
+POLICY
+
+Lynn University makes every effort to create an environment which promotes positive employee performance and behavior.  All staff employees (hereinafter “employee” or “employees”) have an obligation to observe and follow the University’s policies and maintain proper standards of conduct at all times. Any employee who, after investigation, is found to have violated a rule or regulation of the University or the department, will be subject to disciplinary action up to and including discharge. 
+
+														For the occasional instances when an employee is unable or unwilling to do their part, prompt corrective action must be taken.  Such corrective action may include a verbal warning, a written warning and implementation of a performance improvement plan, or discharge.  The appropriate action will be determined by the University based on the frequency, seriousness, and circumstances involved.  There is no guarantee that one form of action will necessarily precede another.
+
+														Corrective counseling via the use of a performance improvement plan is used when the employee and management discuss, review, and resolve problems related to the employee’s behavior and/or performance.  Corrective counseling and the implementation of a performance improvement plan may be used when actions or behaviors fail to meet the University's standards.
+
+All employees should be aware that certain offenses, due to the nature of their seriousness, warrant no other corrective counseling except immediate termination.  The following list, while not all inclusive, serves as a guideline:
+
+Failure to maintain acceptable standards of performance;
+
+Dishonesty;
+
+Theft or unauthorized possession of, or the use of, property belonging to any co-worker, visitor, or customer of Lynn University;
+
+Insubordination;
+
+Fighting;
+
+Being under the influence of alcohol or drugs while on duty;
+
+Profane or abusive language;
+
+Making threats, verbally, or physically to employees;
+
+Failure to cooperate in an investigation conducted by the University or University-designated agents;
+
+The involvement with a student that is in conflict with the Romantic or Sexual Relationship policy;
+
+Falsification of Lynn University records, including time records, the employment application, and other employment records, or refusing to provide timely evidence confirming credentials;
+
+Any act or conduct that constitutes fraud or dishonesty against Lynn University, its employees, its students, and those third parties with which it conducts business;
+
+Engaging in sexual misconduct (i.e., sexual harassment; sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence or stalking; sexual exploitation) against a Lynn University student or employee;*
+
+Violation of the University’s Anti-Bullying and/or Discrimination and Harassment policies;
+
+Possession of explosive, firearms or other weapons on University premises or at University activities;
+
+Excessive absenteeism or tardiness;
+
+Performance of outside work during an employee’s scheduled work hours;
+
+Inappropriate use of the University’s information technology resources;
+
+Disregard of safety and security policies and practices;
+
+Willful destruction of University property;
+
+Conviction of a felony and/or failure to report an arrest or conviction;
+
+Stealing time through the University’s time reporting system; and 
+
+Misuse of University issued credit cards and/or misappropriation of Lynn University funds or other assets of Lynn University.
+
+Notwithstanding the foregoing, the University reserves the right to terminate an employee immediately for any and all conduct that the University deems to be unsafe, inappropriate and/or harmful to the University, at the sole discretion of the University. 
+
+It is emphasized that disciplinary decisions will be based on an assessment of all relevant factors.  The Director of Employee Services shall decide whether conduct occurring off campus rises to the level of termination on a case by case basis, at his/her discretion. 
+
+This Policy is not a contract and does not alter an employee’s employment at-will status.
+
+*Note: Formal complaints of sexual harassment as defined by Title IX and 34 CFR Part 106 will be investigated and resolved pursuant to the live grievance hearing process set forth in the University Sexual Harassment (Title IX) Policy.
+
+Definitions
+
+Corrective Action: employment-related action (including imposition of sanctions) undertaken to correct or modify unacceptable job performance or behavior to acceptable standards. Such corrective action may include a verbal warning, written warning and implementation of a Performance Improvement Plan, or discharge.
+
+Procedures/Guidelines
+
+I.	Supervisor Responsibilities
+
+The employee’s supervisor is responsible for applying corrective action and the implementation of a Performance Improvement Plan (as applicable and necessary) for an employee. Employee Services may be contacted for advice and consultation regarding corrective action and the implementation of a performance improvement plan.
+
+The employee’s supervisor shall notify the employee of the failure to meet performance requirements, or a violation of University or departmental policies or rules and is responsible for consulting with Employee Services to ensure that they are in agreement regarding corrective action.
+
+II.	Suspension Pending Investigation
+
+In cases where the employee’s presence at work may interfere with the performance of an investigation or pose a threat to others, the employee in question may be placed on administrative leave with pay pending the outcome of any investigation conducted by the University.  The area vice president, in consultation with the employee’s supervisor and the Director of Employee Services (or a designee), will be responsible for approving the placement of an employee on suspension when warranted. 
+
+III.	Involuntary Termination Procedures
+
+A supervisor contemplating the involuntary termination of an employee due to performance or conduct related issues must review the matter with the next level of management (if applicable) and the Director of Employee Services prior to making a final determination.
+
+The supervisor is responsible for compiling complete and accurate documentation regarding any involuntary termination.
+
+The Employee Services Director (or designee) is responsible for conducting the termination meeting with the affected employee, and for fully documenting the discussion. 
+
+The University will not re-employ anyone who has been involuntarily terminated from employment at the University for conduct related matters.
+
+Note: Although involuntary terminations due to performance or conduct matters generally include corrective action, the University reserves the right to bypass any corrective action, including verbal warnings or participation in a Performance Improvement Plan, as it deems necessary in light of the specific circumstances. 
+
+IV.	Post-Employment Procedures
+
+														If the employee is asked to leave the employ of the University, a Human Resources representative will meet with the individual to collect all University property, as well as offer guidance regarding any benefit rights and continuation to which the employee is legally entitled.  The individual’s final paycheck, which shall include any unused vacation pay will be direct deposited on the next scheduled pay date.  Unused sick time is not paid out to the employee.
+
+The individual should notify the Director of Human Resources if his or her address changes during the calendar year in which he or she leaves so that tax information will be sent to the proper address.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] norbert text.txt [/INST] Evaluations address a faculty member’s professional strengths and achievements in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service, as well as those areas that can be improved. The guidelines by which faculty are evaluated on these criteria are reflective of, and shaped by, the Mission and unique character of St. Norbert College. Within this context, evaluation of faculty is guided by the Mission of the College and its Core Values. Serving the Mission is accomplished by meeting the expectations set out in the evaluation guidelines, given below. In the course of meeting those expectations, faculty members should reflect upon and articulate how their accomplishments contribute to that Mission. Given a faculty with diverse academic and cultural backgrounds, the guidelines must be applied to recognize service to the Mission according to the particular strengths and commitments of each individual. 
+
+Service. Effectiveness in service regards contributions to the College and the wider community, including the community of one’s scholarly peers. Contributions to the College include active participation in meetings and activities of the whole faculty as well as one’s discipline and division; work on appointed and standing committees; flexibility to adapting to the changing needs of the College; involvement with student and campus-wide organizations; activities that improve the intellectual and cultural climate of the College; activities that serve the College’s mission and heritage; and/or advising student-led groups and clubs. Initiating or participating in efforts in the wider community are also important, such as activities that benefit the community or that contribute to the faculty member’s professional growth. 
+
+
+
+Faculty responsibilities in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service should be understood within the context of St. Norbert College as a Catholic, liberal arts college in the Norbertine tradition. The Mission Statement articulates this character and identity. In the course of meeting those expectations, faculty members should reflect upon and articulate how their accomplishments contribute to the mission. 
+
+Annually, department chairs or deans are expected to have at least one evaluation interview with each non-tenured member of their department. The interview includes a discussion of teaching evaluations, course syllabi, scholarly development, and service to the department, the University, and the community. The results of these interviews are transmitted to the dean of the school or college and then to the Vice President for Academic Affairs for placement in the faculty member’s file. The Vice President for Academic Affairs is responsible for reviewing these evaluations and ensuring that they are included in the appropriate files</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Notes from Forums.txt [/INST] Requests
+
+
+
+Executive Summary
+
+Cliff Notes Version of Concerns Raised at Meetings
+
+
+
+
+
+Issues Raised
+
+
+
+Accelerated Tenure and Promotion Reviews
+
+Can Comparable Text to the Tenure Policy be adopted for Promotion to Full Professor?
+
+Update Tenure and Promotion Sections re: President Involvement
+
+Committee on Tenure
+
+Keep Alternative Text and Remove Original Legislation?
+
+PoPs – 
+
+Page 60 of PDF: Need to Define Institutional Need?
+
+Simple Cross Reference to the Tenure Section on Need?
+
+Add Text that Scholarship Activity will be Counted?
+
+Compensation Issues Raised (Teach an extra class but are paid less)
+
+Listing of Rights – Revise?
+
+Service Criteria – Better Define Some of Entries?
+
+Outside Activities Policy
+
+Page 10 – Three Year vs Four Year Prior Service Credit Discrepancy
+
+
+
+Department Chair/Program Coordinator Section 
+
+See Comment Document
+
+Need to Add Back Old Text that 1st Year Faculty Can’t be Department Chair
+
+Program Coordinator Duties and Compensation
+
+Not the Same Duties as Department Chairs/Should not be lumped together
+
+PC’s Don’t Receive Course Releases
+
+How to Compensate Coordinators?
+
+Sabbatical Policy Change 
+
+Impact on Scholarship/Creative Activity Evaluations for Promotion to Full Professor (and Merit?)
+
+Reduction in Scholarship Expectations?
+
+Student Evaluation Footnote
+
+Move to Body of Document
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+To Discuss
+
+
+
+Alternative Advocate Text in Tenure and Promotion
+
+Evaluation Criteria for Tenure and Promotion: Review “Opt-In” Footnotes 
+
+Needed for reappointment?
+
+New Dean Text
+
+Department Chair Text: Request to add back text that Chairs have to be tenured.  Can’t locate this text.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Notes from Michaele.txt [/INST] ARTICLE I
+
+
+
+4.1: 
+
+Remove certifications. 
+
+“Leading to one or more major/degrees…”
+
+Add a sentence there that says the Provost is responsible for the organization of all academic units. 
+
+
+
+For student services in many places, add “if available and willing” 
+
+
+
+5.1.3.c
+
+Remove it, d is enough
+
+
+
+5.1.9 
+
+Add “digital recording with consent and in accordance with Massachusetts law”
+
+
+
+5.2.1
+
+Remove President as a member of the Committee on Tenure
+
+
+
+5.2.6
+
+Remove “gender” before diversity (so that all kinds of diversity are considered)
+
+
+
+5.2.9.v
+
+Remove “ensure” and replace with “advocate”
+
+
+
+
+
+ARTICLE II
+
+[GO BACK TO VISITING FACULTY DEFINITIONS AND CLARIFY
+
+Once visiting is defined inclusively, the rest can function]
+
+
+
+1.1.1.1
+
+Remove the sentence: “In rare circumstances…..”
+
+
+
+1.3.
+
+Remove “Associate Librarian” and add “Dean of Global Education”
+
+
+
+1.5
+
+Add a sentence “This status is open to all full-time faculty members who have contributed meaningfully to the college for more than 20 years.”
+
+(this would allow PoP to participate)
+
+
+
+2.1.1
+
+Second paragraph, remove “associate professor and professor”
+
+
+
+3.1
+
+Add a sentence that states “in keeping with the College’s commitment to Equity and Belonging values”
+
+
+
+P.33:
+
+“Based upon the candidate’s teaching and scholarly achievements” should replace “professional experience”
+
+Last two sentences should be removed 
+
+
+
+ARTICLE IV
+
+
+
+1.2
+
+3rd line
+
+… by maintaining active involvement in scholarly and creative….”
+
+
+
+2.1
+
+3rd paragraph, 3rd sentence
+
+“A faculty member’s scholarly activities…”
+
+
+
+2.1.1.1
+
+It would be important to be explicit about inclusive pedagogy, maybe in the introductory paragraph
+
+
+
+2.1.1.3
+
+Categories of service, 3rd line from the bottom, insert “tenured” before “faculty member’s record of service.”
+
+
+
+2.1.2.1
+
+Remove “in three categories.”
+
+
+
+First full paragraph in next page, remove “(perhaps due to external circumstances)” and replace with “highly placed with national recognition”
+
+
+
+2.2.1
+
+P.12, 1st full paragraph should not say “self-evaluation” but only “evaluation”
+
+
+
+2.3.1
+
+After numeric list – “senior” needs to be removed (not reviewed every year)
+
+Next paragraph, 4 lines, remove “supplemental”
+
+
+
+Section 3
+
+We need to remove the paragraph “In exceptional cases” because we don’t have a tenure transfer process. The appointment letter contains the details of the reduced probationary period. 
+
+
+
+Promotion to Professor
+
+After 3rd line, remove anything from “although…” to clarify that the 3 years is the wait time.
+
+
+
+2. Should contain something about national reputation
+
+
+
+3. Leadership role in two areas, be more precise (committee? National organization?)
+
+
+
+3.1.2
+
+“Member may request such a review”: when? Other what circumstances? 
+
+
+
+3.1.3
+
+The President should not be on the tenure or promotion committee, given the recommendation to the trustees process. The committee should recommend to the President, who then recommends to the trustees. 
+
+The President is separate from the committee and will either support or disagree with the recommendation of the committee, as it is brought to the trustees
+
+
+
+4.1.1
+
+This only counts teaching. It should include a clause about research: “and scholarship or creative work” should be added. 
+
+
+
+4.1.2
+
+This whole section should be governed by the appointment letter, which is the legal document that establishes this ground. So most of the section should go away. The department does not direct this process.
+
+What is the “contextual” grounds noted here? It is not clear. 
+
+
+
+4.1.6
+
+Typo – allegations of about
+
+
+
+5.2.1
+
+The types of leaves should be detailed: participation in fellowships; prestigious appointments in a different institution for a semester or a year; unique opportunity to engage in travel or professional work that will supplement teaching and scholarship. 
+
+They should be academic leaves of absence. Not medical. 
+
+All of it is entirely contingent on the approval of the Provost. 
+
+It should be separated from a personal leave of absence, which should be defined separately: “Under extraordinary circumstances, someone may wish to be absent from the college for a period of up to one year. The circumstances will be reviewed by the Provost.”
+
+
+
+8.2.2
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ARTICLE V 
+
+Make sure we know what we mean by Visiting 
+
+
+
+ARTICLE VI
+
+Paragraph 3, add to the last “in consultation with the President and the Provost, as consensus among this group is necessary to bring the amendment to faculty for a vote.”
+
+
+
+
+
+8.1.1
+
+Termination of a tenured appointment due to a financial exigency</s>"
+"<s>[INST] NY LEAVE POLICIES.txt [/INST] EMERGENCY RESPONDER LEAVE
+
+Effective Date:
+
+[TBD]
+
+Policy Number:
+
+III – 
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable. 
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+[TBD]
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President, Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+
+
+All College employees who are volunteer emergency responders and work more than 20 hours per week.
+
+History:
+
+
+
+
+
+PURPOSE 
+
+The purpose of this policy is to set forth the requirements for leave eligibility and entitlement, the process for taking leave, and other rules governing the use of unpaid leave to employees working as volunteer emergency responders.
+
+POLICY 
+
+In accordance with New York Labor Law § 202-l and the terms of this Policy, Canisius College will provide unpaid excused leave to employees working as volunteer emergency responders.  
+
+The College expressly prohibits any form of discipline, reprisal, intimidation, or retaliation against any individual for requesting or taking leave under this policy.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+Subject to the eligibility requirements set forth below, during the time of emergency that follows a “declaration of emergency” (as that term is defined by applicable state law), an employee is entitled to take leave while engaged in the actual performance of his or her duties as (a) a volunteer firefighter, or (b) an enrolled member of a volunteer ambulance service (as that term is defined by applicable state law), as applicable, unless the College determines that the employee’s absence would impose an “undue hardship” on the conduct of the College’s business (as that standard is defined by applicable state law). 
+
+Any employee is eligible to take leave under this policy if: 
+
+The College has previously received written documentation from the head of the employee’s volunteer fire department or volunteer ambulance service, as applicable, notifying the College of the employee's status as a volunteer firefighter or member of a volunteer ambulance service, as applicable; and 
+
+The employee’s duties as a volunteer firefighter or member of a volunteer ambulance Upon request, an employee who has been granted leave conditionally under this policy shall provide his or her supervisor with a notarized statement from the head of the volunteer fire department or volunteer ambulance service, as applicable, certifying the period of time(s) that the employee responded to any emergency covered under this policy. 
+
+Leave authorized under this policy either shall be unpaid or may otherwise be charged against any other leave to which such employee is entitled (i.e., Sick/Personal Day and Vacation), as determined by the employee.
+
+							
+
+
+CRIME VICTIM AND CRIMINAL PROCEEDING LEAVE
+
+Effective Date:
+
+[TBD]
+
+Policy Number:
+
+III – 
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable. 
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+[TBD]
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President, Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Any Canisius College employee who is the Victim of a criminal offense or exercises his or rights as a Victim (as provided under the applicable sections of the New York criminal procedure law and executive law), or who is subpoenaed to attend a criminal proceeding as a witness (pursuant to the applicable section of the New York criminal procedure law).
+
+History:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+PURPOSE 
+
+The purpose of this policy is to inform eligible employees of their right to take an unpaid leave to appear as a witness in a criminal proceeding.  
+
+POLICY 
+
+In accordance with New York Penal Law § 215.14, Canisius College will not discharge or otherwise penalize an employee for being absent from work to appear as a witness in a criminal proceeding, to consult with the district attorney, or to exercise the employee’s rights as a Victim (as provided in the applicable sections of the New York criminal procedure law, family court act and executive law).  Leave taken pursuant to this policy is unpaid unless otherwise provided below. 
+
+The College expressly prohibits any form of discipline, reprisal, intimidation, or retaliation against any individual for requesting or taking leave under this policy.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Victim: includes the aggrieved party, or the aggrieved party's next of kin if the aggrieved party is deceased as a result of the offense; the representative of a victim (as defined in the applicable section of the New York executive law); a good Samaritan (as defined in the applicable section of the New York executive law); or a person pursuing an application or enforcement of an order of protection (under the applicable sections of the New York criminal procedure law or the family court act). 
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+I.	Verification 
+
+Upon request of the College, an employee must provide verification of time away from work from the party who sought the attendance or testimony. 
+
+II.	Other College Leaves 
+
+When taken for the same purpose, leave taken under this policy will run concurrently with paid leave taken under Policy No. HR - : Sick/Personal Days. 
+
+Upon exhaustion of paid sick leave, an employee may choose to have any unused, accrued vacation days for which the employee is eligible run concurrently with leave taken under this policy.
+
+							
+
+
+VOTING LEAVE
+
+Effective Date:
+
+[TBD]
+
+Policy Number:
+
+III – 
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable. 
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+[TBD]
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President, Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+
+
+All Canisius College employees.
+
+
+
+History:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+PURPOSE 
+
+The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines regarding the granting of leave for voting during working hours.
+
+POLICY 
+
+Employees who do not have sufficient time outside of their working hours to vote may be granted time off from work to vote, including up to three (3) hours of paid time off to enable the employee to vote in any election.  
+
+Retaliation against an employee who requests leave under this policy is strictly prohibited.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Exempt Employees: College employees who are exempt from minimum wage and overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act as amended.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+Employees that need time off to vote must request voting leave from their supervisor between two (2) and ten (10) days before the election. Exempt employees may be provided time off with pay when necessary to comply with state and federal wage and hour laws. 
+
+Employees are permitted allowed time off for voting only at the beginning or end of the working shift, as designated by the employee’s supervisor, unless otherwise mutually agreed. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+BLOOD DONATION LEAVE
+
+Effective Date:
+
+[TBD]
+
+Policy Number:
+
+III – 
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable. 
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+[TBD]
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President, Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+
+
+All Canisius College employees who work more than 20 hours per week.
+
+
+
+History:
+
+
+
+
+
+PURPOSE 
+
+The purpose of this policy is to set forth the requirements for leave eligibility and entitlement, the process for taking leave, and other rules governing the use of unpaid leave for the purpose of off-premises blood donation.
+
+POLICY 
+
+In accordance with New York Labor Law § 202-j, Canisius College will provide eligible employees with unpaid leave for the purpose of off-premises blood donation. 
+
+The College expressly prohibits any form of discipline, reprisal, intimidation, or retaliation against any individual for requesting or taking leave under this policy.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Employee’s Place of Employment: means the physical location at which a covered employee works. Such location may be in a different building on the same location (e.g., another building on a school campus or office complex, so long as such location is affiliated and physically proximate to the employee’s physical work location).
+
+Exempt Employees: College employees who are exempt from minimum wage and overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act as amended.
+
+Off-Premises Blood Donation: means blood donation that is not made in connection with a blood drive at a covered “employee’s place of employment” or in connection with some other convenient time and place set by the College.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+Employees who work more than 20 hours per week are eligible to take blood donation leave under this policy.  Eligible employees may take up to three (3) hours of unpaid leave per 12-month period to donate blood. Employees may choose to use available accrued but unused vacation and sick/personal days in lieu of unpaid leave.  Any leave that is accrued under this policy, but not used, will not carry over to the next calendar year.  Exempt employees may be provided time off with pay when necessary to comply with state and federal wage and hour laws.  
+
+Employees must request leave under this policy from their supervisor. Requests for leave must be made in writing as far in advance as possible, but no less than ten (10) business days before the leave is scheduled to begin, except in cases of emergency when advance notice is not possible.  
+
+Any employee who has taken blood donation leave must provide the College verification of the employee's blood donation in the form of a letter from the blood bank.  
+
+
+
+
+
+
+BONE MARROW DONATION LEAVE
+
+Effective Date:
+
+[TBD]
+
+Policy Number:
+
+III – 
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable. 
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+[TBD]
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President, Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+
+
+All Canisius College employees who work more than 20 hours per week.
+
+
+
+History:
+
+
+
+
+
+PURPOSE 
+
+The purpose of this policy is to set forth the requirements for leave eligibility and entitlement, the process for taking leave, and other rules governing the use of unpaid leave for the purpose of bone marrow donation.
+
+POLICY 
+
+In accordance with New York Labor Law § 202-a, Canisius College will provide unpaid leave to eligible employees who seeks to undergo a medical procedure to donate bone marrow.  An employee may take leave to make such a donation, to recuperate from the procedure, and to respond to any resulting complications.
+
+The College expressly prohibits any form of discipline, reprisal, intimidation, or retaliation against any individual for requesting or taking leave under this policy.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+Employees who work more than 20 hours per week are eligible to take blood donation leave under this policy.  The length of the leave afforded under this policy must be determined by a physician, but may not exceed twenty-four (24) work hours for each covered request, unless otherwise approved by Human Resources after consultation with the employee’s supervisor.  While an employee is entitled to leave each time he or she makes a donation request, the College is under no obligation to provide the employee with more than 24 work hours of leave in connection with each request.
+
+Where an employee is making a scheduled bone marrow donation, the employee must notify his or her supervisor no less than 24 hours prior to the day of the donation.  When the donation is unscheduled, the employee should notify his or her supervisor as soon as possible after receipt of the request to donate.
+
+The College may require verification by a physician that states the purpose and length of each requested leave.
+
+This policy does not prevent the College from providing leave for bone marrow donations in addition to leave allowed under any other provision of law, nor does this policy affect an employee's rights with respect to any other employee benefit provided by law.
+
+An employee may elect to use any applicable paid sick/personal and vacation leave for which he or she is eligible under College policy for the purpose of donating bone marrow, and such paid leave will run concurrently with the leave afforded under this policy.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Olin - SS Suggested Revisions FY21 COI-TQ.txt [/INST] Annual Conflict of Interest and Tax Compliance Questionnaire
+
+All tax-exempt entities must annually file Form 990, Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax, with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and the Massachusetts Division of Public Charities Form PC with the Massachusetts Attorney General (referred to collectively as the ""Forms"") in order to maintain their tax exempt status. The questions below collect information needed to fully and accurately complete the Forms, which are publicly available. To ensure full and accurate responses, please refer to the Glossary section for terms in bolded font.
+
+
+
+Pursuant to policies adopted by its governing Board, Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering, Inc. (Olin College) requires its members to disclose, annually, outside relationships and interests that may influence or appear to influence how they carry out their Olin College responsibilities. Having a conflict of interest is not per se a violation of the policies, but disclosure and management are required.
+
+
+
+
+
+Question 1:
+
+
+
+Have you read through, understand, and agree to abide by the terms of the Olin College of Engineering Conflict of Interest Policy adopted by the Board of Trustees?
+
+
+
+☐  Yes
+
+☐  No
+
+
+
+If “no,” please explain:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+
+
+Question 2:
+
+
+
+To the best of your knowledge, are you aware of any Direct or Indirect Financial or Other Material Interest or Co-Investment Interest, which is required to be disclosed under the Conflict of Interest Policy?
+
+
+
+☐  Yes
+
+☐  No
+
+
+
+If “yes,” please explain:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Question 3:
+
+
+
+During the period July 1, 2020 – June 30, 2021, to the best of your knowledge, did any entity (including other tax-exempt entities) with which you or a Family Member have a Substantial Interest, engage in any Business Transaction, contract, or other arrangement with Olin College?
+
+
+
+☐  Yes
+
+☐  No
+
+
+
+If ""yes,"" please provide the following:
+
+1.
+
+whether you or a family member had a Substantial Interest in the entity involved in the contract, transaction, or other arrangement
+
+
+
+2.
+
+name of the family member, if applicable
+
+
+
+3.
+
+your relationship to the family member, if applicable
+
+
+
+4.
+
+the name of the entity involved in the transaction, contract, or agreement
+
+
+
+5.
+
+whether it is a for-profit or not-for-profit entity
+
+
+
+6.
+
+the nature of the transaction(s), contract(s), or agreement(s) and the amount(s) of the transaction(s), contract(s) or agreement(s)
+
+
+
+7.
+
+your relationship to that organization (e.g., partner, board member, consultant, etc.)
+
+
+
+8.
+
+If you are a Board Member: 
+
+Did the Board of the entity on which you serve approve the transaction?
+
+
+
+
+
+Did you recuse yourself from that discussion and/or vote?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+EXAMPLES: Disclose that you or a Family Member:
+
+serve on the board of a local non-profit, such as a foundation, the symphony, or public radio station;
+
+serve as the treasurer of a larger non-profit university or museum, such as Babson College;
+
+serve in a management role or has an ownership position in a business, such as a bank or a technology company.
+
+
+
+
+Question 4:
+
+
+
+During the period July 1, 2020 – June 30, 2021, to the best of your knowledge, was a Family Member employed by, or did they otherwise provide services to Olin College?
+
+
+
+☐  Yes
+
+☐  No
+
+
+
+If ""yes,"" please provide the following:
+
+1.
+
+family member’s full name
+
+
+
+2.
+
+relationship to you
+
+
+
+
+
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+
+
+Question 5:
+
+
+
+During the period July 1, 2020 – June 30, 2021, to the best of your knowledge, did you or a Family Member engage in any Business Transaction, contract, or other arrangement with Olin College?
+
+
+
+☐  Yes
+
+☐  No
+
+
+
+If ""yes,"" please report the following relationship(s):
+
+1.
+
+whether it was you or a family member involved in the transaction(s), contract(s) or other arrangement(s)
+
+
+
+2.
+
+name of the family member, if applicable
+
+
+
+3.
+
+your relationship to the family member, if applicable
+
+
+
+4.
+
+whether you or the family member was directly or indirectly engaged in the transaction, contract or arrangement*
+
+
+
+5.
+
+the nature of the transaction(s), contract(s), or arrangement(s) and the amount(s) of such transaction(s), contract(s), or arrangement(s)
+
+
+
+
+
+* If indirectly, please provide the name of the person/entity directly involved in the transaction, contract or arrangement and you or your family member’s relationship to that person/entity;
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Question 6:
+
+
+
+During the period July 1, 2020 – June 30, 2021, to the best of your knowledge, did you or a Family Member receive one or more Grants or Other Assistance from Olin College?
+
+ 
+
+☐  Yes
+
+☐  No
+
+
+
+If ""yes,"" please provide the following:
+
+1.
+
+whether the recipient was you or a family member
+
+
+
+2.
+
+name of the family member, if applicable
+
+
+
+3.
+
+your relationship to the family member, if applicable
+
+
+
+4.
+
+the nature and amount of the grant(s) or other assistance
+
+
+
+
+
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+
+
+Question 7:
+
+
+
+During the period July 1, 2020 – June 30, 2021, to the best of your knowledge, did any entity with which you or a Family Member have a Substantial Interest, receive any Grants or Other Assistance from Olin College?
+
+
+
+☐  Yes
+
+☐  No
+
+
+
+If ""yes,"" please provide the following:
+
+1.
+
+entity which received the grant(s) or other assistance
+
+
+
+2.
+
+whether it was you or a family member who is affiliated with the grantee organization
+
+
+
+3.
+
+name of the family member, if applicable
+
+
+
+4.
+
+your relationship to the family member, if applicable*
+
+
+
+5.
+
+the nature and amount of the grant(s) or other assistance
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Question 8:
+
+
+
+Please review the attached list of current and former Board Members, Officers and Key Employees prior to answering the following question.
+
+
+
+During the period July 1, 2020 – June 30, 2021, to the best of your knowledge, did you or a Family Member have a Business Relationship (including sitting on the board of another entity) with anyone listed in the attachment?  Note: Do not disclose confidential relationships such as attorney and client or medical professional (including psychologist) and patient.  
+
+ 
+
+☐  Yes
+
+☐  No
+
+
+
+If ""yes,"" please provide the following:
+
+1.
+
+Name of individual
+
+
+
+2.
+
+Description of the relationship
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Question 9
+
+During the period July 1, 2020 – June 30, 2021, to the best of your knowledge, did you or a Family Member have personal funds invested with an investment manager providing, or expected to provide, investment management services to Olin College or in a professionally managed investment fund in which Olin College is invested or is considering investing (a “co-investment interest"")?
+
+
+
+☐  Yes
+
+☐  No
+
+
+
+If ""yes,"" please provide the following:
+
+1.
+
+Name of the investment manager or orofessionally managed investment fund
+
+
+
+
+
+Question 10
+
+During the period July 1, 2020 – June 30, 2021, to the best of your knowledge, have you or a Family Member received a gift(s) due to your relationship as an employee, officer or board member of the College that had a cumulative value greater than $250?
+
+
+
+☐  Yes
+
+☐  No
+
+
+
+If ""yes,"" please provide the following:
+
+1.
+
+Name of Grantor
+
+
+
+2.
+
+Type and Value of the Gift
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Conflict of Interest and Tax Questionnaire Certification and Signature
+
+During the time I am a Trustee or Officer of the College, I agree to report any future potential Conflict of Interest with the College that may involve, or appear to involve, any of my Family Members or me in a timely manner.
+
+
+
+To the best of my knowledge, I have provided complete and accurate answers to the questions above related to the period between July 1, 2020 and June 30, 2021.
+
+
+
+Please note that material misstatements or omissions of material facts in either the federal or Massachusetts tax forms may give rise to penalties to Olin College, its Officers, Trustees, certain employees, and certain other persons involved in the preparation of these annual filings.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Signature:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Printed Name:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Date:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Glossary
+
+
+
+Co-Investment Interest is defined as personal funds invested by a Trustee, Officer or Key Employee with an investment manager that provides, or is expected to provide, investment management services to Olin College or in a professionally managed investment fund in which the College is invested or is considering investing (a “co-investment interest"").  For the purposes of the Conflicts of Interest Policy, a ""professionally managed investment fund"" shall not include mutual funds or other similar investment vehicles generally available to the investing public.
+
+
+
+
+
+Being Affiliated with an entity (including both for-profit and not-for-profit) means you:
+
+Serve or served as a trustee, director, officer, partner, employee;
+
+Are the creator or founder;
+
+Have an ownership interest (either individually or collectively with others) listed in the attachment, or with their Family Member (defined below) of 35% or more of the equity value, voting power, or beneficial interest in a trust; or
+
+Have a controlling interest (either individually or collectively with others) listed in the attachment, or with their family member of more than 35% of the governing body of a not-for-profit.
+
+
+
+Examples:
+
+You serve on the board of a small local non-profit;
+
+You serve as the treasurer of a larger non-profit university or museum;
+
+You, your spouse or child serves in a management role or has an ownership position in a business, etc.
+
+
+
+Business Relationships are defined to include:
+
+One person is employed by the other in a sole proprietorship;
+
+One person is employed by an organization with which the other is associated as an Officer, Director, Trustee, Partner, or Key Employee;
+
+One person is employed by an organization in which the other has greater-than-35% Ownership;
+
+Both persons serve as an Officer, Director, Trustee, or Partner in the same business or investment entity;
+
+Both persons have a greater-than-10% ownership in the same business or investment entity; or
+
+One person is transacting business with the other, directly or indirectly, in one or more contracts of sale, lease, license, loan, performance of services, or other transaction involving transfers of cash or property valued in excess of $10,000 in the aggregate.
+
+
+
+Business Relationship is defined to include, but is not limited to service as an officer, director, board member, employee, partner, or trustee at an organization that is known by the Trustee, Officer, or Key Employee to be doing business or seeking to have a business relationship with Olin College.  Business Relationship also includes the direct employment by Olin College of a Family Member.
+
+Examples:
+
+Both sit on the board of Entity X;
+
+Bought insurance from a firm owned by individual Y;
+
+Obtained investment advice from a firm where individual Z serves in senior management, etc.
+
+
+
+Business Transaction  includes, but is not limited to:
+
+Sale, purchase, exchange, leasing, or licensing of property;
+
+Performance of services and/or payment of compensation;
+
+Lending of money or extension of credit;
+
+Furnishing of goods, services, or facilities;
+
+Transfer of income or assets; or
+
+Joint ventures (new or on-going) in which Olin College and your capital/profits interest exceed 10%.
+
+
+
+Co-Investment Interest means you or a Family Member:
+
+Have personal funds invested with an investment manager providing, or expected to provide, investment management services to the College; or
+
+Have personal funds in a professionally managed investment fund in which the College is invested or is considering investing.
+
+Direct or Indirect Financial or Other Material Interest: For the purposes of this Policy, a Trustee or Officer has a direct or indirect financial or other material interest in a proposed or existing contract, Business Transaction, arrangement, or grant if he or she, or one of his or her Family Members:
+
+has a Substantial Financial Interest directly in the proposed or existing contract, transaction, arrangement, or grant; or
+
+has a Substantial Financial Interest in any other organization that:
+
+is a party to the proposed or existing contract, transaction, arrangement, or grant; or  
+
+is in any way involved in the proposed or existing contract, transaction, arrangement, or grant, including through the provision of services in connection therewith (an “involved organization”); or
+
+holds a position as Trustee, officer, member, partner, or employee in any such party or involved organization
+
+
+
+Family Member includes your:
+
+spouse (other than a spouse who is legally divorced from the Trustee or Officer or who is residing apart under a decree of separate maintenance)
+
+domestic partner (or equivalent)
+
+children (including adopted children) and their spouses
+
+brothers or sisters (by whole or half-blood or by adoption) and their spouses, 
+
+parents and step-parents, grandparents 
+
+other members of the household of such persons, and 
+
+other persons for whom the Trustee or Officer has direct financial oversight powers, duties, or responsibilities.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Grants or Other Assistance include:
+
+Goods and services;
+
+Use of facilities at less than fair market value; or
+
+Scholarships, fellowships, internships, stipends, research grants, prizes, or awards of any amount.
+
+Grants or Assistance does not include employee compensation or benefits, including employee tuition waivers through the College benefit program.
+
+
+
+Ownership means stock ownership (voting or value) of a corporation, profits or capital interest in a partnership or LLC, membership interest in a non-profit organization, or beneficial interest in a trust. Ownership includes indirect ownership (e.g., ownership in an entity that has ownership in the entity at issue) and there may be ownership through multiple tiers of entities.
+
+
+
+Substantial Interest: A Trustee's, Officer's, or Key Employee’s or their Family Member’s Financial or Other Material Interest will be considered Substantial if it involves:
+
+general partnership in, limited liability company (“LLC”) management authority over, or other similar management or control rights over a fund in which the College invests; or
+
+an ownership or investment interest representing more than 1% of the outstanding shares of a publicly traded company or 5% of the outstanding shares or comparable interest of a privately owned company with which the College has or is negotiating a contract, transaction, or arrangement or which is an involved organization with respect to the contract, transaction, or arrangement; or
+
+an ownership or investment interest, which produces income for or constitutes part of the net worth of the Trustee, Officer, or Key Employee or a Family Member of the aforementioned which totals $10,000 or more annually, in any entity with which the College has or is negotiating a contract, transaction, or arrangement or which is an involved organization with respect to the contract, transaction. or arrangement; or
+
+a compensation arrangement which totals $10,000 or more annually with any entity or individual with which the College has or is negotiating a contract, transaction, or arrangement or with any involved organization with respect to the contract, transaction, or arrangement; or
+
+A fiduciary duty, even of arising from an uncompensated relationship, to any entity with which the College has or is negotiating a contract, Business Transaction, or arrangement.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Olin College Bylaws, Approved 02.16.2019.txt [/INST] FRANKLIN W. OLIN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, INC.
+
+
+
+Olin Way, Needham, Massachusetts 02492
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Bylaws
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Adopted February 16, 2019
+
+
+
+FRANKLIN W. OLIN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, INC.
+
+
+
+
+
+Bylaws
+
+Table of Contents
+
+
+
+Article I - Board of Trustees Authority and Responsibilities	4
+
+Section 1.  GENERAL AUTHORITY	4
+
+Section 2.  ILLUSTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES	4
+
+Article II - Founding Members of the College	6
+
+Section 1.  APPOINTMENT	6
+
+Section 2.  TENURE	7
+
+Section 3.  POWERS AND RIGHTS	7
+
+Section 4.  RESIGNATION	7
+
+Section 5.  ANNUAL MEETINGS	7
+
+Section 6.  REGULAR MEETINGS	8
+
+Section 7.  SPECIAL MEETINGS	8
+
+Section 8.  NOTICE OF MEETINGS	8
+
+Section 9.  QUORUM	8
+
+Section 10.  ACTION BY VOTE	8
+
+Section 11.  ACTION WITHOUT MEETING	8
+
+Section 12.  PROXIES	9
+
+Section 13.  TELEPHONIC PARTICIPATION IN MEETINGS	9
+
+Section 14.  SOLE SURVIVING FOUNDING MEMBER	9
+
+Section 15.  FOUNDING MEMBER DEATH OR INFIRMITY	9
+
+Article III - Membership of the Board	9
+
+Section 1.  NUMBER	9
+
+Section 2.  APPOINTMENT	10
+
+Section 3.  TENURE	10
+
+Section 4.  YOUNG ALUMNI TRUSTEES	10
+
+Section 5.  REMOVAL	10
+
+Section 6.  NOTICE OF ELECTION	10
+
+Article IV - Board of Overseers, Trustee Emeritus and President’s Council	11
+
+Section 1.  BOARD OF OVERSEERS	11
+
+Section 2.  TRUSTEE EMERITUS.	11
+
+Section 3.  PRESIDENT’S COUNCIL.	11
+
+Article V - Officers of the College	11
+
+Section 1.  OFFICERS DEFINED	11
+
+Section 2.  CERTAIN OFFICERS TO BE TRUSTEES	12
+
+Section 3.  TERMS OF OFFICERS	12
+
+Section 4.  ELECTION OF OFFICERS	12
+
+Article VI - Terms and Responsibilities of the Chair and Vice Chair of the Board	12
+
+Section 1.  THE TERM OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR	12
+
+Section 2.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CHAIR	12
+
+Section 3.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE VICE CHAIR	12
+
+Article VII - Term and Responsibilities of the Clerk	12
+
+Section 1.  TERM OF THE CLERK	12
+
+Section 2.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CLERK	13
+
+Article VIII - Term and Responsibilities of the Treasurer	13
+
+Section 1. TERM OF THE TREASURER	13
+
+Section 2.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE TREASURER	13
+
+Article IX - Term, Authority, and Responsibilities of the President of the College	13
+
+Section 1.  PRESIDENT'S TERM	13
+
+Section 2.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PRESIDENT	13
+
+Article X - Terms, Authority, and Responsibilities of the Other Officers	14
+
+Article XI - Meetings	14
+
+Section 1.  REGULAR MEETINGS	14
+
+Section 2.  SPECIAL MEETINGS	14
+
+Section 3.  QUORUM	14
+
+Section 4.  ACTION WITHOUT MEETING	14
+
+Section 5.  TELEPHONIC PARTICIPATION IN MEETINGS	14
+
+Article XII - Committees	15
+
+Section 1.  ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMITTEES	15
+
+Section 2.  APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS	15
+
+Section 3.  COMMITTEE SUPPORT AND MEETINGS	15
+
+			Section 4.  TRUSTEE ATTENDANCE AT COMMITTEE MEETINGS.	15
+
+Article XIII - Composition, Purposes, and Responsibilities of the Executive Committee	16
+
+Section 1.  EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS	16
+
+Section 2.  EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES	16
+
+Section 3.  EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETINGS	16
+
+Article XIV - Composition, Purposes, and Responsibilities of the Governance Committee	17
+
+Section 1.  COMPOSITION OF THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE	17
+
+Section 2.  GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES	17
+
+Section 3.  GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE MEETINGS	17
+
+Article XV - Indemnification	17
+
+Article XVI - Conflict of Interest	18
+
+Section 1.  DEFINITION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST	18
+
+Section 2.  CONFLICTS DISCLOSURE	18
+
+Article XVII - General	19
+
+Section 1.  CORPORATE SEAL	19
+
+Section 2.  FISCAL YEAR	19
+
+Article  XVIII - Review and Amendment of Bylaws	19
+
+Section 1.  REQUIREMENTS FOR AMENDMENT	19
+
+Section 2.  PERIODIC REVIEW	19
+
+
+
+
+
+
+FRANKLIN W. OLIN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, INC.
+
+
+
+
+
+Bylaws
+
+
+
+Special Note
+
+
+
+The operation of the College is subject to an Agreement between the College and its Founder, the F. W. Olin Foundation, Inc., dated December 26, 2002, as subsequently amended, most recently on October 20, 2017 and further including any future amendments, (the “Endowment Grant Agreement” or “EGA”).  Included in the EGA, as Appendix ""A"", is a Statement of Founding Precepts.  Trustees of the College should familiarize themselves with these documents in order to avoid actions and inaction that would violate them.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article I - Board of Trustees Authority and Responsibilities
+
+
+
+Section 1.  GENERAL AUTHORITY.  The Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering, Inc. (sometimes referred to herein as the ""College"") shall be governed by a Board of Trustees (the “Board”).  The Board shall have and exercise those corporate powers permitted by law, except as limited by these Bylaws, the Articles of Organization and the Endowment Grant Agreement (“EGA”).  Its ultimate authority is affirmed through its general, academic, and financial policy-making functions and its responsibility for the College’s financial health and welfare.  The Board shall exercise ultimate institutional authority as set forth in these Bylaws and in such other policy documents it deems appropriate.  These Bylaws and other Board policy statements shall take precedence over all other institutional statements, documents, and policies except the Articles of Organization, the Endowment Grant Agreement between the College and the F. W. Olin Foundation, Inc., dated December 26, 2002, as subsequently amended, most recently on October 20, 2017 and further including any future amendments, and the Statement of Founding Precepts in Appendix ""A"" to the Agreement.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  ILLUSTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES.  The Board shall have the authority to carry out all lawful functions that are permitted by these Bylaws, the Articles of Organization and the EGA.  This authority shall include but shall not be limited to these illustrative functions:
+
+
+
+		Determine and periodically review the College's mission and purposes consistent with the Founding Precepts.
+
+
+
+		Appoint the President, who shall be the College's chief executive officer, and set appropriate terms of employment, including compensation.
+
+	
+
+	Regularly monitor the quality of the academic program and the career paths of Olin graduates.
+
+
+
+		In consultation with the President, approve the terms of employment of the other College Officers who serve at the pleasure of the President.  
+
+
+
+		Annually assess the President's performance based on mutually agreed-upon goals and other criteria and set the President's compensation for the following year or more.
+
+
+
+		Approve major changes in the College's academic programs and other major enterprises, consistent with the College's mission, plans, and financial resources.
+
+
+
+		Approve major changes in admissions standards and procedures.
+
+
+
+		Approve faculty appointments and policies bearing on faculty appointment, promotion, termination, and dismissal as well as personnel and anti-discrimination policies for all employees.
+
+
+
+		Approve the annual budget, tuition, required fees, housing and board charges, and merit scholarship budget; regularly monitor the College's financial condition; establish policy guidelines affecting all institutional assets, including investments and the physical plant; and approve, review and monitor strategic and business plans.
+
+
+
+		Annually select the auditors of the College's financial operations and establish, when appropriate, policies regarding the conduct of the audit, including which College personnel and Trustees shall have responsibility regarding the same.
+
+
+
+		Contribute financially to the College's fund-raising goals, participate actively in strategies to secure sources of support, and authorize College Officers to accept gifts or bequests on behalf of the College subject to Board policy guidelines.
+
+
+
+		Authorize any debt financing and approve the securitization of loans.
+
+
+
+		Authorize the construction of new buildings, capitalization of deferred maintenance backlogs, and major renovations of existing buildings.
+
+
+
+		Authorize the purchase, sale, and management of land, buildings, or major equipment.
+
+
+
+		Adopt policies and oversight procedures for the management, preservation and growth of the College's endowment.
+
+	
+
+		Select the College's legal counsel and establish policies for monitoring the activities of counsel and approving of litigation and related decisions.
+
+
+
+		Monitor the College's ethical, regulatory, risk and other management and compliance issues.
+
+
+
+		Approve policies intended to support the environment for students to learn and develop their abilities.
+
+
+
+		Approve policies concerning academic freedom and responsibility, teaching, and faculty scholarship and public service.
+
+
+
+		Approve all earned degrees through the faculty and President, as they shall recommend.
+
+
+
+		Approve all honorary degrees.
+
+
+
+		Serve actively as advocates for the College in appropriate matters of public policy in consultation with the President and other responsible parties as the Board shall determine.
+
+
+
+		Periodically undertake assessments of the Board’s performance.
+
+
+
+		Implement, and when necessary, amend the Bylaws of the College.
+
+
+
+In exercising its authority with respect to the above matters and other appropriate and legitimate Board issues, the Board will endeavor to consult with the President before taking action but such consultation shall not be required for any Board action to be effective and binding.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article II - Founding Members of the College
+
+
+
+In recognition of the establishment of the College by the F. W. Olin Foundation, Inc. and its Directors, and also to fulfill certain requirements of the Endowment Grant Agreement with the Foundation, the College shall have a special class of Members (""Founding Members"") who shall have special rights and responsibilities regarding their election to the Board, the election of the Chair of the Board, and the approval of certain changes in these Bylaws and other matters as further provided in this Article.
+
+
+
+Section 1.  APPOINTMENT.  Founding Members shall consist of those Directors of the Foundation who have not resigned their position as Foundation Members under the Bylaws in effect immediately prior to the adoption of these Bylaws.  For purposes of identity, the Founding Members of the College as of the adoption of these Bylaws are Lawrence W. Milas and William B. Norden.  
+
+	
+
+	Section 2.  TENURE.  Each Founding Member shall remain a Founding Member of the College until he dies or resigns.
+
+	
+
+	Section 3.  POWERS AND RIGHTS.  Each Founding Member shall have the right to appoint himself to the College's Board (""Founding Trustee"", or more specifically, as the ""Milas Founding Trustee"" and the ""Norden Founding Trustee"", respectively, and collectively as ""Founding Trustees""), for a term equivalent to the term for Trustees elected under Article III.  As an alternative to appointing himself as a Trustee, each Founding Member may elect a person to the College's Board (""Alternate Founding Trustee"") upon the written consent of the other surviving Founding Member.  Any limitations in these Bylaws on the number of successive terms of Trustees shall not apply to Founding Trustees or Alternate Founding Trustees.  Upon the vacancy of a Founding Trustee or Alternate Founding Trustee position, the Founding Member for whom the Trusteeship is named may appoint himself as successor, or may elect another person to be an Alternate Founding Trustee upon the written consent of the other surviving Foundation Member.  Founding Trustees shall have the right to attend and vote as members-at-large at all meetings of all Board committees of which they are not otherwise a member under Article XII, except the Executive Committee, but Founding Trustees shall not be counted for purposes of determining a quorum for committee action at meetings which they attend as a member-at-large.  Except for the matters in this Article II and in Article III specifically relating to Founding Trustees and Alternate Founding Trustees, their rights as members of the Board shall be no greater than the rights of Trustees elected under Article III. The  Founding Members or Founding Member, acting by a majority of their number then in office, shall also have the following powers: (1) to approve, in advance, any proposed amendment to these Bylaws that would in any way alter or affect this Article II and Article III, or the rights and privileges of the Founding Members, Founding Trustees and Alternate Founding Trustees, as otherwise provided in these Bylaws; (2) to approve, in advance, any proposed amendment to the College's Articles of Organization, (3) to approve, in advance, any proposed merger or consolidation of the College, and (4) to approve, in advance, any proposed sale of all or substantially all of the assets of the College (except endowment and other investment assets at fair market value).  All powers and rights of the Founding Members shall expire on the resignation or death of the last surviving Founding Member and such powers and rights shall thereupon devolve upon the Board as a whole.  
+
+	
+
+		Section 4.  RESIGNATION.  A Founding Member may resign by giving written notice to the other Founding Member (if there shall be one) and to the Chair and Clerk of the Board.  Such resignation shall be effective upon receipt (unless specified to be effective at some other time).
+
+		
+
+	Section 5.  ANNUAL MEETINGS.  The annual meeting of the Founding Members shall be held on such date and at such place and time as the Founding Members may determine.  Each annual meeting shall be held for such purposes as may properly be brought before the meeting under law, the Articles of Organization, or these Bylaws.  If an annual meeting is not held as herein provided, a special meeting of the Founding Members may be held instead with the same force and effect as the annual meeting, and in such case all references in these Bylaws to the annual meeting of the Founding Members, except in this Section 5, shall be deemed to refer to such special meeting.
+
+	
+
+		Section 6.  REGULAR MEETINGS.  Regular meetings of the Founding Members may be held at such places within the United States and at such times as the Founding Members may determine.
+
+		
+
+		Section 7.  SPECIAL MEETINGS.  Special meetings of the Founding Members may be held at any time and at any place within the United States.  Special meetings of the Founding Members may be called by the Chair of the Board or upon the written or electronic application of any Founding Member, by the Clerk, or in the case of death, absence, and incapacity, of the Clerk, by any other Officer of the Board.
+
+		
+
+		Section 8.  NOTICE OF MEETINGS.  Except as otherwise provided by law, a written or electronic notice of every meeting of Founding Members, stating the place, date, and hour thereof, shall be given by the Clerk, by an Assistant Clerk, or by the person calling the meeting, at least seven days before the meeting, to each Founding Member.  Such notice shall state the place, date and hour of the meeting, but need not specify the purposes of the meeting except if the meeting is a special meeting, or if an amendment to the College's Articles of Organization or these By-laws shall be a purpose of the meeting, then the same shall be so stated in the notice.  Attendance at any meeting shall be deemed a waiver of any required notice of such meeting.
+
+		
+
+		Section 9.  QUORUM.  Except as otherwise provided by law, by the Articles of Organization, or by these Bylaws, at any meeting of the Founding Members one-half of the number of Founding Members then in office (whether present in person or duly represented by proxy) shall constitute a quorum.  A quorum shall not be required to adjourn any meeting to such date or dates not more than thirty days after the first session of the meeting, and at any adjourned meeting any business may be transacted which might have been transacted at the meeting as originally called, provided a quorum shall be in attendance at such adjourned meeting.
+
+		
+
+		Section 10.  ACTION BY VOTE.  Each Founding Member shall have one vote.  When a quorum is present at any meeting, a majority of the votes properly cast by Founding Members present in person or duly represented by proxy shall decide any question, unless otherwise provided by law, the Articles of Organization, or these Bylaws.  No ballot shall be required for such election or other matter unless requested by a Founding Member present or duly represented by proxy at the meeting and entitled to vote with respect to such matter.
+
+		
+
+			Section 11.  ACTION WITHOUT MEETING.  Any action required or permitted to be taken at any meeting of the Founding Members present may be taken without a meeting if all Founding Members entitled to vote on the matter consent to the action in writing and the written consents are filed with the record of the meetings of the Founding Members.  Such consents shall be treated for all purposes as a vote at a meeting.
+
+		
+
+		Section 12.  PROXIES.  Founding Members may vote either in person or by written proxy dated not more than six months before the meeting named therein, which proxies, before being voted, shall be filed with the Clerk or other person responsible for recording the proceedings of the meeting.  Unless otherwise specifically limited by their terms, such proxies shall entitle the holder thereof to vote at any adjournment of the meeting but the proxy shall terminate after the final adjournment of such meeting.  A proxy purporting to have been executed by or on behalf of a Founding Member shall be deemed valid unless challenged at or prior to its exercise.
+
+		
+
+		Section 13.  TELEPHONIC PARTICIPATION IN MEETINGS.  Founding Members may participate in a meeting of the Founding Members by means of a conference telephone call or similar communications equipment by means of which all persons participating in the meeting can hear each other at the same time.  Participating by such means shall constitute presence in person at a meeting.
+
+		
+
+		Section 14.  SOLE SURVIVING FOUNDING MEMBER.  At such time as there shall be a sole surviving Founding Member, meetings of Founding Members shall not be required and any actions requiring a majority vote of Founding Members shall only require the vote or approval of the sole surviving Founding Member.  The Clerk will give the sole surviving Founding Member at least thirty days written or electronic notice of actions that such Founding Member may take with respect to the powers provided to Founding Members by these Bylaws.  In the case of a sole surviving Founding Member who shall wish to nominate another person to serve as an Alternate Founding Trustee in his place, such nomination, in writing and sent to the Chair and Clerk, shall be equivalent to such person being elected to the Board.
+
+		
+
+		Section 15.  FOUNDING MEMBER DEATH OR INFIRMITY.  Recognizing that the effectiveness of Founding Members over a lifetime term may be affected by the uncertainties of life, all rights of Founding Members shall cease during such periods as they shall be mentally infirm, provided such is confirmed in writing by such Founding Member's spouse, adult child, physician or a court of law or other competent authority.  Any Alternate Founding Trustee, who was nominated by a Founding Member whose rights have ceased under this section or has died, shall nevertheless continue to serve for the balance of the term for which he or she was elected.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article III - Membership of the Board 
+
+
+
+Section 1.  NUMBER.  The Board shall consist of no fewer than 5 and no more than 25 Trustees, including the Trustees elected by the Founding Members and the President, ex-officio.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  APPOINTMENT.  New Trustees and incumbent members of the Board who are eligible for reelection, except Trustees elected by the Founding Members, normally shall be elected at the Board’s annual meeting by a majority of the Trustees then in office.  However, any unfulfilled term or other vacancies of Trustees elected under this Article may be filled through a special election at any meeting of the Board.  In addition, new Trustees may be elected through a special election at any other meeting of the Board or under the provisions of Article XI, Section 4 – Action Without Meeting, to serve until the next annual meeting when they may be reelected.  Any such partial term shall not count towards the term limits in Article III, Section 3.
+
+
+
+Section 3.  TENURE.  Trustees who are not elected as Young Alumni Trustees under the provisions of Article III, Section 4 shall serve for three-year terms and may be reelected for a total of three consecutive terms. Trustees elected under this Article who have served for three consecutive terms (exclusive of any partial term) shall not be eligible for reelection until one-year later.  Trustees who have served as a Board Officer shall be eligible to serve one additional year  upon reelection by the Board.  Alternate Founding Trustees nominated by a Founding Trustee who subsequently resigns or dies shall complete the term for which elected but then shall have no further rights as an Alternate Founding Trustee unless elected an Alternate Founding Trustee by the other Founding Trustee.
+
+
+
+Section 4.  YOUNG ALUMNI TRUSTEES.  Any alumna/alumnus whose term of Board service would begin not less than four (4) years and not more than nine (9) years following the receipt of their undergraduate degree from Olin College is eligible for election as a “Young Alumni Trustee”.  Young Alumni Trustees will be elected under the provisions of Article III, Section 2 and will serve for a single term of four (4) years.  Young Alumni Trustees will otherwise enjoy the same rights and privileges of all other Trustees, excluding those accorded strictly to Founding Trustees.  The Board may elect up to three (3) alumni of the College to serve concurrently as members of the Board under the “Young Alumni Trustee” classification while respecting the limitation on the total number of Trustees established in Article III, Section 1.  Nothing in this Section shall be deemed to prohibit the election of any alumna/alumnus of the College to the Board outside this special class of Trustees.
+
+  
+
+Section 5.  REMOVAL.  All Trustees except Founding Trustees serve at the pleasure of the Board.  A Trustee other than a Founding Trustee may be removed from office by an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the Trustees.
+
+
+
+Section 6.  NOTICE OF ELECTION.  The Governance Committee shall recommend candidates for election or reelection to the Board through procedures adopted by the Board.  The recommended candidates, with biographical information for each prospective Trustee candidate, shall be provided by written or electronic notice to all Trustees no later than seven days before the annual or regular meeting of the Board at which an election is scheduled.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article IV - Board of Overseers, Trustee Emeritus and President’s Council
+
+
+
+	Section 1.  BOARD OF OVERSEERS.  At such time as the Board deems it appropriate, it shall organize a Board of Overseers to serve as an advisory council to the President and the Trustees.  Overseers shall be elected to four-year terms and be drawn from distinguished alumni, parents and other friends of the College to provide advice and support necessary to insure the quality of the College's programs.  The Board may establish Overseer Visiting Committees to support the activities of the Board of Overseers.  In addition, Overseers may be invited to meet annually with the Trustees to receive the President's report on the general state of the College and join with the Trustees at that meeting to offer comments, suggestions and opinions regarding all College matters.  All Overseers shall be entitled to the same on-campus courtesies and privileges normally extended to Trustees and they will be given a special place of honor at Commencement and at other College convocations.  
+
+	
+
+Section 2.  TRUSTEE EMERITUS.  The Board may convey the title “Trustee Emeritus” upon a former Trustee who has completed at least one term of active service on the Board.  There shall be no limit to the number of Trustees Emeriti.  A Trustee Emeritus (i) shall be entitled to the same on-campus courtesies and privileges normally extended to Trustees, (ii) shall be given a special place of honor at Commencement and at other College convocations and (iii) shall be given notice of all meetings of the Board and may be invited to attend and participate in designated Board meetings and other important events and activities at the College.  A Trustee Emeritus may be invited to sit as a non-voting member of any committee.  A Trustee Emeritus shall not (i) count in computing a quorum, (ii) have any governance responsibilities or (iii) have the right to vote.  Trustees Emeriti serve at the pleasure of the Board and may be removed from office by an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the Trustees.
+
+	
+
+Section 3.  PRESIDENT’S COUNCIL. The President may organize a President’s Council to provide advice and counsel to the President on issues of importance to the College.  The Council shall serve at the pleasure of the President and is advisory in nature.  The number of members, terms, Council leadership, and frequency of meetings shall be determined by the President.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article V - Officers of the College
+
+	
+
+Section 1.  OFFICERS DEFINED.  The Officers of the College shall be the Chair, Vice Chair, Clerk, Treasurer, President and others who may serve in the role of Provost, Vice President, Dean or in other named positions at a comparable level.  The Chair, Vice Chair, Clerk and Treasurer shall serve at the pleasure of the Board.  The Provost (if there be a Provost), Vice Presidents, Deans and those in other named positions at a comparable level shall serve at the pleasure of the President in consultation with the Board.  The Board may also appoint one or more Assistant Clerks and Assistant Treasurers who shall have such responsibilities as the Board may assign.  
+
+Section 2.  CERTAIN OFFICERS TO BE TRUSTEES.  The Chair, Vice Chair and Clerk (the ""Board Officers"") shall be elected from among the members of the Board.  The Treasurer may, but need not, be a Trustee.  The President shall be an ex-officio member of the Board with the power to vote, and his or her presence at meetings shall be counted as part of quorum determinations.  The other College Officers shall not be members of the Board.  
+
+
+
+Section 3.  TERMS OF OFFICERS.  The terms of office for Officers of the College will vary as provided elsewhere in these Bylaws.  The Board may approve the appointments of other College Officers upon the recommendation of the President.
+
+
+
+Section 4.  ELECTION OF OFFICERS.  The Board shall elect the Chair, Vice Chair, Clerk and Treasurer after giving due consideration to the recommendations and nominations of the Governance Committee, but the Board may act otherwise.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article VI - Terms and Responsibilities of the Chair and Vice Chair of the Board
+
+
+
+Section 1.  THE TERM OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR.  The Chair  and Vice Chair shall be elected annually and ordinarily shall serve for at least three consecutive years but not more than five years. Vacancies may be filled at any time by a majority vote of the members of the Board, but election or reelection shall normally take place at the annual meeting.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CHAIR.  The Chair shall preside at all Board and Executive Committee meetings, have the right to vote on all questions, appoint committee chairs and vice chairs, determine the composition of all Board committees (with the exception of the Executive Committee), and otherwise serve as spokesperson for the Board.  He or she shall serve as Chair of the Executive Committee and as an ex-officio member, with the right to vote, of all other standing or ad hoc committees of the Board, and have other duties as the Board may prescribe from time to time.
+
+
+
+Section 3.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE VICE CHAIR.  In the absence of the Chair, the Vice Chair shall perform the duties of the office of the Chair, including presiding at Board and Executive Committee meetings.  He or she shall have other powers and duties as the Board may from time to time prescribe and may or may not be nominated to succeed the Chair when a vacancy occurs.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article VII - Term and Responsibilities of the Clerk
+
+
+
+Section 1.  TERM OF THE CLERK.  The Clerk shall be elected annually and shall ordinarily serve for at least three consecutive years but not more than five years.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CLERK.  The Clerk shall ensure that the Board is acting in accordance with these Bylaws, that bylaw amendments are promptly made as necessary, that minutes of Board meetings are accurate and promptly distributed to all Trustees, that meetings are properly scheduled and Trustees notified, and that Board policy statements and other official records are properly maintained.  The Clerk shall perform other duties as prescribed from time to time by the Board and may be assisted in all duties by a staff member designated by the President.  In the event of the absence of the Clerk from a Board meeting or the Clerk’s temporary inability to fulfill the Clerk’s responsibilities, the Chair may appoint another Trustee to serve as Acting Clerk, for such period of time as may be appropriate.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article VIII - Term and Responsibilities of the Treasurer
+
+
+
+Section 1. TERM OF THE TREASURER.  The Treasurer serves at the pleasure of the Board for such term, compensation, and with such other terms of employment, as it shall determine.  
+
+
+
+Section 2.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE TREASURER.  The Treasurer shall ensure that all Trustees regularly receive appropriate and comprehensible financial statements from the College's administration that include comparisons of revenues and expenditures with the approved annual budget and the preceding fiscal year for the same time periods.  The Treasurer shall ensure that other financial reports—including those for special or major Board-approved expenditures, College investments, and annual or special audits—are provided to all Trustees in a timely manner for review and discussion as appropriate.  He or she shall consult with the College's financial officers, Board-approved auditor, and the investment, finance and audit committees of the Board as appropriate or necessary.  
+
+
+
+
+
+Article IX - Term, Authority, and Responsibilities of the President of the College
+
+
+
+Section 1.  PRESIDENT'S TERM.  The President serves at the pleasure of the Board for such term, compensation, and with such other terms of employment, as it shall determine.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PRESIDENT.  The President shall be the College's chief executive officer and the chief adviser to and executive agent of the Board.  His or her authority is vested through the Board and includes responsibilities for all College educational and managerial affairs.  The President is responsible for leading the College, implementing all Board policies, keeping the Board informed on appropriate matters, consulting with the Board in a timely manner on matters appropriate to its policy-making and fiduciary functions, and serving as the College's key spokesperson.  He or she has the authority to execute all documents on behalf of the College and the Board and to delegate such authority to other responsible College employees, consistent with Board policies and the best interests of the College.  The President serves as an ex-officio voting member of all standing Board committees except the audit committee.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article X - Terms, Authority, and Responsibilities of the Other Officers
+
+
+
+Those individuals with the title Provost, Vice President, Dean or other named positions at a comparable level shall serve for such terms and have such authority and responsibilities as the President shall determine, and as approved by the Board.  In the absence or disability of the President, the Provost or Vice President serving as the chief academic officer or, if absent or disabled, another individual selected by the Board, shall perform the duties of the President for such period of time and subject to such directions as the Board may prescribe. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Article XI - Meetings
+
+
+
+Section 1.  REGULAR MEETINGS.  The Board shall have a minimum of three  regular meetings annually on such dates and at such places as it shall determine.  The annual meeting for the purpose of electing Trustees, Board Officers, and at-large members of the Executive Committee shall be the first Board meeting scheduled after September 1 of each year.  The Clerk of the Board shall send written or electronic notice of such meetings to all Trustees at least seven days in advance.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  SPECIAL MEETINGS.  Special meetings may be held at the call of the Board Chair, the President, or any five Trustees.  The Chair or Clerk of the Board shall send written or electronic notice of such special meetings to all Trustees, along with a clear statement of the meeting's purpose, at least seven days in advance.  Business at such special meetings shall be confined to the stated purpose.
+
+
+
+Section 3.  QUORUM.  A quorum for the transaction of business at meetings of the Board or its Executive Committee shall consist of a majority of their respective regular voting member Trustees.  Except as otherwise provided in these Bylaws or the Articles of Organization, a majority vote of those members present with a proper quorum shall constitute proper action.
+
+
+
+Section 4.  ACTION WITHOUT MEETING.  Any action required or permitted to be taken by the Board or by any of its committees may be taken without a meeting if all persons entitled to vote on the matter consent to the action in writing or by electronic mail and the written consents are filed with the record of the meetings.
+
+
+
+Section 5.  TELEPHONIC PARTICIPATION IN MEETINGS.  Trustees may participate in a meeting of the Board or any of its committees by means of a conference telephone call or similar communications equipment by means of which all persons participating in the meeting can hear each other at the same time.  Participating by such means shall constitute presence in person at a meeting.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article XII - Committees
+
+
+
+Section 1.  ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMITTEES.  In addition to the Executive and Governance Committees that are established by these Bylaws, the Board shall establish standing committees to assist the Board with the following matters: the audit of the College’s financial affairs; the College’s budget and finances; compensation; investments; facilities; academic affairs; student affairs; and development and fundraising.  The Board shall establish such other standing and ad-hoc committees as it deems appropriate to the discharge of its responsibilities.  Committees may be given responsibility for more than one matter or subject.  Each shall have a written statement of purpose and primary responsibilities as approved by the Board, and such rules of procedure or policy guidelines as it or the Board, as appropriate, approves.  Each committee shall review such statements for their appropriateness and adequacy annually.  Committees may include friends of the College and such persons shall have the right to vote.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS.  The Chair of the Board shall have the responsibility to appoint the Chairs, Vice Chairs, and members of all Board committees except the Executive Committee.  All committee chairs and vice chairs shall be Trustees and, unless the Board shall direct otherwise, a majority of each committee’s members shall be Trustees.
+
+
+
+Section 3.  COMMITTEE SUPPORT AND MEETINGS.  Each committee shall have an Officer of the College or member of the administrative staff, as designated by the President, to assist it with its work.  Each committee shall meet with such frequency as shall enable it to fulfill its responsibilities to report its work and make recommendations to the Board so that the Board can consider and make timely decisions regarding the Committee's work.  All Committees excluding the Executive Committee shall be required to keep minutes of all meetings and distribute them to all Trustees on a regular basis.
+
+
+
+	Section 4.  TRUSTEE ATTENDANCE AT COMMITTEE MEETINGS.  In addition to the members of Committees appointed by the Chair, Founding Trustees shall have the right to attend and vote as members-at-large at all meetings (including Executive Sessions) of all Committees, except the Executive Committee.  All other Trustees shall have the right to attend all meetings of all Committees, except the Executive Committee, but they may be excluded from the executive session of a Committee and they shall not be entitled to vote.  Only members of a Committee appointed by the Chair shall be counted for purposes of determining a quorum for Committee action.  
+
+
+
+
+
+Article XIII - Composition, Purposes, and Responsibilities of the Executive Committee
+
+
+
+Section 1.  EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS.  The Executive Committee shall consist of the Chair, Vice Chair and President.  If there is no Vice Chair the Clerk shall serve on the Executive Committee instead.  In addition, for every three Trustees on the Board above nine (disregarding fractions) the Board shall elect an additional member from the Board.  At any time when the Executive Committee shall consist of only the Chair and Vice Chair (or the Clerk) and the President, and the Chair and Vice Chair (or the Clerk) are both Founding Members, the Board shall elect an additional member to the Executive Committee.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES.  The purpose of the Executive Committee is twofold: (1) It shall serve as the Board’s agent in helping the President address business between regular Board meetings, and (2) it shall assist the Chair and the President with their joint responsibility to help the Board function effectively and efficiently by suggesting Board meeting agenda items.  The Committee shall have authority to act for the Board on all matters except for the following, which shall be reserved for the Board (except to the extent otherwise reserved for the Founding Members): Presidential selection, termination and compensation; Trustee and Board-Officer election; changes in institutional mission and purposes; changes to the charter or Articles of Incorporation; incurring of corporate indebtedness; purchase or sale of property, buildings, or major equipment; adoption of the annual budget; and conferral of degrees.  These Bylaws or other Board policies may reserve other powers for the Board.  In addition to its authority to take action on emergency matters that cannot or should not be deferred to the Board’s next scheduled meeting, the Executive Committee shall oversee the work of Board committees and the College's planning process and progress on planning goals.
+
+
+
+Solely for the purpose of assisting the Board in fulfilling its responsibility to assess the President's performance and fix the President’s compensation, the Executive Committee (excluding the President) shall prepare and provide the Board with an annual evaluation of the President’s performance and recommendations regarding the President’s compensation.  All decisions and actions regarding the same shall be the Board’s exclusive responsibility unless specifically delegated to the Executive Committee.
+
+
+
+Section 3.  EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETINGS.  The Executive Committee shall meet as often as is necessary to conduct its business as the Chair and President determine.  Actions taken by the Executive Committee shall be recorded and distributed to all Trustees for subsequent ratification by the Board at its next regular meeting.  A majority of Executive Committee members shall constitute a quorum.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Article XIV - Composition, Purposes, and Responsibilities of the Governance Committee
+
+
+
+Section 1.  COMPOSITION OF THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE.  The Governance Committee shall have at least three members and not more than seven, all of whom shall be voting Trustees.  The Committee’s Chair, Vice Chair, and members shall be appointed for renewable one-year terms by the Chair of the Board.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES.  The purpose of the Governance Committee is fourfold: (1) It shall ensure that the Board’s membership and leadership consist of highly qualified and committed individuals; (2) it shall ensure that regular programs of new Trustee and in-service education are maintained; (3) it shall periodically recommend initiatives by which the Board shall assess its performance; and (4) it shall periodically assess the quality and effectiveness of committee work.  The Governance Committee serves as the Board’s agent in reviewing the performance of incumbent Trustees and Board Officers who are eligible for reelection, maintains a list of qualified candidates for possible nomination, considers cultivation strategies for promising Trustee candidates, makes nominations of candidates for election to the Board and as Board Officers, including succession planning, and proposes and periodically reviews the adequacy of a statement of Trustee responsibilities as adopted by the Board.  It shall establish its own rules of procedure as deemed necessary in consultation with the Board Chair, President, and the Board.
+
+
+
+Section 3.  GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE MEETINGS.  The Committee shall meet as often as is necessary to conduct its business.  It shall seek the assistance of all Trustees in the course of meeting its responsibilities in accordance with these Bylaws and its own rules of procedure, as adopted by the Board.  A majority of the Committee’s members shall constitute a quorum.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article XV - Indemnification
+
+
+
+	The College shall to the extent legally permissible indemnify each of its present and former Trustees, Officers, employees and agents and any person who serves or has served, at the College’s request, as director, officer, employee or agent of another organization or in a capacity with respect to any employee benefit plan and the heirs, executors and administrators of the foregoing (each of such persons is hereinafter referred to as the “Agent”) against all expenses and liabilities which the Agent has reasonably incurred in connection with or arising out of any action or threatened action, suit or proceeding in which the Agent may be involved by reason of being or having been an Agent, such expenses and liabilities to include, but not be limited to, judgments, court costs and attorney’s fees and the cost of reasonable settlements, provided no such indemnification shall be made in relation to matters as to which such Agent shall be finally adjudged in any such action, suit or proceeding not to have acted in good faith in the reasonable belief that his or her action was in the best interests of the College, or, in the case of a person who serves or has served in a capacity with respect to an employee benefit plan, in the best interests of the participants or beneficiaries of such plan.  The College may reimburse an Agent for expenses incurred in defending a civil or criminal action or proceeding, upon receipt of an undertaking by the Agent to repay such reimbursement if the Agent shall be adjudicated to be not entitled to indemnification hereunder, which undertaking may be accepted regardless of the financial ability of the Agent to make repayment.  In the event that a settlement or compromise of such action, suit or proceeding is effected, indemnification may be had but only if the Board shall have been furnished with an opinion of counsel for the College to the effect that such settlement or compromise is in the best interests of the College and that such Agent appears to have acted in good faith in the reasonable belief that his or her action was in the best interests of the College or employee benefit plan, as the case may be, and if the Board (not including the vote of any person seeking indemnification hereunder) shall have adopted a resolution approving such settlement or compromise.
+
+	
+
+			The foregoing right of indemnification shall not be exclusive of other rights to which any Trustee, officer, or employee may be entitled as a matter of law.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article XVI - Conflict of Interest
+
+
+
+Section 1.  DEFINITION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST.  A Trustee or College Officer shall be considered to have a conflict of interest if he or she (1) has an existing or potential business relationship, financial or other material interest, or co-investment interest that impairs or appears to impair his or her independent, unbiased judgment in the discharge of his or her responsibilities to the College; or (2) is aware that a member of his or her family, or any organization in which such person is an officer, director, employee, member, partner, trustee or substantial stockholder, has a business relationship, financial or other material interest, or co-investment interest that would impair or appear to impair the Trustee or Officer's independent judgment in the discharge of his or her responsibilities to the College.  For the purposes of this provision, a family member is defined as spouse (other than a spouse who is legally divorced from the Trustee or Officer or who is residing apart under a decree of separate maintenance), domestic partner (or equivalent), children including adopted children) and their spouses, brothers or sisters (by whole or half-blood or by adoption) and their spouses, parents and step-parents, grandparents, or other members of the household of such persons, and other persons for whom the Trustee or Officer has direct financial oversight powers, duties, or responsibilities.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  CONFLICTS DISCLOSURE.  All Trustees and College Officers shall disclose to the Board any possible conflict of interest at the earliest practical time.  Further, a conflicted Trustee shall absent himself or herself from discussions of, and abstain from voting on, such matters under consideration by the Board or its committees.  The minutes of such meeting shall reflect that a disclosure was made and that the Trustee with a conflict or possible conflict abstained from voting.  Any Trustee who is uncertain as to whether a conflict of interest may exist in any matter may request that the Board or committee resolve the question in his or her absence by majority vote.  Each Trustee shall complete and sign a disclosure form provided annually by the Clerk of the Board.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Article XVII - General
+
+
+
+Section 1.  CORPORATE SEAL.  The corporate seal, if any, shall be in a form determined from time to time by the Board.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  FISCAL YEAR.  The fiscal year of the College shall begin on the first day of July and end on the last day of June, unless otherwise determined by the Board.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article  XVIII - Review and Amendment of Bylaws
+
+
+
+Section 1.  REQUIREMENTS FOR AMENDMENT.  These Bylaws may be changed or amended at any meeting of the Trustees by a two-thirds vote of those present, provided notice of the substance of the proposed amendment is sent to all Trustees at least 30 days before the meeting and further provided that the Founding Members have approved such changes or amendments in accordance with Section 3 of Article II.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  PERIODIC REVIEW.  These Bylaws shall be reviewed no less frequently than every five years after the date they are adopted or after the latest amendment.  The review shall be conducted by a committee appointed by the Chair of the Governance Committee and approved by the Chair of the Board.  After its review the Committee shall render a report to the Board including any recommended changes.
+
+
+
+2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Olin College Bylaws, SS COI Suggested Revisions.txt [/INST] FRANKLIN W. OLIN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, INC.
+
+
+
+Olin Way, Needham, Massachusetts 02492
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Bylaws
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Adopted February 16, 2019
+
+
+
+FRANKLIN W. OLIN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, INC.
+
+
+
+
+
+Bylaws
+
+Table of Contents
+
+
+
+Article I - Board of Trustees Authority and Responsibilities	4
+
+Section 1.  GENERAL AUTHORITY	4
+
+Section 2.  ILLUSTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES	4
+
+Article II - Founding Members of the College	6
+
+Section 1.  APPOINTMENT	6
+
+Section 2.  TENURE	7
+
+Section 3.  POWERS AND RIGHTS	7
+
+Section 4.  RESIGNATION	7
+
+Section 5.  ANNUAL MEETINGS	7
+
+Section 6.  REGULAR MEETINGS	8
+
+Section 7.  SPECIAL MEETINGS	8
+
+Section 8.  NOTICE OF MEETINGS	8
+
+Section 9.  QUORUM	8
+
+Section 10.  ACTION BY VOTE	8
+
+Section 11.  ACTION WITHOUT MEETING	8
+
+Section 12.  PROXIES	9
+
+Section 13.  TELEPHONIC PARTICIPATION IN MEETINGS	9
+
+Section 14.  SOLE SURVIVING FOUNDING MEMBER	9
+
+Section 15.  FOUNDING MEMBER DEATH OR INFIRMITY	9
+
+Article III - Membership of the Board	9
+
+Section 1.  NUMBER	9
+
+Section 2.  APPOINTMENT	10
+
+Section 3.  TENURE	10
+
+Section 4.  YOUNG ALUMNI TRUSTEES	10
+
+Section 5.  REMOVAL	10
+
+Section 6.  NOTICE OF ELECTION	10
+
+Article IV - Board of Overseers, Trustee Emeritus and President’s Council	11
+
+Section 1.  BOARD OF OVERSEERS	11
+
+Section 2.  TRUSTEE EMERITUS.	11
+
+Section 3.  PRESIDENT’S COUNCIL.	11
+
+Article V - Officers of the College	11
+
+Section 1.  OFFICERS DEFINED	11
+
+Section 2.  CERTAIN OFFICERS TO BE TRUSTEES	12
+
+Section 3.  TERMS OF OFFICERS	12
+
+Section 4.  ELECTION OF OFFICERS	12
+
+Article VI - Terms and Responsibilities of the Chair and Vice Chair of the Board	12
+
+Section 1.  THE TERM OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR	12
+
+Section 2.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CHAIR	12
+
+Section 3.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE VICE CHAIR	12
+
+Article VII - Term and Responsibilities of the Clerk	12
+
+Section 1.  TERM OF THE CLERK	12
+
+Section 2.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CLERK	13
+
+Article VIII - Term and Responsibilities of the Treasurer	13
+
+Section 1. TERM OF THE TREASURER	13
+
+Section 2.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE TREASURER	13
+
+Article IX - Term, Authority, and Responsibilities of the President of the College	13
+
+Section 1.  PRESIDENT'S TERM	13
+
+Section 2.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PRESIDENT	13
+
+Article X - Terms, Authority, and Responsibilities of the Other Officers	14
+
+Article XI - Meetings	14
+
+Section 1.  REGULAR MEETINGS	14
+
+Section 2.  SPECIAL MEETINGS	14
+
+Section 3.  QUORUM	14
+
+Section 4.  ACTION WITHOUT MEETING	14
+
+Section 5.  TELEPHONIC PARTICIPATION IN MEETINGS	14
+
+Article XII - Committees	15
+
+Section 1.  ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMITTEES	15
+
+Section 2.  APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS	15
+
+Section 3.  COMMITTEE SUPPORT AND MEETINGS	15
+
+			Section 4.  TRUSTEE ATTENDANCE AT COMMITTEE MEETINGS.	15
+
+Article XIII - Composition, Purposes, and Responsibilities of the Executive Committee	16
+
+Section 1.  EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS	16
+
+Section 2.  EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES	16
+
+Section 3.  EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETINGS	16
+
+Article XIV - Composition, Purposes, and Responsibilities of the Governance Committee	17
+
+Section 1.  COMPOSITION OF THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE	17
+
+Section 2.  GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES	17
+
+Section 3.  GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE MEETINGS	17
+
+Article XV - Indemnification	17
+
+Article XVI - Conflict of Interest	18
+
+Section 1.  DEFINITION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST	18
+
+Section 2.  CONFLICTS DISCLOSURE	18
+
+Article XVII - General	19
+
+Section 1.  CORPORATE SEAL	19
+
+Section 2.  FISCAL YEAR	19
+
+Article  XVIII - Review and Amendment of Bylaws	19
+
+Section 1.  REQUIREMENTS FOR AMENDMENT	19
+
+Section 2.  PERIODIC REVIEW	19
+
+
+
+
+
+
+FRANKLIN W. OLIN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, INC.
+
+
+
+
+
+Bylaws
+
+
+
+Special Note
+
+
+
+The operation of the College is subject to an Agreement between the College and its Founder, the F. W. Olin Foundation, Inc., dated December 26, 2002, as subsequently amended, most recently on October 20, 2017 and further including any future amendments, (the “Endowment Grant Agreement” or “EGA”).  Included in the EGA, as Appendix ""A"", is a Statement of Founding Precepts.  Trustees of the College should familiarize themselves with these documents in order to avoid actions and inaction that would violate them.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article I - Board of Trustees Authority and Responsibilities
+
+
+
+Section 1.  GENERAL AUTHORITY.  The Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering, Inc. (sometimes referred to herein as the ""College"") shall be governed by a Board of Trustees (the “Board”).  The Board shall have and exercise those corporate powers permitted by law, except as limited by these Bylaws, the Articles of Organization and the Endowment Grant Agreement (“EGA”).  Its ultimate authority is affirmed through its general, academic, and financial policy-making functions and its responsibility for the College’s financial health and welfare.  The Board shall exercise ultimate institutional authority as set forth in these Bylaws and in such other policy documents it deems appropriate.  These Bylaws and other Board policy statements shall take precedence over all other institutional statements, documents, and policies except the Articles of Organization, the Endowment Grant Agreement between the College and the F. W. Olin Foundation, Inc., dated December 26, 2002, as subsequently amended, most recently on October 20, 2017 and further including any future amendments, and the Statement of Founding Precepts in Appendix ""A"" to the Agreement.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  ILLUSTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES.  The Board shall have the authority to carry out all lawful functions that are permitted by these Bylaws, the Articles of Organization and the EGA.  This authority shall include but shall not be limited to these illustrative functions:
+
+
+
+		Determine and periodically review the College's mission and purposes consistent with the Founding Precepts.
+
+
+
+		Appoint the President, who shall be the College's chief executive officer, and set appropriate terms of employment, including compensation.
+
+	
+
+	Regularly monitor the quality of the academic program and the career paths of Olin graduates.
+
+
+
+		In consultation with the President, approve the terms of employment of the other College Officers who serve at the pleasure of the President.  
+
+
+
+		Annually assess the President's performance based on mutually agreed-upon goals and other criteria and set the President's compensation for the following year or more.
+
+
+
+		Approve major changes in the College's academic programs and other major enterprises, consistent with the College's mission, plans, and financial resources.
+
+
+
+		Approve major changes in admissions standards and procedures.
+
+
+
+		Approve faculty appointments and policies bearing on faculty appointment, promotion, termination, and dismissal as well as personnel and anti-discrimination policies for all employees.
+
+
+
+		Approve the annual budget, tuition, required fees, housing and board charges, and merit scholarship budget; regularly monitor the College's financial condition; establish policy guidelines affecting all institutional assets, including investments and the physical plant; and approve, review and monitor strategic and business plans.
+
+
+
+		Annually select the auditors of the College's financial operations and establish, when appropriate, policies regarding the conduct of the audit, including which College personnel and Trustees shall have responsibility regarding the same.
+
+
+
+		Contribute financially to the College's fund-raising goals, participate actively in strategies to secure sources of support, and authorize College Officers to accept gifts or bequests on behalf of the College subject to Board policy guidelines.
+
+
+
+		Authorize any debt financing and approve the securitization of loans.
+
+
+
+		Authorize the construction of new buildings, capitalization of deferred maintenance backlogs, and major renovations of existing buildings.
+
+
+
+		Authorize the purchase, sale, and management of land, buildings, or major equipment.
+
+
+
+		Adopt policies and oversight procedures for the management, preservation and growth of the College's endowment.
+
+	
+
+		Select the College's legal counsel and establish policies for monitoring the activities of counsel and approving of litigation and related decisions.
+
+
+
+		Monitor the College's ethical, regulatory, risk and other management and compliance issues.
+
+
+
+		Approve policies intended to support the environment for students to learn and develop their abilities.
+
+
+
+		Approve policies concerning academic freedom and responsibility, teaching, and faculty scholarship and public service.
+
+
+
+		Approve all earned degrees through the faculty and President, as they shall recommend.
+
+
+
+		Approve all honorary degrees.
+
+
+
+		Serve actively as advocates for the College in appropriate matters of public policy in consultation with the President and other responsible parties as the Board shall determine.
+
+
+
+		Periodically undertake assessments of the Board’s performance.
+
+
+
+		Implement, and when necessary, amend the Bylaws of the College.
+
+
+
+In exercising its authority with respect to the above matters and other appropriate and legitimate Board issues, the Board will endeavor to consult with the President before taking action but such consultation shall not be required for any Board action to be effective and binding.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article II - Founding Members of the College
+
+
+
+In recognition of the establishment of the College by the F. W. Olin Foundation, Inc. and its Directors, and also to fulfill certain requirements of the Endowment Grant Agreement with the Foundation, the College shall have a special class of Members (""Founding Members"") who shall have special rights and responsibilities regarding their election to the Board, the election of the Chair of the Board, and the approval of certain changes in these Bylaws and other matters as further provided in this Article.
+
+
+
+Section 1.  APPOINTMENT.  Founding Members shall consist of those Directors of the Foundation who have not resigned their position as Foundation Members under the Bylaws in effect immediately prior to the adoption of these Bylaws.  For purposes of identity, the Founding Members of the College as of the adoption of these Bylaws are Lawrence W. Milas and William B. Norden.  
+
+	
+
+	Section 2.  TENURE.  Each Founding Member shall remain a Founding Member of the College until he dies or resigns.
+
+	
+
+	Section 3.  POWERS AND RIGHTS.  Each Founding Member shall have the right to appoint himself to the College's Board (""Founding Trustee"", or more specifically, as the ""Milas Founding Trustee"" and the ""Norden Founding Trustee"", respectively, and collectively as ""Founding Trustees""), for a term equivalent to the term for Trustees elected under Article III.  As an alternative to appointing himself as a Trustee, each Founding Member may elect a person to the College's Board (""Alternate Founding Trustee"") upon the written consent of the other surviving Founding Member.  Any limitations in these Bylaws on the number of successive terms of Trustees shall not apply to Founding Trustees or Alternate Founding Trustees.  Upon the vacancy of a Founding Trustee or Alternate Founding Trustee position, the Founding Member for whom the Trusteeship is named may appoint himself as successor, or may elect another person to be an Alternate Founding Trustee upon the written consent of the other surviving Foundation Member.  Founding Trustees shall have the right to attend and vote as members-at-large at all meetings of all Board committees of which they are not otherwise a member under Article XII, except the Executive Committee, but Founding Trustees shall not be counted for purposes of determining a quorum for committee action at meetings which they attend as a member-at-large.  Except for the matters in this Article II and in Article III specifically relating to Founding Trustees and Alternate Founding Trustees, their rights as members of the Board shall be no greater than the rights of Trustees elected under Article III. The  Founding Members or Founding Member, acting by a majority of their number then in office, shall also have the following powers: (1) to approve, in advance, any proposed amendment to these Bylaws that would in any way alter or affect this Article II and Article III, or the rights and privileges of the Founding Members, Founding Trustees and Alternate Founding Trustees, as otherwise provided in these Bylaws; (2) to approve, in advance, any proposed amendment to the College's Articles of Organization, (3) to approve, in advance, any proposed merger or consolidation of the College, and (4) to approve, in advance, any proposed sale of all or substantially all of the assets of the College (except endowment and other investment assets at fair market value).  All powers and rights of the Founding Members shall expire on the resignation or death of the last surviving Founding Member and such powers and rights shall thereupon devolve upon the Board as a whole.  
+
+	
+
+		Section 4.  RESIGNATION.  A Founding Member may resign by giving written notice to the other Founding Member (if there shall be one) and to the Chair and Clerk of the Board.  Such resignation shall be effective upon receipt (unless specified to be effective at some other time).
+
+		
+
+	Section 5.  ANNUAL MEETINGS.  The annual meeting of the Founding Members shall be held on such date and at such place and time as the Founding Members may determine.  Each annual meeting shall be held for such purposes as may properly be brought before the meeting under law, the Articles of Organization, or these Bylaws.  If an annual meeting is not held as herein provided, a special meeting of the Founding Members may be held instead with the same force and effect as the annual meeting, and in such case all references in these Bylaws to the annual meeting of the Founding Members, except in this Section 5, shall be deemed to refer to such special meeting.
+
+	
+
+		Section 6.  REGULAR MEETINGS.  Regular meetings of the Founding Members may be held at such places within the United States and at such times as the Founding Members may determine.
+
+		
+
+		Section 7.  SPECIAL MEETINGS.  Special meetings of the Founding Members may be held at any time and at any place within the United States.  Special meetings of the Founding Members may be called by the Chair of the Board or upon the written or electronic application of any Founding Member, by the Clerk, or in the case of death, absence, and incapacity, of the Clerk, by any other Officer of the Board.
+
+		
+
+		Section 8.  NOTICE OF MEETINGS.  Except as otherwise provided by law, a written or electronic notice of every meeting of Founding Members, stating the place, date, and hour thereof, shall be given by the Clerk, by an Assistant Clerk, or by the person calling the meeting, at least seven days before the meeting, to each Founding Member.  Such notice shall state the place, date and hour of the meeting, but need not specify the purposes of the meeting except if the meeting is a special meeting, or if an amendment to the College's Articles of Organization or these By-laws shall be a purpose of the meeting, then the same shall be so stated in the notice.  Attendance at any meeting shall be deemed a waiver of any required notice of such meeting.
+
+		
+
+		Section 9.  QUORUM.  Except as otherwise provided by law, by the Articles of Organization, or by these Bylaws, at any meeting of the Founding Members one-half of the number of Founding Members then in office (whether present in person or duly represented by proxy) shall constitute a quorum.  A quorum shall not be required to adjourn any meeting to such date or dates not more than thirty days after the first session of the meeting, and at any adjourned meeting any business may be transacted which might have been transacted at the meeting as originally called, provided a quorum shall be in attendance at such adjourned meeting.
+
+		
+
+		Section 10.  ACTION BY VOTE.  Each Founding Member shall have one vote.  When a quorum is present at any meeting, a majority of the votes properly cast by Founding Members present in person or duly represented by proxy shall decide any question, unless otherwise provided by law, the Articles of Organization, or these Bylaws.  No ballot shall be required for such election or other matter unless requested by a Founding Member present or duly represented by proxy at the meeting and entitled to vote with respect to such matter.
+
+		
+
+			Section 11.  ACTION WITHOUT MEETING.  Any action required or permitted to be taken at any meeting of the Founding Members present may be taken without a meeting if all Founding Members entitled to vote on the matter consent to the action in writing and the written consents are filed with the record of the meetings of the Founding Members.  Such consents shall be treated for all purposes as a vote at a meeting.
+
+		
+
+		Section 12.  PROXIES.  Founding Members may vote either in person or by written proxy dated not more than six months before the meeting named therein, which proxies, before being voted, shall be filed with the Clerk or other person responsible for recording the proceedings of the meeting.  Unless otherwise specifically limited by their terms, such proxies shall entitle the holder thereof to vote at any adjournment of the meeting but the proxy shall terminate after the final adjournment of such meeting.  A proxy purporting to have been executed by or on behalf of a Founding Member shall be deemed valid unless challenged at or prior to its exercise.
+
+		
+
+		Section 13.  TELEPHONIC PARTICIPATION IN MEETINGS.  Founding Members may participate in a meeting of the Founding Members by means of a conference telephone call or similar communications equipment by means of which all persons participating in the meeting can hear each other at the same time.  Participating by such means shall constitute presence in person at a meeting.
+
+		
+
+		Section 14.  SOLE SURVIVING FOUNDING MEMBER.  At such time as there shall be a sole surviving Founding Member, meetings of Founding Members shall not be required and any actions requiring a majority vote of Founding Members shall only require the vote or approval of the sole surviving Founding Member.  The Clerk will give the sole surviving Founding Member at least thirty days written or electronic notice of actions that such Founding Member may take with respect to the powers provided to Founding Members by these Bylaws.  In the case of a sole surviving Founding Member who shall wish to nominate another person to serve as an Alternate Founding Trustee in his place, such nomination, in writing and sent to the Chair and Clerk, shall be equivalent to such person being elected to the Board.
+
+		
+
+		Section 15.  FOUNDING MEMBER DEATH OR INFIRMITY.  Recognizing that the effectiveness of Founding Members over a lifetime term may be affected by the uncertainties of life, all rights of Founding Members shall cease during such periods as they shall be mentally infirm, provided such is confirmed in writing by such Founding Member's spouse, adult child, physician or a court of law or other competent authority.  Any Alternate Founding Trustee, who was nominated by a Founding Member whose rights have ceased under this section or has died, shall nevertheless continue to serve for the balance of the term for which he or she was elected.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article III - Membership of the Board 
+
+
+
+Section 1.  NUMBER.  The Board shall consist of no fewer than 5 and no more than 25 Trustees, including the Trustees elected by the Founding Members and the President, ex-officio.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  APPOINTMENT.  New Trustees and incumbent members of the Board who are eligible for reelection, except Trustees elected by the Founding Members, normally shall be elected at the Board’s annual meeting by a majority of the Trustees then in office.  However, any unfulfilled term or other vacancies of Trustees elected under this Article may be filled through a special election at any meeting of the Board.  In addition, new Trustees may be elected through a special election at any other meeting of the Board or under the provisions of Article XI, Section 4 – Action Without Meeting, to serve until the next annual meeting when they may be reelected.  Any such partial term shall not count towards the term limits in Article III, Section 3.
+
+
+
+Section 3.  TENURE.  Trustees who are not elected as Young Alumni Trustees under the provisions of Article III, Section 4 shall serve for three-year terms and may be reelected for a total of three consecutive terms. Trustees elected under this Article who have served for three consecutive terms (exclusive of any partial term) shall not be eligible for reelection until one-year later.  Trustees who have served as a Board Officer shall be eligible to serve one additional year  upon reelection by the Board.  Alternate Founding Trustees nominated by a Founding Trustee who subsequently resigns or dies shall complete the term for which elected but then shall have no further rights as an Alternate Founding Trustee unless elected an Alternate Founding Trustee by the other Founding Trustee.
+
+
+
+Section 4.  YOUNG ALUMNI TRUSTEES.  Any alumna/alumnus whose term of Board service would begin not less than four (4) years and not more than nine (9) years following the receipt of their undergraduate degree from Olin College is eligible for election as a “Young Alumni Trustee”.  Young Alumni Trustees will be elected under the provisions of Article III, Section 2 and will serve for a single term of four (4) years.  Young Alumni Trustees will otherwise enjoy the same rights and privileges of all other Trustees, excluding those accorded strictly to Founding Trustees.  The Board may elect up to three (3) alumni of the College to serve concurrently as members of the Board under the “Young Alumni Trustee” classification while respecting the limitation on the total number of Trustees established in Article III, Section 1.  Nothing in this Section shall be deemed to prohibit the election of any alumna/alumnus of the College to the Board outside this special class of Trustees.
+
+  
+
+Section 5.  REMOVAL.  All Trustees except Founding Trustees serve at the pleasure of the Board.  A Trustee other than a Founding Trustee may be removed from office by an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the Trustees.
+
+
+
+Section 6.  NOTICE OF ELECTION.  The Governance Committee shall recommend candidates for election or reelection to the Board through procedures adopted by the Board.  The recommended candidates, with biographical information for each prospective Trustee candidate, shall be provided by written or electronic notice to all Trustees no later than seven days before the annual or regular meeting of the Board at which an election is scheduled.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article IV - Board of Overseers, Trustee Emeritus and President’s Council
+
+
+
+	Section 1.  BOARD OF OVERSEERS.  At such time as the Board deems it appropriate, it shall organize a Board of Overseers to serve as an advisory council to the President and the Trustees.  Overseers shall be elected to four-year terms and be drawn from distinguished alumni, parents and other friends of the College to provide advice and support necessary to insure the quality of the College's programs.  The Board may establish Overseer Visiting Committees to support the activities of the Board of Overseers.  In addition, Overseers may be invited to meet annually with the Trustees to receive the President's report on the general state of the College and join with the Trustees at that meeting to offer comments, suggestions and opinions regarding all College matters.  All Overseers shall be entitled to the same on-campus courtesies and privileges normally extended to Trustees and they will be given a special place of honor at Commencement and at other College convocations.  
+
+	
+
+Section 2.  TRUSTEE EMERITUS.  The Board may convey the title “Trustee Emeritus” upon a former Trustee who has completed at least one term of active service on the Board.  There shall be no limit to the number of Trustees Emeriti.  A Trustee Emeritus (i) shall be entitled to the same on-campus courtesies and privileges normally extended to Trustees, (ii) shall be given a special place of honor at Commencement and at other College convocations and (iii) shall be given notice of all meetings of the Board and may be invited to attend and participate in designated Board meetings and other important events and activities at the College.  A Trustee Emeritus may be invited to sit as a non-voting member of any committee.  A Trustee Emeritus shall not (i) count in computing a quorum, (ii) have any governance responsibilities or (iii) have the right to vote.  Trustees Emeriti serve at the pleasure of the Board and may be removed from office by an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the Trustees.
+
+	
+
+Section 3.  PRESIDENT’S COUNCIL. The President may organize a President’s Council to provide advice and counsel to the President on issues of importance to the College.  The Council shall serve at the pleasure of the President and is advisory in nature.  The number of members, terms, Council leadership, and frequency of meetings shall be determined by the President.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article V - Officers of the College
+
+	
+
+Section 1.  OFFICERS DEFINED.  The Officers of the College shall be the Chair, Vice Chair, Clerk, Treasurer, President and others who may serve in the role of Provost, Vice President, Dean or in other named positions at a comparable level.  The Chair, Vice Chair, Clerk and Treasurer shall serve at the pleasure of the Board.  The Provost (if there be a Provost), Vice Presidents, Deans and those in other named positions at a comparable level shall serve at the pleasure of the President in consultation with the Board.  The Board may also appoint one or more Assistant Clerks and Assistant Treasurers who shall have such responsibilities as the Board may assign.  
+
+Section 2.  CERTAIN OFFICERS TO BE TRUSTEES.  The Chair, Vice Chair and Clerk (the ""Board Officers"") shall be elected from among the members of the Board.  The Treasurer may, but need not, be a Trustee.  The President shall be an ex-officio member of the Board with the power to vote, and his or her presence at meetings shall be counted as part of quorum determinations.  The other College Officers shall not be members of the Board.  
+
+
+
+Section 3.  TERMS OF OFFICERS.  The terms of office for Officers of the College will vary as provided elsewhere in these Bylaws.  The Board may approve the appointments of other College Officers upon the recommendation of the President.
+
+
+
+Section 4.  ELECTION OF OFFICERS.  The Board shall elect the Chair, Vice Chair, Clerk and Treasurer after giving due consideration to the recommendations and nominations of the Governance Committee, but the Board may act otherwise.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article VI - Terms and Responsibilities of the Chair and Vice Chair of the Board
+
+
+
+Section 1.  THE TERM OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR.  The Chair  and Vice Chair shall be elected annually and ordinarily shall serve for at least three consecutive years but not more than five years. Vacancies may be filled at any time by a majority vote of the members of the Board, but election or reelection shall normally take place at the annual meeting.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CHAIR.  The Chair shall preside at all Board and Executive Committee meetings, have the right to vote on all questions, appoint committee chairs and vice chairs, determine the composition of all Board committees (with the exception of the Executive Committee), and otherwise serve as spokesperson for the Board.  He or she shall serve as Chair of the Executive Committee and as an ex-officio member, with the right to vote, of all other standing or ad hoc committees of the Board, and have other duties as the Board may prescribe from time to time.
+
+
+
+Section 3.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE VICE CHAIR.  In the absence of the Chair, the Vice Chair shall perform the duties of the office of the Chair, including presiding at Board and Executive Committee meetings.  He or she shall have other powers and duties as the Board may from time to time prescribe and may or may not be nominated to succeed the Chair when a vacancy occurs.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article VII - Term and Responsibilities of the Clerk
+
+
+
+Section 1.  TERM OF THE CLERK.  The Clerk shall be elected annually and shall ordinarily serve for at least three consecutive years but not more than five years.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CLERK.  The Clerk shall ensure that the Board is acting in accordance with these Bylaws, that bylaw amendments are promptly made as necessary, that minutes of Board meetings are accurate and promptly distributed to all Trustees, that meetings are properly scheduled and Trustees notified, and that Board policy statements and other official records are properly maintained.  The Clerk shall perform other duties as prescribed from time to time by the Board and may be assisted in all duties by a staff member designated by the President.  In the event of the absence of the Clerk from a Board meeting or the Clerk’s temporary inability to fulfill the Clerk’s responsibilities, the Chair may appoint another Trustee to serve as Acting Clerk, for such period of time as may be appropriate.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article VIII - Term and Responsibilities of the Treasurer
+
+
+
+Section 1. TERM OF THE TREASURER.  The Treasurer serves at the pleasure of the Board for such term, compensation, and with such other terms of employment, as it shall determine.  
+
+
+
+Section 2.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE TREASURER.  The Treasurer shall ensure that all Trustees regularly receive appropriate and comprehensible financial statements from the College's administration that include comparisons of revenues and expenditures with the approved annual budget and the preceding fiscal year for the same time periods.  The Treasurer shall ensure that other financial reports—including those for special or major Board-approved expenditures, College investments, and annual or special audits—are provided to all Trustees in a timely manner for review and discussion as appropriate.  He or she shall consult with the College's financial officers, Board-approved auditor, and the investment, finance and audit committees of the Board as appropriate or necessary.  
+
+
+
+
+
+Article IX - Term, Authority, and Responsibilities of the President of the College
+
+
+
+Section 1.  PRESIDENT'S TERM.  The President serves at the pleasure of the Board for such term, compensation, and with such other terms of employment, as it shall determine.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PRESIDENT.  The President shall be the College's chief executive officer and the chief adviser to and executive agent of the Board.  His or her authority is vested through the Board and includes responsibilities for all College educational and managerial affairs.  The President is responsible for leading the College, implementing all Board policies, keeping the Board informed on appropriate matters, consulting with the Board in a timely manner on matters appropriate to its policy-making and fiduciary functions, and serving as the College's key spokesperson.  He or she has the authority to execute all documents on behalf of the College and the Board and to delegate such authority to other responsible College employees, consistent with Board policies and the best interests of the College.  The President serves as an ex-officio voting member of all standing Board committees except the audit committee.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article X - Terms, Authority, and Responsibilities of the Other Officers
+
+
+
+Those individuals with the title Provost, Vice President, Dean or other named positions at a comparable level shall serve for such terms and have such authority and responsibilities as the President shall determine, and as approved by the Board.  In the absence or disability of the President, the Provost or Vice President serving as the chief academic officer or, if absent or disabled, another individual selected by the Board, shall perform the duties of the President for such period of time and subject to such directions as the Board may prescribe. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Article XI - Meetings
+
+
+
+Section 1.  REGULAR MEETINGS.  The Board shall have a minimum of three  regular meetings annually on such dates and at such places as it shall determine.  The annual meeting for the purpose of electing Trustees, Board Officers, and at-large members of the Executive Committee shall be the first Board meeting scheduled after September 1 of each year.  The Clerk of the Board shall send written or electronic notice of such meetings to all Trustees at least seven days in advance.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  SPECIAL MEETINGS.  Special meetings may be held at the call of the Board Chair, the President, or any five Trustees.  The Chair or Clerk of the Board shall send written or electronic notice of such special meetings to all Trustees, along with a clear statement of the meeting's purpose, at least seven days in advance.  Business at such special meetings shall be confined to the stated purpose.
+
+
+
+Section 3.  QUORUM.  A quorum for the transaction of business at meetings of the Board or its Executive Committee shall consist of a majority of their respective regular voting member Trustees.  Except as otherwise provided in these Bylaws or the Articles of Organization, a majority vote of those members present with a proper quorum shall constitute proper action.
+
+
+
+Section 4.  ACTION WITHOUT MEETING.  Any action required or permitted to be taken by the Board or by any of its committees may be taken without a meeting if all persons entitled to vote on the matter consent to the action in writing or by electronic mail and the written consents are filed with the record of the meetings.
+
+
+
+Section 5.  TELEPHONIC PARTICIPATION IN MEETINGS.  Trustees may participate in a meeting of the Board or any of its committees by means of a conference telephone call or similar communications equipment by means of which all persons participating in the meeting can hear each other at the same time.  Participating by such means shall constitute presence in person at a meeting.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article XII - Committees
+
+
+
+Section 1.  ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMITTEES.  In addition to the Executive and Governance Committees that are established by these Bylaws, the Board shall establish standing committees to assist the Board with the following matters: the audit of the College’s financial affairs; the College’s budget and finances; compensation; investments; facilities; academic affairs; student affairs; and development and fundraising.  The Board shall establish such other standing and ad-hoc committees as it deems appropriate to the discharge of its responsibilities.  Committees may be given responsibility for more than one matter or subject.  Each shall have a written statement of purpose and primary responsibilities as approved by the Board, and such rules of procedure or policy guidelines as it or the Board, as appropriate, approves.  Each committee shall review such statements for their appropriateness and adequacy annually.  Committees may include friends of the College and such persons shall have the right to vote.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS.  The Chair of the Board shall have the responsibility to appoint the Chairs, Vice Chairs, and members of all Board committees except the Executive Committee.  All committee chairs and vice chairs shall be Trustees and, unless the Board shall direct otherwise, a majority of each committee’s members shall be Trustees.
+
+
+
+Section 3.  COMMITTEE SUPPORT AND MEETINGS.  Each committee shall have an Officer of the College or member of the administrative staff, as designated by the President, to assist it with its work.  Each committee shall meet with such frequency as shall enable it to fulfill its responsibilities to report its work and make recommendations to the Board so that the Board can consider and make timely decisions regarding the Committee's work.  All Committees excluding the Executive Committee shall be required to keep minutes of all meetings and distribute them to all Trustees on a regular basis.
+
+
+
+	Section 4.  TRUSTEE ATTENDANCE AT COMMITTEE MEETINGS.  In addition to the members of Committees appointed by the Chair, Founding Trustees shall have the right to attend and vote as members-at-large at all meetings (including Executive Sessions) of all Committees, except the Executive Committee.  All other Trustees shall have the right to attend all meetings of all Committees, except the Executive Committee, but they may be excluded from the executive session of a Committee and they shall not be entitled to vote.  Only members of a Committee appointed by the Chair shall be counted for purposes of determining a quorum for Committee action.  
+
+
+
+
+
+Article XIII - Composition, Purposes, and Responsibilities of the Executive Committee
+
+
+
+Section 1.  EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS.  The Executive Committee shall consist of the Chair, Vice Chair and President.  If there is no Vice Chair the Clerk shall serve on the Executive Committee instead.  In addition, for every three Trustees on the Board above nine (disregarding fractions) the Board shall elect an additional member from the Board.  At any time when the Executive Committee shall consist of only the Chair and Vice Chair (or the Clerk) and the President, and the Chair and Vice Chair (or the Clerk) are both Founding Members, the Board shall elect an additional member to the Executive Committee.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES.  The purpose of the Executive Committee is twofold: (1) It shall serve as the Board’s agent in helping the President address business between regular Board meetings, and (2) it shall assist the Chair and the President with their joint responsibility to help the Board function effectively and efficiently by suggesting Board meeting agenda items.  The Committee shall have authority to act for the Board on all matters except for the following, which shall be reserved for the Board (except to the extent otherwise reserved for the Founding Members): Presidential selection, termination and compensation; Trustee and Board-Officer election; changes in institutional mission and purposes; changes to the charter or Articles of Incorporation; incurring of corporate indebtedness; purchase or sale of property, buildings, or major equipment; adoption of the annual budget; and conferral of degrees.  These Bylaws or other Board policies may reserve other powers for the Board.  In addition to its authority to take action on emergency matters that cannot or should not be deferred to the Board’s next scheduled meeting, the Executive Committee shall oversee the work of Board committees and the College's planning process and progress on planning goals.
+
+
+
+Solely for the purpose of assisting the Board in fulfilling its responsibility to assess the President's performance and fix the President’s compensation, the Executive Committee (excluding the President) shall prepare and provide the Board with an annual evaluation of the President’s performance and recommendations regarding the President’s compensation.  All decisions and actions regarding the same shall be the Board’s exclusive responsibility unless specifically delegated to the Executive Committee.
+
+
+
+Section 3.  EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETINGS.  The Executive Committee shall meet as often as is necessary to conduct its business as the Chair and President determine.  Actions taken by the Executive Committee shall be recorded and distributed to all Trustees for subsequent ratification by the Board at its next regular meeting.  A majority of Executive Committee members shall constitute a quorum.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Article XIV - Composition, Purposes, and Responsibilities of the Governance Committee
+
+
+
+Section 1.  COMPOSITION OF THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE.  The Governance Committee shall have at least three members and not more than seven, all of whom shall be voting Trustees.  The Committee’s Chair, Vice Chair, and members shall be appointed for renewable one-year terms by the Chair of the Board.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES.  The purpose of the Governance Committee is fourfold: (1) It shall ensure that the Board’s membership and leadership consist of highly qualified and committed individuals; (2) it shall ensure that regular programs of new Trustee and in-service education are maintained; (3) it shall periodically recommend initiatives by which the Board shall assess its performance; and (4) it shall periodically assess the quality and effectiveness of committee work.  The Governance Committee serves as the Board’s agent in reviewing the performance of incumbent Trustees and Board Officers who are eligible for reelection, maintains a list of qualified candidates for possible nomination, considers cultivation strategies for promising Trustee candidates, makes nominations of candidates for election to the Board and as Board Officers, including succession planning, and proposes and periodically reviews the adequacy of a statement of Trustee responsibilities as adopted by the Board.  It shall establish its own rules of procedure as deemed necessary in consultation with the Board Chair, President, and the Board.
+
+
+
+Section 3.  GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE MEETINGS.  The Committee shall meet as often as is necessary to conduct its business.  It shall seek the assistance of all Trustees in the course of meeting its responsibilities in accordance with these Bylaws and its own rules of procedure, as adopted by the Board.  A majority of the Committee’s members shall constitute a quorum.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article XV - Indemnification
+
+
+
+	The College shall to the extent legally permissible indemnify each of its present and former Trustees, Officers, employees and agents and any person who serves or has served, at the College’s request, as director, officer, employee or agent of another organization or in a capacity with respect to any employee benefit plan and the heirs, executors and administrators of the foregoing (each of such persons is hereinafter referred to as the “Agent”) against all expenses and liabilities which the Agent has reasonably incurred in connection with or arising out of any action or threatened action, suit or proceeding in which the Agent may be involved by reason of being or having been an Agent, such expenses and liabilities to include, but not be limited to, judgments, court costs and attorney’s fees and the cost of reasonable settlements, provided no such indemnification shall be made in relation to matters as to which such Agent shall be finally adjudged in any such action, suit or proceeding not to have acted in good faith in the reasonable belief that his or her action was in the best interests of the College, or, in the case of a person who serves or has served in a capacity with respect to an employee benefit plan, in the best interests of the participants or beneficiaries of such plan.  The College may reimburse an Agent for expenses incurred in defending a civil or criminal action or proceeding, upon receipt of an undertaking by the Agent to repay such reimbursement if the Agent shall be adjudicated to be not entitled to indemnification hereunder, which undertaking may be accepted regardless of the financial ability of the Agent to make repayment.  In the event that a settlement or compromise of such action, suit or proceeding is effected, indemnification may be had but only if the Board shall have been furnished with an opinion of counsel for the College to the effect that such settlement or compromise is in the best interests of the College and that such Agent appears to have acted in good faith in the reasonable belief that his or her action was in the best interests of the College or employee benefit plan, as the case may be, and if the Board (not including the vote of any person seeking indemnification hereunder) shall have adopted a resolution approving such settlement or compromise.
+
+	
+
+			The foregoing right of indemnification shall not be exclusive of other rights to which any Trustee, officer, or employee may be entitled as a matter of law.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article XVI - Conflict of Interest
+
+
+
+Section 1.  DEFINITION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST.  A Trustee or College Officer shall be considered to have a conflict of interest if he or she (1) has an existing or potential business relationship, financial or other material interest, or co-investment interest that impairs or appears to impair his or her independent, unbiased judgment in the discharge of his or her responsibilities to the College; or (2) is aware that a member of his or her family, or any organization in which such person is an officer, director, employee, member, partner, trustee or substantial stockholder, has a business relationship, financial or other material interest, or co-investment interest that would impair or appear to impair the Trustee or Officer's independent judgment in the discharge of his or her responsibilities to the College.  For the purposes of this provision, a family member is defined as spouse (other than a spouse who is legally divorced from the Trustee or Officer or who is residing apart under a decree of separate maintenance), domestic partner (or equivalent), children including adopted children) and their spouses, brothers or sisters (by whole or half-blood or by adoption) and their spouses, parents and step-parents, grandparents, or other members of the household of such persons, and other persons for whom the Trustee or Officer has direct financial oversight powers, duties, or responsibilities.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  CONFLICTS DISCLOSURE.  All Trustees and College Officers shall disclose to the Board any possible conflict of interest at the earliest practical time.  Further, a conflicted Trustee shall absent himself or herself from discussions of, and abstain from voting on, such matters under consideration by the Board or its committees.  The minutes of such meeting shall reflect that a disclosure was made and that the Trustee with a conflict or possible conflict abstained from voting.  Any Trustee who is uncertain as to whether a conflict of interest may exist in any matter may request that the Board or committee resolve the question in his or her absence by majority vote.  Each Trustee shall complete and sign a disclosure form provided annually by the Clerk of the Board.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Article XVII - General
+
+
+
+Section 1.  CORPORATE SEAL.  The corporate seal, if any, shall be in a form determined from time to time by the Board.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  FISCAL YEAR.  The fiscal year of the College shall begin on the first day of July and end on the last day of June, unless otherwise determined by the Board.
+
+
+
+
+
+Article  XVIII - Review and Amendment of Bylaws
+
+
+
+Section 1.  REQUIREMENTS FOR AMENDMENT.  These Bylaws may be changed or amended at any meeting of the Trustees by a two-thirds vote of those present, provided notice of the substance of the proposed amendment is sent to all Trustees at least 30 days before the meeting and further provided that the Founding Members have approved such changes or amendments in accordance with Section 3 of Article II.
+
+
+
+Section 2.  PERIODIC REVIEW.  These Bylaws shall be reviewed no less frequently than every five years after the date they are adopted or after the latest amendment.  The review shall be conducted by a committee appointed by the Chair of the Governance Committee and approved by the Chair of the Board.  After its review the Committee shall render a report to the Board including any recommended changes.
+
+
+
+2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Open Issues for Touba.txt [/INST] Open Issues for Touba
+
+
+
+June 27, 29 and 30th Meetings
+
+General Questions:
+
+Some program coordinators do not receive course releases like Department Chairs.   Why is there disparity?  Should they receive a release(s)?
+
+Article I
+
+Will the University ever promote someone granted prior service credit to Associate Professor prior to tenure review?  This came up in the context of discussing the charge of the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotion.
+
+Article II
+
+During the 6.30 meeting, the Working Group had several questions regarding the role of POP in various department/program governance matters.  For example, will they be involved in tenure cases as part of the department/program review?  Offer letters of support? etc
+
+Will college-wide committee evaluators have the expertise to evaluate Professors of the Practice in programs such as nursing?
+
+During the 6.30 meeting, the Working Group noted that there are situations where Visiting Faculty may be appointed for up to three years.  The group agreed that Touba should be consulted in this regard.
+
+
+
+7.15 Meeting
+
+Section 2 – Faculty Contracts
+
+The Team recommends that faculty contracts going forward include a clause referencing the Faculty Bylaws and Faculty Handbook.
+
+Section 2.1.2: Tenure-Track Contracts
+
+Is the following clause accurate (or will the College enact going forward)?
+
+
+
+“A tenure-track faculty member’s time to the tenure decision will be stated in the initial letter of appointment”
+
+Section 2.1.2: Tenured Contracts
+
+Will the College issue tenured contracts to tenured faculty on an annual basis?
+
+Section 2.2 Duration and Notice of Termination
+
+2.2.1 – Duration of Appointments
+
+Does the College issue tenure-line faculty an initial appointment for one year?  If not, then number 1 needs to be edited.
+
+2.2.2 – Notice of Termination
+
+Provost’s Office should confirm that the notification dates will be applicable to Professors of the Practice.  The working group expressed concern that contracts for non-tenure track faculty are often not available/renewed until late June, which is contrary to the dates in the current policy. Also, Fall course registration doesn’t occur until after March 1.
+
+2.5: Joint Appointments
+
+If this policy is adopted, then MOU’s documenting joint appointments already in place should be put in place.  See Josh’s June 30th comment in Section 2.5 of the document.
+
+Section 3 – Recruitment and Initial Appointment
+
+3.1: Recruitment and Initial Appointment of Full-Time Teaching Faculty
+
+Need to confirm that the procedures in Section 3.1 will apply to Professors of the Practice.
+
+Need to confirm the College has a record retention in place given reference added to the policy in the 2nd draft of the document.
+
+Does the board still approval all initial appointments to Associate and Full Professor?
+
+Miscellaneous Issues
+
+Should a Faculty-in-Residence appointment category be developed.  Some on group indicated that an artist-in-residence title has been used in the past.
+
+
+
+7.18 Meeting
+
+1.1.1 – Teaching Load
+
+The group grappled with teaching load numbers and whether a contact hour system should be developed.  They agreed to review some of the example course equivalencies examples I linked to in my comment notes.
+
+1.1.10 - Student Course Feedback
+
+Will the model text regarding the impact of student course feedback forms also apply to Professors of the Practice?  I assume so, but the group wanted to confirm this with you.
+
+7.19 Meeting
+
+2.1.2 – Academic Unit Evaluation Criteria
+
+A final resolution on whether this subsection should remain was not reached. There was discussion regarding whether the divisions, as opposed to the departments/programs, should develop the criteria. There was also conversation regarding whether the programs/divisions have the bandwidth to develop such criteria. We also discussed making this optional at the discretion of the departments. Rachael counseled, however, that there should be a uniform approach. Per my notes, the group agreed with Rachael that if this text is to remain in some form, it should not be optional.
+
+
+
+2.2 – Evaluation of Tenure-Track Faculty for Reappointment 
+
+Josh raises the point of how to handle the review of faculty who have joint appointments.  Typically, this is addressed via an MOU.  However, he informs me that not all such faculty have such an agreement in place.  I have cited text from Bates on how they address the issue (i.e., review by both departments).  Not sure this is something you think is workable or not.
+
+2.3.1 – Annual Evaluation of Professors of the Practice
+
+The text here, which is based on the Full-time Faculty Contract Proposal, has the chair/coordinator conducting the annual evaluations of professors of the practice.  Josh asked if there is risk having a non-tenured chair or coordinator conducting the review.  I do not believe there is risk here.  However, Rachael can certainly weigh in on this.  If she believes there is risk, then I can add a clause stating that if the chair/coordinator is not tenured, the Provost will appoint a tenured faculty member to conduct the evaluation.
+
+2.4 – Evaluation of Tenured Faculty
+
+There was extensive discussion on this section.  In the end, the consensus was that tenured faculty should have to submit a truncated annual faculty report at a minimum.  The general consensus was also that the chair/coordinator should not be charged with reviewing the annual forms and that the Provost's office does not have the bandwidth to conduct such reviews.  As such, we discussed possible alternative approaches, including a comprehensive periodic peer committee review perhaps every five to six years or a more a merit based evaluation every three years.  Ultimately, final consensus was not reached and the group decided to table the matter for further discussion.  The group also would like your perspective as well.
+
+7.20 Meeting
+
+3.1.1 – Promotion to Associate Professor
+
+As noted in Article I, there is a discrepancy as to whether a faculty member may be promoted to Associate Professor outside of tenure and, if so, is the recommendation made by the Provost or the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions? 
+
+3.2.1 – Standards for Promotion to Sr. Professor of the Practice
+
+The group requests clarity regarding the time in rank requirement before a candidate is eligible to seek promotion to the Sr. rank.  
+
+3.2.2 – Review Procedures for Promotion to Sr. Professor of the Practice
+
+The group raised several questions regarding whether the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions is the appropriate peer committee to conduct the evaluation. There is concern that neither PoP nor associate professors are members of the committee. Also, a few noted that with respect to nursing and perhaps other disciplines, the members of the current committee will not have the requisite disciplinary knowledge to undertake such a review. The general consensus was that perhaps a new committee should be put in place.
+
+Questions were also raised whether the same procedural process should be followed.  Will there by an advocate?  Additional clarity from the team that constructed the Full-Time Faculty line proposal is needed.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] OUTSIDE ACTIVITIES.txt [/INST] Outside Activities
+
+The University encourages the involvement of its full-time faculty in professional activities directly related to the faculty member’s area of expertise that contribute significantly to the reputation of the institution and to the professional and scholarly or artistic stature of the faculty member, provided these activities do not interfere with the faculty member’s contractual responsibilities to St. Mary’s University and do not otherwise create a conflict of interest. When these standards are met, activities such as serving with professional associations, editing, reviewing, writing, consulting, performing, teaching, and public service activities, whether paid or unpaid, are considered a desirable part of the faculty member's total professional activity. 
+
+Faculty members, however, must report to the Provost any outside professional or other activities occurring during the academic year that involve a substantial and continuing commitment of time and effort. No prior approval, however, is required for occasional and brief commitments such as occasional speaking engagements or participation in evaluation visits to other institutions or for activities that occur between the end of one academic year and the beginning of the next. 
+
+A faculty member’s written report of such activities must be submitted to the Provost in advance of the semester in which the work is to take place. The report should explain how the faculty member’s expectations for University service will be met, and where appropriate, how the outside activity will contribute to the faculty member’s professional growth. 
+
+The Provost will provide a written response within 15 days of receiving the faculty member’s report.  Approval for up to the equivalent of one day per work week during the academic year will normally be provided if the activity does not reflect discredit on the University, is not in competition with offerings or activities of the University, and does not interfere with the faculty member's contractual responsibilities to Ohio Wesleyan. 
+
+If the Provost does not approve the faculty member’s participation in the outside professional or other activity, the reasons will be provided in writing to the faculty member, who may, in turn, appeal the decision to the Faculty Executive Committee through the grievance procedure outlined in Section 3.13.3.  Pending the grievance, however, the proposed activity should not be undertaken until the matter is resolved.  
+
+If the Provost approves the outside professional or other activity and later, after experience, determines that continuation of such activity is adversely impacting the faculty member’s responsibilities to the University, the Provost may require that the activity be discontinued, giving the faculty member reasonable written notice. The Provost’s decision is also appealable to the Faculty Executive Committee of the Faculty (see Section 3.13.3) and, if a formal grievance is filed, the faculty member may continue the activity pending the final determination under the grievance procedures.</s>"
+<s>[INST] OWU Faculty Handbook (7th Draft) (Clean).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] OWU Faculty Handbook (7th Draft) (Tracked).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] OWU Faculty Handbook Update (New TOC Draft)(July).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] OWU Faculty Handbook Update (Pre-Draft)).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] OWU Faculty Handbook Update (Working Draft)(July).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] OWU Faculty Handbook Update (Working Draft).txt [/INST] FACULTY HANDBOOK
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+OHIO WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY
+
+
+
+First Draft
+
+
+
+															
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Table of Contents
+
+Introduction	3
+
+CHAPTER I: CODE OF REGULATIONS OF THE TRUSTEES OF THE OHIO WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY	4
+
+	Section 1.	4
+
+	Article	4
+
+	[Section 1.2]	4
+
+	[Section 1.3]	4
+
+[Chapter 2]	5
+
+	[Section 2.1]	5
+
+	[Section 2.2]	5
+
+	[Section 2.3]	5
+
+	CHAPTER III.	GENERAL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING FACULTY CONTRACTS AT OHIO WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY	6
+
+		3.1	Preamble and General Policy	6
+
+		3.2	Kinds of Positions	6
+
+		3.3	Kinds of Appointments	7
+
+[Chapter 4]	9
+
+	[Section 4.1]	9
+
+	[Section 4.2]	9
+
+	[Section 4.3]	9
+
+[Chapter 5]	10
+
+	[Section 5.1]	10
+
+	[Section 5.2]	10
+
+	[Section 5.3]	10
+
+[Chapter 6]	11
+
+	[Section 6.1]	11
+
+	[Section 6.2]	11
+
+	[Section 6.3]	11
+
+[Conclusion]	12
+
+Appendix A	13
+
+Appendix B	14
+
+Appendix C	15
+
+Bibliography	16
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Introduction
+
+The aim of the Faculty Personnel Handbook is to provide faculty members with a clear, accurate, and comprehensive overview of their contractual relationship to the College so that important personnel practices and related matters are as transparent as possible. The handbook describes faculty rights and responsibilities. In particular it describes the processes and criteria of evaluation for hiring, renewal, and tenure (where appropriate), as well as the conditions under which a faculty contract may be terminated or faculty positions may be eliminated. 
+
+The Richard Bland College Faculty Handbook provides many of the policies, information concerning the policies, and related administrative matters associated with the role of a faculty member.   (The College Policy Manual provides policies that apply to all College employees, including faculty, and other campus-wide policies may be found on the College website, rbc.edu.) Any questions concerning the administrative policies of the College may be directed to the Chief Academic Officer or the President. Concerns and questions related to course content and instructional needs may be directed to the appropriate Academic Division Chair and/or the Office of the Chief Academic Officer. It shall be the responsibility of the Office of the Chief Academic Officer to maintain the Handbook and provide to the President any recommended changes from the appropriate administrative units or the faculty.
+
+This Faculty Handbook and the Richard Bland College Catalog are provided for your information and preparation for serving as a member of the Richard Bland College faculty.
+
+ 
+
+
+
+Any subsequent changes in policies, procedures, or employment terms are incorporated in the next annual contract issued by the University to the faculty after such changes are adopted by the Board of Trustees. Changes in the Faculty Handbook are effected in accordance with the procedure specified in Section 
+
+Changes in the contractual agreement become effective with the issuing of new contracts, which generally occurs in the spring of each year. Changes in the contractual agreement are made in accordance with the procedure described in section 1.9. 
+
+
+
+Statement of Non-Discrimination
+
+
+
+CHAPTER I: CODE OF REGULATIONS OF THE TRUSTEES OF THE OHIO WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY
+
+
+
+[Text for Chapter 1 goes here]
+
+
+
+Section 1.
+
+[Text for 1.1 goes here]
+
+Article
+
+
+
+[Section 1.2]
+
+[Text for 1.2 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 1.3]
+
+[Text for 1.3 goes here]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+[Chapter 2]
+
+
+
+[Text for Chapter 2 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 2.1]
+
+[Text for 2.1 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 2.2]
+
+[Text for 2.2 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 2.3]
+
+[Text for 2.3 goes here]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER III.	GENERAL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING FACULTY CONTRACTS AT OHIO WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY
+
+3.1	Preamble and General Policy
+
+In all matters affecting academic freedom, intellectual responsibility, and tenure the University adopts the principles set forth in the 1940 AAUP Statement of Principles of Academic Freedom and Tenure, except as specifically modified in the sections below.
+
+In order (a) to assure practical implementation of their commitment to the above guiding principles governing academic freedom, tenure, and responsibility already adopted, (b) to provide an atmosphere of academic integrity and mutual confidence among Faculty and Trustees, (c) to establish conditions of stable employment which will make possible the attraction and retention of able faculty personnel who will provide instructional services of high quality, and (d) otherwise to effectuate the command of the Charter, granted in 1842, that ""the University shall forever be conducted on the most liberal principles, accessible to all religious denominations and designed for the benefit of our citizens in general,"" the Trustees of Ohio Wesleyan University do adopt and declare to be a condition and integral part of their contractual agreement with every member of the Faculty the following policies and procedures governing faculty appointment, reappointment, tenure, salary increases, promotion and dismissal. The provisions of this Chapter can be revised only by an action of the Board of Trustees.
+
+The policies outlined in the Faculty Handbook as in effect from time to time form part of the essential employment understandings between members of the Faculty and the University. Other University policies and guidelines are available ----. In addition, academic departments and programs may have their own internal rules, procedures, and policies, which may supplement – but do not supersede or replace - policies outlined in this Chapter of the Faculty Handbook.
+
+Where the terms and provisions of an individual contract of a faculty member are inconsistent with the general policies contained herein, the provisions of the individual contract shall supersede. Otherwise, the provisions of Chapter III of the Faculty Handbook are legally binding on all parties for the specific period covered by a contract and will not be changed during that period. 
+
+
+
+3.2	Kinds of Positions
+
+Each faculty position to which a remunerated appointment is to be made shall be of one of two kinds, tenure track or term. A tenure track position is one which has a tenured occupant or, lacking such, about which a determination has been made that circumstances point to the continuing need for the position.  A term position is one which has been approved for a specifically limited time, normally one to three years. Both positions include the ranks of instructor, assistant professor, associate professor, and professor, and term faculty also include the rank of lecturer.
+
+Positions are classified as tenure track or term by the President in consultation with established faculty governance processes (See Handbook, Section IV).
+
+In addition to the above, the University also reserves the right to assign faculty rank to certain administrators (Section 3.3) and to acknowledge faculty members who have separated from service with the University following distinguished careers with the honorary designation of Associate Professor or Professor Emeritus (Emerita) (see Section 3.4).
+
+3.2.1	Tenure Track Positions
+
+
+
+3.2.2	Term Positions
+
+Term positions are limited to the term of employment stated in the contract and carry no presumption of renewal. Term positiions do not lead to tenure. Should a faculty member with a term position subsequently receive a probationary appointment, the length of the probationary period prior to tenure review is determined in accord with Section 2.3.6, ""Initial Rank and Length of the Probationary Period."" Compensation and responsibilities are ordinarily worked out and agreed upon in writing between the appointee and the dean of the faculty, [and/or the dean of the School of Theology], in consultation with the department chair. See Sections 2.1.3 and 2.1.4 for a further description of term appointments. 
+
+Although a part-time, term-contract appointment might be appropriate for many years in succession, full-time faculty members are ordinarily either tenured (receiving a continuous contract; see Section 2.2.1.3 below) or on tenure-track (receiving a probationary contract; see Section 2.2.1.2 below). Full-time term contracts are routinely limited to no longer than three years. 
+
+In special circumstances (for example, for summer teaching), tenured/tenure-track faculty of the college [university] may receive term contracts in addition to their regular contracts. 
+
+Full-time, term-contract faculty will receive annual departmental reviews. 
+
+3.3.3	Other Faculty Positions
+
+
+
+Administrators with Faculty Status
+
+
+
+
+
+Professional Librarians
+
+Librarians make a significant contribution to the educational program and general academic life of a college. They have an important responsibility for developing library collections, for bibliographical control over these collections, for informing students about library resources and uses, and for advising faculty in the use of the collection. They answer questions, compile bibliographies, and strive to improve library processes and practices. Their work involves high-level skills of communication, analysis, organization, and follow-through, among others. It requires trained intelligence and graduate professional education.
+
+Given the close involvement of librarians in support of the faculty's teaching and the student's learning, professional librarians at Ohio Wesleyan will be voting members of the Faculty and will be eligible for election to the committees of that body. Because the duties and responsibilities of librarians are significantly different in important respects from those of the classroom faculty, appointments of librarians will not necessarily be governed by the terms and conditions applicable to classroom faculty, but will, except as explicitly noted herein, be governed by those of the nonfaculty professional staff of the University. In addition to membership in the faculty body as noted above, the following special terms and conditions will be applicable to librarians.
+
+Performance appraisals of librarians, including the Director of Libraries, will make use of several sources of information including a self report, evaluations from librarian colleagues, and evaluation by library patrons. The Library Subcommittee of the Committee on Teaching and Learning will determine appropriate procedures for evaluation by patrons. Using the above information and consulting with the Director of Libraries except, of course, when his or her own case is involved, the Provost shall make final personnel recommendations to the President.
+
+The normal highest degree for professional librarians is the master's degree in library science. Librarians entering employment with this degree will be paid at the level of entering teaching faculty with comparable training and experience. They will also participate in salary increases on the same basis as faculty members and other professional staff.
+
+Librarians will be eligible to apply for paid study leaves after six years since start of service or since the last leave. Such leaves will not be automatic, but must be approved by the Provost upon recommendation of the Director of Libraries in consultation with the Library Subcommittee of the Committee on Teaching and Learning for projects which promise to advance the contribution of the library to the academic life of the institution. They normally will be granted for an eight week period in the summer, which period shall be in addition to the usual one month annual vacation.
+
+A librarian may be the instructor of record for credit bearing student work upon approval of the Provost who will make an appropriate appointment on the recommendation of the department or program which has responsibility for the course(s) involved. On the recommendation of the Faculty Personnel Committee, this appointment may be a continuing departmental ""courtesy appointment."" In other cases it will be for the academic term of the course(s) involved.
+
+A librarian may use the appropriate appeal process in the Faculty Handbook for a case he or she believes involves violation of his or her academic freedom.
+
+Professor Emeritus/a
+
+The special status of Professor Emeritus/a is awarded by the Board of Trustees to those persons who meet the following qualifications: 
+
+Have completed at least ten (10) academic years of ranked faculty service to Ohio Wesleyan and held the rank of Associate Professor or Professor at retirement (in exceptional circumstances, documented by the appropriate Department Chair Provost, candidates may be advanced who do not meet these qualifications); 
+
+Have fulfilled the responsibilities of a faculty member with consistency and effectiveness; 
+
+Have received a positive recommendation for such appointment from the appropriate department, the Faculty Personnel Committee, the Provost, and the University President. 
+
+Professor Emeritus/a are not considered employees of the University and therefore are not entitled to fringe benefits.  As members of the broader University community, Professor Emeritus/a are welcome to advise the community in all University assemblies, colloquia, and other academic events.  However, they are not afforded voting privileges in faculty governance.
+
+Professor Emeritus/a faculty are entitled to the following recognitions and privileges:
+
+Listing in the Catalog and other University publications and directories that collectively list the Faculty;
+
+The right to participate in formal and informal academic events and other University events and social functions with other faculty colleagues;
+
+Use of the University Library with faculty privileges;
+
+Use of office space and/or laboratories if recommended by the Department Chair and approved by the Provost;
+
+Use of University identification card and parking permit; and
+
+Attendance at University events and use of services under the same conditions and at the same cost as other regular appointment faculty.
+
+Revocation of Status
+
+Once awarded, Professor Emeritus/a status continues in perpetuity unless the recipient either requests to have status rescinded or violates the intent and spirit of emeritus/a status by engaging in serious dishonorable conduct in violation of law, rule, or policy and/or causes harm to the University’s reputation. 
+
+To revoke Professor Emeritus/a status without the consent of the individual, a petition must be made by a member of the University community to the President, and subsequently to the Board of Trustees, which has the final authority to revoke the individual’s Professor Emeritus/a status.  Actions or conduct protected by academic freedom and unlawful discrimination shall not be used to revoke such status.
+
+
+
+3.3	Kinds of Appointments
+
+Remunerated appointments to the Faculty of the University shall conform to the categories described in this section. The definition of 'fulltime' is implicit in other policies in the Handbook, including those on teaching load. Fringe benefits for fulltime faculty are described elsewhere in the Handbook; contrasting policies for part-time faculty are included in this section.
+
+3.3.1.1	Fulltime
+
+Regular Appointments
+
+A regular appointment is made to a tenure track position. A regular appointment includes a University commitment for a probationary period of service leading to permanent tenure on the teaching faculty unless the appointment is terminated by the appointee or by action of the University as hereinafter provided. Persons on a full-time regular appointment will be issued an initial contract that is subject to renewal after two years of service. Subsequent contracts are issued annually. Reappointment will be preceded by an evaluation by the Faculty Personnel Committee.
+
+Temporary Appointments
+
+A temporary appointment is made to a term position. It is renewable only to the expiration date of the position approval and in no case is renewable as a temporary appointment beyond the individual's seventh year of fulltime faculty service at the University. Renewal of appointment will be preceded by an evaluation by the Faculty Personnel Committee.
+
+A temporary appointment may also be made to a tenure track position in cases where the appointee serves as a leave replacement, or when time has not permitted a full search to be conducted or the search has not yielded a suitable regular appointee. In latter kinds of cases, a new search will be conducted the next year, in which search the temporary appointee may compete.
+
+A faculty member shall be regarded as on a temporary appointment when the faculty member is in a terminal period following notification of nonrenewal of appointment or denial of tenure.
+
+Temporary appointments do not carry tenure status.
+
+Part-time
+
+2.  	Part-Time*
+
+			a.	General
+
+A part-time faculty member is a person who, in the judgment of the Provost, carries less than a normal faculty teaching load and whose total faculty responsibilities are partial rather than full. Part-time appointments are subject to the approval of the department and the Provost.
+
+			b.	Part-Time Appointments
+
+Part-time faculty members are not tenurable and they are not eligible for promotion except to the levels of Lecturer and Senior Lecturer as specified below. All initial part-time appointments will be made to Part-Time Instructorships.
+
+			c.	Establishment of Need for Part-Time Faculty
+
+Before any part-time faculty can be appointed to teach, the department(s) or program(s) seeking faculty for part-time teaching must have submitted to the Provost and received approval of a statement of need for part-time support for the semester or term the appointment would cover.
+
+			d.	Terms of Part-Time Appointments
+
+1)	Instructors
+
+	
+
+				a)	Appointment
+
+	
+
+The initial appointment of a Part-Time Instructor by the Provost will be for the duration of a semester. Additional semester appointments may follow.
+
+
+
+				b)	Compensation
+
+	
+
+Part-Time Instructors are paid per unit (course) pursuant to a salary scale to be established and approved on an annual basis by the provost in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee. Part-Time Instructors are eligible for prorated professional development funds after having completed the teaching of eight course units. In addition, Part-time Instructors may be eligible for other benefits as determined by the Provost and the Director of Human Resources.
+
+					
+
+						c)	Evaluation
+
+	
+
+In their second year of teaching, Part-Time Instructors will be reviewed by the home department(s) or program(s) on the basis of the quality of their teaching only. Part-time Instructors are assumed to have only teaching duties (i.e., no advising, committee service, or other obligations). A summary of the review process and findings will be filed and maintained in the Provost’s office. Departmental reviews will be repeated at two-year intervals for each Part-Time Instructor, and reports of each review will be filed in the Provost's office. The schedule for review may be adjusted only by departmental application to the Faculty Personnel Committee. Part-Time Instructors must evaluate every class they teach.
+
+
+
+						d)	Promotion
+
+	
+
+In the sixth year and after completion of twelve regular units of teaching, Part-Time Instructors, with the support and recommendation of the department(s) or program(s) in which the part-time instructor has taught, and upon conclusion of a favorable departmental review as described in c) above, may apply to the Faculty Personnel Committee for a promotion to Lecturer by submitting a teaching dossier. Such application will be considered only if the relevant department(s) or program (s) has submitted a statement of need for continued part-time support covering the term for which appointment is sought. Candidates for promotion to Lecturer will be evaluated by the Faculty Personnel Committee on the basis of their teaching, and, if promotion is recommended by the Committee and approved by the Provost, the candidates will be granted Lecturer status. If promotion is not granted, Part-Time Instructors may, with the support and approval of the department(s) or program(s) needing part-time support, continue to receive semester appointments and may seek promotion to Lecturer after their next departmental review.
+
+2) 	Lecturers
+
+
+
+a) 	Appointment
+
+
+
+If promotion to Lecturer is granted, the Lecturer will have assignment priority over Part-Time Instructors and can expect, contingent upon need for part-time faculty, as explained in (f) below, a minimum of two units of teaching per year for a two-year term. Assignments will take into consideration seniority within level, with preference given to those with higher seniority. During the second year of the initial two-year appointment as Lecturer, the faculty member may, with the support and recommendation of the department(s) or program(s) in which the Lecturer has taught, apply for a four-year term to the Faculty Personnel Committee. After that time, Lecturers may apply for renewal of their terms every four years. Renewal applications must be accompanied by a letter of support from the department(s) or program(s) which has submitted and had approved by the Provost a statement of need for continued part-time support covering said term. If the statement of need is not approved, Lecturers will be eligible to continue to teach on a semester-by-semester basis as Lecturers; they may re-apply for a four-year term at the end of the second year following the non-approval. If the statement of need is approved and renewal of the four-year term is not granted, Lecturers will be eligible to teach on a semester-by-semester basis as Part-Time Instructors. They may re-apply for promotion to Lecturer during the second year following non-renewal using the procedure specified in 1d.
+
+
+
+						b)	Compensation
+
+	
+
+At the time of promotion, Lecturers can expect an increase in their base salary. Lecturers are paid per unit (course) pursuant to a salary scale to be established and approved on an annual basis by the Provost in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee. They are eligible for merit increases every two years (see 2d below).
+
+
+
+Professional development benefits will continue, and Lecturers will receive prorated tuition remission benefits at Ohio Wesleyan. In addition, Lecturers may be eligible for other benefits as determined by the Provost and the Director of Human Resources.
+
+						c)	Continuity and Requests for Leave
+
+
+
+In order to maintain their status and terms as a Lecturer, Lecturers are expected to accept the teaching of at least two courses per academic year with the following exceptions: 1) The Lecturer was not offered two courses during any given semester due to a lack of need (see f below) or 2) The lecturer has been granted a professional leave of absence. Requests for such leave may occur once every four years and the leave would be unpaid. The maximum duration of professional leaves is two semesters. Professional leaves of absence will be approved by the Provost in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee if supported by the departments) or program(s). Time spent on professional leave would not be counted toward the evaluation period specified in 2d.
+
+					
+
+						d)	Evaluation
+
+	
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee will review Lecturers for a merit-based salary increase every two years based on the quality of their teaching responsibilities, which may include student advising. A discretionary review of a Lecturer may be initiated by the department or the Faculty Personnel Committee at any time; unfavorable review could result in loss of Lecturer status. Lecturers must evaluate every class they teach.
+
+						
+
+						e)	Promotion
+
+	
+
+During the sixth year as Lecturer and upon completion of twelve regular units of teaching at the level of Lecturer, again with the support and recommendation of the department(s) or program(s) in which the part-time instructor has taught, and upon conclusion of a favorable departmental review as described in c) above. Lecturers may apply to the Faculty Personnel Committee for a promotion to Senior Lecturer by submitting a teaching dossier. Such application will be considered only if the relevant department(s) or program(s) has submitted and had approved by the Provost a statement of need for continued part-time support covering the term for which appointment is sought. Candidates for promotion to Senior Lecturer will be evaluated by the Faculty Personnel Committee on the basis of their teaching, and, if promotion is recommended by the Committee and approved by the Provost, the candidates will be granted Senior Lecturer status.
+
+
+
+ 	3) 	Senior Lecturers
+
+
+
+						a)	Appointment
+
+	
+
+If promotion to Senior Lecturer is granted, the Senior Lecturer will have assignment priority over Part-Time Instructors and Lecturers and can expect, contingent upon need for part-time faculty, as explained in g. below, a minimum of two units of teaching per year for a four-year term. Assignments will take into consideration seniority within level, with preference given to those with higher seniority. Senior Lecturers may apply for renewal of their Senior Lecturer designation every fourth year. Application for renewal must be accompanied by a letter of support from the department(s) or program(s) in which the part-time instructor has taught and the department(s) or program(s) must have submitted a statement of need for continued part-time support covering said term. If the statement of need is not approved, Senior Lecturers will be eligible to continue to teach on a semester-by-semester basis as Senior Lecturers; they may re-apply for a four-year term at the end of the second year following the non-approval. If the statement of need is approved and renewal of the four-year term is not granted, Senior Lecturers will be eligible to teach on a semester-by-semester basis as Part-Time Instructors. They may re-apply for promotion to Lecturer during the second year following non-renewal using the procedure specified in 1d.					
+
+	
+
+						b)	Compensation
+
+	
+
+At the time of promotion, Senior Lecturers can expect an increase in their base salary. Senior Lecturers are paid per unit (course) pursuant to a salary scale to be established and approved on an annual basis by the provost in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee. They are eligible for merit increases every two years (see 3d. below).
+
+
+
+Professional development benefits will continue, as will pro-rated tuition remission benefits at OWU. Senior Lecturers will be eligible to receive a paid one-semester leave upon the completion of 36 units of teaching at that rank. In addition, Senior Lecturers may be eligible for other benefits as determined by the Provost and the Director of Human Resources. Senior Lecturers will be eligible to apply for all internal grants for which regular full-time faculty are eligible.
+
+
+
+						c)	Continuity and Requests for Leave
+
+	
+
+In order to maintain their status and terms as Senior Lecturers, Senior Lecturers are expected to accept the teaching of at least two courses per academic year with the following exceptions: 1) The Senior Lecturer was not offered two courses during any given semester due to a lack of need (see f below) or 2) The Senior Lecturer has been granted a professional leave of absence. Requests for such leave may occur once every four years and the leave would be unpaid. The maximum duration of professional leaves is two semesters. Professional leaves of absence will be approved by the Provost in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee if supported by the department(s) or program(s). Time spent on professional leave or paid leave would not be counted toward the evaluation period specified in 2d.
+
+
+
+ 	d)  	Evaluation
+
+
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee will review Senior Lecturers for a merit-based salary increase every two years based on the quality of their teaching responsibilities, which may include student advising. A discretionary review of a Senior Lecturer may be initiated by the department or the Faculty Personnel Committee at any time. Senior Lecturers must evaluate a minimum of one class per semester in any semester in which they are teaching.
+
+			e.	Appeal Procedures for Part-Time Faculty
+
+Part-time Instructors, Lecturers, and Senior Lecturers seeking review of a nonrenewal decision by the Faculty Personnel Committee must submit a letter seeking review of the nonrenewal to the provost within 30 days of non-renewal. The decision of the provost will be final.
+
+
+
+		f.	Approval of Appointments and Promotions
+
+
+
+All appointments and promotions of part-time faculty must be approved by the Provost.
+
+
+
+g. 	Course Assignments Contingent upon Need
+
+While the University will attempt to hire and promote the number of part-time faculty that will, to the extent possible, allow for faculty members to teach two courses per year, the number of courses assigned to specific individual Part-Time Instructors, Lecturers, and Senior Lecturers is contingent upon the availability of a sufficient number of courses to be taught by part-time faculty allocated to a department by the Provost. In the event that circumstances such as staffing changes, enrollment changes, programmatic changes or budgetary constraints reduce the number of courses available for staffing by part-time faculty, as determined by and at the discretion of the provost, courses will be assigned to part-time faculty on the basis of need and expertise, taking into consideration current level and seniority within level.
+
+*The provisions of this section do not necessarily apply to a person on full-time administrative appointment who holds faculty rank and teaches less than a full load.
+
+
+
+Retention of Academic Rank and Tenure by University Faculty Members Who Accept Administrative Assignments
+From time to time, University faculty members may receive part-time or full-time administrative assignments. 
+
+3 . 2 . 9 . 1 Retention of Academic Rank, Tenure, and Eligibility for Promotion by University Faculty Members Who Accept Part-Time Administrative Assignments
+Ranked faculty members who receive part-time administrative appointments—i.e., appointments that entail half- time or less administrative work (§3.6.3)—retain their faculty contracts as augmented in some cases to reflect their administrative duties, along with full faculty rights (e.g., retention of rank and tenure). Unless otherwise specified in modifications to their contracts signed by the Provost, such faculty members remain eligible for sabbatical leave, senior review, and review for promotion in academic rank according to the normal schedule. 
+
+3 . 2 . 9 . 2 Retention of Academic Rank and Tenure by University Faculty Members
+Who Receive Full-Time Administrative Assignments
+University faculty members who receive appointment to full-time administrative positions—i.e., positions entailing more than half-time administrative work—move automatically to administrative contracts. Exceptions to this policy must be approved by the Provost. 
+
+Faculty members serving in administrative positions will be subject to the University rules and policies applicable to other administrative personnel. 
+
+At the time of an initial administrative appointment or subsequently, the Dean, the Provost, or, if necessary, the President will state in a letter of understanding the conditions under which the person will return to the faculty and whether the time spent as an administrator will count toward promotion, tenure, or the next sabbatical leave. Faculty members holding full-time administrative appointments are ineligible for promotion in academic rank during their terms of administrative service. 
+
+Faculty members who accept administrative appointments retain their current academic rank and tenure provided they teach at least one course at the University every three (3) years. Full-time administrators lose their faculty rank and tenure at the beginning of the fourth academic year in which they have not satisfied this requirement. 
+
+Faculty Rank and Retreat Rights or Tenure for Administrators 
+
+The University does not ordinarily appoint members of the Administration with faculty rank. Nor does an administrator receive faculty rank by virtue of teaching part-time for the University. However, in accordance with §3.2.10.1, administrators possessing the requisite qualifications and meeting applicable standards (§§3.9.2, 3.9.5, 3.9.8, 3.9.9) are eligible for appointment with faculty rank, and in addition they may also be given retreat rights to join the faculty following the successful completion of their administrative assignment, including tenure or the possibility of standing for tenure after a designated interval. 
+
+3 . 2 . 10 . 1 Assignment of Faculty Rank to Administrators 
+
+The President, in consultation with the appropriate Dean and the Provost, has the authority to assign to an administrator a faculty rank that was earned through a faculty review at a comparable regionally accredited four-year college or university. At its discretion, the Board of Trustees may assign to the President an appropriate faculty rank, either at the time of hire or subsequently. 
+
+To retain an academic rank, an administrator must teach at least one course at the University every three years; administrators lose their academic rank at the beginning of the fourth academic year in which they have not satisfied this requirement. Administrators holding academic rank are ineligible for promotion in academic rank during their terms of administrative service. 
+
+3 . 2 . 10 . 2 Retreat Rights or Tenure for Administrators 
+
+Administrators who are not already tenured faculty members at the University do not ordinarily receive tenure either at the time of their initial administrative appointments or during their terms as administrators. However, the President has the authority to assign retreat rights or tenure to an administrator, either at the time of initial appointment or subsequently. 
+
+An administrator hired with retreat rights is eligible to assume a faculty position and, in some cases, subsequently stand for tenure (after the usual four-year probationary period, §3.2.1). 
+
+Prior to such an action, the President, the Provost, or the appropriate Dean will consult with the relevant department or School (as early in the hiring process as possible if the decision is made at the time of hire) to enable the department or School to review the candidate’s academic credentials, to meet with the candidate (if possible), and to make a recommendation on the case. 
+
+When an administrator is granted retreat rights, the appropriate Dean, the Provost, or the President will state in a letter of understanding the conditions under which the administrator may join the faculty at the conclusion of the administrative appointment. The terms of any such arrangement must be approved by the President. 
+
+An administrator hired with tenure is eligible to assume a tenured faculty position upon completing her or his administrative assignment. Prior to making a decision to award tenure at time of hire, the President or Provost, in addition to consulting with the relevant department or School, will submit the candidate’s credentials to the Faculty Review Committee for its evaluation and recommendation. If the department or School, the Faculty Review Committee, the P r o v o s t , and the President concur,an initial appointment with tenure can be made. Subsequently, the President or Provost will review the case with the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees. 
+
+3. Annual Contract Period 
+
+The period of employment under a fulltime faculty contract shall be for the 12month period beginning one week prior to the first day of classes, fall semester, during which the individual shall receive salary, fringe benefits, and the other perquisites of a faculty appointment. The salary and benefits in this contract will cover the duties associated with the position performed during the portion of the employment period which precedes Commencement and is known as the ""academic year."" Separate subsidiary contracts will be issued for duties performed outside the academic year, such as summer session teaching. Such contracts will not include fringe benefits, unless such benefits are funded by outside sources. 
+
+Contract Terms 
+
+The precise terms and conditions as to kind of appointment, rank, dates of beginning and close of period covered by the appointment, number of years remaining in probationary period in case of regular appointment, salary, insurance coverage, and pension rights and payments, shall be stated in writing and be in possession of both the University and the appointee before an appointment to the teaching faculty is consummated. 
+
+Rank and Salary of Initial Appointment 
+
+Initial appointment to the teaching faculty of Ohio Wesleyan shall be at a rank and salary commensurate with the individual's training in terms of degree or equivalents and the extent of experience in terms of the number of years of successful college teaching or its equivalent. The salary of initial appointment at each rank shall be within a narrow range, established by the Provost in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee and reported to all faculty. 
+
+
+
+Faculty Qualifications
+
+Nebraska Wesleyan University Faculty Qualifications Policy
+Nebraska Wesleyan University follows Higher Learning Commission requirements for faculty qualifications. NWU determines faculty qualifications primarily by credentials, although it may consider other factors, such as tested experience, as qualification for teaching. Based on HLC recommendations, NWU’s instructional faculty “possess an academic degree relevant to what they are teaching and at least one level above the level at which they teach, except in programs for terminal degrees or when equivalent experience is established. In terminal degree programs, faculty members possess the same level of degree. When faculty members are employed based on equivalent experience, the institution defines a minimum threshold of experience and an evaluation process that is used in the appointment process” (page 3, https://www.hlcommission.org/Publications/determining-qualified-faculty…) Documentation of teaching qualifications is part of each faculty member’s file. In cases where equivalent experience and/or credentials are a consideration for employment, the file provides information regarding the particular experiences and/or credentials, and their relevance to the discipline or courses taught by the faculty member.
+
+Qualifications based on Academic Credentials:
+NWU’s preference is to hire faculty members with terminal degrees in the relevant field whenever possible.
+
+Baccalaureate programs: Faculty members recommended for full-time or part-time positions in undergraduate programs must have completed at minimum one of the following:
+
+A master’s degree in the discipline, OR
+
+A master’s degree in a related field, plus at least 18 graduate credits in the discipline
+
+Master’s programs: Faculty members recommended for full-time or part-time positions in graduate programs must have completed at minimum one of the following:
+
+A terminal degree in the discipline, OR
+
+A terminal degree in a related field, plus at least 18 hours of graduate credit in the discipline
+
+Qualifications Based on a Combination of Academic Credentials and Tested Experience
+The Higher Learning Commission recognizes that tested experience may substitute for a credential in situations when the institution determines said experience is equivalent to the degree required for the position. Specific disciplines and programs may establish what constitutes tested experience, including the skill sets, experiences, and professional credentials that qualify candidates to teach in those programs.
+
+Candidates whose eligibility is based on a combination of credentials and tested experience must hold at least the lesser degree (i.e., a degree one level lower than those indicated above) plus appropriate experience. In these cases, department chairs must submit a request explaining how the individual meets qualification requirements. Requests must be approved by the appropriate academic dean in the case of part-time faculty, or by the provost in the case of full-time faculty.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+[Chapter 4]
+
+
+
+[Text for Chapter 4 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 4.1]
+
+[Text for 4.1 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 4.2]
+
+[Text for 4.2 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 4.3]
+
+[Text for 4.3 goes here]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+[Chapter 5]
+
+
+
+[Text for Chapter 5 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 5.1]
+
+[Text for 5.1 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 5.2]
+
+[Text for 5.2 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 5.3]
+
+[Text for 5.3 goes here]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+[Chapter 6]
+
+
+
+[Text for Chapter 6 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 6.1]
+
+[Text for 6.1 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 6.2]
+
+[Text for 6.2 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 6.3]
+
+[Text for 6.3 goes here]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+[Conclusion]
+
+
+
+[Text for conclusion goes here]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Appendix A
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Appendix B
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Appendix C
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Bibliography
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+vi
+
+11</s>"
+<s>[INST] OWU FHB (Attorney Draft).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] OWU FHB Chapter 3.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] OWU FHB Chapter 4.txt [/INST] Chapter Four: Part-time Faculty Personnel Policies
+
+This chapter is the official statement of policies, terms, responsibilities, duties, rights, and privileges pertaining to part-time faculty. It becomes a part of every part-time faculty member's contract of employment.  Part-time faculty are subject to the provisions of Chapter III of the Faculty Handbook only as indicated herein.  Part-time faculty shall be familiar with and abide by the policies and procedures of this Chapter IV. 
+
+Academic Titles for Part-Time Faculty
+
+Part-time faculty members are appointed on a part-time contractual basis, teaching less than a fifty percent full-time teaching load for the academic year or less than a one hundred percent full-time teaching load for half of the academic year, as determined by the Provost.  To be appointed to a part-time faculty position, an individual must meet the minimum faculty qualifications as defined in Chapter III, Section 3.4.5 of this Handbook.
+
+The academic titles approved by the University for part-time faculty include Part-time Instructor, Part-time Lecturer, and Part-time Senior Lecturer. Part-time faculty are temporary employees employed only on part-time contracts and are not eligible for tenure. 
+
+Recruitment and Initial Appointment of Part-Time Faculty
+
+Establishment of Need for Part-Time Faculty
+
+Before any part-time faculty can be appointed to teach, the department(s) seeking faculty for part-time teaching must have submitted to the Provost and received approval of a statement of need for part-time support for the semester or term the appointment will cover. The Provost or the Provost’s designee must approve the position.
+
+Recruitment of Part-time Faculty
+
+When the Provost authorizes a part-time faculty position, the procedures published in the Faculty Search Guide shall be generally employed, except that advertisement may be limited to a regional search provided that a suitable pool of applicants is obtained in keeping with the University’s policy as an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer. In addition, the Department Chair may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures due to time constraints, provided that a suitable pool of qualified and diverse candidates is obtained.  
+
+All initial part-time appointments are made to Part-Time Instructorships.  
+
+Part-time Faculty Rights and Privileges 
+
+Part-time faculty have the rights and privileges as specified below:
+
+Right to attend Faculty meetings with voice, but without vote
+
+Right to academic freedom (Chapter III, Section 3.5.1)
+
+Right to attend University ceremonies
+
+Right to notification of reasons for dismissal for adequate cause, if requested and the dismissal occurs prior to the termination date of their contracted services
+
+Right to have their professional performance evaluated based on interval set forth in Chapter IV, Section 4.3. 
+
+Part-time Faculty Contractual Duties and Responsibilities 
+
+In addition to the teaching duties and other responsibilities stated in the part-time faculty member’s individual appointment contract and Chapter Four of this Faculty Handbook and its subsections, Part-time Faculty shall fulfill the following responsibilities:
+
+To foster the mission and aims of the mission of Ohio Wesleyan University
+
+To follow all academic policies published in the Catalog and meet deadlines for the submission of syllabi, course grades, etc.
+
+To maintain and assess student learning in accordance with existing University policies and procedures
+
+To make appropriate accommodations for students relating to disabilities disclosed in accordance with the University’s policies
+
+To adhere to the prevailing ethical standards of the faculty member’s discipline(s) or professional organization(s)
+
+To adhere with the Standards of Professional Conduct set forth in Chapter III, Section 3.5 of the Faculty Handbook, including but not limited to knowing and adhering to University and department policies and procedures applicable to them, provided they do not contravene academic freedom. Such policies and procedures, include, but not are not limited to, those published in this Chapter IV of the Faculty Handbook, the Employee Handbook, and the University Catalog.
+
+
+
+
+Terms of Part-Time Faculty Appointments
+
+Part-time Instructors
+
+Appointment
+
+The initial appointment of a Part-Time Instructor by the Provost will be for the duration of a semester. Additional semester appointments may follow.
+
+Compensation
+
+Part-Time Instructors are paid per unit (course) pursuant to a salary scale approved by the Board of Trustees and published by Academic Affairs. Part-Time Instructors are eligible for individual professional development account funds on a per-course basis at the established rate after having completed the teaching of eight course units. 
+
+In addition, Part-time Instructors may be eligible for other benefits as determined by  University human resource policy and any applicable benefit plans.
+
+Evaluation
+
+	Current University Policy
+
+	In their second year of teaching, Part-Time Instructors will be reviewed by the home department(s), in consultation with individual’s Program Director (if applicable), on the basis of the quality of their teaching only, utilizing the teaching criteria set forth in Section 3.8.1.  Part-Time Instructors are assumed to have only teaching duties (i.e., no advising, committee service, or other obligations). A summary of the review process and findings will be filed and maintained on the Academic Affairs’ website. 
+
+	Departmental reviews will be repeated at two-year intervals for each Part-Time Instructor, and reports of each review will be filed in the  faculty member’s personnel file. The schedule for review may be adjusted only by departmental application to the Faculty Personnel Committee. Student course evaluations must be distributed for every course a Part-Time Instructor teaches.
+
+	Alternative Policy
+
+	In their second year of teaching, Part-Time Instructors will be reviewed by the home Department Chair, in consultation with individual’s Program Director as applicable, on the basis of the quality of their teaching only, utilizing the teaching criteria set forth in Chapter III, Section 3.8.1. Part-Time Instructors are assumed to have only teaching duties (i.e., no advising, committee service, or other obligations).
+
+	Department Chair reviews will be repeated at two-year intervals for each Part-Time Instructor, and reports of each review will be filed in the faculty member’s personnel file. The schedule for review may be adjusted only by departmental application to the Faculty Personnel Committee. Student course evaluations must be distributed for every course a Part-Time Instructor teaches.
+
+	-End Alternative Policy-
+
+Promotion
+
+	Current University Policy
+
+	In the sixth year and after completion of twelve regular units of teaching, Part-Time Instructors, with the support and recommendation of the department(s) in which the part-time instructor has taught, and upon conclusion of a favorable departmental review as described in 4.3.1.3 above, may apply to the Faculty Personnel Committee for a promotion to Part-time Lecturer by submitting a teaching dossier. Such application will be considered only if the relevant department(s) has submitted to the Provost a statement of need for continued part-time support covering the term for which appointment is sought and the Provost (or Provost’s designee) has approved the position. 
+
+	Candidates for promotion to Part-time Lecturer will be evaluated by the Faculty Personnel Committee on the basis of their teaching utilizing the evaluation criteria set forth in Section 3.8.1, and, if promotion is recommended by the Committee and approved by the Provost, the candidates will be granted Part-time Lecturer status. If promotion is not granted by the Provost, Part-Time Instructors may, with the support and approval of the department(s) or needing part-time support, continue to receive semester appointments and may seek promotion to Lecturer after their next departmental review.
+
+	Alternative Policy
+
+	In the sixth year and after completion of twelve regular units of teaching, Part-Time Instructors may apply to the Provost for promotion to Part-time Lecturer by submitting a teaching dossier to the Department Chair for distribution to the department faculty.  A summary of the department(s) review process will be filed and maintained in Academic Affairs. Such application will be considered only if the relevant department has submitted to the Provost a statement of need for continued part-time support covering the term for which appointment is sought and the Provost (or Provost’s designee) has approved the position.
+
+	Candidates for promotion to Part-time Lecturer will be evaluated by the faculty of the home department(s), in consultation with individual’s Program Director as applicable, on the basis of their teaching utilizing the evaluation criteria set forth in Section 3.8.1. If promotion is recommended by the department(s) and approved by the Provost, candidates will be granted Part-time Lecturer status. If promotion is not granted by the Provost, Part-Time Instructors may, with the support and approval of the department(s) needing part-time support, continue to receive semester appointments and may seek promotion to Part-time Lecturer after their next departmental review.
+
+	-End Alternative Policy-
+
+Lecturers
+
+Appointment
+
+If promotion to Part-time Lecturer is granted, the faculty member will maintain the rank of Part-time Lecturer until such time as the individual is promoted to Part-time Senior Lecturer pursuant to Section 4.3.2.5, even if there is a break in service at Ohio Wesleyan University. Upon promotion, the Part-time Lecturer will normally have assignment priority over Part-Time Instructors. They may also expect, contingent upon need for part-time faculty as explained in 4.3.6 below, a minimum of two units of teaching per year for a two-year term. Assignments may also take into consideration seniority within level, with preference normally given to those with higher seniority. However, in all instances, the determination of course assignments and the number of teaching units per year will be determined on the basis of department and University need, program integrity, and expertise (see 4.3.6 below).
+
+During the second year of the initial two-year appointment as a Part-time Lecturer, the faculty member may, with the support and recommendation of the department(s) in which the Lecturer has taught, apply for a four-year term to the Faculty Personnel Committee. Following its review, the Faculty Personnel Committee will issue a recommendation to the Provost, who shall make the final decision.  If an initial four-year term is approved by the Provost, Part-time Lecturers may apply for renewal of their terms every four years.  
+
+Renewal applications will be considered only if the relevant department(s) has submitted to the Provost a statement of need for continued part-time support covering the term for which appointment is sought and the Provost (or Provost’s designee) has approved the position. If the statement of need is not approved by the Provost (or Provost’s designee), Part-time Lecturers will be eligible to continue to teach on a semester-by-semester basis as Part-time Lecturers; they may re-apply for a four-year term at the end of the second year following the non-approval. If the statement of need is approved and renewal of the four-year term is not granted, Part-time Lecturers will be eligible to teach on a semester-by-semester basis at their current rank.
+
+Compensation
+
+	At the time of promotion, Part-time Lecturers can expect an increase in their base salary.  Part-time Lecturers are paid per unit (course) pursuant to a salary scale periodically approved by the Board of Trustees and published by Academic Affairs . They are eligible for merit increases every two years (see 4.3.2.4 below) if University resources permit.
+
+	Individual professional development account funds will continue, and Part-time Lecturers will receive prorated tuition remission benefits at Ohio Wesleyan. In addition, Part-time Lecturers may be eligible for other benefits as determined by applicable human resource policy and any applicable benefit plans.
+
+Continuity and Requests for Leave
+
+	In order to maintain their status and terms as a Part-time Lecturer, Lecturers are expected to accept the teaching of at least two courses per academic year with the following exceptions: 
+
+	The Part-time Lecturer was not offered two courses during any given semester due to a lack of need (see 4.3.6 below), or 
+
+	The Part-time Lecturer has been granted an unpaid professional leave of absence. 
+
+	Requests for such leave may occur once every four years and the leave would be unpaid. The maximum duration of professional leaves is two semesters. Professional leaves of absence will be approved by the Provost in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee if supported by the departments) or program(s). Time spent on professional leave would not be counted toward the evaluation period specified in 4.3.2.3.
+
+Evaluation
+
+	Current University Policy
+
+	The Faculty Personnel Committee will review Part-time Lecturers for a merit-based salary increase every two years based on the quality of their teaching responsibilities pursuant to the criteria in Chapter III, Section 3.8.1, which may include student advising.  The Committee’s written evaluation and recommendation for merit is submitted to the Provost, who makes a final decision on the merit increment utilizing the same criteria above.  
+
+	A discretionary review of a Part-time Lecturer may be initiated by the department or the Faculty Personnel Committee at any time; unfavorable review could result in loss of Part-time Lecturer status as determined by the Provost. Part-time Lecturers must distribute student course evaluations for every class they teach.
+
+	Alternative Policy
+
+	The department, in consultation with individual’s Program Director as applicable, will review Part-time Lecturers for a merit-based salary increase every two years based on the quality of their teaching responsibilities pursuant to the criteria in Chapter III, Section 3.8.1, which may include student advising. A summary of the department review process will be filed and maintained in Academic Affairs.  
+
+	The department’s written evaluation and recommendation for merit is submitted to the Provost, who makes a final decision on the merit increment utilizing the same criteria above.  
+
+	A discretionary review of a Part-time Lecturer may be initiated by the department at any time. Part-time Lecturers must distribute student course evaluations for every class they teach.
+
+	-End Alternative Policy-
+
+Promotion
+
+	Current University Policy
+
+	During the sixth year as a Part-time Lecturer and upon completion of twelve regular units of teaching at the level of Lecturer, again with the support and recommendation of the department(s) or program(s) in which the part-time instructor has taught, and upon conclusion of a favorable departmental review as described in 4.3.2.4 above. 
+
+	Part-time Lecturers may apply to the Faculty Personnel Committee for a promotion to Senior Lecturer by submitting a teaching dossier. Such application will be considered only if the relevant department(s) or program(s) has submitted and had approved by the Provost a statement of need for continued part-time support covering the term for which appointment is sought.  Candidates for promotion to Part-time Senior Lecturer will be evaluated by the Faculty Personnel Committee on the basis of their teaching in light of the evaluative criteria in Chapter III, Section 3.8.1, and, if promotion is recommended by the Committee and approved by the Provost, the candidates will be granted Part-time Senior Lecturer status.
+
+	Alternative Policy
+
+	During the sixth year as a Part-time Lecturer and upon completion of twelve regular units of teaching at the level of Lecturer, Part-Time Lecturers may apply to the Provost for promotion to Part-time Senior Lecturer by submitting a teaching dossier to the Department Chair for distribution to the department faculty. A summary of the department review process will be filed and maintained in Academic Affairs. Such application will be considered only if the relevant department has submitted to the Provost a statement of need for continued part-time support covering the term for which appointment is sought and the Provost (or Provost’s designee) has approved the position.
+
+	Candidates for promotion to Part-time Lecturer will be evaluated by the faculty of the home department, in consultation with individual’s Program Director as applicable, on the basis of their teaching utilizing the evaluation criteria set forth in Chapter III, Section 3.8.1. If promotion is recommended by the department and approved by the Provost, candidates will be granted Part-time Senior Lecturer status. If promotion is not granted by the Provost, Part-Time Lecturers may, with the support and approval of the department needing part-time support, continue to receive semester appointments and may seek promotion to Part-time Senior Lecturer after their next departmental review.
+
+	-End Alternative Policy-
+
+	
+
+
+Senior Lecturers
+
+Appointment
+
+If promotion to Part-time Senior Lecturer is granted, the faculty member will maintain the rank, even if there is a break in service at Ohio Wesleyan University. Upon promotion, the Part-time Senior Lecturer will normally have assignment priority over Part-Time Instructors and Lecturers and may expect, contingent upon need for part-time faculty, as explained in 4.3.6 below, a minimum of two units of teaching per year for a four-year term. Assignments may also take into consideration seniority within level, with preference given to those with higher seniority. However, in all instances, the determination of course assignments and the number of teaching units per year will be determined by Academic Affairs on the basis of need, program integrity, and expertise (see 4.3.6 below). 
+
+Part-time Senior Lecturers may apply for renewal of their Senior Lecturer designation every fourth year. 
+
+	If the statement of need is not approved by the Provost (or Provost’s designee), Part-time Senior Lecturers will be eligible to continue to teach on a semester-by-semester basis as Part-time Senior Lecturers; they may re-apply for a four-year term at the end of the second year following the non-approval. If the statement of need is approved and renewal of the four-year term is not granted, Part-time Senior Lecturers will be eligible to teach on a semester-by-semester basis at their current rank. 
+
+Compensation
+
+	At the time of promotion, Part-time Senior Lecturers can expect an increase in their base salary depending on the available resources of the University.  Part-time Senior Lecturers are paid per unit (course) pursuant to a salary scale periodically approved by the Board of Trustees and published by Academic Affairs . They are eligible for merit increases every two years (see Section 4.3.3.4 below) if University resources permit.
+
+	Individual professional development account funds  will continue, as will pro-rated tuition remission benefits at  Ohio Wesleyan. 
+
+	Part-time Senior Lecturers will be eligible to receive a paid one-semester leave upon the completion of 36 units of teaching at that rank. 
+
+	In addition, Senior Lecturers may be eligible for other benefits as determined by University human resource policy and any applicable benefit plans. 
+
+	Senior Lecturers will be eligible to apply for all internal grants for which regular full-time faculty are eligible.
+
+Continuity and Requests for Leave
+
+	In order to maintain their status and terms as Senior Lecturers, Senior Lecturers are expected to accept the teaching of at least two courses per academic year with the following exceptions: 1) The Senior Lecturer was not offered two courses during any given semester due to a lack of need (see f below) or 2) The Senior Lecturer has been granted a professional leave of absence. Requests for such leave may occur once every four years and the leave would be unpaid. The maximum duration of professional leaves is two semesters. Professional leaves of absence will be approved by the Provost in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee if supported by the department(s) or program(s). Time spent on professional leave or paid leave would not be counted toward the evaluation period specified in 2d. 
+
+Evaluation
+
+Current University Policy
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee will review Part-time Senior Lecturers for a merit-based salary increase every two years based on the quality of their teaching responsibilities pursuant to the criteria in Chapter III, Section 3.8.1, which may include student advising. The Committee’s written evaluation and recommendation for merit is submitted to the Provost, who makes a final decision on the merit increment utilizing the same criteria above. Time spent on leave is not counted toward the merit evaluation period.
+
+A discretionary review of a Part-time Senior Lecturer may be initiated by the department,  the Faculty Personnel Committee, or Provost at any time.  
+
+Part-time Senior Lecturers must distribute student course evaluations for every class they teach.
+
+	Alternative Policy
+
+	The department(s) will review Part-time Senior Lecturers for a merit-based salary increase every two years based on the quality of their teaching responsibilities pursuant to the criteria in Chapter III, Section 3.8.1, which may include student advising.  A summary of the department(s) or program(s) review process will be filed and maintained in Academic Affairs. Time spent on leave is not counted toward the merit evaluation period.
+
+	The department ’s written evaluation and recommendation for merit is submitted to the Provost, who makes a final decision on the merit increment utilizing the same criteria above.   
+
+	A discretionary review of a Part-time Senior Lecturer may be initiated by the department(s) or Provost at any time. 
+
+	Part-time Senior Lecturers must distribute student course evaluations for every class they teach.
+
+	-End Alternative Policy-
+
+Appeal Procedures for Part-Time Faculty
+
+	Part-time Instructors, Lecturers, and Senior Lecturers seeking review of a nonrenewal decision by the Faculty Personnel Committee must submit a letter seeking review of the nonrenewal to the Provost within 30 days of non-renewal. The decision of the Provost will be final.
+
+Approval of Appointments and Promotions
+
+	All appointments and promotions of part-time faculty must be approved by the Provost.
+
+Course Assignments Contingent upon Need
+
+While the University will attempt to hire and promote the number of part-time faculty that will, to the extent possible, allow for faculty members to teach two courses per year, the number of courses assigned to specific individual Part-Time Instructors, Lecturers, and Senior Lecturers is contingent upon the availability of a sufficient number of courses to be taught by part-time faculty allocated to a department by the Provost. In the event that circumstances such as staffing changes, enrollment changes, programmatic changes or budgetary constraints reduce the number of courses available for staffing by part-time faculty, as determined by and at the discretion of the Provost, courses will be assigned to part-time faculty on the basis of need, program integrity, and expertise, taking into consideration current level and seniority within level. 
+
+
+
+
+
+10</s>"
+"<s>[INST] OWU FHB Chapter 5.txt [/INST] Chapter Five: Allocation and Review of Faculty Positions 
+
+Preamble and General Policy
+
+This Chapter of the Handbook addresses the authorization of full-time  faculty positions, under which is included initial authorization and subsequent re-authorization, classification of positions as Visiting or Tenure Track, and the review of Tenure Track positions in terms of planning considerations.
+
+The Academic Planning and Allocation Committee is charged with making recommendations to the Administration on all full-time faculty authorization decisions. The Committee will conduct its studies and formulate its recommendations on all positions and transmit these recommendations to the Provost and President. Recently vacated positions are addressed in section 5.2.2 below. For those vacancies which arise too late to be included in the review, the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee normally will recommend to the Administration that the vacancy be filled with a one-year appointment and postpone the re-authorization decision until the subsequent authorization process.
+
+The Academic Planning and Allocation Committee, working with the Provost, shall develop appropriate guidelines which it shall use to arrive at its recommendations. These guidelines will be approved by the Faculty and submitted to the President for approval and published so that any proposal for a new position can be appropriately constructed (see Section 5.2.3 below). 
+
+Final responsibility for all authorization decisions lies with the President, who shall use the established procedures in Section 5.2. and guidelines (see Section 5.2.3) in reaching decisions. It shall be part of such procedures that the President will not act contrary to a recommendation by the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee without first meeting with the Committee to explain the intended action and hear the Committee’s argument in rebuttal.
+
+Authorization of Full-time Faculty Positions
+
+Initial Authorization of Positions
+
+This section refers to initial authorization of new full-time positions within existing departments of the University. Such new positions may be proposed by a department, by any standing or ad hoc committee, or by the Academic Administration. Proposals for a new full-time faculty position will be evaluated by the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee during the semester when the Committee is considering the tenure-line positions. The Academic Planning and Allocation Committee will consult directly with the proposing group and/or department before submitting its recommendation to the Provost and President.
+
+The recommendations of the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee to the Provost and President shall be directed to: 
+
+Whether the proposed position should be created, and, if so, 
+
+Whether it should be Tenure Track or Visiting.
+
+If a proposed position is not authorized, the proposing group may appeal directly to the President. The President's decision in consideration of the appeal is final.
+
+The Provost will forward recommendations on the proposed position to the President.  When the Provost’s recommendation disagrees with the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee’s recommendation, the Provost’s letter to the President will include an explanation of the specific reasons for the differing recommendation.
+
+The President shall receive the Committee and Provost’s respective recommendations and make a final decision on whether the position should be authorized and, if so, whether it should be Tenure Track or Visiting. The President will not act contrary to a recommendation by the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee without first meeting with the Committee to explain the intended action and hear the Committee’s argument in rebuttal.
+
+Re-authorization of Vacant Positions
+
+When any position on the full-time faculty shall become vacant for any reason, except paid or unpaid leaves, the position must be re-authorized before it can be filled.  For these purposes, a Visiting Faculty position shall be construed as vacant at the expiration of its stated period of authorization.  In addition, the tenure-line position of a tenured faculty member participating in the Phased Retirement Program (Section 3.11.2.1) shall be considered vacant when the faculty member enters the program. 
+
+The Academic Planning and Allocation Committee of the Faculty will evaluate each vacant full-time position and convey its recommendation to the Provost and President. 
+
+When a position, as described above, becomes vacant, the department shall immediately inform the Provost and submit, within [two weeks] of being notified of the vacancy, a Vacancy Memorandum to the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee. The brief memorandum shall include a description of the vacated position, the year the position was allocated and filled, and the strategic importance of the position to the department and University.  The Academic Planning and Allocation Committee will affirm receipt of the memorandum.
+
+Within [two weeks] of receiving the Vacancy Memorandum, the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee will make an initial written recommendation to the Provost and President regarding whether the vacant position should be immediately reauthorized or evaluated by the Committee pursuant to the standard allocation process. The Committee reserves the right to recommend position allocation in diverse ways that meet the needs and strategic importance of the position to the department and University.
+
+Regardless of which allocation process is utilized, the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee will consult directly with the appropriate department or group of faculty prior to formulating its recommendations to the Provost and President. 
+
+The recommendations of the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee to the Provost and President shall be directed to: 
+
+Whether the full-time faculty position should be authorized, and, if so,
+
+Whether it should be Tenure Track or Visiting.
+
+If a vacant position is not re-authorized, the department or program requesting re-authorization may appeal directly to the President. The President's decision in consideration of the appeal is final. 
+
+The Provost will forward recommendations on the vacated position to the President.  When the Provost’s recommendation disagrees with the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee’s recommendation, the Provost’s letter to the President will include an explanation of the specific reasons for the differing recommendation.
+
+The President shall receive the committee and Provost’s respective recommendations and make a final decision on whether the vacant position should be authorized and, if so, whether it should be Tenure Track or Visiting. The President will not act contrary to a recommendation by the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee without first meeting with the Committee to explain the intended action and hear the Committee’s argument in rebuttal.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Guidelines for Review and Allocation of Full-time Faculty Positions
+
+Decisions as to whether to authorize new full-time faculty positions or reauthorize vacant ones requires the consideration of different kinds of data and circumstances, and are always conditioned by the number of faculty the University has decided it can support.
+
+The following categories of factors, detailed in the current Academic Planning and Allocation Committee Request for Faculty Position form, will be taken into consideration: 
+
+Mission
+
+Program Quality
+
+Market
+
+Cost-Effectiveness
+
+The order of their enumeration should not be taken to indicate their order of priority. Neither should it be presumed that all four categories will be weighed equally in making particular decisions. 
+
+The number of available positions will be made available by Academic Affairs to the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee on or before October 1 of the academic year. Thereafter, the Committee will send a memorandum to the full-time faculty, communicating the number of available positions and information about pre-proposals and/or full proposals for faculty positions. 
+
+If a pre-proposal model is used, pre-proposals are due no later than February 1, followed by communication with departments.  Full proposals will be submitted by April 1.  Committee recommendations will then be forwarded to the Provost, then to the President, by May 1 and announced to full-time faculty within two weeks.  If a full proposal only model is used, the deadlines shift earlier: Full proposals will be due February 1, followed by communication with departments. Decisions shall be forwarded to the Provost, then President, by April 1, and announced to full-time faculty within two weeks.
+
+Because of the unique and varied conditions of each department it is not possible to attach fixed weights to the factors which will be considered. For initial authorization and reauthorization decisions, the following factors will be taken into consideration:  
+
+How the curriculum of the department and the position under consideration fit into the statement of aims and the liberal arts traditions of Ohio Wesleyan. 
+
+How the position relates to the curriculum of the department. 
+
+The need for a viable curriculum for the major.
+
+Departmental method of determining faculty teaching load and its consistency with University teaching load policy. 
+
+Number of graduation units generated by each faculty member. 
+
+Cost of program per graduation unit (e.g., Hegis data). 
+
+Versatility of other faculty in department to teach courses associated with the position under review. 
+
+Grade distribution. 
+
+Number of majors. 
+
+Service functions of the department. 
+
+Non-teaching responsibilities unique to the department. 
+
+Course proliferation and course overlap.
+
+The impact of new courses and/or new programs on the curriculum and on the total enrollment.
+
+Distribution of course offerings (upper-level and lower-level). 
+
+Decisions as to whether newly authorized or reauthorized full-time positions shall be non-tenure track term or tenure-track will involve judgments about the expendability of such positions and about the effect of such decisions on the academic and financial flexibility of the department(s) and the University regarding the following factors: mission, program quality, market, and cost-effectiveness.  A position will be classified as tenure-track when at the time of decision circumstances favor a reasonable expectation that the position can be supported in the long run.  The state of the job market for a position may also be relevant in individual cases, when classifying a position as non-tenure track  seems likely to make it very difficult, if not impossible, to attract a qualified appointee.  A position shall be classified as non-tenure track  when at the time of the decision there is significant doubt about the institution’s long-term commitment to support that position.  It is expected that such a circumstance will be rare and that newly authorized and reauthorized positions normally shall be tenure-track. 
+
+In a review of tenure track positions, a decision to change the status of a tenure-track position will be made only when circumstances supporting that status initially have changed significantly. In that review the Committee and the administration shall use those criteria previously outlined.  The burden of proof for change in status lies with those proposing the change. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Review and Allocation of New Programs and New Faculty Positions
+
+The addition of new programs and associated faculty positions may be proposed to meet the strategic needs and goals of the University. Proposals for new programs and positions may come from faculty, departments, committees, task forces, or the administration. In each case, mission, program quality, market and cost-effectiveness should be assessed, using internal and external data as evidence. Such proposals may be submitted at any time during the academic year.
+
+Proposals should follow the format set forth by the Provost and be submitted to the Provost for distribution to relevant faculty committees who will assess the programs according to committee purview. Relevant committees include APAC, CAP, ECF, FPC and UGC who will each delineate procedures for assessing and ensuring the success of all new programs. Committee recommendations on proposals will be sent to the Provost who will review and forward the recommendations to the President. If the Provost disagrees with the faculty committee recommendations, consultation with the committees should resolve differences before forwarding recommendations to the President. The President will make the final recommendation on the new Programs and positions to the Board of Trustees. 
+
+If new programs and faculty positions are provisional, the process for review and conversion of the programs and faculty positions will follow the procedures outlined for such provisional new programs and positions as developed by APAC, CAP, ECF, FPC, UGC and the Provost. Provisional new programs should be either eliminated or voted on by faculty within three years of being established. 
+
+Provisional faculty positions may take different forms, including one-year faculty positions, renewable for three years, or tenure-line positions subject to provisional or scheduled review. Provisional positions are not included in the maximum count of faculty positions as determined by the Board of Trustees and President. 
+
+Provisional faculty positions should be evaluated with the new programs they are associated with, no longer than three years after being established. Assessment and conversion of provisional faculty positions to tenure-track faculty positions can happen at any time and will then be included in the maximum count of faculty positions as determined by the Board of Trustees and President.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Review of Tenure Track Positions
+
+Scheduled Review
+
+During the fall semester prior to the scheduled tenure evaluation of an individual occupying a tenure track position on the faculty, a position review will be conducted in the manner described below. The department(s) in which the position resides will be directly consulted as set forth below.
+
+No later than the early fall semester, the Provost (or the Provost’s designee) will assess the continuing need for each tenure track position scheduled for tenure review.
+
+On the basis of the Provost’s assessment, the Provost will advise the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee on the findings and conclusions.    
+
+In cases where the Provost has concluded that the tenure track position be confirmed, the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee may join the Provost in a joint recommendation to the President, or, if the Committee chooses, it may conduct its own study of the position before determining its recommendation to the President.      
+
+In cases where the Provost has concluded that the tenure track designation should not be continued, the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee will evaluate the position before any recommendation is transmitted to the President.       
+
+In cases in which the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee evaluates the position, the evaluation will be conducted insofar as possible with other position evaluations (initial authorizations or re-authorizations) being carried out by the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee during the academic year. During the review, the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee will consult directly with the department or program in which the tenure track position resides before the Committee makes any written recommendation to the President.
+
+In arriving at recommendations, the Provost and the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee will utilize the guidelines set forth in Section 5.2.3 above. 
+
+As a result of this review process, the University may:
+
+Confirm the tenure track status initially assigned to the position, in which case the tenure evaluation will proceed as scheduled.
+
+Terminate the position at the end of the probationary period of the individual occupying the position.
+
+Convert the position to a Visiting Faculty position, effective with the end of the probationary period of the individual occupying the position.    
+
+It is expected that the actions in (b) and (c) above will be taken only under extraordinary conditions or in cases in which a decision has been made to phase out the program of which the position is a part.
+
+
+
+Discretionary Review
+
+At any time during the probationary period of a person occupying a tenure track position on the faculty, the Provost may charge the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee to review the position or the Committee on its own initiative may conduct such a review. Insofar as possible, the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee will conduct such a review while evaluating other faculty positions for that year.  During the review, the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee will consult directly with the department(s) or program(s) in which the position resides before the Committee makes its recommendation to the Provost and President.   
+
+Following the discretionary review, the President may:
+
+Continue the tenure track position. Normally the scheduled review still would be carried out prior to any tenure evaluation of the individual occupying the position.
+
+Terminate the position. The individual occupying the position would be notified of the termination of the position and would be offered a terminal appointment in accordance with current policies on notice of termination.
+
+Continue the position as a Visiting Faculty position. The person occupying the tenure track position would be eligible to occupy the Visiting Faculty position for no longer than the duration of that individual's probationary period.   
+
+It is expected that the actions in 2. and 3. above will be taken only under extraordinary conditions or in cases in which a decision has been made to phase out the program of which the position is a part.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Appeals Related to Regular and Discretionary Reviews
+
+Either the department, program, or the individual faculty member may appeal a decision to terminate a tenure track position or convert a tenure track position to a Visiting Faculty position as follows: 
+
+If a tenure track position is terminated or converted to a Visiting Faculty position , the department may appeal directly to the President.  The President's decision in consideration of the appeal is final.
+
+A faculty member whose position has either been terminated or converted to a Visiting Faculty position may appeal the decision. There shall be only two reasons for appeal:
+
+Allegation of the violation of academic freedom; or
+
+Allegation that established procedures or guidelines were not followed. 
+
+In the case of violation of academic freedom the appeal shall be to the Faculty Personnel Committee (see Section 3.13.2). In case of allegation of procedural violation, the appeal shall be to the Executive Committee of the Faculty (see Section 3.13.3).
+
+The faculty member’s written appeal must be filed with the appropriate committee within ten in session days of receiving the President’s decision.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Selected for Full-time Administrative Positions
+
+
+
+If a tenured member of the faculty of the University is selected for a full-time administrative position, the faculty member's academic department or program will receive a tenure-track replacement position. The search committee will be responsible for informing candidates of the conditional nature of the tenure-track position (see 3). The probationary period for the tenure-track replacement position will be six years and no credit given for prior service.
+
+The faculty member who accepted the full-time administrative position (hereinafter “faculty-administrator”) will retain tenure; however, the faculty-administrator will not be included in the official faculty count and will not be paid out of the faculty salary line in the operating budget.
+
+Full-time administrators with tenure will be eligible to return to faculty status in accordance with the procedures below, providing that the faculty member’s original position has not been eliminated pursuant to Section 3.13.6 (2)(b).
+
+If the full-time faculty-administrator decides to return to the faculty position before the probationary period for the replacement faculty member has expired (i.e., before the tenure decision has been made), then the replacement position will be discontinued and the person occupying the position so informed. The replacement faculty member will be given notice according to Section 3.12.3 .
+
+However, if the replacement faculty member has received tenure by the time the full-time faculty-administrator elects to return to the faculty, then the returning faculty member will not be included in the official faculty count, either for the department or for the University. The returning faculty member’s salary will not be paid out of the faculty salary line in the operating budget.
+
+If the replacement faculty member has received tenure by the time the full-time faculty-administrator elects to return to the faculty, it is the department’s responsibility to determine teaching assignments that best suit the needs of students, the department, and the University. Both the returning full-time faculty-administrator and the replacement faculty member should be aware that their teaching assignments may vary from the ideal for their expertise and education, and that they may be asked to retrain in order to meet the department's needs most appropriately.
+
+In the event that the full-time faculty-administrator, having returned to full-time teaching, resigns or retires, or the faculty member in the replacement position resigns or retires, then the vacated position will be discontinued. If the department wishes to apply for a continuing position, it must apply for such a position as a new position, and the position must be included in the official faculty count.
+
+	
+
+External Candidate Appointed as Provost and Granted Tenure with That Appointment
+
+A Provost who is awarded tenure at the time of initial appointment on the basis of having held tenure at another accredited higher education institution will not be included in the count of authorized faculty positions, and will not be paid out of the faculty salary line in the operating budget.
+
+At the time of resignation or is dismissal from office, the Provost may join the faculty in the department and at the rank determined at the time of hire.  The Provost will not be included in the count of authorized faculty positions, either for the department or for the University. The Provost’s salary will be established by the Board of Trustees in accordance with Article III, Section 1 of the Code of Regulations, but will not be paid out of the faculty salary line in the operating budget. 
+
+It is the department’s responsibility to determine the former Provost’s teaching assignments that best suit the needs of students, the department, and the University. The former Provost who is joining the department should be aware that  the teaching assignment may vary from the ideal for the Provost’s expertise and education, and that  the Provost may be asked to retrain in order to meet the department’s needs most appropriately.  In the alternative, the services of the former Provost may be utilized outside the department through other assignments, depending on the needs of the University. In such a case that individual may be assigned other duties, such as teaching, research, service, and/or administrative responsibilities, depending upon the needs of the University and the expertise of the faculty member. However, the individual’s tenured status shall not be affected despite such assignments.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+10</s>"
+"<s>[INST] OWU FHB Chapter 6 and Appendices.txt [/INST] Chapter VI – Amendments to the Faculty Handbook and Sanction of the Board of Trustees
+
+Amendments to the Faculty Handbook
+
+Original Proposed Text
+
+Amendments to Chapters Three, Four and Five of the Faculty Handbook may be proposed by Faculty Standing Committees, University Committees, ad-hoc committees or task forces, individual faculty members, the Provost, the President, or the Board of Trustees. Recommendations for such changes are submitted first to the Faculty Executive Committee for review and possible recommendation; then to the Faculty; then to the Provost and President; then to the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees; then to the full Board of Trustees. The Board of Trustees must act to effect any substantive change in the Faculty Handbook. The Board of Trustees retains the authority to direct changes in this Handbook at any time but has committed itself to make changes or additions only after giving opportunity for advice and counsel from the Faculty, Provost, and the President.  Changes approved by the Board of Trustees are to be reprinted and distributed promptly. Unless otherwise directed by the Board, policies in effect for a given academic year are those published in the Handbook.
+
+New Alternative Text
+
+Substantive changes to Chapters Three through Six and the appendices of the Faculty Handbook, require the approval of the Board of Trustees.  As a general practice, in keeping with principles of shared governance, the Board will approve changes or additions to the Faculty Handbook only after giving opportunity for advice and counsel from the Faculty.  Changes approved by the Board of Trustees are to be reprinted and distributed promptly. Unless otherwise directed by the Board, policies in effect for a given academic year are those published in the Faculty Handbook.
+
+A “Substantive Change” is defined as an addition, deletion, or revision of policy or procedure in the Faculty Handbook.  Whonen proposed amendments to the Faculty Handbook involve simple editing for clarity, the Executive Committee of the faculty will incorporate the revisions in the Faculty Handbook and notify the Faculty and Academic Affairs.
+
+Substantive changes to Chapters Three through Six and the appendices of the Faculty Handbook may be initiated by either the faculty or the administration, via Academic Affairs.  A proposal from a member of the faculty or standing faculty committee to substantively change the Faculty Handbook will be referred to the Executive Committee.  Substantive changes to the Faculty Handbook approved by the vote of the Faculty will be approved in accordance with the procedures below.*
+
+Faculty Review and Vote
+
+The Executive Committee will publish all proposed substantive changes to the faculty in accordance with the Faculty Bylaws, which will then vote on the matter.  If the proposed substantive change was initiated by the administration, the Faculty must vote on the matter within 120 days of receiving the proposed change (excluding the period of time between the end of the traditional nine-month full-time faculty contract period and the beginning of the new nine-month full-time time faculty contract period), unless an extension is agreeable to both the President of the University and the Executive Committee of the faculty and is expressed in writing.  
+
+A proposed substantive change representing a substantive change that was initially referred by the administration and not voted upon by the faculty within the time prescribed or that was not approved by the faculty may, at the option of the President, move forward to the Board of Trustees.  In such a case, both the faculty and the President shall have the right to provide the Board of Trustees with memoranda setting forth their positions on the proposed substantive change. 
+
+Administration Review
+
+The President, upon receipt of a proposed substantive change approved by the faculty, will either accept or reject the proposed change within 120 days of receiving the matter (excluding the period between nine-month full-time faculty contracts). 
+
+If the administration agrees with the proposed substantive change approved by the faculty, it will be forwarded to the Board of Trustees for final approval.
+
+If, however, the President does not accept the proposed substantive change, the President or the President’s designee will state the reasons therefore in writing to the faculty.  If a resolution mutually acceptable to the parties cannot be reached and ultimately approved by the faculty, the President will submit the proposed amendment to the Board of Trustees for a final decision.  Both the faculty and the President shall have the right to provide the Board of Trustees with memoranda setting forth their positions on the proposed substantive change. 
+
+Board of Trustees Review
+
+Any proposed amendment causing a substantive change to Chapters Three through Six and the appendices of the Faculty Handbook will be submitted by the President to the Board of Trustees for review and approval, which shall have the ultimate authority to adopt the proposed amendment.  
+
+If the Board of Trustees either (a) does not approve a proposed amendment approved by the faculty; or (b) approves a proposed amendment the faculty has not voted affirmatively to approve, the Board of Trustees will provide the faculty with a memorandum detailing its rationale.
+
+In engaging in the procedural processes outlined above and in appreciation of the principles of shared governance and in the interest of the general well-being of the University, the administration and Board of Trustees will weigh heavily the faculty’s recommendations pertaining to the policies published in Chapters Three through Six and the appendices of the Faculty Handbook.  The faculty, administration, and Board of Trustees shall work meaningfully and sincerely with each other in addressing these matters of institutional importance.  
+
+Conflict with Federal, State or Local Law: If any provision of the Faculty Handbook is in conflict with federal, State, or local law, or is otherwise illegal, the remainder of the Faculty Handbook shall not be affected.  The Faculty shall make it a priority to meet and resolve the conflict in conjunction with the administration.
+
+*Note: These revision procedures do not apply to amendments to the Faculty Bylaws or descriptions of the faculty standing committees published in Chapter Two of the Faculty Handbook.  Amendments to the Faculty Bylaws or descriptions of the faculty standing committees are governed by the process published in Article V of the Faculty Bylaws.
+
+
+
+Sanction of Board of Trustees
+
+															Subject only to the limitations imposed upon the Board of Trustees by the Constitution and the laws of the State of Ohio, by the Charter of the University and its Code of Regulations, and by the practical exigencies of enrollment and finances available as judged by the Board, the applicable provisions set forth in the Faculty Handbook shall be deemed a part of the University's contractual commitment to each faculty member in consideration of the individual’s faithful adherence to the faculty member’s own contractual commitments to the University. The President of the University or the President’s designee shall employ faculty members and enter into binding contracts with them on this basis, subject to confirmation by the Board of Trustees.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Appendices
+
+Appendix A: Faculty Personnel Forms
+
+Links to be added to current forms
+
+Appendix B: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Policy
+
+Link to policy to be added
+
+Appendix C. Policy Statement on Appointment of Librarians
+
+Librarians make a significant contribution to the educational program and general academic life of a college. They have an important responsibility for developing library collections, for bibliographical control over these collections, for informing students about library resources and uses, and for advising faculty in the use of the collection. They answer questions, compile bibliographies, and strive to improve library processes and practices. Their work involves high-level skills of communication, analysis, organization, and follow-through, among others. It requires trained intelligence and graduate professional education.
+
+Given the close involvement of librarians in support of the faculty's teaching and the student's learning, professional librarians at Ohio Wesleyan will be voting members of the Faculty and will be eligible for election to the committees of that body. Because the duties and responsibilities of librarians are significantly different in important respects from those of the classroom faculty, appointments of librarians will not necessarily be governed by the terms and conditions applicable to classroom faculty, but will, except as explicitly noted herein, be governed by those of the non-faculty professional staff of the University. In addition to membership in the faculty body as noted above, the following special terms and conditions will be applicable to librarians.
+
+Performance appraisals of librarians, including the Director of Libraries, will make use of the general staff evaluation process implemented by the Office of Human Resources. Using the information from this process and consulting with the Director of Libraries, except when the Director’s own case is involved, the Provost shall make final personnel recommendations to the President. Performance appraisals of librarians, including the Director of Libraries, will make use of several sources of information including a self-report, evaluations from librarian colleagues, and evaluation by library patrons. The Library Subcommittee of the Committee on Teaching and Assessment will determine appropriate procedures for evaluation by patrons. Using the above information and consulting with the Director of Libraries except, of course, when the director’s own case is involved, the Provost shall make final personnel recommendations to the President.  
+
+	The normal highest degree for professional librarians is the master's degree in library science. Librarians entering employment with this degree will be paid at the level of entering teaching faculty with comparable training and experience. They will also participate in salary increases on the same basis as faculty members and other professional staff.
+
+	Librarians will be eligible to apply for paid study leaves after six years since start of service or since the last leave. Such leaves will not be automatic, but must be approved by the Provost upon recommendation of the Director of Libraries in consultation with the Teaching and Assessment Committee Library Subcommittee of the Committee on Teaching and Learning for projects which promise to advance the contribution of the library to the academic life of the institution. They normally will be granted for an eight-week period in the summer, which period shall be in addition to the usual one-month annual vacation.
+
+	A librarian may be the instructor of record for credit bearing student work upon approval of the Provost, who will make an appropriate appointment on the recommendation of the department or program which has responsibility for the course(s) involved. On the recommendation of the Faculty Personnel Committee, this appointment may be a continuing departmental ""courtesy appointment."" In other cases, it will be for the academic term of the course(s) involved.
+
+	A librarian may use the appropriate appeal process in the Faculty Handbook for a case he or she believes involves violation of his or her allegations of violations of academic freedom.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+10</s>"
+"<s>[INST] OWU FHB Chapters 1 and 2.txt [/INST] Ti
+
+tleFACULTY HANDBOOK
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+OHIO WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY
+
+
+
+Committee Draft
+
+
+
+
+
+					Ohio Wesleyan University
+Faculty Handbook
+
+	
+
+In accordance with its mission to “forever be conducted on the most liberal principles, accessible to all religious denominations and designed for the benefit of our citizens in general,” the University has as its preeminent purpose to be a quality institution for teaching and learning.  The University therefore seeks to affirm, preserve, and strive to improve the quality of instruction and mentoring provided to our students and the level of professional expertise and accomplishments of our Faculty.  These values take form in policies and procedures in the Faculty Handbook that impact decisions creating and sustaining faculty positions, in faculty appointments, through professional development, in the application of criteria and standards during evaluations for reappointment, tenure, promotion, and merit increases, and in the provision of fair, inclusive, and equitable working conditions, salaries, and benefits.  In adopting the Faculty Handbook, the Board of Trustees affirms its commitment to maintaining a strong faculty whose primary responsibility is to provide the best educational opportunities to our students by imparting knowledge, developing and enhancing certain important capabilities of our students, and placing education in the context of values.  The policies and procedures set out in the Faculty Handbook define the respective contractual duties and responsibilities of the Faculty and the University in accordance with this central tenet in the University’s mission. 
+
+
+
+Faculty Committee Advice
+
+															In every case involving the application of the policies and procedures pertaining to faculty personnel matters contained  in Chapters Two and Three of the Faculty Handbook, the President or the Provost may call upon the Faculty Personnel Committee for advice and recommendations.  Such advice is to be interpreted and understood within the context of the University’s mission and aims.
+
+
+
+Chapter One: Code of Regulations of the Trustees of the Ohio Wesleyan University 
+
+Insert link to current Code of Regulations
+
+
+
+
+Chapter Two: Faculty Governance 
+
+Faculty Bylaws
+
+	Article I: Organization of the Faculty
+
+	Section 1.	Members of the Faculty shall be (a) the President, the Provost, the Vice Presidents; (b) all persons appointed with the ranks of professor, associate professor, assistant professor, or instructor; (c) professional librarians; and (d) others admitted to membership by vote of the Faculty.  Voting members shall be those of the above who hold full-time University appointments. When voting takes place at meetings of the Faculty, voting members  must be present if they wish to vote. However, in the event a person is unable to attend a faculty meeting due to illness or a family or medical emergency, that person may either vote by absentee ballot or electronic ballot for elections to faculty committees only. The person must arrange with the Office of the Provost both to pick up and deliver the absentee ballot. . If the person is to vote in the election by electronic ballot, the Office of the Provost will email the electronic ballot to the eligible faculty member’s official University email address.
+
+	Section 2.	The permanent officers of the Faculty shall be the President of the University, the Provost, the Secretary, and the Parliamentarian of the Faculty. The Secretary shall be elected by the Faculty at the regular April meeting for a term of two years commencing on the June first following such election. The Parliamentarian may be elected by the Faculty at the regular April meeting for a term of two years commencing on the June first following such election. The Parliamentarian shall give interpretations of procedure when requested to do so by the presiding officer, or on the Parliamentarian’s own volition. Any interpretation by the Parliamentarian shall hold unless it is overruled by a two-thirds majority of those Faculty members present and voting.  In the event of a vacancy, the Parliamentarian shall be elected by the Faculty at the next regular meeting of the Faculty.
+
+	Section 3.	The Provost shall be the presiding officer over all faculty meetings except when the President of the University chooses to preside. In the event neither the President of the University nor the Provost can preside at a regular meeting of the Faculty, the senior full professor, in terms of service, on the Executive Committee shall be the presiding officer of the meeting .  
+
+	Section 4.	The Secretary of the Faculty shall prepare and keep full and complete minutes of all faculty meetings. If, for any reason, the Secretary is unable to perform  the secretarial duties, the Provost shall appoint a secretary pro term who shall perform the functions of the Secretary.
+
+	
+
+	Article II: Committees of the Faculty
+
+	Section 1.	Standing Committees of the Faculty shall be designated, elected and directed by the Faculty and shall have as ex officio members the President of the University and the Provost. Ad hoc committees of the Faculty are to be established by the Faculty only when the subject matter is outside the area of responsibility of a standing committee.
+
+	Section 2.	Except as may otherwise be provided in these Faculty Bylaws, the term of office for committee members shall be six semesters and shall commence on July 1 and end on June 30 of the sixth semester thereafter, or when successors have been elected or appointed. Leave time of up to one year is included as part of a faculty member's term. In the event that a faculty member takes leave time in excess of one year, the faculty member is required to relinquish committee assignments. No member of the Faculty shall serve more than 14 consecutive semesters on the same standing committee of the Faculty. A faculty member may not serve on a committee on which the faculty member has served 14 consecutive semesters until two consecutive semesters have elapsed. If a faculty member vacates  a term of office on any standing committee because of election to another standing committee, the faculty member may not resume service on the first committee when the term on the second committee expires.
+
+	Section 3.	Normally, a faculty member shall serve on no more than one standing committee. Exceptions to this rule may be adopted as provisions in the official descriptions of particular committees.
+
+	Section 4.	Except as otherwise provided, it shall be the duty of each committee of the Faculty: 1. To keep the Faculty informed of agenda items on which the committee is working that may affect the long-term future of the institution, its faculty or students.  The committee shall provide opportunity for Faculty response and questions where feasible and appropriate, whether at the time of an oral report to the Faculty, at an open meeting, in surveys or by other means.  2. To act for the Faculty when and as directed by the Faculty. 3. To make recommendations to the Faculty on matters of policy relevant to its area of responsibility.
+
+	Section 5.	Except as otherwise provided, each committee of the Faculty shall elect its chair and vice chair and be responsible to the Faculty for its own organization and procedures.
+
+	Section 6.	A committee of the Faculty can, upon a majority vote of its members, invite other persons to participate in its deliberations, but only members of the committee shall be permitted to vote.  
+
+	Section 7.	With the exception of the Faculty Reappointment Appeals Committee and the Academic Conduct Review Board, each committee of the Faculty shall make a full and complete report of its activities during the academic year at the regularly scheduled meeting in April.
+
+	Section 8.	In the event an elected member of a standing or ad hoc committee of the Faculty is unable to complete the faculty member’s full term of office, the Executive Committee of the Faculty shall seek a replacement at the earliest opportunity, applying the methods outlined in Chapter II, Article II, Section 2 above and Article IV., Section 3., below.  A faculty member elected to fill a vacancy shall serve the unexpired committee term of the individual whom the newly elected faculty member succeeds.  
+
+	Section 9.	Whenever provision is made for faculty representation on Trustee, Administration, University, Divisional, or Departmental Councils, Boards, or Committees, it shall be the responsibility of such faculty representatives to keep the Faculty informed of the activities of these bodies and act as liaison between them and the Faculty.
+
+	Section 10.	In consultation with the President and the Provost, the Executive Committee will set the initial meeting time for new faculty committees prior to the election of faculty committee members. For all existing faculty committees except the Wesleyan Council on Student Affairs (“WCSA”), the initial meeting time may be changed, beginning the following academic year, by 1) a unanimous vote of all faculty and administrators with a continuing term of office and 2) a majority vote of the Faculty. Faculty committee meeting dates and times for the remainder of the academic year are scheduled by the unanimous vote of the members of the respective committees, reported to the Executive Committee, and shared with the Faculty.  
+
+	
+
+	Article III: Meetings
+
+	Section 1.	Regular monthly meetings of the University Faculty shall be held during the academic year. No regular monthly meeting shall last longer than ninety minutes unless it is extended by a majority vote of those present. At the last regular meeting of each academic year, a schedule of meeting dates for the coming year shall be adopted by the Executive Committee, provided that the time or place of meetings may be changed or the meeting may be canceled by the presiding officer or the Executive Committee, when it is deemed in the interest of the Faculty to do so.  If ten members of the Faculty requests by written petition that a cancelled meeting be reinstated, the presiding officer of the Faculty shall call the meeting.
+
+	Section 2.	Special meetings of the Faculty shall be held at the call of the presiding officer or the Executive Committee or upon the request of 10 members of the Faculty transmitted in writing to the Secretary of the Faculty.
+
+	Section 3.	In-person meetings are the usual method for conducting Faculty meetings, with electronic meetings held when circumstances make it advisable that the Faculty not gather as a whole in person.  Determinations of whether the meeting shall be held electronically are made by the presiding officer in consultation with the Chair of the Executive Committee.  When meetings of the Faculty are to be conducted electronically, they shall be through use of an electronic meeting services designated by the Executive Committee.  When a meeting is held electronically, that meeting will function as a regular meeting of the Faculty and all actions and deliberations within such a meeting will have the same standing as an in-person meeting.  A vote conducted through the designated electronic meeting service shall be deemed a ballot vote, fulfilling any requirement in these Bylaws that a vote be conducted by ballot.
+
+	Section 4	Consistent with our shared governance system, attendance at Faculty meetings is expected of all members of the Faculty with voting privileges. 
+
+	Section 5	Except for executive sessions, faculty meetings shall be open to all members of the Ohio Wesleyan University staff and guests invited by a majority vote of the Faculty.  Reporters, whether affiliated with the university or not, shall not be admitted as guests to the monthly meetings of the Ohio Wesleyan University faculty.  Minutes of the meeting shall be documented by the Secretary and distributed to the Faculty within seven business days of the meeting.
+
+	Section 6.	After the completion of the regular order of business, the Faculty shall go into executive session at the request of any member of the Faculty; it may vote to do so at any other time on motion to that effect.
+
+	Section 7.	The agenda of each faculty meeting shall include the following items in the order specified: 1. Call to order. 2. Introduction of guests. 3. Approval of minutes. 4. Old business. 5. New business. 6. Reports of Faculty committees. 7. Report of University officers. 8. Announcements.  9. Adjournment. The agenda of each faculty meeting shall be emailed 96 hours in advance of the meeting.  On any subject requiring a vote, a detailed report should accompany the agenda, such report should include the proposal to be voted on and substantiating statements. On a subject not requiring a vote, advance materials for the Faculty are desirable but optional. The Faculty shall have the right to waive the 96 hour rule by majority vote. The motion to waive must be accompanied by a rationale for suspending the rule. The motion to waive is debatable.
+
+	Section 8.	A majority of the voting members of the Faculty who are not on approved leave shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.  Unless otherwise provided in these Bylaws, when a vote is taken on any matter at a meeting of the Faculty, a quorum being present, a majority of the votes of the members present shall determine the outcome.  If voting is by electronic ballot, a majority of votes cast shall determine the outcome.  
+
+	Section 9.	The proceedings and deliberations of the Faculty shall be governed by Robert's Rules of Order, except that upon the request of a voting member of the meeting the body will vote by secret or electronic ballot.
+
+	Section 10.	Faculty action within an area of primary responsibility as defined in the Article VIII, Section 2 of the Code of Regulations shall be transmitted to the Board of Trustees by the President, along with any administrative recommendations.
+
+	
+
+	Article IV: Nominations and Election Procedures
+
+	Section 1.	The Executive Committee of the Faculty shall act as a Nominating Committee of the Faculty. The agenda of the February faculty meeting shall include a slate of nominees for those faculty committees the members of which do not, under the provisions of Bylaws Article II, Section 3, normally serve on more than one standing committee of the Faculty. The elections for these committees will occur in the March faculty meeting. For all other committees or other responsibilities to which faculty members are elected, the Executive Committee will prepare a slate of nominees for the March faculty meeting; the elections for these positions shall be in the April faculty meeting. In preparing all ballots, the slate will consist of, insofar as possible, at least fifty percent more nominees than positions to be filled. After the Executive Committee's slate has been presented, there shall be a call for nominations from the floor.  
+
+	Section 2.	At all elections, each member of the Faculty shall have as many votes as there are positions to be filled for each office. Depending upon the number of offices to be filled, the candidate, or candidates, receiving the greatest number of votes shall be certified as elected by the Chair of the Executive Committee of the Faculty or the Chair’s designate. In the event of ties, a runoff election will be held by mail ballot. The official announcement of the election results shall be made by the presiding officer as soon as possible after each of the March and April elections.
+
+	Section 3.	The Executive Committee shall fill, or cause to be filled by election, vacancies on committees created when members cannot serve some or all of their terms of service. A vacancy for an unexpired term of one or more full academic years shall be filled by election in the spring or at the earliest possible fall meeting of the Faculty, depending on when the vacancy becomes known to the Executive Committee. Vacancies of less than a full academic year on all committees other than Faculty Personnel Committee shall be filled by appointment by the Executive Committee, unless such partial year vacancies can be summed to one or more full academic years, in which case each summed vacancy shall be filled by election. When such summed vacancies are known in time, the election(s) shall be held in the spring. Otherwise, summed vacancies shall be filled by special election at the first possible faculty meeting in the fall.  Pending the election, the Executive Committee may temporarily appoint a replacement faculty member so as to not delay the work of the committee.
+
+	Section 4.	The President or Provost may appoint, in consultation with Executive Committee, members of the Faculty to administrative committees, ad hoc committees, task forces, and working groups as determined by the written statement or charter establishing the committee, task force or working group. A written statement of the purpose, scope, and expected timetable of administrative committees, ad hoc committees, task forces, or working group will be presented to  Executive Committee, and reports will be distributed to  Executive Committee and to any appropriate Faculty committees at the conclusion of the work of the ad hoc committee, task force, or working group.
+
+	
+
+	Article V: Amendments
+
+Upon the motion of any members of the Faculty at any one of its regularly scheduled meetings, a motion to amend, alter, or abolish any bylaw of the Faculty or description of faculty committee may be entertained. No vote shall be taken on any such motion, however, until it has been submitted in written form to the Secretary of the Faculty and, by the Secretary, circulated among the Faculty at least 12 full class days before the vote at the next regularly scheduled Faculty meeting or at a meeting called especially for that purpose. If approved by a three-fifths majority of the members present and voting where a quorum is present, the amendment shall have carried.
+
+
+
+
+Descriptions of Faculty Committees
+
+For the purpose of determining eligibility for membership on Faculty Committees, the word ""faculty"" appearing under Membership or Membership Qualifications shall be understood to include all persons appointed with the ranks of professor, associate professor, assistant professor, instructor, or professional librarian and to not include all persons that serve half-time or more in the administration.
+
+The committees described below are considered non-overlap committees.  Faculty may not serve on two non-overlap committees at the same time:
+
+Committee on University Governance
+
+Duties
+
+It shall be the responsibility of the Chair and Vice Chair to meet with the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees and for the total committee to meet with the full Board and to cooperate with the officers of the University in fiscal planning and budgeting. Such responsibility shall include consideration of the size of the administration and of the number of faculty in relation to the number of students, seen from the overall institutional perspective. On matters affecting academic programs, the committee shall work together with the Committee on Academic Programs and the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee. The Committee on University Governance shall also act as liaison between faculty and administration on such matters of faculty welfare as pensions, insurance programs, sick leaves, group health, retirement, tuition benefits, and faculty aid.
+
+Membership
+
+Four faculty members.
+
+Membership Qualification
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+
+
+Faculty Personnel Committee
+
+Duties
+
+	To develop for faculty consideration and Board of Trustees approval recommendations on policies related to the employment and reappointment of faculty members, their promotions, tenure, merit increases, and leaves of absence.
+
+	To evaluate faculty members for retention, promotion, tenure, merit increases, and leaves of absences, and to make recommendations on individual cases to the administration; 
+
+	To recommend to the administration appointments to vacant endowed or named chairs.
+
+	To evaluate the performance of the Provost and to report these evaluations to the President of the University. An evaluation will be performed in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th years of service and every four years thereafter, unless more frequent evaluations is deemed necessary by the Committee. A review also will be performed in years when a search is being conducted for a new President.
+
+	Alternative Model Text
+
+	To provide Faculty feedback to the President regarding the Provost’s performance.  Feedback will be provided every three years, unless more frequent feedback is deemed necessary by the President.  
+
+	As a full committee, to interview candidates for the senior ranks (full and associate professors) and to make recommendations in regard to their appointment.
+
+	To provide a member of the committee to work with two faculty members appointed by the Provost to interview all candidates in other than senior ranks for each particular position or vacancy.
+
+	To recommend to the President of the University the recipients of the Welch Award for Scholarly or Artistic Achievement and for the Sherwood Dodge Shankland Award for Encouragement of Teachers.
+
+	To contribute to the annual performance evaluation of the people who report directly to the Provost by collecting evaluative comments from selected faculty and reporting a summary to the Provost. Comments will be collected beginning in the second year of service and every three years thereafter unless a greater frequency is deemed necessary by the Committee.
+
+Membership
+
+Seven faculty members, with inclusive and diverse representation. Administrative members are not considered voting member when the issue on the floor of the committee concerns a recommendation to the administration.  If a member cannot serve in either semester in any year of an unexpired term (due to a leave or for other reasons), that member must be replaced for the entire year.  The one-year vacancy will be filled by election as described in Article IV, Section 3 of the Faculty Bylaws. The committee’s actions shall have full force and effect during the period of vacancy.
+
+Membership Qualification
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.  
+
+
+
+Executive Committee of the Faculty
+
+Duties
+
+	To review the structure, and function of all existing faculty committees when deemed necessary by the committee, but at least once every ten years; to review the structure and function of all proposed faculty committees; to review the annual reports of all existing faculty committees once per year; to recommend such changes as seem desirable.
+
+	To work with the Provost on updating the Faculty Handbook as necessary.  
+
+	To nominate members of standing and ad hoc committees and to fill committee vacancies of less than one year's duration.
+
+	To conduct the necessary elections of members to all faculty committees.
+
+	To make available and count secret ballots at faculty meetings.
+
+	To be responsible for assigning to the appropriate standing committee, or committees, any problem or issue not already allocated as a regular function of any existing committee, when consideration of such problem or issue has been requested by appropriate faculty action or deemed advisable by the Executive Committee.
+
+	To provide the election process for faculty members to serve on administrative committees, task force or working group outside the Faculty Standing Committee structure of Ohio Wesleyan University that require elected faculty members pursuant to the charge of the committee or task force.  Administrative committees, task forces, or working groups whose charge call for the appointment of faculty members shall be appointed by the President or Provost after consultation with the Executive Committee. 
+
+	To consider a grievance, brought by any member of the Faculty, for which no regular committee channel or University policy is available, providing attempts have been made to resolve the matter informally through the good offices of the Chair, or Provost (as appropriate). In such matters, the Executive Committee will operate in an advisory capacity to the President.
+
+	To act as liaison between faculty and administration on matters not specifically assigned to other regular standing committees.
+
+	To act for the Faculty during extended vacation periods or in an emergency of such urgency as to make impractical the timely assembly of the Faculty.
+
+Membership
+
+Seven faculty members.
+
+Membership Qualification
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+
+
+Committee on Academic Programs
+
+An academic program is any set of courses that leads to a degree granted by the institution.
+
+Duties
+
+	To review the functioning of academic programs as needed, taking into consideration the academic plan of the institution; and to bring recommendations to the Faculty and administration regarding:
+
+	changes in course offerings; including temporary, permanent, summer, and online courses;
+
+	changes to a major or minor;
+
+	University wide requirements and policies including competency and distribution requirements;
+
+	changes in the academic program structure of the University, including the creation or termination of academic programs.
+
+	To collect program reviews from all academic programs, to work with the Provost’s office to ensure that all program reviews are stored securely and accessible to the Faculty.
+
+Membership
+
+Seven faculty members, one member of the administration, and one student. Administrative members are not considered voting members when the issue on the floor of the committee concerns a recommendation to the administration.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration: By virtue of the office or appointment by the President.
+
+Students: As selected by WCSA.
+
+
+
+Academic Planning and Allocation Committee
+
+The total academic program is the aggregate of all academic programs.
+
+Duties
+
+To review the functioning of the total academic program across the previous two academic years; to provide a report on the review to the Faculty.
+
+To review the academic plan of the institution reported by the administration in the previous academic year; to provide a report on the review of the Faculty.
+
+To develop short- and long-term policy goals for advancing the total academic program, taking into consideration the functioning of the total academic program and the academic plan of the institution; to provide a report on the goals the Faculty.
+
+To convene an academic planning meeting twice each year with all APAC members and the faculty chairs of all non-overlap committees for the purposes of sharing information and providing feedback:
+
+In September, the committee chairs shall provide an update on planned committee actions that affect the academic programs;
+
+In March, the administration shall provide an update on the academic plan of the institution.
+
+To keep under continuing review the resources required for the total academic program and for proposed or adopted changes in academic programs as follows:
+
+To consult with the Committee on University Governance during the preparation of the University budget, especially concerning those portions which may affect the academic programs. Such responsibility shall include consideration of the number of Faculty om relation to the number of students, seen from a program perspective.
+
+To recommend for faculty consideration and appropriate action policies and procedures regarding changes in faculty positions, after the necessary review, consultation, and analysis of relevant data.
+
+To recommend for the administration’s approval allocations of faculty positions among teaching areas, taking into account the potential effects of such allocations on the total academic program.
+
+To report to the Faculty on the work of the committee regarding faculty position changes, as fully as is compatible with the confidentiality of personnel information.
+
+Membership
+
+Seven faculty members.  Administrative members are not considered voting members when the when the issue on the floor of the committee concerns a recommendation to the administration.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+	
+
+Teaching and Assessment Committee
+
+Duties
+
+Taking into consideration the learning assessment report collected from each academic program every two years, analyze the educational environment at Ohio Wesleyan University and encourage and assist Faculty in reaching the education goals of the University. This is accomplished by supporting and assessing the educational efforts of the Faculty and academic programs in the following ways:
+
+Promote faculty development, support the teaching and learning goals of academic programs, support efforts to create and maintain inclusive learning environments.
+
+Develop and promote on-campus programs and workshops; advocate for resources to support these initiatives.
+
+Review the recommendations made by the Director of International and Off Campus Programs on the awarding of Theory to Practice Grants, and make changes deemed necessary by the committee to these recommendations.
+
+Review the policies and adequacy of academic facilities including the library, information services and bookstore, and recommend priorities regarding University pedagogical resources.
+
+Review the policies and procedures for international, domestic, and summer off-campus programs in consultation with the Director of International and Off Campus Programs.
+
+Encourage faculty involvement in international off-campus education and faculty development in international issues through their own international study and research.
+
+Assessment of student learning within and across academic programs; assessment of the educational goals of the University.  
+
+To collect and evaluate a learning assessment report from each academic program once every two years.
+
+To offer assistance to academic programs and administrative units in the construction and implementation of assessment plans and assessment instruments.
+
+To develop and implement, in consultation with academic departments and others, an assessment plan for the University’s general education program.
+
+To respond to the Higher Learning Commission’s initiatives regarding assessment.
+
+To communicate in a timely manner with the Chair of the Committee on Academic Programs regarding assessment issues that are pertinent to the work of the committee.
+
+Membership
+
+Five faculty members, at least one from each academic division (Social Sciences, Humanities, Fine and Performing Arts, Natural Sciences/Mathematics), the Academic Administrator who oversees assessment, the Director of Libraries, the Director of International and Off-Campus Programs, and two students.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty:  A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration:  By virtue of the office.
+
+Students:  As selected by WCSA.
+
+	
+
+Academic Status Committee
+
+Duties
+
+To serve in an advisory capacity for policies and procedures related to academic counseling, academic advising and new student registration and orientation.
+
+To formulate and recommend for faculty consideration and to implement all policies governing academic warning, academic standing, dismissal of students for academic reasons, and re-admittance of students following academic dismissal.
+
+To review student petitions for exceptions to university academic policies and procedures.  These include, but are not limited to, course registration and graduation requirements.
+
+To review appeals of academic dismissals and applications for re-admittance following dismissal.
+
+Membership
+
+Five faculty members, the Registrar, one administrator involved in advising from the office of Academic Affairs, and one administrator from the Division of Student Affairs, and two student members.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration: By virtue of the office or appointment by the Provost or Vice President of Student Affairs.
+
+Students: As selected by WCSA.
+
+	
+
+Committee on Enrollment and Communications
+
+Duties
+
+	To exercise primary responsibility over academic standards and policies for the admission of students to the university.
+
+	To advise the Vice President for Enrollment and Communications and, as needed, the President and Provost on enrollment-related issues.
+
+	To collaborate with Enrollment and Communications to optimize admission, financial aid, and communication practices.
+
+	To serve as a liaison to the faculty by communicating (1) how policy is established and managed by the Offices of Admission, Financial Aid and Communications, and (2) other enrollment-related information relevant to teaching and to faculty policy decisions.
+
+	To support and ensure accurate and robust representation of OWU’s academic offerings and faculty members in on- and off-campus programs and marketing initiatives for prospective students.
+
+	To advise the administration on student retention issues that pertain to enrollment management.  
+
+Membership
+
+Five faculty members, the Vice President for Enrollment and Communications, and two students. Administrative members are not considered voting members when the issue on the floor of the committee concerns a recommendation to the administration.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration: By virtue of the office.
+
+Students: As selected by WCSA.
+
+	
+
+Committee on Women and Gender
+
+Duties
+
+	To review all policies and procedures insofar as they affect faculty, staff, administration, or students on the basis of their sex, gender, or sexual orientation.
+
+	To recommend to the Faculty and appropriate committees such changes as seem desirable.
+
+	To act as liaison between the faculty, administration, and all other interested groups on issues related to women, gender, and sexual orientation.
+
+	To collect and communicate data and other information related to women, gender, and sexual orientation.
+
+Membership
+
+Five faculty members, one administrator, two staff members one selected from the clerical staff and one from the housekeeping staff - and two students. The Coordinator of the Women's Resource Center shall be invited to serve as an ex officio member.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+	Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+	Administration: By appointment of the President.
+
+	Staff: As selected by appropriate staff action.
+
+	Students: As selected by appropriate student action.
+
+
+
+The committees described below are considered overlap committees. Faculty may serve on both an overlap committee and other faculty committees at the same time:
+
+
+
+Committee on Intercollegiate Athletics
+
+Duties
+
+	To recommend to the administration and faculty policies under which the intercollegiate athletics program of the University shall be maintained.
+
+	To participate in and approve of the scheduling of all intercollegiate athletic events and post-season competition. To formulate policy guidelines for the scheduling of intercollegiate athletic events.
+
+	To formulate policies for the review and approval of athletic awards to student participants in the intercollegiate athletic program.
+
+	To establish recommend procedures by which groups or clubs apply for varsity sport status, and to make recommendations to the administration and faculty regarding approval of a sport for varsity status.
+
+	To recommend and review policies and procedures regarding the use of university recreational and athletic facilities.
+
+Membership
+
+The chair of the Department of Health and Human Kinetics.
+
+Three faculty members not in the Department of Health and Human Kinetics, one of whom shall serve as chair.
+
+The Men's and Women's Faculty Athletic Representatives (FARs) to the North Coast Athletic Conference.
+
+Two University administrators.
+
+The University’s Title IX Representative for Athletics.
+
+Two Athletic administrators.
+
+Two students, one woman and one man.
+
+Two alumni, one woman and one man, shall be non-voting members.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+	Department of Health and Human Kinetics chair: By virtue of the office.
+
+	Other Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty, but not a member of the Department of Health and Human Kinetics. Faculty may simultaneously be members of other standing committees of the Faculty, Article II, Section 3 of the Faculty Bylaws notwithstanding.
+
+	Faculty Representatives to the North Coast Conference: By virtue of the office.
+
+	University Administration: By appointment of the President.
+
+	The University’s Title IX Representative for Athletics: By virtue of the position.
+
+	Athletic Administration:
+
+	Director of Athletics
+
+	Ranking male athletic administrator if Director of Athletics is a woman; or Senior Women’s Administrator if Director of Athletics is a man.
+
+	Students: A student in the University appointed by WCSA; one woman and one man.
+
+	Alumni: A member of the “W” Association appointed by the Director of Alumni Relations.  Term limit of 3 years (renewable).  
+
+	
+
+Reappointment Appeals Committee
+
+Duties
+
+To entertain appeals from faculty members who have been denied reappointment (including denials of tenure) according to procedures and policies developed by the Faculty, approved by the Board of Trustees, and described in the Faculty Handbook.
+
+Membership
+
+Five faculty members and three faculty alternates elected for overlapping three-year terms. The alternates shall replace faculty members who disqualify themselves for consideration of specific individual appeal cases.
+
+Membership Qualification
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan Faculty. Members and alternates may simultaneously be members of other standing committees of the Faculty (except current members and members elect of the Faculty Personnel Committee), Article II, Section 3 of the Faculty Bylaws notwithstanding.
+
+Trustee-Faculty Committee
+
+Duties
+
+To fulfill the responsibilities designated in the Code of Regulations to the Trustee-Faculty Liaison Committee and the Committee on Honorary Degrees.
+
+Membership
+
+Six faculty members.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+
+
+Ohio Wesleyan Council on Student Affairs
+
+Duties
+
+To formulate basic policies on all matters related to student life outside the classroom.
+
+To make regular written reports to the President, to the Faculty at its regular meeting, and to the Board of Trustees through the President.
+
+To prepare an annual report to be made available to all constituencies prior to the end of the academic year.
+
+Membership
+
+Thirty-two students.
+
+One faculty member, non-voting.
+
+Two members of the administration, non-voting.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+Faculty:  A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.
+
+Administration:  By appointment of the President.
+
+Students:  As selected by appropriate student action.
+
+
+
+Academic Conduct Review Board
+
+Duties
+
+To hear and rule on alleged cases of academic dishonesty according to procedures and policies in the Academic Honesty Policy.
+
+Membership
+
+Three faculty members and one faculty alternate, the Dean of Academic Affairs, and two students.
+
+Membership Qualifications
+
+	Faculty: A member of the Ohio Wesleyan University Faculty.  Faculty may simultaneously be members of other standing committees of the Faculty, Article II, Section 3 of the Faculty Bylaws notwithstanding.
+
+	Administration:  By appointment of the President.
+
+	Students:  As selected by WCSA.
+
+
+
+
+	
+
+10
+
+
+
+
+
+viii</s>"
+<s>[INST] OWU HR Policies Proposal - Final.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] OWU HR Policies Proposal.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] OWU PEER SCHOOLS.txt [/INST] OWU PEER SCHOOLS
+
+
+
+https://www.wesleyan.edu/acaf/faculty/faculty-handbook/_files/2020-2021-faculty_handbook.pdf</s>"
+<s>[INST] OWU Proposal - FInal (Three Segments).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] OWU Proposal - FInal Three Segments w- Revised OWU Terms).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] OWU Proposal - FInal.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] OWU Proposal - Proposed Three Segments w- Revised OWU Terms).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] OWU Updated Faculty HB (Draft 1) (8.10).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] OWU Updated Faculty HB (Draft 3 TOC) (11.22).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Pacifica Faculty Ranking System (Draft 1).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] PAYMENT CARD INFORMATION SECURITY POLICY (SS Comments).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Peer Evaluation Summaries.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Peer Listing.txt [/INST] Peer Listing
+
+
+
+Northeast 9 Comparison Group
+
+
+
+Bates College
+
+Colby College
+
+Connecticut College (Not Available)
+
+Hamilton College
+
+Haverford College
+
+Hobart & William Smith College
+
+Muhlenberg College 
+
+Trinity College
+
+
+
+NSSE Peer Group
+
+
+
+Bryn Mawr College (Not Available)
+
+Connecticut College (Not Available)
+
+Dickinson College
+
+Franklin & Marshall College (Not Available)
+
+Hobart & William Smith College
+
+Lawrence University (Not Available)
+
+Ohio Wesleyan
+
+Ursinus College
+
+Washington & Jefferson College
+
+Wofford College (Not Avaliable)</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Peer Memo.txt [/INST] 22
+
+
+
+
+
+June 28, 2022
+
+
+
+TO:	Karlyn Crowley and Dale Brugh
+
+FROM: 	Stephen Lazarus
+Sr. Consultant
+Stevens Strategy
+
+RE: 	Faculty Handbook Content and Identification of Comparison Institutions
+
+During the June 1, 2022, Zoom session with the Review Team, a request was made to provide examples of faculty handbooks that in my judgement are well organized and limited in content to faculty governance, faculty status matters, and other policies addressing employment rights or responsibilities unique to the faculty.  In response to the team’s request, I briefly set forth in this memorandum the reasoning why I advocate that faculty handbooks be limited in scope to the aforementioned areas.  Thereafter, I identify and summarize the content of peer and other comparison institution handbooks that adhere to the content guidelines referenced above and/or make use of hyperlinks to avoid duplication of policies that have wider application to other campus community members.
+
+Inclusion of Human Resource, Campus Community, and Other Policies
+
+While many colleges and universities, including most of Ohio Wesleyan’s comparison institutions, continue to publish or paraphrase select employment and/or campus-community policies in their faculty handbooks or manuals, doing so promotes obsolescence and confusion about what constitutes an area of primary faculty responsibility.  Such a practice also creates potential risk management issues.  The latter commonly manifests itself in the context of a faculty handbook that includes dated policy that potentially conflicts with or, at a minimum, does not mirror current university policy.  Indeed, this appears to be the case at St. Mary’s.  For example, the Equity Discrimination Resolution Process for Resolving Allegations of Harassment and Discrimination published in Appendix H-2 does not exactly mirror the Equity Dispute Resolution Process published on the University’s website.
+
+Worth noting, the tradition of publishing select general human resource policies, campus community policies, student academic policies, and/or descriptions of campus resources in faculty handbooks emanated from a time when policies were not published online and therefore were often included for the faculty’s ease of reference.  With today’s technology, however, this is no longer a concern and I urge clients to make use of hyperlinks to minimize unnecessary risk associated with publishing policies in multiple policy publications.  It should also be noted that faculty handbooks typically only include a small portion of the institutional policies applicable to all employees, including the faculty.  This may give rise to the misimpression that only the policies in the faculty handbook are applicable to the faculty.  A faculty handbook should not be intended to state all institutional employment and campus community policies.  Rather, better practice is to remind faculty of their professional ethics obligation (see paragraph 4 of the AAUP Statement on Professional Ethics) to observe institutional policies applicable to them (assuming they are not violative of academic freedom) and then reference and/or hyperlink to policy publications and/or webpages that house such policies. 
+
+Finally, limiting faculty handbook content in accordance with the recommended guidelines above helps create clarity regarding whether a formal faculty vote is required to amend the policy at issue.  At most institutions, revisions to the Faculty Handbook require a formal faculty vote.  This in turn creates confusion whether a faculty vote is required to modify a community or HR policy published in the handbook for ease of reference that is within the delegated authority of the administration as opposed to the faculty.  For example, the administration should be able to amend a policy such as the FMLA policy, which is a legally mandated policy, without a formal vote of the entire faculty.  Unless the institution adopts text clarifying that some sections of a handbook may be amended via alternative processes (see e.g., Section 1.4 of the University of Redlands’ Faculty Handbook and Section 1.5 of the Augustana College Faculty Handbook), the better practice, in my view, is to simply limit the faculty handbook to material that directly address faculty governance, faculty status, and core faculty employment rights and responsibilities.  The determination regarding whether a policy falls within an area of faculty responsibility or unique faculty right is guided by the institution’s overarching governance documents.  At Ohio Wesleyan, these are University’s Code of Regulations and Faculty Bylaws.  Of course, following the suggested guidelines above should not diminish the faculty’s ability, in the spirt of shared governance, to provide consultative recommendations or input on policy matters outside of the faculty’s primary area of responsibilities.   Such consultative input is typically provided via faculty committee recommendations, faculty membership on standing university committees and task forces, and constructive dialogue with university administrators. 
+
+
+
+Comparison Group Institutions 
+
+Below I list comparison and other institutions that organize their faculty personnel documents in a manner consistent with the guidelines recommended above.
+
+University of Puget Sound
+
+The University of Puget Sound’s Faculty Code is an example of a faculty policy document that is specifically limited in scope to faculty governance and faculty status matters.  The code includes the following distinct chapters:
+
+Chapter One – General Policies
+
+	Categories of Faculty
+
+	Role of Faculty
+
+	Professional Duties and Responsibilities
+
+	Academic Freedom
+
+	Amendments to Faculty Code
+
+Chapter Two – Faculty Appointments
+
+Chapter Three – Evaluation of Faculty
+
+Chapter Four - Tenure and Promotion
+
+Chapter Five – Separation from the University
+
+Chapter Six - Grievances
+
+General employee benefit, human resource, and campus community policy content are not included in the code.  Rather, applicable policies in these areas are published electronically on the Office of University Counsel and Human Resources webpages.  For example, the Office of University Counsel maintains a Faculty Policies webpage that links to the following policies unique to the faculty:
+
+Compensation for Sponsored Agreements/Grants
+
+Early Retirement and Career Change
+
+Faculty Medical Leave and Disability Policies
+
+Faculty Opportunity Hire
+
+Financial Conflict of Interest Policy for Federally-Sponsored Research
+
+Part-time Teaching for Retired Faculty
+
+Post-Retirement Medical Benefits
+
+Shared Faculty Appointments
+
+Phased Retirement Program for Full-time Faculty
+
+In addition to the above, the Office of University Counsel maintains a Campuswide Policies webpage with links to policies that apply to all members of the campus community and the Code of Conduct.  Employee benefits are published on the Human Resources webpage.  This includes a link to a PDF document entitled “Summary of Benefits for Faculty Members.”
+
+
+
+Rhodes College
+
+Rhodes College has adopted an online College Handbook, which serves as a “reference for information” for all Rhodes employees.  The handbook includes a stand-alone section entitled “Faculty Policies,” which links to policies addressing a wide variety of topics important to the faculty, ranging from academic advising to textbooks.  The key subsection, however, is entitled “Statement of Policies and Procedures in Regard to Faculty.”  Amendments to this subsection requires Board approval and in my view the subsection is tantamount to a traditional Faculty Handbook as it focuses on academic governance and “faculty status” matters (e.g.,  faculty recruitment, contracts, professional duties and responsibilities, reappointment, promotion, tenure, dismissal, etc.).  With respect to leaves, the subsection is limited to policies addressing sabbaticals and faculty leaves of absence without salary.  Employee benefit, non-professional development leaves, and human resource policies are not published or hyperlinked in the Statement of Policies and Procedures in Regard to Faculty; rather, these policies are linked in the Employee Policies tab of the College Handbook.  
+
+
+
+Beloit College
+
+Beloit College has adopted an electronic Administrative Policy Manual that links to the following chapters:
+
+Chapter I - Board Bylaws
+
+Chapter II - Goals of the College
+
+Chapter III - Members of the College Community and Their Roles
+
+Chapter IV - General College Policies
+
+Chapter V - General Employment Policies
+
+Chapter VI – Special Provisions Governing Faculty Employment
+
+Chapter VII - Special Provisions Governing Administrative Staff Employment
+
+Chapter VIII – Policies and Procedures Governing Academic Senate, Divisions, and Departments
+
+Chapter IX – General Academic Regulations
+
+Chapter X – Academic Regulations Governing Specific Programs
+
+Chapter VI of the manual, entitled “Special Provisions Governing Faculty Employment,” houses faculty status policies.  The chapter is organized by section as follows:
+
+Procedures for Authorizing Faculty Line
+
+Guidelines for Faculty Search Committees
+
+Faculty Appointments (Initial Rank, Initial Period of appointment, Notifications, Timing of Promotions, Limitation on Terms of Appointments, Other Limitations)
+
+Faculty Employment Obligations
+
+Permanent Tenure (Criteria for Tenure, Timing for Consideration)
+
+Appeals Process for Contract Termination or Non-Renewal
+
+Promotion to Rank of Professor (Criteria for Promotion, Timing for Consideration)
+
+Dismissal for Cause and Release for Reasons of Extraordinary Economic Exigency
+
+Evaluation of Performance 
+
+Faculty Sabbaticals and Professional Development Leaves
+
+Policy on Endowed Professorships
+
+Employee benefit, leaves, and human resource policies are not published or hyperlinked in Chapter VI.  Instead, these policies are published in Chapter V (General Employment Policies) of the administrative manual.  Other policies applicable to College employees are set forth in Chapter IV-General College Policies and address topics such as equal employment, disability, drug-free workplace, consensual relations, conflicts of interest, harassment, whistleblower, sexual harassment, computer and information resources, personnel information, etc..   
+
+
+
+Spellman College
+
+Spellman College’s Faculty Handbook is an example of a faculty handbook that publishes faculty governance and faculty status policies and utilizes hyperlinks or cross-references to refer readers to other policies that apply to all College employees and directly impact faculty.  
+
+More specifically, Section One of the handbook summarizes general College information, reprinting the College’s mission statement, statement of purpose, standards of excellence, College history, and statement of accreditation.  Section Two sets forth the Faculty Bylaws, which includes procedures for updating the Faculty Handbook.  The third section of the handbook is entitled “Faculty Structure” and includes five subsections: academic unit: departments and programs; policies on academic rank, tenure and termination of appointments; promotions and tenure; faculty duties and responsibilities; and grievances and dispute resolution.  Section Four of the handbook is entitled “Policies” and addresses leaves of absence, selected workplace policies, and standards of professional conduct.  Changes to Section Four may not be made without prior consultation with the Faculty Council and the relevant Faculty Standing Committee. 
+
+As noted above, Spellman makes use of hyperlinks in Section Four to not repeat policies in more than one College publication.  With respect to leaves, Spellman publishes only those leave policies that are unique to the faculty in the handbook and otherwise references readers via hyperlinks to leave policies in the Employee Handbook that apply to all employees.  So, for example, there is a link to the FMLA policy since it applies to all College employees.  Conversely, faculty specific parental leave, personal leave, academic leave, and sabbatical leave policies are published in the Faculty Handbook.  The “Selected Workplace” subsection of Section Four addresses employee conduct, ethics, and work roles; benefits; emergency response procedures; and laboratory safety.  For each category, applicable college policy is either referenced or hyperlinked.  Full policies are not reprinted.  Similarly, in the “Standards of Professional Conduct” subsection of Section Four, the College, except for a computer security and password policy, utilizes links to refer readers to the following policies: FERPA, Acceptable Use, Consulting, Scientific Misconduct, IRB, Intellectual Property, Log Use, Website/Social Media, and Conflicts of Interest policies are provided.  
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Cornell College
+
+Cornell College’s Faculty Handbook is devoted to faculty governance, faculty status, and academic responsibilities matters, as well as professional development benefits and leaves that are unique to Faculty (e.g., sabbatical and unpaid leaves).  General employee benefit, salary, human resource, and campus community policies are not included in the Faculty Handbook.  Similar to other schools identified in this memorandum, the College publishes these policies in the “Employee Handbook and College Policies” document linked on the HR Webpage (password protected).  Links to both the Employee Handbook and the HR Webpage are provided in the Faculty Handbook.
+
+Cornell College organizes its Faculty Handbook as follows:
+
+I – The Corporate Faculty
+
+The Faculty
+
+Department Chairs
+
+Faculty Meetings
+
+Faculty Meetings: Rule of Procedure
+
+Faculty Elections
+
+II – The Committee System
+
+Committee System
+
+Committee Organization
+
+Faculty, Divisional and Provost’s Advisory Councils
+
+Major Committees
+
+Other Committees
+
+Ad Hoc Committees
+
+Other Elected Representatives
+
+Elections
+
+III – Personal Policies
+
+Academic Freedom
+
+Professional Ethics
+
+Faculty Grievance Policy and Procedure
+
+Descriptions of the Several Faculty Ranks
+
+Procedures: Initial Appointment of Faculty
+
+Expectations and Evaluation of Faculty Members at Cornell College
+
+Criteria for Pre-Tenure, Tenure and Promotion
+
+Faculty Review Schedule
+
+Procedures: Faculty Reviews
+
+Procedures: Termination of Appointments
+
+Emeritus Faculty
+
+Part-Time Faculty
+
+Procedures: Appointment of Administrative Officers with Faculty Status
+
+Procedures: Appointment of a Provost
+
+Procedures: Appointment of a President of the College
+
+IV – Academic Regulations: The Academic Regulation section of the handbook includes information pertaining to and clarifying specific faculty academic responsibilities, particularly those related to teaching and advising.  As noted below, where applicable, hyperlinks are utilized to refer the reader to an academic policy published in the College’s Catalogue or other policy location.
+
+Absence from Campus (Faculty)
+
+Absence from Class (Faculty)
+
+Advising
+
+Cheating (links to policy in Catalogue) 
+
+Class and Office Hours 
+
+Class Lists
+
+Classroom
+
+Class Size 
+
+College-Sponsored Trips 
+
+Commencement and Convocation
+
+Confidentiality of Student Records (links to College’s FERPA Policy)
+
+Course Evaluation 
+
+Faculty Responsibilities 
+
+Final Examinations 
+
+First-year Academic Program 
+
+Grades 
+
+Grade of Incomplete (links to policy in Catalogue)
+
+Grade of Withdrawal (links to policy in Catalogue)
+
+Petitions
+
+Student with Disabilities (links to Students with Disabilities webpage)
+
+Syllabi 
+
+Registration
+
+V - Faculty Benefits: This section of the Cornell College Faculty Handbook includes an introductory clause stating that benefits available to all employees of the College (i.e., health care, business travel, life and disability insurance, employee assistance program, fitness club membership, FMLA, TIAA retirement benefits) are described on the HR Website and in the College’s Employee Handbook.  Links to both are provided in the introductory text to the section.  Thereafter, the following faculty-specific benefit and leave policies are published.  
+
+Faculty Development
+
+Leaves of Absence
+
+Sabbaticals
+
+
+
+Ursinus College
+
+The Ursinus College Faculty Handbook includes policies pertaining faculty governance, faculty status and research activities.  Benefit policies are limited to faculty professional development leaves.  Titles of general HR policies and campus resources are listed and linked in an Appendix to the handbook.  
+
+Ursinus College organizes its Faculty Handbook as follows:
+
+History and Mission
+
+Part One: Faculty Benchmarks
+
+Recruitment and Appointment of Faculty
+
+Tenure-Track Faculty
+
+Non-Tenure Track Faculty
+
+Contracts and Salary Notification
+
+Outside Employment
+
+Evaluation
+
+Purpose
+
+Procedures for Faculty Evaluation
+
+Evaluation Materials
+
+Evaluation Criteria
+
+Guidelines for Faculty Evaluation
+
+Promotion and Tenure Review
+
+Schedule and Sequence of Faculty Review and Assessment
+
+Dismissal of Faculty and Right of Appeal
+
+Leave of Absence, Pre-Tenure Leave, and Sabbatical Leave: The policies published in this subsection are unique to faculty and address faculty professional development leaves.  Leaves of Absence policies applicable to all College Faculty are linked in Part Four – Appendices of the handbook. 
+
+Retirement
+
+Part Two: Faculty Governance and Responsibilities
+
+Faculty Meetings
+
+Academic Convocations
+
+Academic Administrative Units
+
+Administration and Governance
+
+Part Three: Academic Responsibilities and Procedures
+
+Academic Standards and Instructional Responsibilities
+
+Advising
+
+Course Management
+
+Part Four: Appendices
+
+Confidentiality of Student Records
+
+Research Compliance Guidelines – Federal Compliance; Ethical Standards: This appendix links to the IRB Policy, as well as publishes in full a policy addressing Scholarly Misconduct.
+
+Links to College Policies: Direct links to Campus Safety, IRB, the Institutional Animal Care and Use, Environmental Health & Safety, and general HR Policies applicable to all employees are provided in this Appendix.  
+
+Links to Campus Resources: Links to the Academic Affairs, Business Office, Diversity and Inclusion, IT, Institutional Research, Instructional Technology, Teaching and Learning Institute, Institute for Student Success, and Wellness Center webpages are provided.  In addition, there are links to the College Directory and College Catalog.
+
+
+
+Carleton College
+
+Similar to Rhodes and Beloit, Carleton College publishes all College policies electronically on the Campus Handbook homepage.  Readers are then instructed to click on either the Student Handbook, Faculty Handbook, or Staff Handbook to view those policies specifically applicable to the applicable reader.  The Faculty Handbook tab links to all policies applicable to the faculty, including a section entitled “Faculty Appointments” that, similar to Rhodes, houses faculty status policies.  Amendments to the policies in the “Appointment to Faculty” and “Appointments and Tenure” subsections both require approval from the Faculty and Board of Trustees.
+
+
+
+Drew University
+
+Drew University has two central faculty policy documents: The Faculty Personnel Policy and the University Faculty Handbook – Faculty Reviews.  As summarized below, both faculty documents include various faculty status and governance policies.  General human resource policies applicable to all employees, including faculty, are published in the Drew University Employee Handbook.  In addition, other important employee-related policies (i.e., Whistleblower, Family Leave, FMLA, Human Rights, Minors on Campus, Sexual Harassment and Misconduct, Tuition, etc.) are linked on the Human Resources webpage.
+
+The Faculty Personnel Policy addresses the following faculty status and governance matters:
+
+I. Officers Concerned with Faculty Personnel Policy
+
+II. Academic Freedom
+
+III. Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action
+
+IV. Faculty Structure
+
+V. Initial Appointment Procedures
+
+VI. Procedures for Reappointment and Promotion
+
+VII. Academic Tenure
+
+VIII. Leaves
+
+IX. Non-university Employment
+
+X. Salary Letters
+
+XI. Termination of Appointment by Faculty Member
+
+XII. Termination of Appointment by the University
+
+A. Financial Exigency
+
+B. Discontinuance of Program or Department not mandated by Financial Exigency
+
+C. Medical Reasons
+
+D. Dismissal for Cause
+
+XIII. Procedures for Imposition of Sanctions Other than Dismissal
+
+XIV. Grievance Procedures
+
+XV. Retirement
+
+XVI. Amendment
+
+*Each of the links above are active for ease of reference.)  
+
+Of note, Section VIII – Leaves is limited in scope to sabbaticals and faculty leaves without pay to teach at another institution, to complete a major research project, to attend to pressing family business, or for parental leave.  Leaves applicable to all employees are set forth in the Employee Handbook, as well as the HR webpage referenced above.
+
+The “Faculty Handbook – Faculty Reviews” document sets forth more specific information regarding faculty evaluations at Drew University.  The first section of the document is devoted to faculty evaluation criteria utilized in all faculty reviews, as well as standards for reappointment and promotion.  Section Two articulates general university guidelines regarding the reappointment, tenure, and promotion review process.  Senior Faculty reviews are addressed in Section Three and the annual review process is briefly summarized in Section Four of the document.  The latter two sections are very brief and not detailed oriented.
+
+Wabash College
+
+Wabash College’s Faculty Handbook is devoted to college governance, faculty status, and faculty research and professional development matters.  The handbook also includes salary policies and benefit explanations that are specific to faculty or of “particular interest to faculty.”  Readers are otherwise referred to the Human Resources webpage to access policies and information regarding benefits applicable to all college employees (i.e., comprehensive group health coverage, disability benefits, Family and Medical Leave Policy, Life Insurance, and similar policies).
+
+The Wabash Faculty Handbook is organized by chapter as follows:
+
+Chapter 1: College Governance
+
+College Administrative Structure
+
+Faculty Meetings
+
+Committees
+
+Chapter 2: The Faculty: Expectations and Responsibilities
+
+2.1 Expectation of Faculty Excellence
+
+2.2 Teaching Responsibilities
+
+2.3 Academic Honesty
+
+2.4 Accommodations for Students with Disabilities
+
+2.5 Copyright Compliance in Teaching and Learning
+
+2.6 Faculty Statement on Harassment 
+
+Chapter 3: Policies on Academic Appointments, Tenure and Promotion
+
+3.1 Conditions of Appointment
+
+3.2 Tenure Track Faculty Reviews (First Year, Second Year, Fourth Year and Tenure Reviews)
+
+3.3 Promotion to Professor
+
+3.4 Associated Faculty Status and Review of Associated Faculty
+
+3.5 Review of Contingent Faculty
+
+3.6 Appointment of Department/Division Chairs
+
+3.7 Termination of Appointment or Dismissal
+
+Chapter 4: Faculty Research and Professional Development
+
+4.1 Commitment to Faculty Development
+
+4.2 Professional Travel Fund
+
+4.3 John J. Coss Faculty Development Funds
+
+4.4 BKT Research Grants
+
+4.5 Sabbatical Leave Program
+
+4.6 McClain-McTurnan-Arnold Research Scholar Program
+
+4.7 Outside Grant Proposals
+
+4.8 Institutional Policies and Procedures Relating to Research Misconduct
+
+Chapter 5: Faculty Salary and Benefits (Faculty Specific Policies)
+
+5.1 Salary Review Procedure (outlines merit review procedures)
+
+5.2 Pleacher Fund Salary Supplement
+
+5.3 Regular Leave of Absence (One Year Unpaid Leaves specific to Faculty)
+
+5.4 Leave of Absence for Untenured Faculty Members
+
+5.5 Parental Leave (Note: This is a Faculty specific policy)
+
+
+
+Other Institutions
+
+Below are links to examples of other non-peer faculty handbooks that are limited in scope to faculty governance, faculty status, and policies of unique application to the faculty.  
+
+Duquesne University
+
+The Duquesne University Faculty Handbook is a very well organized handbook that focuses upon faculty governance and faculty status matters.  It incorporates by reference the University’s administrative policies (“TAPs”), which are binding obligations for all University employees, including faculty, rather than reprint the policies in their entirety in the handbook.  The TAPs policies are summarized and linked in the Appendix of the handbook.
+
+A truncated version of the Table of Contents is reprinted below for ease of reference:
+
+Introduction
+
+Governance Structure
+
+Academic Freedom and Faculty Standards of Conduct
+
+3.1 Freedom and Responsibility as Citizens
+
+3.2 Freedom and Responsibility in Teaching
+
+3.3 Freedom and Responsibility in Scholarship
+
+3.4 The Balance Between Academic Freedom and Responsibilities
+
+University-Wide Faculty Ranks and Appointment
+
+4.1 Diversity and Inclusion
+
+4.2 Faculty Appointments
+
+4.3 Classification of Faculty
+
+4.4 Full-Time Faculty Ranks
+
+4.5 Joint Appointments
+
+4.6 Part-Time Faculty
+
+4.7 Faculty Hiring
+
+4.8 Expectations of Faculty
+
+4.9 Annual Performance Evaluation
+
+4.10 Compensation 
+
+4.10.1 Salary: This policy delineates faculty payment installments, factors that contribute to the determination of faculty salaries, and the annual issuance of written notification of any salary adjustments.
+
+4.10.2 Stipends: This policy outlines that faculty may receive stipends to compensate them for performing specific tasks.
+
+4.10.3 Benefits: Benefits are not listed; rather, the reader is instructed to review the HR webpage and applicable TAPs policies
+
+4.10.4 Compensation from Grants
+
+University-wide Faculty Tenure and Promotion
+
+5.1 Tenure-Track and Tenured Faculty
+
+5.2 Non-Tenure Track Faculty
+
+5.3 Library Faculty
+
+5.4 Part-Time Faculty
+
+5.5 Other Appointments
+
+5.6 Funded Faculty Positions
+
+5.7 Faculty Fellowships
+
+5.8 Professors Emeriti and Emeritae
+
+Leave
+
+6.1. Leave for Professional Advancement
+
+6.1.1 Sabbatical Leave
+
+6.1.2 Pre-Tenure Leave
+
+6.1.3 Uncompensated Leave
+
+6.1.4 Grant-Supported Leave
+
+Other Privileges and Responsibilities
+
+7.1 Use of University Title and Affiliation
+
+7.2 Conflicts of Interest
+
+7.3 Conflict of Commitment
+
+Voluntary and Involuntary Termination of Employment
+
+Disciplinary Actions and Dismissal
+
+Grievances
+
+Appendix A: Summary of The Administration Policies
+
+Appendix B: Definitions and Interpretive Conventions
+
+Appendix C: Title IX - Note: I am not clear why the University published this policy in the document since it is already referenced and summarized in Appendix A. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Northeastern University 
+
+Northeastern University’s Faculty Handbook is also worth a closer look in terms of its organization structure.  It consists of the following five modules and is limited in scope to faculty governance, faculty status and policies applicable to a unique faculty right or responsibility: 
+
+Governance
+
+Statement of the Faculty Senate
+
+Faculty Senate Bylaws
+
+Dismissal Proceedings: Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty
+
+Faculty Discipline
+
+Full-Time Faculty Grievance Procedure
+
+Non-retaliation for Participation in Faculty Governance 
+
+Appointments, Promotions and Tenure
+
+Rights and Responsibilities
+
+Performance Expectations
+
+Compensation (Faculty Merit and Equity Review Procedures)
+
+Appointments, Terms and Reappointments
+
+Tenure
+
+Tenure and Promotion of Jointly Appointed Faculty
+
+Sabbatical
+
+Leaves of Absence and Vacation
+
+Professional Leaves
+
+Leaves of Absence for Academic Study
+
+Other Leaves (readers are referred to the Human Resources Management website and University Policies website)
+
+Rights in Teaching, Research and Scholarship
+
+Academic Freedom
+
+Patent and Copyright
+
+Instructional Media
+
+Conflict of Commitment and Interest (addresses conflicts unique to faculty)
+
+Personnel Policies
+
+Faculty Workloads
+
+Presence at University
+
+Faculty Outside Professional Activities
+
+Retirement
+
+Academic Organization
+
+The General University Faculty Advisory Board and Bylaws
+
+The College Faculties
+
+Procedural Guidelines in the Appointment and Evaluation of University Administrators
+
+The following text is published on the bottom of the homepage of the handbook:
+
+Additional information affecting faculty can be found in the Faculty Senate Resolutions and in policies in the Undergraduate Student Handbook, the Undergraduate Catalog and the Northeastern University Policy Page.
+
+
+
+University of Seattle
+
+https://www.seattleu.edu/media/academic-affairs/Faculty-Handbook.pdf
+
+
+
+Ithaca College
+
+https://www.ithaca.edu/policy-manual/volume-iv-faculty-handbook
+
+
+
+Loyola Chicago
+
+https://www.luc.edu/media/lucedu/academicaffairs/pdfs/Faculty-Handbook-LoyolaUniversityChicago_2015.pdf
+
+
+
+Dillard University (former client)
+
+https://www.dillard.edu/academics/faculty-handbook.php
+
+
+
+John Carrol University
+
+http://faculty.jcu.edu/handbook/files/2019/06/Faculty_Handbook_Spring_2019_6-3-19_reprinting.pdf
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Phased Retirement - 2nd Model.txt [/INST] Voluntary Phased Retirement
+
+Eligibility
+
+Tenured faculty members who are in a full-time teaching status, who (1) have completed at least fifteen years of full-time teaching service at Ohio Wesleyan University and (2) reached the age of 62 are eligible to apply for Phased Retirement.  Participation in the program is strictly voluntary.
+
+Application
+
+To apply, an eligible tenured faculty member should prepare a written request to the Provost by submitting an application on or before October 15th for the year preceding the beginning of the academic year for which the applicant requests to begin the Phased Retirement. 
+
+The request, which can be in the form of a letter or e-mail, should express intent to enter into a phased-in retirement agreement, should state proposed starting and ending dates, and should describe proposed activities, in terms of teaching, scholarly or creative work, and service, during the phase-in period, including whether the teaching load will be spread over the academic year or concentrated in one semester.
+
+Phase-in Period
+
+A tenured faculty member may opt to transition from a full teaching load to retirement over a phase-in period of one or two years, in accordance with the Phased Retirement Plan Options Table below.
+
+Phased Retirement Plan Options
+
+Plan
+
+Year 1 Pay and Load Percent
+
+Year 2 Pay and Load Percent
+
+1-year Plan
+
+50 / 50
+
+N/A
+
+2-year Plan
+
+50 / 50
+
+50 / 50
+
+Pay % = percent of full compensation payable; Load % = percent of full-time teaching load. 
+
+Written Agreement
+
+The tenured faculty member and Provost, in consultation with the faculty member’s Department Chair, shall execute a written agreement setting out the terms of the phased-in retirement. The faculty member will have 30 calendar days to consider the agreement.  Final approval is made by the Provost.
+
+Tenure and Related Matters
+
+Participation in Phased Retirement leads to retirement and the end of employment and the end of tenure at the conclusion of the phase-in period.  The tenured faculty member will retain status as a full-time tenure-line member of the faculty during the phase-in period and retain faculty rank.
+
+Compensation During Phase-in Period
+
+The compensation for a participant in the phase-in period will be that percentage of full compensation described in the Retirement Table above.  Full compensation means the amount that the faculty will be compensated during the applicable year had the faculty member maintained a full-time teaching load, including any adjustments that would have been applied to such faculty member’s salary. The full teaching load is that number of courses per academic year which is considered a standard full teaching load for the faculty member’s department.  A participant will be entitled to consideration for salary increases consistent with the pay raises for other full-time faculty.
+
+Scholarship Grants, Development Funds, and Summer Teaching
+
+A participant is not eligible to receive a scholarship grant or research stipend or any other form of remuneration from a fund set aside for distribution to faculty for scholarship support. However, the faculty member may continue to receive individual professional development account funds available to all full-time faculty members. The faculty member may teach during the summer, either during the on-campus program or in a study-abroad program and receive the same summer rate as other faculty members.
+
+Benefits
+
+Except as otherwise provided in this section, participants in the program remain eligible to participate in University benefits as a full-time faculty member, in accordance with the terms of the applicable plan documents.  All benefit participation components are subject to and governed exclusively by the applicable benefit plan terms and laws governing these plans, including any plan amendment or change in law. Prior to entering into the program, the faculty member should meet with Human Resources and consult a tax advisor.  In the event of conflict between this policy and the actual benefit plan terms, the benefit plan terms will prevail. 
+
+Part-time Teaching After Retirement
+
+After the conclusion of the phase-in period, a retired faculty member may teach on a per-course basis at the University, if the Provost agrees and there is departmental need.
+
+Workload During Phased-in Period
+
+Teaching: A participant will be expected to teach the percentage of a full teaching load described in the Retirement Table above. The courses may be taught in the same semester, if approved by the Provost, after consultation with the Department Chair.
+
+Advising: Unless otherwise agreed by the Provost, a participant’s advising load will be commensurate with the faculty member’s teaching load.
+
+Sabbaticals and Leaves
+
+Faculty participating in the program are not eligible for a regular leave (sabbatical) or other paid leave.  A participant may be eligible, however, for an unpaid leave in accordance with established University policy.  Time spent on unpaid leave of absence will not count as part of the Phase-in Period.
+
+Chairs and Administrative Appointments
+
+During the Phase-in Period, the faculty member will typically not be eligible to hold a chair or administrative appointment, absent unusual and compelling circumstances warranting such an appointment. Such an appointment must approved by the Provost. 
+
+The level and extent of service on committees and engagement in other faculty activities (other than advising) will be negotiated by and between the faculty member and the Provost, but in all instances will be proportionate to the faculty member’s teaching load.
+
+Disclaimer
+
+The University retains the right to modify this Voluntary Phased Retirement Plan. The Plan may be reviewed, modified, or terminated at any time by the Board of Trustees without affecting already existing arrangements.  Participation in the program does not confer any additional employment rights upon the participant.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Phased Retirement - djb comments.txt [/INST] Below is a model Phase Retirement Program policy from a prior client.  I am also linking to St. Mary’s Voluntary Phase Retirement Policy, which is more generous than the model from a former client set forth below.  If you prefer one over the other, please let me know.
+
+See https://www.stmarytx.edu/policies/academic-affairs/voluntary-phased-retirement-faculty/
+
+Model Tenured Faculty Voluntary Phased Retirement Program
+
+All tenured full-time faculty having 15 or more years of full-time service at Ohio Wesleyan University and have reached the age of 62 are eligible to participate in the Tenured Faculty Voluntary Phased Retirement Program (“VPRP”).
+
+By voluntarily electing to enter into the VPRP, the faculty member understands that a terminal contract will be offered for a period of one year in duration, renewable for a second year at the sole discretion of the University, provided the faculty member completes all teaching obligations during the course of the first VPRP academic year.  
+
+The faculty member agrees to teach three courses during the academic year selected and will in turn receive an annual salary equal to one half of the base salary received in their contract for the period of the VPRP, paid in equal semi-monthly payments over the period selected.  Any standard salary increments will be made available to the faculty member as they are to all full-time faculty. The teaching schedule for the faculty member may be for one semester per year or for two determined mutually by the Department Chair and the individual and subject to the approval of the Provost.  The specific courses taught will depend upon departmental needs.  The faculty member will not be assigned any mandatory responsibilities related to student advising, committee assignments, or other service-related activities.  The faculty member is invited to attend commencement, orientation, recruiting, and other University events. At the time of entering into the VPRP, the faculty member will no longer be able to vote at faculty and department meetings.  
+
+The faculty member accepting this plan will remain eligible for all fringe benefits.  Out-of-pocket cost will not exceed the amount of the current medical benefit contribution at the time of the faculty member’s entry into the program, but are subject to any annual percentage increases that impact full-time faculty.  TIAA contributions will be based on salary earned.  All tax obligations and other financial implications incurred by any individual as a result of accepting this offer are the sole responsibility of the faculty member.
+
+Acceptance of the plan is entirely voluntary and open only to qualified faculty members as stated above.  The faculty member understands that when voluntarily agreeing to enter into this program, the faculty member is relinquishing all tenure rights with the University, is permanently forfeiting status as a tenured professor, and is voiding pre-existing employment agreements with the University.  
+
+The University reserves the right to accept or deny any request for participation in the VPRP due to budgetary reasons or allocation of faculty resources.
+
+In exchange for the payments under the plan, a faculty member expressly agrees not to apply for unemployment compensation.  A VPRP participating faculty member also waives and releases all claims against the University existing prior to the date of the faculty member’s entrance into the program, including but not limited to claims for breach of contract. 
+
+Faculty accepting a VPRP remain eligible to teach part-time at the current per-course rate for part-time instruction, subject to approval of the Provost.
+
+Any faculty member interested in the VPRP should send a request to the Provost. It is preferred that this request be submitted by August preceding the final year of full-time employment to allow departments to accommodate the transition.  If approved, the Provost will generate an agreement for participation in the VPRP. The faculty member has seven days from the date of signing to revoke the agreement by informing the Provost in writing of such revocation.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Voluntary Phased Retirement
+
+Eligibility
+
+Tenured faculty members who are in a full-time teaching status, who (1) have completed at least ten (10) years of full-time teaching service at Ohio Wesleyan University and (2) reached the age of 62 are eligible to apply for Phased Retirement.  Participation in the program is strictly voluntary.
+
+Application
+
+To apply, an eligible faculty member should prepare a written request to the Provost.  Eligible faculty may choose to voluntary phased retirement may apply to enter into year one of voluntary phased retirement beginning by submitting an application by August 15th for the year preceding the beginning of academic year for which the applicant requests to begin the Phased Retirement. 
+
+The request, which can be in the form of a letter or e-mail, should express intent to enter into a phased-in retirement agreement, should state proposed starting and ending dates, and should describe proposed activities, in terms of teaching, scholarship, and service, during the phase-in period, including whether the teaching load will be spread over the academic year or concentrated in one semester.
+
+Phase-in Period
+
+A faculty member may opt to transition from a full teaching load to retirement over a phase-in period of one or two years, in accordance with the Phased Retirement Plan Options Table below.
+
+Phased Retirement Plan Options
+
+Plan
+
+Year 1 Pay and Load Percent
+
+Year 2 Pay and Load Percent
+
+1-year Plan
+
+100 / 50
+
+N/A
+
+2-year Plan
+
+75 / 50
+
+50 / 50
+
+Pay % = percent of full compensation payable load % = percent of full-time teaching load. 
+
+Written Agreement
+
+The faculty member and Provost shall execute a written agreement setting out the terms of the phased-in retirement. The faculty member will have 30 calendar days to consider the agreement.
+
+Tenure and Related Matters
+
+Participation in Phased Retirement leads to retirement and the end of employment and the end of tenure at the conclusion of the phase-in period.  The faculty member will retain status as a full-time member of the faculty during the phase-in period and retain faculty rank.
+
+Compensation During Phase-in Period
+
+The compensation for a participant in the phase-in period will be that percentage of full compensation described in the Retirement Table above.  Full compensation means the amount that the faculty will be compensated during the applicable year had the faculty member maintained a full-time teaching load, including any adjustments that would have been applied to such faculty member’s salary. The full teaching load is that number of courses per academic year which is considered a standard full teaching load for the faculty member’s department or program.  A participant will be entitled to consideration for salary increases consistent with the pay raises for other full-time faculty.
+
+Scholarship Grants, Summer Teaching, and Development Funds
+
+A participant will be not be eligible to receive a scholarship grant or research stipend or any other form of remuneration from a fund set aside for distribution to faculty for scholarship support. The faculty member may continue to receive any individual faculty development funds generally provided to full-time faculty. The faculty member may teach during the summer, either during the on-campus program or in a study-abroad program and receive the same summer rate as other faculty members..
+
+Benefits
+
+Except as otherwise provided in this section, a participant shall remain eligible to participate in university benefits as a full-time faculty member, in accordance with the terms of the applicable plan documents. 
+
+All benefit participation components of this policy are subject to and governed exclusively by the applicable benefit plan terms and laws governing these plans, including any plan amendment or change in law. Before initiating participation, faculty members considering phased retirement are encouraged to both meet with Human Resources and consult a tax advisor. In the event of conflict between this policy and the actual benefit plan terms, the benefit plan terms will in all cases prevail. 
+
+Part-time Teaching After Retirement
+
+After the conclusion of the phase-in period, a retired faculty member may teach on a part-time basis on a per-course basis, if the Provost agrees.
+
+Workload During Phased-in Period
+
+Teaching: A participant will be expected to teach the percentage of a full teaching load described in the Retirement Table. The courses may be taught in the same semester, if approved by the Provost.
+
+Advising: Unless otherwise agreed by the Provost, a participant’s advising load will be commensurate with the faculty member’s class load.
+
+Sabbaticals and Leaves
+
+A participant will not be eligible for a sabbatical or paid leave. A participant may be eligible for an unpaid leave in accordance with established University policy. Time spent on unpaid leave of absence shall not count as part of the Phase-in Period.
+
+Chairs and Administrative Appointments
+
+During the Phase-in Period, the participant will typically not be eligible to hold a chair or administrative appointment, absent unusual and compelling circumstances warranting such an appointment and the agreement of the Provost to permit it. The level and extent of service on committees and engagement in other faculty activities (other than advising) will be negotiated by and between the faculty member and the Provost, but should be proportionate to teaching load.
+
+Disclaimer
+
+The University retains the right to modify this Voluntary Phased Retirement Plan. The Plan may be reviewed, modified or terminated at any time without affecting already existing arrangements. Participation in the Program does not confer any additional employment rights upon the participant.
+
+Phased Retirement Plan Options
+
+Plan
+
+Year 1 Pay and Load Percent
+
+Year 2 Pay and Load Percent
+
+1-year Plan
+
+100 / 50
+
+N/A
+
+2-year Plan
+
+75 / 50
+
+50 / 50
+
+Pay % = percent of full compensation payable load % = percent of full-time teaching load.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Phased Retirement - St. Marys Model.txt [/INST] Voluntary Phased Retirement
+
+Eligibility
+
+Tenured faculty members who are in a full-time teaching status, who (1) have completed at least ten (10) years of full-time teaching service at Ohio Wesleyan University and (2) reached the age of 62 are eligible to apply for Phased Retirement.  Participation in the program is strictly voluntary.
+
+Application
+
+To apply, an eligible faculty member should prepare a written request to the Provost.  Eligible faculty may choose to voluntary phased retirement may apply to enter into year one of voluntary phased retirement beginning by submitting an application by August 15th for the year preceding the beginning of academic year for which the applicant requests to begin the Phased Retirement. 
+
+The request, which can be in the form of a letter or e-mail, should express intent to enter into a phased-in retirement agreement, should state proposed starting and ending dates, and should describe proposed activities, in terms of teaching, scholarship, and service, during the phase-in period, including whether the teaching load will be spread over the academic year or concentrated in one semester.
+
+Phase-in Period
+
+A faculty member may opt to transition from a full teaching load to retirement over a phase-in period of one or two years, in accordance with the Phased Retirement Plan Options Table below.
+
+Phased Retirement Plan Options
+
+Plan
+
+Year 1 Pay and Load Percent
+
+Year 2 Pay and Load Percent
+
+1-year Plan
+
+100 / 50
+
+N/A
+
+2-year Plan
+
+75 / 50
+
+50 / 50
+
+Pay % = percent of full compensation payable load % = percent of full-time teaching load. 
+
+Written Agreement
+
+The faculty member and Provost shall execute a written agreement setting out the terms of the phased-in retirement. The faculty member will have 30 calendar days to consider the agreement.  Final approval is made by the Provost.
+
+Tenure and Related Matters
+
+Participation in Phased Retirement leads to retirement and the end of employment and the end of tenure at the conclusion of the phase-in period.  The faculty member will retain status as a full-time member of the faculty during the phase-in period and retain faculty rank.
+
+Compensation During Phase-in Period
+
+The compensation for a participant in the phase-in period will be that percentage of full compensation described in the Retirement Table above.  Full compensation means the amount that the faculty will be compensated during the applicable year had the faculty member maintained a full-time teaching load, including any adjustments that would have been applied to such faculty member’s salary. The full teaching load is that number of courses per academic year which is considered a standard full teaching load for the faculty member’s department or program.  A participant will be entitled to consideration for salary increases consistent with the pay raises for other full-time faculty.
+
+Scholarship Grants, Development Funds, and Summer Teaching
+
+A participant is not eligible to receive a scholarship grant or research stipend or any other form of remuneration from a fund set aside for distribution to faculty for scholarship support. However, the faculty member may continue to receive individual professional development account funds available to all full-time faculty members. The faculty member may teach during the summer, either during the on-campus program or in a study-abroad program and receive the same summer rate as other faculty members.
+
+Benefits
+
+Except as otherwise provided in this section, participants in the program remain eligible to participate in University benefits as a full-time faculty member, in accordance with the terms of the applicable plan documents.  All benefit participation components are subject to and governed exclusively by the applicable benefit plan terms and laws governing these plans, including any plan amendment or change in law. Prior to entering into the program, the faculty member should meet with Human Resources and consult a tax advisor.  In the event of conflict between this policy and the actual benefit plan terms, the benefit plan terms will prevail. 
+
+Part-time Teaching After Retirement
+
+After the conclusion of the phase-in period, a retired faculty member may teach on a per-course basis at the University, if the Provost agrees and there is departmental need.
+
+Workload During Phased-in Period
+
+Teaching: A participant will be expected to teach the percentage of a full teaching load described in the Retirement Table above. The courses may be taught in the same semester, if approved by the Provost, after consultation with the Department Chair.
+
+Advising: Unless otherwise agreed by the Provost, a participant’s advising load will be commensurate with the faculty member’s teaching load.
+
+Sabbaticals and Leaves
+
+Faculty participating in the program are not be eligible for a sabbatical or other paid leave.  A participant may be eligible, however, for an unpaid leave in accordance with established University policy.  Time spent on unpaid leave of absence will not count as part of the Phase-in Period.
+
+Chairs and Administrative Appointments
+
+During the Phase-in Period, the faculty member will typically not be eligible to hold a chair or administrative appointment, absent unusual and compelling circumstances warranting such an appointment. Such an appointment must approved by the Provost. 
+
+The level and extent of service on committees and engagement in other faculty activities (other than advising) will be negotiated by and between the faculty member and the Provost, but in all instances will be proportionate to the faculty member’s teaching load.
+
+Disclaimer
+
+The University retains the right to modify this Voluntary Phased Retirement Plan. The Plan may be reviewed, modified, or terminated at any time by the Board of Trustees without affecting already existing arrangements.  Participation in the program does not confer any additional employment rights upon the participant.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Phased Retirement.txt [/INST] Below is a model Phase Retirement Program policy from a prior client.  I am also linking to St. Mary’s Voluntary Phase Retirement Policy, which is more generous than the model from a former client set forth below.  If you prefer one over the other, please let me know.
+
+See https://www.stmarytx.edu/policies/academic-affairs/voluntary-phased-retirement-faculty/
+
+Model Tenured Faculty Voluntary Phased Retirement Program
+
+All tenured full-time faculty having 15 or more years of full-time service at Ohio Wesleyan University and have reached the age of 62 are eligible to participate in the Tenured Faculty Voluntary Phased Retirement Program (“VPRP”).
+
+By voluntarily electing to enter into the VPRP, the faculty member understands that a terminal contract will be offered for a period of one year in duration, renewable for a second year at the sole discretion of the University, provided the faculty member completes all teaching obligations during the course of the first VPRP academic year.  
+
+The faculty member agrees to teach three courses during the academic year selected and will in turn receive an annual salary equal to one half of the base salary received in their contract for the period of the VPRP, paid in equal semi-monthly payments over the period selected.  Any standard salary increments will be made available to the faculty member as they are to all full-time faculty. The teaching schedule for the faculty member may be for one semester per year or for two determined mutually by the Department Chair and the individual and subject to the approval of the Provost.  The specific courses taught will depend upon departmental needs.  The faculty member will not be assigned any mandatory responsibilities related to student advising, committee assignments, or other service-related activities.  The faculty member is invited to attend commencement, orientation, recruiting, and other University events. At the time of entering into the VPRP, the faculty member will be given the choice of opting in or opting out of voting at faculty and department meetings.  
+
+The faculty member accepting this plan will remain eligible for all fringe benefits.  Out-of-pocket cost will not exceed the amount of the current medical benefit contribution at the time of the faculty member’s entry into the program, but are subject to any annual percentage increases that impact full-time faculty.  TIAA contributions will be based on salary earned.  All tax obligations and other financial implications incurred by any individual as a result of accepting this offer are the sole responsibility of the faculty member.
+
+Acceptance of the plan is entirely voluntary and open only to qualified faculty members as stated above.  The faculty member understands that when voluntarily agreeing to enter into this program, the faculty member is relinquishing all tenure rights with the University, is permanently forfeiting status as a tenured professor, and is voiding pre-existing employment agreements with the University.  
+
+The University reserves the right to accept or deny any request for participation in the VPRP due to budgetary reasons or allocation of faculty resources.
+
+In exchange for the payments under the plan, a faculty member expressly agrees not to apply for unemployment compensation.  A VPRP participating faculty member also waives and releases all claims against the University existing prior to the date of the faculty member’s entrance into the program, including but not limited to claims for breach of contract. 
+
+A VPRP agreement is offered as a final contract with no offer of full-time or continued part-time re-employment at the end of the contract period. 
+
+Any faculty member interested in the VPRP should send a request to the Provost. It is preferred that this request be submitted by August preceding the final year of full-time employment to allow departments to accommodate the transition.  If approved, the Provost will generate an agreement for participation in the VPRP. The faculty member has seven days from the date of signing to revoke the agreement by informing the Provost in writing of such revocation.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Policies Recommended to be Deleted.txt [/INST] Policies Recommended to be Deleted
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Chapter III
+
+
+
+U.  Statement on Retirement
+
+It is my understanding that the policy is not current.
+
+W.  Library Staff Member with Faculty Rank
+
+Based on conversations with Dale, there are no longer any Librarians at OWU with faculty rank and the University no longer appoints faculty librarians with faculty standing.
+
+
+
+Chapter VI – Benefits, Leaves, and Professional Support Programs
+
+I recommend that two new sections be developed in a revised Chapter III.  
+
+A section devoted to Professional Development Programs, which should include the Pre-Tenure Regular Paid Leave for Full-Time Faculty, Regular Paid Leaves for Tenured Full-Time Faculty, Special Released Time for Scholarly Production, Retraining Leaves, Leaves without Pay, and Assistance with Travel and Other Professional Expenses policies.
+
+
+
+A.  Pension and Insurance Benefits
+
+I recommend that these policies be referenced and replaced with a link to the Employee Handbook being developed by HR.
+
+B.  Tuition and Room Benefits
+
+Same as above.
+
+C.6. Personal Leaves
+
+a. Pregnancy
+
+I recommend this policy be replaced with the Faculty Parental Leave policy currently in development.
+
+
+
+
+
+Appendices
+
+D. University Policy on Harassment, Including Sexual Harassment
+
+E. Policy on Voluntary Sexual Relationships Between Faculty/Staff and Students</s>"
+<s>[INST] Policy 9.1 (SL Edits).docx (jv).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Policy_Medical_Parent_proposed final version JAN 28 2022 (SS Comments).txt [/INST] Proposed Policy Manual Language to appear in
+
+4.12.3. 	Faculty Leave Policies
+
+following
+
+4.12.3.1.	Leave of Absence
+
+replacing
+
+4.12.3.2.	Medical Leave
+
+Periods of a brief illness of a faculty member are usually covered by colleagues on an informal basis.  There is, however, an official medical leave policy, which at times may be invoked.  
+
+
+
+Any full-time member of the faculty requesting medical leave is entitled either:
+
+up to one semester of full leave at full pay and benefits and, if necessary, up to a second semester of disability leave coverage through the College insurance carrier; or
+
+up to two semesters at half duty for full pay and benefits.
+
+
+
+Regardless of the option chosen, faculty are entitled to extend medical leave for up to a second year of unpaid leave.  During this second year, all benefits may be continued at the level in effect prior to the medical leave of absence with the total cost borne by the individual.  
+
+
+
+Faculty on the tenure-track may request a pause in the six-year timeline outlined in 4.7.1., without prejudice, if on medical leave during this time.  Moreover, the College will provide pro-rated overload compensation (in line with 4.11.1.2.) for coverage of the course load assigned to the faculty member on medical leave, or will provide for temporary replacement (4.1.1.3.) in cases where full semesters of medical leave are required.
+
+
+
+It should be explicitly noted that medical leave may be requested on a per malady basis, upon receipt of documentation of incapacitating illness or injury, and does not need to be reset.  For example, a leave of absence for chemotherapy treatments does not preclude a leave of absence for involvement in a vehicle accident the following year.  
+
+
+
+A member of the faculty who, because of illness or any other emergency, finds it impossible to participate in a College activity shall make a demonstrable effort to make prior arrangements.
+
+
+
+Medical leave may also be invoked to attend to injured or ill persons related to the faculty member by blood or marriage or whose relationship with the faculty member is similar to that of persons who are related by blood or marriage.
+
+
+
+and including
+
+4.12.3.3.	New Parent Leave
+
+Any full-time member of the faculty requesting new parent leave to provide primary maternal, paternal, or new adoptive parent care is entitled either
+
+up to one semester of full leave at full pay and benefits; or
+
+up to two semesters at half duty for full pay and benefits.
+
+
+
+
+
+Moreover, clean, quiet lactation or pumping rooms will be made available if no private office is available.  
+
+
+
+Regardless of the option chosen, when two members of the faculty request leave for care of the same child, full-semester New Parent Leave should be taken in sequential semesters rather than simultaneously.
+
+
+
+Faculty on the tenure-track may request a pause in the six-year timeline outlined in 4.7.1., without prejudice, if on New Parent Leave during this time.  Moreover, the College will provide pro-rated overload compensation (in line with 4.11.1.2.) for coverage of the course load assigned to the faculty member on New Parent Leave, or will provide for temporary replacement (4.1.1.3.) in cases where full semesters of New Parent Leave are required.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Paid Medical and Paternal Leave for Full-time Faculty Members
+
+In support of Bethany College’s commitment to supporting members of the full-time faculty as they balance the demands of the workplace with family obligations, it is the policy of the College to provide paid medical and parental leave and job protection to full-time faculty when eligibility requirements are met.  Periods of a brief illness of a faculty member are usually covered by colleagues on an informal basis.
+
+Family and medical leave are available for full-time faculty members who need to take time off work due to: 
+
+The faculty member’s own serious health condition 
+
+The care of a sick family member 
+
+Childbirth or adoption 
+
+Such leave may be a combination of paid and unpaid FMLA leave, but in all cases ensures members of the full-time faculty, including faculty librarians, with job protection and maintenance of group health benefits as set forth below. 
+
+Eligibility
+
+All members of the full-time faculty, including faculty librarians, are eligible for paid leave under this policy (hereinafter “full-time faculty” or “members of the full-time faculty”).  
+
+Medical Leave
+
+A. Medical Leave for a Faculty Member’s Serious Health Condition
+
+For a faculty member’s own serious health condition(s), a member of the full-time faculty is qualified for the following paid leave medical leave during any 12-month period, conditional upon certification by a licensed health care provider: 
+
+Up to one semester of full leave at full pay and benefits and, if necessary, up to a second semester of disability leave coverage through the College insurance carrier; or
+
+Up to two semesters at half duty for full pay and benefits.
+
+B. Medical Leave for the Care of a Family Member with a Serious Health Condition
+
+All members of the full-time faculty, including faculty librarians, may take up to four (4) weeks of paid family medical leave to care for a family member (i.e., spouse, child, or parent as defined in this policy below) with a serious health condition as defined by the Family and Medical Leave Act.  This leave may also be taken as a 3 or 4 credit course release during one semester.  If additional leave is needed, faculty members may supplement the four (4) weeks of paid leave with eight (8) additional weeks of unpaid leave, assuming FMLA eligibility requirements have been met (see Volume III, Section 3.3.4.1). 
+
+Note: The Provost has the discretion to reassign teaching duties and assign alternate appropriate duties to an eligible faculty member taking Medical Leave under this Policy when medically advised or to serve the integrity of the academic or administrative program.  The duration of such reassignment of duties will depend on when return from the leave occurs during the course of the academic semester.
+
+Parental Leave
+
+Full-time faculty members are eligible for parental leave in the event of the birth, adoption, or state placement of a child for whom the faculty member has parental responsibilities.  
+
+An eligible faculty member will be granted one (1) full semester of paid leave within twelve (12) months of the birth, adoption, or state placement of a child.  Should both parents be eligible faculty members, the leave allowed is a total of one (1) semester for both parents, not one (1) semester each.  All leave following the date of birth, adoption, or placement must be taken within twelve (12) months following the event.  All leave following the date of birth, adoption, or placement must be taken in consecutive days or weeks.  No intermittent leave is available for birth, adoption, or state placement.
+
+Whether leave is taken as full time or equivalent prorated part-time, leave shall be determined by the faculty member and the Provost, in consultation with the Department Chair. 
+
+The Provost has the discretion to reassign teaching duties and assign alternate appropriate duties to an eligible faculty member taking Parental Leave under this Policy when medically advised or to serve the integrity of the academic or administrative program.  The duration of such reassignment of duties will depend on when the birth, adoption, or placement occurs during the course of the academic semester.
+
+Note: Surrogate mothers and sperm donors are excluded from coverage under this policy.
+
+Relationship to Federal Family and Medical Leave Act 
+
+If a faculty member is eligible for leave under the College’s FMLA Policy (see Volume III, Section 3.3.4.1), then any paid medical or parental leave pursuant to this policy shall count toward the twelve (12) weeks of leave guaranteed under FMLA.  Specifically, FMLA leave and paid leave taken under this policy will run concurrently, not cumulatively.  If a faculty member is not eligible for leave under the FMLA, that faculty member is still eligible for paid medical or parental leave under this policy, but such leave shall not count as leave under the FMLA.  Any leave taken under the FMLA, after exhaustion of the paid leave available under this policy shall be unpaid leave.
+
+
+
+How to Request Medical or Parental Leave 
+
+A. Medical Leave
+
+Faculty members should schedule an appointment with Human Resources to discuss their unique situation and how College policies can accommodate their needs.  Human Resources will determine whether the faculty member is eligible for paid and/or unpaid leave and will notify the faculty member, Department Chair, and Provost of its determination.  The faculty member should then submit a written request for medical and/or parental leave to the Department Chair and Provost.  Approval of the medical leave is made by the Provost.
+
+If the reason for requested medical leave is foreseeable, the faculty member is required to provide 30 days notice of intent to take leave.  If the need for leave is not foreseeable, the faculty member is required to provide as much notice as possible.  Faculty members requesting a paid medical leave under this policy must submit a written request to the faculty member’s department chair, which includes a start date and an end date for the leave.  Medical certification may accompany the written request or it may be sent directly to the Provost. 
+
+B. Parental Leave
+
+Faculty should provide the Department Chair and Provost with advance written notice of the intent to take parental leave as soon as practicable and, in no event later than June 1st for the Fall semester and October 1st for the Spring semester.  The College recognizes that, in the case of adoption or state placement, the timeframe for such placement or adoption may not be known that far in advance.  In such event, faculty should provide the College with notice of the possible adoption or state placement as specified above and must promptly notify the College once the date of such adoption or placement is known. Any failure to give a timely notice may cause the leave to be delayed.
+
+Medical Documentation
+
+Faculty members will be required to furnish appropriate medical documentation to Human Resources.  If the faculty member is eligible for FMLA leave, the FMLA medical certification requirements will govern.  The medical documentation must be completed and signed by the individual’s health care provider.
+
+The College has the right to ask for a second opinion if it has reason to doubt the certification.  The College will pay for the faculty member’s family member to get a certification from a second doctor, which the College will select. The College may deny medical leave to a faculty member whose family member refuses to release relevant medical records to the health care provider designated to provide a second or third opinion. If necessary to resolve a conflict between the original certification and the second opinion, the College  will require the opinion of a third doctor. The College and the faculty member will mutually select the third doctor, and the College will pay for the opinion. This third opinion will be considered final. The employee will be provisionally entitled to paid leave pending the second and/or third opinion.
+
+Adoption Documentation
+
+Faculty members seeking parental leave due to the adoption or state placement of a child will be required to furnish appropriate adoption documentation to Human Resources, such as a letter from an adoption agency, the attorney in cases of private adoptions, or the state in case of state placements.
+
+Reinstatement
+
+A faculty member will be reinstated to the same position held when medical or parental leave began with equivalent pay, benefits, and other terms and conditions of employment, provided the faculty member can perform the essential functions of the position.
+
+The College’s obligation to restore the faculty member to the same position ceases if and when: 1) the employment relationship would have terminated if the faculty member had not taken medical or parental leave; 2) the faculty member informs the College in writing of the faculty member’s intent not to return to work at the expiration of the Parental Leave; or 3) the faculty member fails to return to work at the expiration of the Parental Leave.
+
+Note: The Provost has the discretion to reassign teaching duties and assign alternate appropriate duties to an eligible faculty member taking leave under this policy, when medically advised or to serve the integrity of the academic program.  
+
+														Tenure Extensions
+
+														Faculty on the tenure-track may request a pause in the six-year timeline outlined in 4.7.1., without prejudice, if on Medical or Parental Leave during this time.  
+
+														Protection from Discrimination, Harassment or Retaliation
+
+														No faculty member will face discrimination, harassment, or retaliation as a result of the faculty member’s use of paid medical or parental leave consistent with this Policy. 
+
+														Benefits
+
+														During an approved  paid medical or parental leave, all benefits remain in effect.  
+
+														Return from Medical Leave
+
+The College reserves the right to require a physician's statement indicating a faculty member returning from medical leave is fit to resume the employee's responsibilities. If requested, the physician’s statement must be provided to the Provost before the faculty member is allowed to return to work.
+
+														Failure to Return
+
+Unless waived by the Provost, a faculty member who takes Medical or Parental Leave is obligated to return to active status for at least an equivalent period immediately following such leave in order to retain the benefits of the leave, including salary paid.  If the faculty member who has taken paid Medical or Parental Leave does not return, the faculty member shall be responsible to return the pay received under this policy unless otherwise waived by the Provost.
+
+														
+
+														Voluntary Separation
+
+														The College considers a voluntary termination by the faculty member when the following incidents occur:
+
+																	If the faculty member fails to return from the leave at the specified time without contacting the faculty member’s Department Chair and Provost.
+
+																	If the faculty member seeks or accepts any work with another employer during the paid leave.
+
+																	If the faculty member operates a personal business during the paid leave.
+
+
+
+Definitions
+
+Family Member: Covered family members under this policy are the faculty member’s spouse, son, daughter, or parent as defined in the FMLA regulations.
+
+""Spouse"" means a husband or wife, including those in same-sex marriages.
+
+""Son or daughter"" means a biological, adopted or foster child; a stepchild; a legal ward; or a child of a person standing in loco parentis who is either under age 18 or age 18 or older and ""incapable of self-care because of a mental or physical disability.""
+
+""Parent"" means a “biological, adoptive, step or foster father or mother, or any other individual who stood in loco parentis to the employee when he or she was a minor.”
+
+Serious Health Condition: a condition that requires inpatient care at a hospital, hospice, or residential medical care facility, including any period of incapacity or any subsequent treatment in connection with such inpatient care or a condition that requires continuing care by a licensed health care provider.</s>"
+<s>[INST] Ponce IWPM Pro.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] PoP Review Framework (DRAFT).txt [/INST] FRAMEWORK FOR THE REVIEW PROCESS OF 
+
+PROFESSORS OF THE PRACTICE
+
+
+
+
+
+TIMELINE 
+
+1st appointment: 1 year (PoP)
+
+In May of appointment year, course evals & self evaluation reviewed for reappointment
+
+Provost Office decision of renewal based on review & curricular need
+
+Satisfactory review = second 1-year contract
+
+Service is not expected
+
+2nd appointment: 1 year (PoP)
+
+In May of appointment year, review of course evals, self evaluation content, service, etc reviewed for reappointment
+
+Provost Office decision of renewal based on review & curricular need
+
+Satisfactory review = first 2-year contract
+
+Service is expected
+
+3rd appointment: 2 years (PoP)
+
+In May of final appointment year, review of course evals, self evaluation content, & service reviewed for reappointment
+
+Faculty Scholarship & Promotion Committee involved with review and recommendation 
+
+Review: if positive review and curricular need, 3-year contract for Senior Professor of the Practice (with salary increase)
+
+4th+ appointment: 3 years (Senior PoP)
+
+In May of final appointment year, review of course evals, self evaluation content, & service reviewed for appointment
+
+Renewal at discretion of Provost Office based on review & curricular need
+
+
+
+
+
+OUTLINE OF SERVICE EXPECTATIONS 
+
+Contributions to the institution may be weighed differently and do not need to fulfill all three categories. Any stipended or course equivalency work does not count as service.
+
+Examples of service (not exhaustive)
+
+Program/Departmental Service, such as:
+
+Department meetings (expected)
+
+Other meetings
+
+Major curricular initiatives
+
+Programming
+
+Search committees
+
+Student supervision
+
+Advising 
+
+Teaching observations for colleagues 
+
+Recommendation letters for students
+
+Institutional Service, such as:
+
+Attendance at Commencement and Convocation (expected)
+
+Committees
+
+Curricular initiatives 
+
+Interdisciplinary collaborations 
+
+Admissions participation 
+
+Advising 
+
+Field and Community Service, such as:
+
+National organizations
+
+External reviews 
+
+Journal/editorial work
+
+Pro bono deployment of expertise 
+
+
+
+SELF-EVALUATION CONTENT 
+
+A document of approximately two pages noting:
+
+Courses taught
+
+Number of students taught
+
+Average grade per course
+
+Course reassignments/releases
+
+Service 
+
+A peer teaching observation
+
+A statement of support from the department chair/program coordinator 
+
+Evidence of teaching effectiveness, which may include but is not limited to assignment guidelines, student work, a selection of course evaluations, or other student feedback
+
+
+
+The PoP will have access to the chair’s statement and may respond to it, if desired. The response will be included as part of the yearly evaluation.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Possible Recommendations.txt [/INST] Faculty Forum Questions – 1st Draft
+
+
+
+2, 4, 6 Evaluation System vs. Annual/Mid-Probationary System:  
+
+Should the current 2/4/6-year evaluation system remain (as opposed to an annual/mid-probationary system), but with a strengthened annual review component that emphasizes formative evaluation and goal setting?
+
+Annual Administrative Evaluation(s): 
+
+Should CLU refine the current Faculty Policies Handbook section addressing annual evaluations by including text requiring the submission of a written self-evaluation report by all faculty to include goal setting, followed by a written evaluation by the Chair/Program Director and an in-person meeting with the faculty member?
+
+Faculty Self-Evaluation Report: The Self-Evaluation report should include evidence from the then-current academic year of faculty member’s work in the areas of each evaluative criteria as defined by the University (and each respective academic division), noting strengths and weaknesses and the degree to which stated performance goals have been met by the faculty member.  
+
+Chair/Program Director Written Evaluation: The Chair/Program Director’s written evaluation should evaluate the faculty member’s performance, including an assessment of progress towards achieving the goals identified by the faculty member in the prior year’s evaluation.  Specifically, the chair/program director’s annual written evaluation should provide feedback so that the faculty member may maintain or improve subsequent performance and be based in part on identifying with the faculty member individual goals that are in alignment with and consistent with the faculty member’s current or aspirational rank, as well as University and division missions, goals, and long-range plans.  It should also establish a realistic program for obtaining these goals and evaluating them.  The results of the evaluation should then serve as a basis for reappointment and promotion and tenure decisions and provide formative feedback regarding the quality of the faculty member’s professional performance.
+
+Conference with Chair/Program Director: The Chair/Program Director should meet with the faculty member to share the results of the written evaluation and discuss and formulate next year’s goals.
+
+Faculty Member Comment: The faculty member should have the right to submit a written response to the chair/program director’s evaluation.
+
+Note: The Chair/Program Director evaluation should be considered mandatory.  If not conducted, this should be highlighted by the Dean or Provost in the annual evaluation of the chair/program director’s administrative evaluation.
+
+Teaching Observation Process
+
+Should CLU develop a comprehensive policy addressing the teaching observation process? 
+
+If so, we recommend that the policy clearly delineate the frequency of teaching observations (including peer and administrator classroom evaluations) and outline in procedural detail how peer evaluators and courses to be observed are selected. To provide more formative feedback, we also recommend that after the peer has conducted the classroom observation, the policy allow for a meeting to be scheduled to share the results of the observation with the faculty member.
+
+Student Course and Instruction Evaluations
+
+Should CLU revise the current Student Course and Instruction Evaluations policy in the Faculty Policies Handbook to: 
+
+(a) Modify the timing of when the evaluations are conducted to account for undergraduate/graduate students; 
+
+(b) Remove the student comments from the promotion and tenure process;
+
+(c) Amend the questionnaire to include course evaluation questions for statistical analysis; 
+
+(d) Include text noting that student evaluations are used in combination with other measures of teaching effectiveness.  
+
+Evaluation Criteria
+
+Adoption of Academic Discipline Evaluation Guidelines
+
+Because the nature of teaching effectiveness, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service differs in some respects across academic disciplines, should CLU adopt a policy that requires academic units to develop discipline-specific guidelines for tenure and promotion? 
+
+If so, the policy text should require that the division guidelines (a) conform to the general University standards published in the Faculty Policies Handbook; (b) make clear what each discipline values in pedagogy, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service; and (c) be used by all evaluators in the annual, promotion, and tenure evaluation processes.  Moreover, the procedural guidance regarding the development and approval of the academic division guidelines should be developed. 
+
+Teaching Effectiveness
+
+Should CLU adopt formal university-wide benchmarks for teaching effectiveness and a corresponding teaching evaluation rubric comparable to those developed by the University of Kansas (see e.g., https://cte.ku.edu/benchmarks-teaching-effectiveness-project)?
+
+Advising/Mentoring
+
+Given the recent CLU policy shift away from advising and towards mentoring responsibilities, the current advising clause in the Faculty Policies Handbook will need to be removed and replaced with a formal definition of mentoring, including a listing of corresponding examples of mentoring activities.  Should mentoring be considered a “stand-alone” evaluation criterion or a component of service responsibilities?
+
+Scholarly Activity and Professional Development
+
+Should CLU refine the University Scholarly Activity and Professional Development section to more clearly define “scholarship” and “professional development”* and provide a listing of examples of acceptable “peer review” activities?
+
+Additionally,
+
+(a) Should the Boyer text, which is currently published in the “Guidelines for Candidates” document, be reprinted in the Scholarly Activity and Professional Development section of the Faculty Policies Handbook?
+
+(b) Should specific examples of activities be listed for each Boyer category?
+
+(c) Should attendance at professional conferences be listed as a mandatory professional development requirement?
+
+(d) Should applied, public scholarship, and community-engaged scholarship be included as additional evidence of Scholarly Activity and Professional Development activities?
+
+* There has been some discussion regarding whether professional development should be moved to the service category.
+
+
+
+
+
+Service
+
+Should CLU refine the University Service and Community Service section by developing a formal definition of “community service” and providing additional examples of corresponding activities?
+
+Administrative Service Recognition
+
+Should CLU adopt a clause indicating that promotion and tenure evaluations shall be conducted relative to each candidate’s administrative workload assignments as may be applicable? For example, if a candidate’s workload assignment requires more administrative service (such as serving as department chair/program director, director of a center, etc.) and less teaching and scholarly activities, the expectation for teaching effectiveness and scholarship or creative work shall not be compromised, but the expected volume of teaching and research may be reduced and taken into consideration by promotion and tenure evaluators. 
+
+If so, faculty asked to fill significant administrative roles should negotiate their performance evaluation criteria and workloads with their Dean and the Provost before taking on such roles; these workload assignments should be documented and considered in evaluating these faculty members’ achievements in teaching and scholarship/creative works. Moreover, external reviewers (if utilized) should be informed of the candidate’s workload assignment and provided with additional data as needed to ensure proper evaluation of the accomplishments of the candidate.
+
+Addition of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusivity Standard
+
+Should CLU include contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion as a faculty evaluation standard under the Faculty Evaluation Criteria and Documentation section of the Faculty Policies Handbook?
+
+If so, faculty should be required to submit personal statements in the Annual Activity Report and promotion and tenure dossiers detailing their specific individual and/or collaborative activities aimed at supporting diversity, equity, an inclusion, discussing the context, importance, and impact of their contributions in teaching, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service activities during the evaluation period.
+
+Note: We recommend that the University adopt a staged roll-out of the DEI criteria and provide DEI training to both faculty and evaluators.
+
+Addition of Collegiality or Campus Citizenship Clause
+
+Consistent with the University’s values, should CLU include “collegiality” or “campus citizenship” as a component of faculty promotion and tenure evaluations?  
+
+If so, the text should emphasize that the evaluator’s focus solely relates to collaboration and constructive cooperation associated with a faculty member’s overall performance.  The text should also note that an assessment of collegiality must not be confused with conformity, sociability, or likability and may not be interpreted in a way that violates the principles of academic freedom. 
+
+Second- and Fourth-Year Reviews
+
+Should the evaluation procedures for second- and fourth-year reviews be amended to provide more narrative detail regarding the current stepwise evaluation process?  For example, should text be added addressing in greater detail the department chair/program director evaluation, ART Committee deliberations and reporting requirements, etc.?   
+
+Should the evaluation procedures for second- and fourth-year reviews include text indicating that the review culminates in a recommendation for reappointment or non-reappointment and include a written explanation outlining the reasons for the recommendation?
+
+If so, where reappointment is recommended, the ART Committee evaluation should discuss the faculty member’s strengths and weaknesses and identify areas that require development for continued progress toward tenure (if any).  The Dean (or Provost) should discuss the written evaluation with the faculty member.
+
+Promotion Policies, Eligibility, and Criteria
+
+Should the criteria for each academic rank be refined to more clearly articulate and define the standards that must be met for the applicable rank?  
+
+For example, for the Assistant Professor rank, should narrative text describing what constitutes “good teaching” be developed?  For the Associate Professor rank, should text be developed further outlining expectations regarding scholarship or creative work expectations? 
+
+For each rank, should a clause be added indicating that the candidate must also successfully provide evidence of congruence with the university’s mission and exhibit conduct in accordance with the standards of ethical professional conduct? 
+
+Note: For the latter, a clarifying sentence should be included noting that unless evidence to contrary is presented in the evaluation file, it will be assumed that the candidate has exhibited conduct in accordance with ethical standards.
+
+
+
+Criteria for Tenure
+
+Should the individual requirements subsection be refined to better articulate and define the standards that must be met for tenure? 
+
+Should a clause be added indicating that the candidate must also successfully provide evidence of congruence with the university’s mission and exhibit conduct in accordance with the standards of ethical professional conduct?  
+
+Should the Institutional Need clause be refined to include detailed procedures regarding how such determinations are made and implemented?
+
+Procedures for Promotion and Tenure Review 
+
+For formative purposes, should some (or all) of the content in the confidential file be reclassified to allow candidate access (i.e., teaching evaluations, copies of student course evaluations, and course loads and grade distributions)?
+
+Should candidates be afforded an opportunity to respond in writing to recommendation letters that are not included in the confidential file?
+
+Should the evaluation procedures for promotion and tenure review be amended to provide more narrative detail regarding the current stepwise evaluation process?  For example, should text be developed which clearly explains how tenured faculty inside and outside the department conduct their evaluations, how the department chair/program director and dean conduct their respective evaluations and document the results, the manner in which the ART Committee deliberates and arrives at a recommendation and how it documents the results, etc.?
+
+Should external reviews be a mandatory requirement for promotion and tenure evaluations or remain optional at the discretion of the candidate?  
+
+Regardless of whether external reviews are optional or mandatory, should detailed procedures regarding the external evaluation process be developed to address how and when external evaluators are contacted, receive materials, etc.?
+
+Should the current department evaluation procedure (i.e., submission of letters) be amended?  Specifically, 
+
+(a) Should the current process of soliciting letters from all full-time, tenured department faculty remain in place? Or should this process be opened to full-time, continuing faculty at a rank equal to and higher than the candidate?
+
+OR
+
+(b) Should departments, academic divisions or the schools/colleges be required to appoint a promotion and tenure committee to evaluate dossiers of division candidates for promotion and tenure and provide a written recommendation?  
+
+OR
+
+(c) Should the Chair/Program Director be charged with polling members of the department (or division), recording the vote numerically.  For example, for tenure candidates, the chair would poll all tenured full-time members of each candidate’s department, recording that vote numerically. For promotion candidates, the chair would poll all tenured full- time members of the candidate’s department with rank above that of the candidate, recording the vote numerically. Promotion to the rank of professor requires at the department level the vote of a least three (3) professors. The results of the polls, along with a narrative from the chair and/or department faculty setting forth a recommendation and summarizing the candidate’s accomplishments in teaching, scholarship, and service, and the candidate’s narrative and supporting documentation would then be forwarded to the next evaluator.
+
+Note: For departments with small numbers, faculty from outside the department may be brought in.
+
+A minority of CLU peer institutions have the Dean’s evaluation occur after the ART Committee evaluation (see e.g., Redlands and Valparaiso).  Others, such as Loyola Marymount, Chapman, St. Mary’s of California, University of the Pacific, and Santa Clara, have an approach like CLU where the Dean evaluates the candidate before the ART Committee. Should CLU keep its current approach?
+
+Should a clause be developed indicating that evaluations will be based solely on the content of the evaluation file (dossier and confidential file) and the results of the ART Committee’s interview with the candidate, which are considered in light of the applicable criteria and standards?  
+
+Note: If the ART Committee seeks additional content, the faculty member will be notified and be afforded an opportunity to respond.
+
+Should a policy addressing an evaluator’s conflict of interest be developed?
+
+Should a Promotion and Tenure Evaluation Appeals process be developed in lieu of the current use of the Faculty Grievance Policy?
+
+Post-tenure/Post-6th Year Review Policy and Procedures 
+
+Should CLU revise Section B – Evaluation and Action of the Post-tenure/Post-6th Year Review Policy and Procedures to include possible outcomes of the evaluation – positive, improvement necessary, and a commendation for distinguished performance? 
+
+For example, the the following definitions and detailed procedures may be introduced:
+
+Positive Review: If the ART Committee determines that the faculty member’s performance during the period of review meets or exceeds applicable standards for the rank currently held by the faculty member, then the faculty member receives a positive review and the evaluation is concluded.
+
+Improvement Necessary: If the ART Committee determines that the faculty member’s performance during the period of review falls below applicable standards in one or more evaluation criteria for the rank currently held by the faculty member, then the faculty member will design, in consultation with the chair of the ART Committee and Dean, a two-year development plan to address the area(s) in need of improvement.  
+
+Commendation for Distinguished Performance: If the ART Committee determines that the faculty member’s performance during the period of review is outstanding in all evaluation criteria categories, then the faculty member will receive a commendation for distinguished performance. 
+
+Miscellaneous
+
+Should the Provost continue to be a member of the ART? 
+
+Some interviewees questioned whether the Provost should remain an ex-officio member of the ART.  This is a matter of institutional preference.  A sampling of peer institution reflects no uniformity.  For example, the provost is not a member of the applicable promotion and tenure committees at University of the Redlands, Chapman, Loyola Marymount, and Santa Clara University.  At Pacific Lutheran and St. Mary’s, however, the provost is an ex-officio, non-voting advisory member of their respective rank and tenure committees.
+
+RAISE ISSUE ABOUT ART MAKEUP IN GENERAL – CHARGE TO FACULTY SENATE – OUTSIDE PURVUE OF TASK FORCE
+
+The following clause regarding appointment with tenure is published in the Faculty Policies document:
+
+“In rare cases, tenure may be granted on appointment of a faculty member who has been tenured or has held equivalent faculty status elsewhere.” 
+
+Should CLU adopt a more comprehensive policy permitting initial appointment with tenure which articulates how such decisions are made and approved?
+
+OR
+
+Should the above text be removed from the handbook?
+
+Should CLU adopt a policy permitting allowance for the submission of an application for tenure prior to the expiration of the probationary period?
+
+Should CLU refine its policy address the pausing of “tenure clock” to more clearly articulate circumstances that warrant the extension of the probationary period and how such applications are approved?
+
+
+
+Note re: Training: While not a policy issue, it should be noted that several faculty members during the interview process expressed a desire for additional university training. For example, some interviewees expressed a need for chairs to be trained on evaluation best practices.  Moreover, junior faculty indicated that there is a need for dossier writing training, as well as the need for mentoring to help in navigating the process.  If DEI is incorporated into the evaluative process, there is a recognition that training will be needed.  Finally, some expressed the need for new ART members to be trained when they come onboard, particularly given the introduction of the ART subcommittees.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Post tenure Examples.txt [/INST] Post tenure/Periodic Review
+
+
+
+F. Periodic Review of Tenured Faculty 
+
+Whitman College
+
+Each tenured faculty member shall be evaluated in every fifth year following tenure. The evaluation shall be conducted by the Provost and Dean of the Faculty in consultation with the faculty member’s Division Chair. (Faculty Code CH 1, Art IV, Sec 5.A.) (08/08/2002) 
+
+The faculty member being evaluated is responsible for the collection of the following materials to be used by the Provost and Dean of the Faculty and the appropriate Division Chair: 
+
+ActivityReportsfromthefive-yearperiodprecedingthereview.The faculty member being evaluated is responsible for submitting a current activity report. Past activity reports will be supplied by the Office of the Provost and Dean of the Faculty. 
+
+Three letters from colleagues from within the institution who have observed the candidate's teaching through at least two classroom visits and are familiar with the candidate's instructional aims, organization and materials. 
+
+Student evaluations from two-thirds of the courses taught in the preceding four years of teaching. 
+
+Anupdatedvita. 
+
+A self-assessment regarding teaching, professional activity and service to the College in the preceding five-year period as well as plans in each of these three areas for the next five-year period. 
+
+The Provost and Dean of the Faculty will invite all departmental colleagues to submit letters regarding the candidate’s performance in the areas of teaching, professional activity, and service to the department, College and community. The Provost and Dean of the Faculty shall notify the candidate of the source of any letter in their file before that letter is considered by the Provost and Dean of the Faculty and the appropriate Division Chair. The content of letters from internal and external reviewers are kept confidential by the Faculty Personnel Committee. (04/19/2017) 
+
+AfterconsultingwiththeappropriateDivisionChair,theProvostandDean of the Faculty will arrange a meeting with the faculty member being reviewed, and, at the discretion of the faculty member, the appropriate Division Chair. In the event that the faculty member is a division Chair, that person may elect to have the Chair of the Faculty at this meeting. The meeting will provide the opportunity for the faculty member and the Provost and Dean of the Faculty to have a dialogue about the evaluation. 
+
+Within three weeks of the meeting, the faculty member will receive a written letter from the Provost and Dean of the Faculty summarizing their conversation. The faculty member may respond in written form. The Provost and Dean of the Faculty’s letter and any written response from the faculty member will be added to the faculty member’s file for consultation in subsequent reviews. (12/07/2016) 
+
+In the event that the faculty member disagrees with the assessment made by the Provost and Dean of the Faculty, the faculty member may petition the Division Chairs and the Chair of the Faculty, who will conduct an independent evaluation. Any review by the Division Chairs and Chair of the Faculty will result in a written report that will be sent to the President of the College, the Provost and Dean of the Faculty and the faculty member, and will be added to the faculty member’s file. (Faculty Code Ch. 1, Art. IV, Sec. 5C.) 
+
+In the event a faculty member receives negative criticism, the College will make available faculty development opportunities that are appropriate for correcting the perceived deficiency.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Pre Draft - Appt Types - djb comments.txt [/INST] Faculty Classifications
+
+
+
+Full-Time Teaching Faculty
+
+The Full-time Teaching Faculty at Ohio Wesleyan University is comprised of those individuals appointed to either a Tenure-Line or Term (Non-Tenure Track) position in one of the University’s academic departments.  Members of the full-time teaching faculty have teaching, scholarship or creative work, and service responsibilities equal to a full-time teaching load as defined in Section - .  Positions are classified as Tenure Line or Term by the President in consultation with established faculty governance processes (See Handbook, Section IV).
+
+	Tenure-Line Faculty
+
+Tenure-Line faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who either hold a tenure-track or tenured appointment and are appointed to the rank of Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor or Professor.
+
+Tenure Track Faculty
+
+Tenure-track faculty members hold regular appointments, which is defined as a University commitment for a probationary period of service leading to permanent tenure on the teaching faculty unless the appointment is terminated by the appointee or by action of the University as hereinafter provided. At the time of initial appointment to Ohio Wesleyan University, tenure track faculty members are issued an initial contract that is subject to renewal after two years of service.  Subsequent contracts are issued [annually or every two years].  Reappointments are preceded by an evaluation by the Faculty Personnel Committee and Provost.  
+
+Tenured Faculty
+
+Tenured faculty hold tenured appointments at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.  A tenure appointment, once conferred by the Board of Trustees, is subject only to modifications pertaining to rank, salary, and academic assignments in accordance with the provisions of this Faculty Handbook.  
+
+Non-Tenure Track Term Faculty
+
+Non-tenure track term faculty hold full-time temporary appointments approved for a specifically limited time, normally one to three years, and are appointed to the academic title of Visiting Faculty or Faculty-in-Residence.  Individuals appointed to a non-tenure track term position are not eligible for tenure, promotion, or sabbatical; however, they have the same academic freedom and responsibilities in the management of courses as Tenure-Line Faculty.
+
+Non-tenure track term appointments are renewable only to the expiration date of the position approval and in no case are renewable as a term appointment beyond the individual's seventh year of full-time faculty service at the University.  Renewal of appointment is preceded by an evaluation by the Faculty Personnel Committee and Provost.  
+
+Visiting Faculty
+
+The title of Visiting Faculty is accorded to a term faculty member appointed on a temporary basis to fill a need for a short-term full-time teaching position, serve as a leave replacement, or teach courses when time has not permitted a full search to conducted or the search has not yielded a suitably regular tenure-trach appointee. 
+
+The University reserves the right to make temporary appointments as Visiting Instructor, Visiting Assistant Professor, Visiting Associate Professor, or Visiting Professor in accordance with qualifications and ranks earned through review at a comparable regionally accredited four- year college or university.
+
+Faculty-in-Residence
+
+The title of Faculty-in-Residence is accorded to a full-time non-tenure track term faculty member appointed on a temporary basis to teach courses within an area of special expertise or training.  This designation is reserved for individuals whose research, publication, or other accomplishments are recognized as authoritative in such areas as the arts, industry, politics, or other domains outside the academic profession. Examples of Faculty-in-Residence include, but are not limited to, Scholar-in-Residence, Writer-in-Residence, and Artist-in-Residence.
+
+
+
+Continuation of Faculty in Term Positions
+
+Seen in the light of the University's general responsibility to hire and keep the best Faculty available, the following policy shall apply:
+
+If a person appointed to a full-time non-tenure track term position wishes to be appointed to a vacant regular tenure track position, the individual must apply as a candidate and compete in a national search for the best qualified person to fill the position. This policy will apply when the vacant position is the result of ""converting"" the term position presently occupied by the individual into a regular tenure track position, as well as when it is a new tenure track position or one created by retirement, resignation, or dismissal for adequate cause.
+
+The Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee and the department concerned, may in special cases approve exceptions to the above policy such that a non-tenure track term faculty member may be simply appointed to the tenure track position without competing in a search. Such exceptions will be considered only after the tenure track vacancy has been approved and will require convincing evidence that that the individual in all likelihood is the best available person for the position. The thoroughness of the search which resulted in hiring the individual, including its adequacy in reaching an inclusive candidate pool, will be a consideration. 
+
+This policy will not necessarily apply when a term position is reestablished as a ""new"" term position. In such cases the occupant of the position may, by simple renewal of appointment, be appointed.
+
+Rationale: Some faculty members are appointed to positions which are scheduled to terminate at a definite time. It is reasonable to assume that such an appointment, being by definition temporary, is less desirable from the faculty member's point of view than is a regular appointment. It follows that on the average the pool of applicants will be smaller for such positions and that some potential candidates who are of such quality as to be able to secure regular positions elsewhere will not be in the pool.
+
+
+
+Part-Time Faculty
+
+Part-time faculty members are appointed on a part-time contractual basis, teaching less than a fifty percent full-time teaching load for the academic year or less than a one hundred percent full-time teaching load for half of the academic year, as determined by the Provost.  They are appointed to the rank of Part-time Instructor, Part-time Lecturer, or Part-time Senior Lecturer.
+
+Part-time appointments are subject to the approval of the department and the Provost. Before any part-time faculty may be appointed to teach, the department(s) or program(s) seeking faculty for part-time teaching must have submitted a request to the Provost and received approval from the same.  
+
+Part-time faculty members are not tenurable and they are not eligible for sabbatical.  When eligibility requirements are met, they may be promoted to the ranks of Part-time Lecturer and Part-time Senior Lecturer as specified in Chapter IV.  All initial part-time appointments are made to Part-Time Instructorships.  See Chapter IV for additional information regarding the terms, rights, and responsibilities applicable to part-time faculty.
+
+Appointment to a part-time position does not confer membership in the Faculty as defined in the Faculty Bylaws.  Accordingly, part-time faculty are not voting members of the Faculty.  They are, however, invited to attend the Faculty meetings, with voice, but not vote. In addition, part-time faculty do not participate in the Faculty or University standing committee structure.
+
+Part-time Instructor
+
+The title of Part-time Instructor is accorded to a person who teaches courses limited to a specific area of expertise.  To be appointed as an instructor, the individual must meet the minimum faculty qualifications as defined in Section 3.5.5 of this Handbook.
+
+Lecturer 
+
+The title of Lecturer is accorded to a person who has served effectively as a Part-Time Instructor at the University for a period of six years and completed a minimum of twelve regular full units of teaching.
+
+Senior Lecturer
+
+The title of Senior Lecturer is accorded to a person who has served effectively as a Lecturer at the University for a period of six years and completed a minimum of twelve regular full units of teaching since their last promotion.
+
+
+
+Administrators with Faculty Status
+
+Pursuant to Article I, Section 1 of the Faculty Bylaws, the following administrators are members of the Faculty: 
+
+President 
+
+Provost 
+
+Vice Presidents
+
+Chaplain
+
+The above individuals are considered administrators for employment purposes, under terms and conditions of employment as stated in the University’s staff personnel policies.  However, they have the privilege of vote at meetings of the Faculty in accordance with Article I, Section 1 of the Faculty Bylaws.  
+
+Librarians
+
+The policies and provisions described in the paragraphs with respect to a member of the teaching faculty shall apply to a faculty member engaged in fulltime professional service on the staff of the University Library, professional library service being substituted for teaching services wherever mentioned. 
+
+University librarians are members of the University’s professional staff and are guided by those policies applicable to staff as set forth in the Staff Employee Handbook.  However, given the close involvement of librarians in support of the faculty's teaching and the student's learning, professional librarians at the University are afforded voting privileges at Faculty meetings and are eligible for election to Faculty standing committees. In addition, librarians may use the appropriate appeal process in the Faculty Handbook for cases involving alleged violations of their academic freedom.  See the Policy Statement on Appointment of Librarians in the Appendix.
+
+
+
+Affiliate Professorships
+
+The main duties of an Affiliate Professor are to give advice to students who have professional goals in or related to the expertise of the Affiliate Professor and to serve as a resource person with whom both staff and students can consult. Affiliate Professors are permitted to supervise departmental honors programs and independent study projects and to serve in the apprenticeship program.
+
+Selection, Appointment, and Review
+
+Departments may make application on behalf of the person they wish to recruit. The application is to include the regular Ohio Wesleyan University application form, a vita, and a supporting document from the department. The application is to be presented for approval to the Provost and to the Faculty Personnel Committee. All Affiliate Professorships shall be reviewed by the Faculty Personnel Committee every three years.
+
+Compensation
+
+Normally, Affiliate Professors will serve without remuneration. However, if lectures or courses are given by the Affiliate Professor, separate honoraria or part-time contracts can be arranged as they exist for part-time personnel from outside the University. Benefits are not included in such arrangements.
+
+Privileges
+
+Affiliate Professors are listed in the University catalog and directory, are placed on faculty mailing lists, and are admitted to general University activities during their period of appointment. Adjunct Professors can be admitted to may attend faculty and committee meetings and to appropriate committees by invitation.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Honorific Faculty
+
+Professor Emeritus/a
+
+The special status of Professor Emeritus/a is awarded by the Board of Trustees to those persons who meet the following qualifications: 
+
+		Have completed at least ten (10) academic years of ranked faculty service to Ohio Wesleyan and held the rank of Associate Professor or Professor at retirement (in exceptional circumstances, documented by the appropriate Department Chair Provost, candidates may be advanced who do not meet these qualifications); 
+
+		Have fulfilled the responsibilities of a faculty member with consistency and effectiveness; 
+
+		Have received a positive recommendation for such appointment from the appropriate department, the Faculty Personnel Committee, the Provost, and the University President. 
+
+Professor Emeritus/a are not considered employees of the University and therefore are not entitled to fringe benefits.  As members of the broader University community, Professor Emeritus/a are welcome to advise the community in all University assemblies, colloquia, and other academic events.  However, they are not afforded voting privileges in faculty governance.
+
+Professor Emeritus/a faculty are entitled to the following recognitions and privileges:
+
+Listing in the Catalog and other University publications and directories that collectively list the Faculty.
+
+The right to participate in formal and informal academic events and other University events and social functions with other faculty colleagues.
+
+Use of the University Library facilities and the resources housed within.
+
+Use of office space and/or laboratories if recommended by the Department Chair and approved by the Provost.
+
+Use of the University’s recreational facilities.
+
+Use of University identification card and parking permit.
+
+Attendance at University events and use of services under the same conditions and at the same cost as other regular appointment faculty.
+
+Revocation of Status
+
+Once awarded, Professor Emeritus/a status continues in perpetuity unless the recipient either requests to have status rescinded or violates the intent and spirit of emeritus/a status by engaging in serious dishonorable conduct in violation of law, rule, or policy and/or causes harm to the University’s reputation. 
+
+To revoke Professor Emeritus/a status without the consent of the individual, a petition must be made by a member of the University community to the President, and subsequently to the Board of Trustees, which has the final authority to revoke the individual’s Professor Emeritus/a status.  Actions or conduct protected by academic freedom and unlawful discrimination shall not be used to revoke such status.
+
+
+
+Endowed or Named Chairs
+
+The University reserves the right to make faculty appointments that carry the additional title of endowed or named chair. The holder of an endowed or named chair must satisfy the conditions associated with the chair.  
+
+Appointments to endowed chairs are made by the President with the advice of the Provost and Faculty Personnel Committee and expire at the conclusion of the specified term. 
+
+The terms of the appointment to an endowed or named chair will be specified in the chair holder’s letter of initial appointment to the chair.  The holder of an endowed or named chair will receive an annual salary stipend if so stipulated in the charter document establishing the chair.
+
+A tenure track or tenured faculty member currently employed by the University retains rank and tenure upon appointment to the chaired position.  An endowed or named chair is relinquished at the time of retirement, resignation, dismissal for cause, or termination.
+
+
+
+Types of Faculty Contracts
+
+The following types of contracts are issued to individuals granted faculty status at Ohio Wesleyan University:
+
+Tenure-Track Contracts, Regular Appointments
+
+Tenure-Line faculty members eligible for tenure receive tenure-track contracts and hold a regular appointment until they either receive tenure or separate from the University.  A probationary appointment is made with the understanding that both the University and the faculty member will engage in a period of mutual evaluation—the probationary period—leading to the tenure decision.
+
+A tenure-track appointment is normally renewable up to a total of six years.  A tenure-track faculty member’s time to the tenure decision will be stated in the initial letter of appointment.  
+
+Faculty members holding tenure-track contracts undergo reappointment review as specified in Section --.  A faculty member undergoing an unsuccessful tenure review will receive notice and  a terminal contract for the following academic year.
+
+
+
+Tenured Contracts
+
+Tenure contracts are awarded to full-time tenure track faculty who have attained tenured status (see Section -).  The granting of tenure can only be effected by the procedures specified in the University’s Tenure Policy (see Section ) and upon the affirmative vote of the Board of Trustees.  
+
+A tenure contract is subject only to annual modifications pertaining to academic rank, salary, and academic and/or administrative assignments in accordance with the provisions of this Faculty Handbook.  
+
+Full-Time Term Contracts
+
+Full-time term contracts are offered to faculty members holding temporary appointments in a Non-Tenure Track Term position and are limited to the term of employment outlined in the contract.  Term appointments do not confer upon the faculty member an expectation of tenure or a right of continuing employment beyond the expiration date of the position approval.  
+
+A term contract may also be issued to a faculty member holding a tenure track position where the appointee serves as a leave replacement, or when time has not permitted a full search to be conducted or the search has not yielded a suitable regular appointee. In latter kinds of cases, a new search will be conducted the next year, in which search the temporary appointee may compete.
+
+Part-Time Term Contracts
+
+Part-time term contracts are issued to part-time faculty for a designated period or course and automatically expires at the end of that period. Reemployment of the faculty member after expiration of the contract is solely within the discretion of the University. 
+
+Terminal Contracts
+
+A terminal contract is a final annual term contract issued to a full-time faculty member following notice of non-renewal of appointment or denial of tenure.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Pre Draft - Appt Types.txt [/INST] Faculty Classifications
+
+
+
+Full-Time Teaching Faculty
+
+The Full-time Teaching Faculty at Ohio Wesleyan University is comprised of those individuals appointed to either a Tenure-Line or Term (Non-Tenure Track) position in one of the University’s academic departments or programmatic areas.  Members of the full-time teaching faculty have teaching, scholarship or creative work, and service responsibilities equal to a full-time teaching load as defined in Section - .  Positions are classified as Tenure Line or Term by the President in consultation with established faculty governance processes (See Handbook, Section IV).
+
+	Tenure-Line Faculty
+
+Tenure-Line faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who either hold a tenure-track or tenured appointment and are appointed to the rank of Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor or Professor.
+
+Tenure Track Faculty
+
+Tenure-track faculty members hold regular appointments, which include a University commitment for a probationary period of service leading to permanent tenure on the teaching faculty unless the appointment is terminated by the appointee or by action of the University as hereinafter provided. At the time of initial appointment to Ohio Wesleyan University, tenure track faculty members are issued an initial contract that is subject to renewal after two years of service.  Subsequent contracts are issued annually.  Reappointments are preceded by an evaluation by the Faculty Personnel Committee and Provost.  
+
+Tenured Faculty
+
+Tenured faculty hold tenured appointments at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.  A tenure appointment, once conferred by the Board of Trustees, is subject only to modifications pertaining to rank, salary, and academic assignments in accordance with the provisions of this Faculty Handbook.  A Full-time faculty member with a tenure appointment has the right to continuous appointments until death, resignation, retirement, failure to accept a written assignment of appropriate duties for the ensuing academic year within sixty days following receipt of such assignment, or discontinuance of the individual's teaching position.
+
+Non-Tenure Track Term Faculty
+
+Non-tenure track term faculty hold full-time temporary appointments approved for a specifically limited time, normally one to three years, and are appointed to the academic title of Visiting Faculty or Faculty-in-Residence.  Individuals appointed to a non-tenure track term position are not eligible for tenure, promotion, or sabbatical; however, they otherwise enjoy the same rights and responsibilities as their Tenure-Line colleagues.
+
+Non-tenure track term appointments are renewable only to the expiration date of the position approval and in no case are renewable as a temporary appointment beyond the individual's seventh year of full-time faculty service at the University.  Renewal of appointment is preceded by an evaluation by the Faculty Personnel Committee and Provost.  If the appointment is not renewed prior to expiration date of the position approval, the University will provide notice as specified in Section --.
+
+Visiting Faculty
+
+The title of Visiting Faculty is accorded to a term faculty member appointed on a temporary basis to fill a need for a short-term full-time teaching position, serve as a leave replacement, or teach courses when time has not permitted a full search to conducted or the search has not yielded a suitably regular tenure-trach appointee. 
+
+The University reserves the right to make temporary appointments as Visiting Instructor, Visiting Assistant Professor, Visiting Associate Professor, or Visiting Professor in accordance with qualifications and ranks earned through review at a comparable regionally accredited four- year college or university.
+
+Faculty-in-Residence
+
+The title of Faculty-in-Residence is accorded to a term faculty member appointed on a temporary basis to teach courses within an area of special expertise or training.  This designation is reserved for individuals whose research, publication, or other accomplishments are recognized as authoritative in such areas as the arts, industry, politics, or other domains outside the academic profession. Examples of Faculty-in-Residence include, but are not limited to, Scholar-in-Residence, Writer-in-Residence, Artist-in-Residence, and Pastor-in-Residence.
+
+
+
+Continuation of Faculty in Term Positions
+
+Seen in the light of the University's general responsibility to hire and keep the best Faculty available, the following policy shall apply:
+
+If a person appointed to a full-time non-tenure track term position wishes to be appointed to a vacant regular tenure track position, the individual must apply as a candidate and compete in a search for the best qualified person to fill the position. This policy will apply when the vacant position is the result of ""converting"" the term position presently occupied by the individual into a regular tenure track position, as well as when it is a new tenure track position or one created by retirement, resignation, or dismissal for adequate cause.
+
+The Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee and the department concerned, may in special cases approve exceptions to the above policy such that a non-tenure track term faculty member may be simply appointed to the tenure track position without competing in a search. Such exceptions will be considered only after the tenure track vacancy has been approved, and will require convincing evidence that the individual in all likelihood is the best available person for the position. The thoroughness of the search which resulted in hiring the individual, including its adequacy in reaching a diverse and inclusive pool of candidates minorities and women, will be a consideration.  If awarded a tenure-track appointment, the individual's maximum probationary period will be stated in the initial contract of employment. 
+
+This policy will not necessarily apply when a term position is reestablished as a ""new"" term position. In such cases the occupant of the position may, by simple renewal of appointment, be appointed.
+
+Rationale: Some faculty members are appointed to positions which are scheduled to terminate at a definite time. It is reasonable to assume that such an appointment, being by definition temporary, is less desirable from the faculty member's point of view than is a regular appointment. It follows that on the average the pool of applicants will be smaller for such positions and that some potential candidates who are of such quality as to be able to secure regular positions elsewhere will not be in the pool.
+
+
+
+Part-Time Faculty
+
+Part-time faculty members are appointed on a part-time term contractual basis, teaching less than a normal full-time faculty teaching load over the course of an academic year as determined by the Provost, and having total responsibilities that are partial rather than full.  They are appointed to the rank of Part-time Instructor, Lecturer, or Senior Lecturer.
+
+Part-time appointments are subject to the approval of the department and the Provost. Before any part-time faculty may be appointed to teach, the department(s) or program(s) seeking faculty for part-time teaching must have submitted to the Provost and received approval of a statement of need for part-time support for the semester or term the appointment would cover. 
+
+Part-time faculty members are not tenurable and they are not eligible for sabbatical.  When eligibility requirements are met, they may be promoted to the ranks of Lecturer and Senior Lecturer as specified in Chapter IV.  All initial part-time appointments are made to Part-Time Instructorships.  See Chapter IV for additional information regarding the terms, rights, and responsibilities applicable to part-time faculty.
+
+Appointment to a part-time position does not confer membership in the Faculty as defined in the Faculty Bylaws.  Accordingly, part-time faculty are not voting members of the Faculty.  They are, however, invited to attend the Faculty and department meetings, with voice, but not vote. In addition, part-time faculty do not participate in the Faculty or University standing committee structure.
+
+Part-time Instructor
+
+The title of Part-time Instructor is accorded to a person who teaches courses limited to a specific area of expertise.  To be appointed as an instructor, an individual must hold a minimum of the master's degree in the discipline that they will be teaching, or a master’s in another related discipline, with at least 18 semester hours of graduate work in the discipline that they will be teaching; in special cases the Provost may grant an exception to this degree requirement based on “tested experience” (see Faculty Qualifications).
+
+Lecturer 
+
+The title of Lecturer is accorded to a person who has served effectively as a Part-Time Instructor at the University for a period of six years and completed a minimum of twelve regular units of teaching.
+
+Senior Lecturer
+
+The title of Senior Lecturer is accorded to a person who has served effectively as a Lecturer at the University for a period of six years and completed a minimum of twelve regular units of teaching since their last promotion.
+
+
+
+Administrators with Faculty Status
+
+Pursuant to Article I, Section 1 of the Faculty Bylaws, the following administrators are members of the Faculty: 
+
+President 
+
+Provost 
+
+Vice Presidents
+
+Chaplain
+
+The above individuals are considered administrators for employment purposes, under terms and conditions of employment as stated in the University’s staff personnel policies.  However, they have the privilege of vote at meetings of the Faculty in accordance with Article I, Section 1 of the Faculty Bylaws.  
+
+Librarians
+
+The policies and provisions described in the paragraphs with respect to a member of the teaching faculty shall apply to a faculty member engaged in fulltime professional service on the staff of the University Library, professional library service being substituted for teaching services wherever mentioned. 
+
+University librarians are members of the University’s professional staff and are guided by those policies applicable to staff as set forth in the Staff Employee Handbook.  However, given the close involvement of librarians in support of the faculty's teaching and the student's learning, professional librarians at the University are afforded voting privileges at Faculty meetings and are eligible for election to Faculty standing committees. In addition, librarians may use the appropriate appeal process in the Faculty Handbook for cases involving alleged violations of their academic freedom.  See the Policy Statement on Appointment of Librarians in the Appendix.
+
+
+
+Adjunct Faculty
+
+The main duties of an Adjunct Professor are to give advice to students who have professional goals in or related to the expertise of the Adjunct Professor and to serve as a resource person with whom both staff and students can consult. Adjunct Professors are permitted to supervise departmental honors programs and independent study projects and to serve in the apprenticeship program.
+
+Selection, Appointment, and Review
+
+Departments may make application on behalf of the person they wish to recruit. The application is to include the regular Ohio Wesleyan University application form, a vita, and a supporting document from the department. The application is to be presented for approval to the Provost and to the Faculty Personnel Committee. All Adjunct Professorships shall be reviewed by the Faculty Personnel Committee every three years.
+
+Compensation
+
+Normally, Adjunct Professors will serve without remuneration. However, if lectures or courses are given by the Adjunct Professor, separate honoraria or part-time contracts can be arranged as they exist for visiting and part-time personnel from outside the University. Fringe benefits are not included in such arrangements.
+
+Privileges
+
+Adjunct Professors are listed in the University catalog and directory, are placed on faculty mailing lists, and are admitted to general university activities during their period of appointment. Adjunct Professors can be admitted to may attend faculty and committee meetings and to appropriate committees by invitation.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Honorific Faculty
+
+Professor Emeritus/a
+
+The special status of Professor Emeritus/a is awarded by the Board of Trustees to those persons who meet the following qualifications: 
+
+		Have completed at least ten (10) academic years of ranked faculty service to Ohio Wesleyan and held the rank of Associate Professor or Professor at retirement (in exceptional circumstances, documented by the appropriate Department Chair Provost, candidates may be advanced who do not meet these qualifications); 
+
+		Have fulfilled the responsibilities of a faculty member with consistency and effectiveness; 
+
+		Have received a positive recommendation for such appointment from the appropriate department, the Faculty Personnel Committee, the Provost, and the University President. 
+
+Professor Emeritus/a are not considered employees of the University and therefore are not entitled to fringe benefits.  As members of the broader University community, Professor Emeritus/a are welcome to advise the community in all University assemblies, colloquia, and other academic events.  However, they are not afforded voting privileges in faculty governance.
+
+Professor Emeritus/a faculty are entitled to the following recognitions and privileges:
+
+Listing in the Catalog and other University publications and directories that collectively list the Faculty,
+
+The right to participate in formal and informal academic events and other University events and social functions with other faculty colleagues,
+
+Use of the University Library with faculty privileges.
+
+Use of office space and/or laboratories if recommended by the Department Chair and approved by the Provost.
+
+Use of University identification card and parking permit, and
+
+Attendance at University events and use of services under the same conditions and at the same cost as other regular appointment faculty.
+
+Revocation of Status
+
+Once awarded, Professor Emeritus/a status continues in perpetuity unless the recipient either requests to have status rescinded or violates the intent and spirit of emeritus/a status by engaging in serious dishonorable conduct in violation of law, rule, or policy and/or causes harm to the University’s reputation. 
+
+To revoke Professor Emeritus/a status without the consent of the individual, a petition must be made by a member of the University community to the President, and subsequently to the Board of Trustees, which has the final authority to revoke the individual’s Professor Emeritus/a status.  Actions or conduct protected by academic freedom and unlawful discrimination shall not be used to revoke such status.
+
+
+
+Endowed or Named Chairs
+
+The University reserves the right to make faculty appointments that carry the additional title of endowed or named chair. The holder of an endowed or named chair must satisfy the conditions associated with the chair. 
+
+Appointments to endowed chairs are made by the President with the advice of the Provost and Faculty Personnel Committee and expire at the conclusion of the specified term. 
+
+The terms of the appointment to an endowed or named chair will be specified in the chair holder’s letter of initial appointment to the chair.  A tenure track or tenured faculty member currently employed by the University retains rank and tenure upon appointment to the chaired position.
+
+
+
+Types of Faculty Contracts
+
+The following types of contracts are issued to individuals granted faculty status at Ohio Wesleyan University:
+
+Tenure-Track Contracts, Regular Appointments
+
+Tenure-Line faculty members eligible for tenure receive tenure-track contracts and hold a regular appointment until they either receive tenure or separate from the University.  A probationary appointment is made with the understanding that both the University and the faculty member will engage in a period of mutual evaluation—the probationary period—leading to the tenure decision.
+
+A tenure-track appointment is normally renewable up to a total of seven (7) years—i.e., a maximum of six (6) years prior to and including the year of the tenure decision, plus one (1) additional terminal year in the case of a negative tenure decision.  A tenure-track faculty member’s time to the tenure decision will be stated in the initial letter of appointment.  
+
+Faculty members holding tenure-track contracts undergo reappointment review as specified in Section --.  A faculty member undergoing an unsuccessful tenure review will receive notice and will be allowed to complete the final year of the probationary appointment pursuant to a Terminal contract.
+
+
+
+Tenured Contracts
+
+Tenure contracts are awarded to full-time tenure track faculty who have attained tenured status (see Section -).  The granting of tenure can only be effected by the procedures specified in the University’s Tenure Policy (see Section ) and upon the affirmative vote of the Board of Trustees.  
+
+A tenure contract is subject only to annual modifications pertaining to academic rank, salary, and academic and/or administrative assignments in accordance with the provisions of this Faculty Handbook.  
+
+Full-Time Term Contracts
+
+Full-time term contracts are offered to faculty members holding temporary appointments in a Non-Tenure Track Term position and are limited to the term of employment outlined in the contract.  Term appointments do not confer upon the faculty member an expectation of tenure or a right of continuing employment beyond the expiration date of the position approval.  
+
+A term contract may also be issued to a faculty member holding a tenure track position where the appointee serves as a leave replacement, or when time has not permitted a full search to be conducted or the search has not yielded a suitable regular appointee. In latter kinds of cases, a new search will be conducted the next year, in which search the temporary appointee may compete.
+
+Part-Time Term Contracts
+
+Part-time term contracts are issued to part-time faculty for a designated period or course and automatically expires at the end of that period. Reemployment of the faculty member after expiration of the contract is solely within the discretion of the University. 
+
+Terminal Contracts
+
+A terminal contract is a final annual term contract issued to a full-time faculty member following notice of non-renewal of appointment or denial of tenure.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Pre-Draft - Faculty Evaluation Criteria.txt [/INST] Faculty Evaluation
+
+The University’s faculty evaluation system is designed to encourage self-appraisal as well as foster professional development through constructive feedback on performance.  As a system for supporting sound personnel recommendations regarding re-appointment, promotion, tenure, and merit increases, it defines the criteria, standards, and evidence used in making these recommendations, as well as takes a comprehensive approach to the documentation and assessment of faculty performance.  The criteria and standards by which faculty are evaluated reflect, and are shaped by, the mission, aims, and unique character of Ohio Wesleyan University.
+
+To preserve the integrity of the evaluation process, those who are involved in it are expected to conduct themselves in accordance with standards of professionalism and confidentiality.  Evaluations should express judgments about a faculty member's performance, using the principles of equity, which considers each faculty member’s unique talents, abilities, and accomplishments in relation to the University’s established criteria and standards for personnel decisions.
+
+Evaluation Criteria for Personnel Decisions  
+
+Decisions regarding initial appointments, merit increases, and promotions at Ohio Wesleyan University are based on an individual faculty member’s performance in the following performance categories:
+
+Effectiveness in teaching,
+
+Scholarly, creative, or other professional engagement contributions as evidenced through research, publication or performance, and professional participation, and
+
+Service to the University and community based on professional qualifications.
+
+Each of the three categories for evaluation will be considered within the broader context of the mission and aims of the University.  Each faculty member is expected to exhibit values consistent with this purpose by having respect for persons who differ, a readiness to engage open-mindedly in the search to impart knowledge, and an attentiveness to place education in the context of values.  The professional behavior of each faculty member should evidence a demonstrated concern to develop in students an understanding of themselves, appreciation of others, and willingness to meet the responsibility of citizenship in a free society. 
+
+Evaluation of performance in these categories shall be made by the Faculty Personnel Committee on referral by the Provost and transmitted back to the Provost for consideration and for the Provost’s recommendation to the President. Neither the Provost nor the President are bound to accept the evaluations of the Faculty Personnel Committee, but the Provost, in making recommendations to the President, and the President, in making recommendations to the Board of Trustees (when applicable), are governed by the same evaluation criteria as agreed upon jointly by the Administration and the Faculty.
+
+Decisions on reappointment and tenure are made as described above except, as noted in G above, such decisions may also be made on the basis of a review of the institution's need for the position. For the latter reviews, the President shall make the final decision, in consultation with the Faculty, according to established procedures and criteria.
+
+The jointly agreed upon criteria used by the Faculty Personnel Committee, Provost, and President for evaluation of full-time members of the teaching faculty instructional staff in each of the categories of performance are summarized below, as well as stated on the current Faculty Personnel Information sheets and the Rating Scales employed in the evaluation process (see Appendices).  In applying the criteria below, evaluators assign the following weight to each category: 60% for teaching; 30% for research, creative, or other professional engagement activities; and 10% for service.
+
+Category I - Effectiveness in Teaching (60%)
+
+Evaluation and Evidence of Teaching Effectiveness
+
+As an undergraduate liberal arts university, Ohio Wesleyan places the greatest emphasis upon effectiveness in teaching, weighting teaching as 60% of the overall evaluation. The University recognizes the existence of diverse paths toward effective teaching, even within a discipline.  While effective teaching practices vary considerably among disciplines, courses, and instructors, evaluation of teaching at the University considers the following characteristics of effectiveness in teaching:
+
+Subject Matter Expertise: Effective teachers stay informed and current regarding the knowledge base necessary to design and deliver the courses being taught.  More specifically, effective teaching presents a discipline or an interdisciplinary framework—in the current state of its development—to students through a faculty member’s own interpretative and evaluative perspective.  
+
+Preparation for Teaching: A course whose content is well designed, planned and structured has integrity with a discipline or across disciplines and reflects the University’s academic standards and expectations.  Student learning is facilitated by the careful selection of course content, sequencing of learning experiences, identification and development of effective course materials, and use of techniques for evaluating student learning (i.e., crafting of examinations, assignments, laboratory exercises, individual and group activities, etc.).  Effective teaching leads students to improve their mastery of critical, analytical, creative, or other skills appropriate to the subject matter. 
+
+The components of a course—e.g., the organizational structure of course material, course expectations, and grading standards—should be represented clearly and accurately to students in course syllabi.  In cases where courses are jointly designed, the faculty member’s ability to contribute to such joint efforts enhances successful teaching and learning. 
+
+Finally, effective teaching requires the renewal of existing courses and the preparation of new ones over time as may be informed by personal interests and expertise, developments in a field, and the curricular needs of academic programs. 
+
+Course Management: Effective teachers demonstrate the ability to organize and manage the tasks of maintaining and operating a course, such as keeping grade records, providing timely return of exams/assignments, sufficient opportunity for out-of-class contact between the faculty member and students, submitting final grades, and other necessary course management duties and responsibilities.
+
+Course Conduct Skills: Effective teachers employ techniques, activities, and strategies that enable them to present ideas effectively and explain complex concepts clearly.  They make effective use of communication and human interaction skills to promote learning in the classroom, including the use a variety of approaches to teaching (e.g., lecture, discussion, small-group activities, writing, etc.) to reflect the diverse learning styles and backgrounds of their students and achieve the learning objectives of their courses.  Moreover, they create learning environments that encourage students to participate and enable critical discourse to occur, as well as listen well to students, understanding their queries and confusions, and responding in creative and constructive ways. 
+
+Motivating and Mentoring Skills: Through their commitment to and enthusiasm for their subject matter, effective teachers stimulate their students’ intellectual curiosity or artistic vision and enable them to become independent learners.  They model for their students the standards of performance and professionalism appropriate to their discipline and guide and hold them accountable toward attaining those standards.  Effective teaching engenders enthusiasm and appreciation in students to participate actively in the process of learning across differences in, e.g., level of ability, interest, life experience, learning style, sexual orientation, and gender, racial or ethnic background.  It assists students to excel as learners, stimulates students' intellectual curiosity, and provides the inspiration, guidance, and support that students need for self-directed research, independent study, and senior projects, as well as for successful learning in courses.
+
+Quality of Advising: Hallmarks of quality, effective advising include, but are not limited to, familiarity with curricular requirements, an understanding of special programs and curricular opportunities (e.g.,  OWU Connections, Off-Campus Study, Sagan National Colloquium, etc.), availability to students by maintaining adequate open office hours and responding in a timely manner to all communications or questions either from a student or from colleagues about a student, helping students select a course of study, referring students to available University resources, accepting a proportionate share of advisees, guiding students to integrate co-curricular and extra-curricular activities into their academic and career planning, and providing students in the faculty member’s classes with additional consultation and guidance outside of class.
+
+Evidence of Teaching Effectiveness
+
+Informed judgments about a colleague’s teaching are based on evidence relating to the preceding features of effective teaching that takes into consideration the arc of a candidate’s career and development, and work done at the various levels of the curriculum.  Such evidence of effectiveness in teaching may be provided through a variety of means, including but not limited to:
+
+Documentation of teaching activities, philosophy, materials (e.g., coarse goals, syllabi, sample course materials, representations of student products/materials, etc.), and techniques and methods utilized
+
+Documentation of efforts to improve teaching
+
+Student course evaluation feedback
+
+Products of student research or creative work
+
+Student Board evaluations 
+
+Peer teaching observation reviews
+
+Evaluation by department and other faculty peers 
+
+Documentation of teaching success across a range of students
+
+Documentation of an established campus presence (e.g., office hours)
+
+Awards or commendations
+
+The University recognizes that the above listing does not exhaust the ways effective teaching might manifest itself and candidates may wish to present other evidence. 
+
+See also the Faculty Personnel Committee Statement of Policies and Practices in the Faculty Evaluation Process for further information.
+
+
+
+Category II – Scholarly Contributions As Evidenced Through Research, Publication, and Professional Participation (30%)
+
+Within their area(s) of expertise, full-time faculty members are expected to remain productive scholars or artists, maintain an ongoing program of scholarly, creative, or professional engagement activities that enable them to grow as teacher-scholars or artists and keep informed of developments in their fields, and maintain engagement with the discipline at a professional level.  Such activities are weighted 30% of an overall evaluation.
+
+At the time of a review, the University expects all members of the full-time faculty to produce tangible evidence of scholarly productivity and professional growth accomplishments that have contributed to the faculty member’s growth as a teacher-scholar.  Examples of activities considered by the Faculty Personnel Committee, as documented in Category II of the Self-Report, include:
+
+Completed Publication and Other Scholarly or Creative Accomplishments
+
+Leadership in Professional Organizations and Organizations of Conferences
+
+Presentations at Professional Conferences
+
+Attendance at Professional Conferences
+
+Memberships in Professional Organizations
+
+Overall Research and/or Creative Agenda and Changes Thereto
+
+Works in Progress
+
+Professional Training that Impacts Scholarship
+
+Note that faculty are not necessarily expected to address every element listed above.
+
+Broad Definition of Scholarly Contributions
+
+In evaluating Category II contributions, the University defines scholarly productivity broadly given the breadth of disciplines, the differences among teaching contexts, and the diversity of the faculty.  The University endorses an inclusive view of scholarship, recognizing that scholarly, creative, or professional engagement activities-whether they are individual or collaborative - may originate in any of the non-prescriptive broad categories set forth below:
+
+Scholarship of Discovery: encompasses traditional research that creates new knowledge through original investigation that may be theoretical or empirical, disciplinary or interdisciplinary, or some combinations of these. Construed broadly, this dimension of professional development also encompasses the creation of new works of art or musical composition and writing works of fiction, poetry, or creative nonfiction. 
+
+Scholarship of Integration: encompasses the critical evaluation, synthesis, analysis, integration, or interpretation of the research or creative work produced by others. It may be disciplinary, interdisciplinary, or multidisciplinary in nature and includes the varieties of artistic interpretation and performance. 
+
+Scholarship of Application/Practice/Engagement: encompasses applying disciplinary expertise or the results of existing scholarship or creative works (produced by oneself or others) to the investigation or solution of intellectual, social, or institutional problems.  In the arts it can involve mastering a new performance repertory or exploring a style of creative activity (e.g., unique approach to artmaking) developed by someone else. Such work involves activities that make use of one’s special areas of knowledge or expertise, and it demands the same levels of rigor and accountability traditionally associated with the scholarship of discovery or the scholarship of integration. Application may also include a scholarly focus on the nature and best practices of delivering the materials of one’s discipline to students and other audiences.  The scholarship of application/practice/engagement is measured by impact on the discipline and/or community, the scope of the project, the originality of design and methodology, the extent to which results can be generalized, the connection to industry, visibility gained for the researcher and the University through the dissemination process, the significance of the work to the discipline, and the peer review processes.  original creations of literary, fine, performing, or applied arts and other expressions or activities of creative disciplines or fields that are made available to or generated in collaboration with a public (non-university) audience
+
+Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: encompasses scholarly activities that focus on transforming and extending knowledge about pedagogy.  The scholarship of teaching is not equivalent to teaching.  It involves the discovery, evaluation, and transmission of information about the learning process. Conversely, classroom teaching and remaining current in the discipline are not relevant criteria for evaluating teaching scholarship.  Teaching, in contrast, involves the application of that information through actual instruction.
+
+The specific form and intensity of scholarly productivity and professional growth activities appropriately varies between academic departments and program areas due to inherent differences among the disciplines.  In some academic disciplines, for example, refereed journals and research monographs, scientific or technical reports, clinical reviews, scholarly books, treatises, chapters in larger books, and publications on teaching and learning, etc. are the traditional media for documenting scholarly productivity; in others, art exhibitions, concerts, novels, essays, short stories, poems, web publications, and theatrical or musical performances are the appropriate form.  In still other fields, scholarly or creative productivity, including, but limited to digital scholarship, may result in original software, inventions on which patents are obtained, mathematical and scientific formulas, or emerging technologies resulting in entirely new media and interactive works that are impossible to publish in print form.  Scholarly and creative productivity may also be validated and communicated through conference presentations and invited lectures.  Other professional activities such as holding offices in a professional organization, editorial work, consulting, peer-reviewed grant proposals, conference attendance, professional training that impacts scholarship, etc. may represent evidence of scholarly productivity and professional growth.  Refer to the Faculty Personnel Committee Statement of Policies and Procedures in the Faculty Evaluation Process for further guidance.  
+
+Accordingly, the judgments of the members of Faculty Personnel Committee, Provost, and President regarding the quality of a faculty member’s scholarly productivity and professional growth will be informed by the advice of department/program peer colleagues (as expressed in Rating Sheets) and other knowledgeable peers (if external letters are provided), especially regarding such factors as disciplinary norms and other relevant conditions within the discipline.  Moreover, such judgments will be informed by any applicable discipline-specific descriptions of appropriate forms of scholarly and/or artistic productivity documented in a Memorandum of Understanding between the department and Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee.  Such advice is particularly important in setting expectations for the quantity of scholarly, artistic, or professional productivity in the various disciplines.
+
+Evidence of scholarly productivity and professional growth is provided through: 
+
+Reporting of scholarly productivity and professional growth activities as documented in the Self Report and tenure or promotion narratives 
+
+Rating sheets submitted by department peer colleagues
+
+Optional evaluations by external disciplinary peers
+
+Examples of the products of one's scholarship and professional growth activities
+
+Documents evidencing the impact of scholarly or creative activities in terms of depth, duration, and/or persistence of influence or use (e.g., citations, adaptations or use by others), as well as its public and critical appreciation
+
+Awards, grants, or commendations.
+
+The University recognizes that the above listing does not exhaust the ways scholarly productivity and professional growth activities might manifest itself and candidates may wish to present other evidence. 
+
+See also the Faculty Personnel Committee Statement of Policies and Practices in the Faculty Evaluation Process for further information.
+
+Category III – Service to the University and Community (10%)
+
+Effective service involves utilizing one’s time, skills, and expertise to benefit the University in activities such as supporting the faculty or university governance systems or enhancing the co-curriculum and/or making professional disciplinary-related contributions to the community. Service has traditionally been weighted as 10% in the overall evaluation and are evaluated holistically with a preference towards campus service.  
+
+The type and level at which University service performed should be commensurate with the rank of the faculty member, with the expectation that, as a faculty member rises in rank, the level at which service is performed is expected to rise.  For example, the University expects that a faculty member’s record of service will eventually incorporate participation and positions of leadership (e.g., service as a committee chair or a leader or Board member in a community organization related to the faculty member’s discipline).  Elected positions of major responsibility are viewed as evidence that a candidate’s service has earned the esteem of peers.
+
+Evaluation and Evidence of Service
+
+In personnel evaluations, the University evaluates the quantity and, more importantly, of the quality of a faculty member’s contribution to service.  For example, in addition to attending the meetings of a committee to which one has been elected or appointed, a faculty member is expected to contribute to the work the committee is charged to perform.  Thus, evaluators look for specific contributions that the colleague has made.
+
+Evidence of effective service is provided through:
+
+Reporting of scholarly productivity and professional growth activities as documented in the Self Report and tenure or promotion narratives 
+
+Supporting materials, as appropriate to the type of service provided 
+
+Rating sheets submitted by department peer colleagues
+
+Awards or commendations
+
+The University recognizes that the above listing does not exhaust the ways effective service manifest itself and candidates may wish to present other evidence. 
+
+See also the Faculty Personnel Committee Statement of Policies and Practices in the Faculty Evaluation Process for further information.
+
+Contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
+
+In keeping with the University’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Policy (see Appendix), Ohio Wesleyan University is committed to creating an environment where underrepresented populations have equal access to resources and opportunities to learn and grow both personally and professionally.  In support of this commitment, faculty contributions that enhance diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are recognized and valued in appointment, reappointment, tenure, promotion, and merit evaluations.  Faculty are encouraged to document in the Self-Report, as appropriate in any of the three performance categories, their contributions to Ohio Wesleyan’s goal of building a diverse and inclusive campus community.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Pre-Draft - Separation from Service (Edited).txt [/INST] Separation from Service
+
+Faculty members may end their employment relationship with the University through: 
+
+resignation (Section 3.13.1) or 
+
+retirement (Section 3.13.2). 
+
+The University may end its employment relationship with a member of the faculty through: 
+
+non-renewal of appointment (Section 3.13.3), 
+
+dismissal for cause (Section 3.13.4), or
+
+termination (Section 3.13.5).
+
+This section of the Faculty Handbook sets out the procedures to be followed in such cases in order to preserve the rights and interests of both faculty members and the University. 
+
+Resignation
+
+Resignation is a means of separation by which a faculty member ends their employment relationship with the University either at or prior to the end of a contractual term. Faculty members intending to resign should notify the appropriate Dean in writing at the earliest possible opportunity. Except in unusual circumstances, members of the faculty intending to resign will be expected to serve to the end of an academic year.  Faculty members may properly request a waiver of this expectation of notice in case of hardship or in a situation where they would otherwise be denied substantial professional advancement or other opportunity.
+
+Retirement
+
+Retirement is a means of separation by which a faculty member ends their employment relationship with the University.  Faculty members who intend to retire should submit a letter to the Provost stating their intention to retire and specifying an effective date.  In consideration of the welfare of students and colleagues, a faculty member should provide notification to the University of intent to retire no less than nine (9) months prior to the effective date of the retirement. 
+
+Nonrenewal of Appointment 
+
+Nonrenewal of a regular or temporary nontenure appointment to the teaching faculty may occur at the close of any contract period. Such nonrenewal occurs when the individual's work does not meet the applicable standards for reappointment or tenure as determined by the process of a faculty review or because the position occupied by the individual has been discontinued as provided for in Chapter V of this Handbook.
+
+Notification of Non-Renewal
+
+Written notice that a non-tenure full-time appointment is not to be renewed will be given to the faculty member as follows: 
+
+not later than March 1 of the first academic year of service if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if a one-year appointment is not renewed during an academic year, at least three months in advance of its expiration;
+
+not later than December 15 of the second academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if an initial two-year appointment expires during the academic year, at least six months in advance of its expiration; 
+
+not later than Commencement before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years in the institution.
+
+After completion of two years of service, nonrenewal of a regular non-tenured  appointment to the teaching faculty will be accompanied by the offer of a one-year temporary appointment in the year following notification of nonrenewal. This period of employment is known as the terminal period as described in Section C.1.b.
+
+Policies and Procedures Governing Dismissal For Cause
+
+															l.	Dismissal Defined
+
+															Dismissal is a severance action by which the University ends its professional relationship with a tenured or non-tenured faculty member for adequate cause. Dismissal may remove a member from service, for adequate cause, either at or before the end of a current appointment.  Dismissal will not be used by the University to restrain faculty members from exercising their academic freedom. 
+
+															2.	Adequate Cause Defined
+
+Except in those instances where there has been a final judicial determination of a faculty member's legal conviction on a felony charge or on a charge involving moral turpitude, the faculty member has waived a right to a hearing, or agrees to voluntary resign, a faculty member shall be dismissed for cause only if after a hearing according to the provisions set forth below, the preponderance of evidence shall establish the faculty member’s unfitness to teach continue in a professional capacity as a teacher, scholar, or creative artist because of:
+
+
+
+															Incompetence: the faculty member either lacks, or is unwilling to demonstrate, the skills and abilities necessary to fulfill the duties of a faculty member, 
+
+															Continued neglect of duties in spite of written warnings, 
+
+															Lack of scholarly objectivity or integrity, 
+
+															Inability to perform the essential or inherent duties and responsibilities of a faculty position, with or without reasonable accommodation(s) by the University, upon exhaustion or declination of all authorized leaves,
+
+															Serious misuse of the classroom or of academic prestige, or 
+
+															Gross personal misconduct rendering the faculty member unfit for association with students or colleagues (e.g., physical assault, sexual or unlawful discrimination or harassment, violation of standards of professional ethics or conduct in teaching, scholarship, and service, such as would evoke general condemnation from the academic community generally.)
+
+The burden of proof to establish the existence of adequate cause for dismissal rests with the administration of the University. 
+
+Note: The parties may mutually stipulate in writing to modify the timelines set forth below in extraordinary circumstances and for good cause shown in order to achieve full and fair evaluations or resolution of disputes.
+
+															3.	Provost Consultation with the Faculty Member
+
+If the Provost has evidence that a faculty member has demonstrated or is demonstrating conduct that may constitute adequate cause for dismissal defined above, the Provost will meet with the faculty member to discuss the concerns and to consider the faculty member’s response.  A faculty member may decline to attend the meeting.
+
+At the Provost’s discretion, the Provost may request further investigation into the matter by appropriate University staff or external agents before or after meeting with the faculty member. However, before moving beyond this stage, the Provost will afford the faculty member a reasonable opportunity to respond to any information that the Provost believes would constitute adequate cause for dismissal and, if possible, to arrive at a mutually agreeable settlement. 
+
+															4. Notification to Faculty Member of Intent to Dismiss for Cause
+
+															In those instances where a mutual resolution cannot be reached and the Provost deems it in the best interests of the University to recommend the dismissal of a faculty member's employment for adequate cause, the following procedures shall apply:
+
+															At least thirty (30) days prior to the date on which the Provost plans to present to the President of the University a recommendation for dismissal of a faculty member's contract, the Provost shall notify the faculty member of the intended action either by registered mail (return receipt requested) to the faculty member’s home address or personal delivery, with signature required for delivery.  The Provost’s notification will set forth in specific terms the basis for the proposed action and inform the faculty member of the right to a formal hearing and adjudication of the case.
+
+															If the faculty member refuses to acknowledge the personal delivery or certified mailing by signature, the University will email the notice to the faculty member’s University email address, which shall be considered receipt of the notice.
+
+															5.	Faculty Member's Right to a Hearing Assured
+
+At the request of the faculty member charged, a hearing will be held, provided that the accused faculty has, within 30 days of receipt of the original notification of intent from the Provost, provided the Provost with a written request for such a hearing.  A faculty member who does not request a hearing within 30 days of receipt of the Provost’s correspondence waives all appeal and grievance rights pertaining to the dismissal action.
+
+If the faculty member fails to request a hearing within the 30 day deadline, the Provost will present to President of the University a recommendation that the faculty member be dismissed for cause.  If the President concurs with the Provost’s recommendation, the President will notify the faculty member in writing of the effective date of dismissal.  Such notice may be given either by registered mail (return receipt requested) to the faculty member’s home address or personal delivery, with signature required for delivery.  If the faculty member refuses to acknowledge the personal delivery or certified mailing by signature, the University will email the notice to the faculty member’s University email address, which shall be considered receipt of the notice.  Dismissal will take effect in accordance with the terms specified in the notice of dismissal, a hearing will not take place, and the faculty member will have waived all rights to a hearing or appeal.
+
+															6.	Appointment, Composition and Duties of the Hearing Panel
+
+															In every case where an accused faculty member requests a formal hearing, the President of the University will assemble from the full-time teaching faculty a Faculty Hearing Panel (“Panel”).  
+
+															The Panel shall consist of three (3) persons selected by the President from among the elected members of the Standing Faculty Committees for that year, two (2) members of the Faculty appointed by the President from a list of nominees submitted by the accused faculty member, and two (2) members of the Faculty appointed by the President from a list of nominees submitted by the Provost. The Panel shall select its own chair from among the participating members of the Standing Faculty Committees for that year.
+
+															It is the duty of the Panel to:
+
+															hear the charges against the faculty member,
+
+															ascertain as nearly as possible all the relevant facts,
+
+															deliberate upon the matters before it, and
+
+															recommend to the President of the University a course of action not inconsistent with the highest academic, ethical, and moral ends of the University.
+
+7. Interim Suspension of Faculty Member
+
+Under authority delegated to the President by the Board of Trustees (Code Article VII, Section 1B (1)), the President, pending the outcome of a dismissal for cause hearing, may summarily suspend the faculty member upon finding that there is good cause to believe that the continued presence of the faculty member on campus would endanger the safety or well-being of the faculty member or the safety and well-being of students, other Faculty, staff, or University property.  The faculty member's salary will continue during any suspension imposed by the President.
+
+															8. Pre-Hearing Conference
+
+The Panel will schedule and commence a pre-hearing meeting. 
+
+Purpose: The purpose of the pre-hearing is to:
+
+Simplify the issues,
+
+Effect stipulations of facts,
+
+Provide for the exchange of documentary or other information,
+
+Achieve such other appropriate pre-hearing objectives as will make the hearing fair, effective, and expeditious,
+
+Hear any challenges brought by the faculty member or the Provost regarding the disqualification of a Panel member for bias or a conflict of interest.
+
+Notice: All parties shall be notified of the pre-hearing date at least five academic days in advance, and such notice shall include:
+
+A statement as to the appointment and members of the Panel, and
+
+A statement of the time, place, and nature of the pre-hearing.
+
+Committee Member Challenges: 
+
+Challenges brought by the parties regarding the disqualification of a Panel member for a conflict of interest must be submitted on or before two academic days of the pre-hearing date.
+
+The chair of the panel shall decide any such challenge.  If the chair is challenged for disqualification based on an alleged conflict of interest, the President shall arbitrate the challenge.  In the event of a disqualification, the President will appoint a replacement for each member excused in advance of the hearing date.
+
+															9.	Time and Place of Hearing
+
+															The Panel shall issue notice to the parties and commence the hearing within ten academic days of the pre-hearing meeting.  The hearings of the Panel shall be held on the Ohio Wesleyan University campus in Delaware at such a time and place as may be designated by the chair of the Panel, after consultation with the faculty member charged and the Provost.
+
+															10.	Conduct of the Hearing
+
+In the conduct of its hearing, the Faculty Hearing Panel shall be guided by such rules of procedure as will be most likely to elicit pertinent and accurate information relative to the facts at issue. It is not intended that hearing adhere to legal procedures of a court.  The chair of the Panel will conduct the proceedings and rule on all objections.  
+
+The hearing shall be concluded in two days or less, except in rare extenuating circumstances as determined by the Panel. The parties shall present their respective positions and testimony from relevant witnesses in a concise, clear and focused manner, with due regard to completion of the hearing in an efficient, fair, and timely manner.
+
+The faculty member accused and the administrator assigned by the President to present the case for dismissal on behalf of the University will each be allowed to have outside legal aid (at the faculty member and University’s respective expense) and/or such faculty counsel as they may desire and shall have the right, directly or through counsel, to call and question witnesses in support of their case and to cross-examine all adverse witnesses presented. 
+
+Upon request of the faculty member and at no personal cost, a daily copy of the record or a video or audio recording of the proceedings will be made available prior to the commencement of the proceedings for the following day.  Recording failures that occur notwithstanding good faith attempts will not require a delay or affect the validity of the proceedings, but in such event the chair will prepare a written summary of the hearing.  In the event that a deaf or hard of hearing person is involved in the hearing or is a witness, the University will provide and arrange for a sign language interpreter with comprehensive skills certification, if requested by the faculty member(s) or other participants who are deaf or hard of hearing.  Likewise, at the completion of the hearing, the Panel will deliver to the faculty member at no personal cost a full and complete copy of the proceedings. and of the Hearing Panel's opinions and judgments, and recommendations to the President of the University.
+
+The chair of the Panel has discretion to grant adjournments to enable either party time for discovery, so long as such requests are reasonable and relate substantively to the hearing proceedings.  
+
+Within five academic days of the conclusion of the hearing, the Chair of the Panel will present to the President written findings of fact and recommendations as to the review of the faculty member's dismissal; copies must at the same time be sent to the faculty member and the Provost. The Panel’s report must contain recommendations regarding whether adequate cause for dismissal has or has not been established by the preponderance of the evidence.  The Panel’s written findings of fact and recommendation will be based on a simple majority vote.  Any dissenting opinions will be included in the written report.
+
+11. President’s Review and Decision
+
+Within five academic days after receipt of the Panel’s findings and recommendations, the President, in light of the documented evidence and hearing record, will issue an independent written decision on the matter, with copies to the Panel, the faculty member, and Provost.  
+
+If the President does not accept the Panel’s decision, the President will state the reasons for doing so in the written decision.
+
+If the President sustains the Panel’s recommendation that adequate cause to dismiss the faculty member does not exist, the matter will be concluded.  
+
+If the President determines that additional consideration by the Panel is necessary, the President will remand the case back to the Panel with specific objections.  
+
+If the President concludes that the administration has established adequate cause for a dismissal, but that a sanction(s) less than dismissal or suspension would be more appropriate, the sanction(s) and effective date of sanction(s) will be stated in the President’s letter to the faculty member with supporting reasons.  
+
+If the President concludes that adequate cause for a dismissal exists and that dismissal or suspension is appropriate, the effective date of termination or suspension will be stated in the President’s letter to the faculty member.  On written request of the faculty member, which must be submitted within three academic days of receipt of the President’s decision, the President shall transmit to the Board of Trustees the record of the case, the full report of the Panel, and the President’s recommendation in accordance with Step 12 below.  The faculty member’s request to a review by the Board of Trustees must be made in writing to the President within five academic days of receiving the President’s letter of termination or suspension.
+
+															12.	Faculty Member's Right to Appeal
+
+															If the recommendations of the Faculty Hearing Panel which are adverse to the faculty member are accepted by the President with a recommendation to the Board of Trustees or its Executive Committee that the faculty member be dismissed for cause, the faculty member accused may request and shall be entitled to a review of the case before the Board of Trustees or its Executive Committee or a special committee designated by one of these bodies.  
+
+															If requested by the faculty member, a review of the case before the Board of Trustees, its Executive Committee, or a special committee designated by either will be based upon the record made before the Faculty Hearing Panel and shall not constitute a rehearing of the evidence.  However, the faculty member accused and/or their counsel, as well as the administration’s representative(s), will be given the opportunity to present oral arguments on such review. The reviewing committee, in its discretion, may consider newly discovered evidence as part of its deliberations.
+
+The Board of Trustees or its designated committee may approve the faculty member’s dismissal, disapprove the faculty member’s dismissal, recommend to the President a lesser penalty if it believes that the conduct of the faculty member is sufficiently grave to justify such a sanction, or direct that further proceedings take place. The final decision of the Board of Trustees or its designated committee shall not be subject to review. If the Board of Trustees or its designated committee approves dismissal or recommends a lesser penalty to the President, the President is responsible for carrying out the Board’s decision. 
+
+															13.	Panel Hearings Closed
+
+															The hearing proceedings of the Panel shall be closed to all but the parties involved, their advisers and aides, provided always that the National Office of the American Association of University Professors may have an official observer present during the hearings.
+
+															14.	Salary for Faculty Member Dismissed for Cause
+
+															Current University Text
+
+															A faculty member dismissed for cause under the foregoing hearing procedure shall in every instance be paid his or her salary for one full year from the date of notification that the President has accepted the Panel's recommendations of dismissal in 6 above.
+
+Alternative Model
+
+A faculty member whose contract is terminated due to inability to perform the essential functions of the position due to physical or mental illness shall receive notice or normal salary in accordance with Section 3.13.3.  
+
+If the faculty member’s contract, however, is terminated due to a legal conviction on a felony charge or on a charge involving moral turpitude, incompetence, continued neglect of University duties and responsibilities, lack of scholarly objectivity or integrity, serious misuse of the classroom or of academic prestige, or gross personal misconduct, there are no requirements for provision of either notice or severance salary.
+
+
+
+Policies and Procedures Governing Imposition of Sanctions Other than Dismissal for Cause
+
+															Current University Policy
+
+															Major Sanctions
+
+															There may be instances in which the conduct of a faculty member, although not constituting adequate grounds for institution of dismissal proceedings, is nevertheless sufficiently inappropriate as to warrant imposition of a major sanction, such as suspension from service for a stated period without pay. A major sanction may be imposed only as a result of the due process proceeding specified in 1 through 12 of Section 3.13.3 above, the policies and procedures of which will apply with the proposed major sanction being substituted for dismissal throughout. The conduct judged by due process proceedings to be ""sufficiently inappropriate"" (above) shall be confined to the areas of professional incompetence, neglect of obligations and responsibilities as set forth in the Handbook or faculty legislation, and gross personal misconduct.
+
+															It is understood that major sanctions shall not be imposed to deny, restrict, or otherwise inhibit the exercise of academic freedom, as specified in the 1940 AAUP Statement of Principles of Academic Freedom and Tenure. The President, Provost, Faculty Personnel Committee, and the Hearing Panel (if it is brought to bear) have joint responsibility for assuring that major sanction proceedings are neither initiated nor pursued in violation of academic freedom.
+
+															Minor Sanctions
+
+															If the Provost believes that the conduct of a faculty member warrants imposition of a minor sanction such as, but not limited to, a written reprimand, the Provost will, after informal consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee, notify the faculty member of the basis for the proposed sanction and provide the individual with an opportunity to persuade the Provost that the proposed minor sanction letter of reprimand should not be sent implemented. A faculty member who believes that a minor sanction has been unjustly imposed may petition file a grievance with the Faculty Executive Committee Faculty Personnel Committee to seek the rescinding of the reprimand in accordance with the Faculty Grievance Policy (see Section  --). The provisions protecting academic freedom relative to major sanctions apply to minor sanctions as well.
+
+															
+
+															Alternative Model
+
+Informal Action 
+
+If the Provost receives or initiates a complaint about a faculty member involving alleged professional incompetence, neglect of obligations and responsibilities as set forth in the Handbook, or gross personal misconduct, the first step should be for the faculty member and Provost to determine whether the complaint appears to have merit and then to address the matter informally through conversation and mentoring, provided the nature of the complaint permits informal resolution. 
+
+Informal actions in response to a complaint may include, but are not limited to:
+
+clarification of the standards of conduct
+
+written warning
+
+recommendation for counseling or mentoring
+
+monitoring of the situation 
+
+support for self-help 
+
+mediation by a third party.
+
+
+
+Sanctions 
+
+If the faculty member persists in failing to correct the behavior that has elicited the complaint, or if the basis of the complaint is sufficiently serious in the judgment of the Provost to warrant immediate formal action, the Provost will informally consult with the Faculty Personnel Committee regarding the proposed disciplinary sanction. The Provost may then either issue another warning letter, impose a sanction(s), or end the matter.  If the Provost imposes a sanction(s), the Provost will notify the faculty member of the basis for the proposed sanction and provide the individual with an opportunity to provide evidence that the proposed sanction should not be implemented.
+
+When the disciplinary action involves the imposition of a minor sanction--such as a written reprimand, denial of specific faculty privileges such as sabbatical, or removal from committee assignments or administrative duties--the faculty member may grieve the imposition of the sanction in accordance with the policies and procedures in Section --. 
+
+If the Provost believes that the conduct of a faculty member is sufficiently grave to justify suspension or dismissal, the faculty member shall have an opportunity of a hearing in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 3.13.3. 
+
+
+
+Termination
+
+															Current University Text
+
+															1.	Termination Defined
+
+															Termination is a severance action by which the University ends the service of a probationary faculty member before the expiration of a contract, or of a tenured faculty member at any time, without prejudice.
+
+															2.	Causes for Termination
+
+															Prolonged mental or physical illness or The elimination of faculty positions are the only causes for termination of faculty.
+
+															a.	Prolonged Mental or Physical Illness
+
+															Termination for medical reasons of an appointment with tenure, or of a nontenured appointment before the end of the contract period, will be based on clear and convincing medical evidence that the individual cannot continue to fulfill the terms and conditions of the appointment. The decision to terminate will be made by the President only after there has been appropriate consultation with the individual's department and the Faculty Personnel Committee, and after the individual, or someone representing the individual (say, a family member), has been informed of the basis of the proposed action and been afforded an opportunity to present the individual's position and to respond to the evidence. If the individual so requests, the Faculty Personnel Committee will review the matter and report its conclusions to the President before the President makes the final decision and notifies the faculty member.
+
+															Prior to the President's final decision, the individual concerned may, if eligible, elect to retire under the early retirement program with such severance payments as that program entails, making moot the matter of separation. Or the individual may be eligible for salary continuation or insurance payments under the University's disability program. Finally, upon the President's final decision to terminate the faculty member's appointment for medical reasons, the individual will receive earned salary or severance pay for three months from that date if the decision has been reached within the individual's first six months of service, for six months if the decision has been reached after six months but before 18 months of service, and for one academic year (nominal nine months) if the decision has been reached after 18 months of service.
+
+															b.	Elimination of Faculty Positions 
+
+Termination of a faculty appointment may occur through the elimination of a position by means of (1) the conclusion of a term appointment and the discontinuation of the position, (2) review of a tenure track position and discontinuation of the position, as provided for in Chapter V of this Handbook.
+
+Written notice or salary in lieu of notice at the discretion of the University that a faculty appointment has been terminated due to elimination of a position will be given to the faculty member on the same schedule as for non-renewal (See Section 3.13.2.1 – Notification of Non-Renewal), except that for the final year of a term position the initial contract letter specifying the termination of the position shall constitute notice of termination. Notification of a decision to continue the position will be provided as soon as it is made.
+
+
+
+Alternative Model
+
+															1.	Termination Defined
+
+															Termination is a means of separation by which the University ends its employment relationship with a tenured faculty member or, prior to the end of the term of appointment, with a tenure-track faculty member.  
+
+															2.	Causes for Termination
+
+															Termination may occur because of (1) a financial contingent situation or (2) the discontinuance of an academic program or department of instruction due to educational considerations.
+
+	a.	Termination Due to Financial Contingencies and Resource Allocation
+
+Termination of a tenured faculty member or, prior to the end of the term of appointment, of a tenure-track faculty member may occur because of the declaration of a financial contingent situation as described below. 
+
+		Criteria
+
+The criteria to be employed in financially contingent situations in allocating resources to University programs and services fall under three headings: Mission, Cost Effectiveness Marketability, and Quality. These will at times compete and at other times converge. If and when Ohio Wesleyan University meets contingencies that require institutional contraction, these sets of criteria will be used in complementary fashion as guidelines. The order of their enumeration should not be taken to indicate their order of priority. Neither should it be presumed that all four will be weighed equally in making particular decisions. Particular circumstances may encourage the assignment of greater weight to one or another in particular cases, even though in financially contingent situations it is to be expected that fiscal pressure may emphasize reference to the criterion of cost effectiveness. What is important is that the campus community, in considering financial contingency reductions, identify and grapple directly with what are likely to be very difficult choices from among options that all carry significant costs and/or benefits in terms of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality. The objective must be to arrive at wise judgments.
+
+	MISSION
+
+Because Ohio Wesleyan University is a specific private university with a specific heritage, a major consideration associated with any reduction or change in size will be to preserve its essential character by maintaining those programs and activities judged to be more central to that character. To do so will require reference to several questions, including but not limited to the following: How closely does the program or service in question fit the stated mission of Ohio Wesleyan University? How importantly does it contribute toward a non-curricular campus ambience vital to Wesleyan's liberal arts heritage? Is it essential in serving other programs?
+
+	COST EFFECTIVENESS & MARKETABILITY
+
+Attentiveness to the cost effectiveness and marketability of programs and services is a key characteristic of a well-run institution. Cost-effectiveness must be one guideline in determining staffing levels and whether or not to maintain programs or services. The University must therefore be sensitive to the constituencies it serves and to their preferences. While Ohio Wesleyan cannot mindlessly add or subtract staff or programs or services to track short-term fluctuations in cost effectiveness, neither can it ignore longer term or more profound shifts as it decides which subject areas, programs, or services to maintain and at what staffing levels. It must ask what is the relationship between direct expenses and revenues in a given area? What is the actual and relative cost of a graduation unit (or, in the case of non-academic areas, other service unit)? What is the trend line for both, and for enrollments and student/staff ratio? Is the program or service a ""native recruiter?"" Is it duplicative?  What is the present and future demand for the program among existing and protentional student populations as measured by labor market projections, external stakeholder feedback, and national and state policy/economic projections and placement data?
+
+	QUALITY
+
+Since the primary purpose of Ohio Wesleyan University is to provide excellent instruction in the liberal arts and selected career options, and comparable quality in non-academic services, it must consider program or service quality in making program, service, and staffing decisions. In dealing with any financially contingent situation, it will seek to retain its best personnel, programs, and services, as one top priority. It will strive to adjust programs and services and retain or retrain individuals so as to maintain the best possible teaching and learning environment. Major issues associated with this guideline are complex and difficult. Among them include, but are not limited to, the following: Is the program or service and its staff generally perceived by Faculty (staff, where non-academic services may be involved) and students to be of high quality? Do students, in or associated with it, perform throughout the University at average or higher levels? Is the staff versatile as well as strong?
+
+
+
+	The guidelines of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality are contradictory. Any one of them used exclusively could lead to very serious imbalances in the focus and operation of the University. Recognition that each of these three needs to be considered and that each provides an outward boundary for the decision process will encourage an intelligent and equitable response to financially contingent situations as well as to ordinary conditions.
+
+		Making Contingency Decisions
+
+If financially contingent situations require reductions in personnel and/or programs or services, the University will balance a need for timely action with the need for shared decision-making.  In both determining whether such a situation exists and in shaping difficult decisions that contingencies might require, the President will engage in extensive consultation with appropriate faculty committees, administrators, and where conditions allow, students, before making a recommendation to the Board of Trustees.  The Board of Trustees retains ultimate authority for declaring that a financial contingency situation exists.
+
+Responsibility for framing a proposal for program or services and/or personnel reductions to deal with a financial contingency will rest with the President.  The proposal, when it pertains to academic programs and/or personnel, will be referred to the Committee on Academic Programs as to curricular impact, to the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee as to the implications for the academic plan, to the Faculty Personnel Committee as to personnel implications, and to the affected programs. When the proposal pertains to non-academic programs, services, and/or personnel, it will be forwarded to the Governance Committee and the Senior Leadership Team Cabinet for consideration. These bodies will hold hearings as part of their deliberations. At the discretion of the President, an advisory student committee may also be created. These groups will severally consider the proposal(s) and in doing so may consult widely with faculty, students, and, where appropriate, with staff. They are to complete their deliberations within 30 calendar days of receipt of the President's proposal(s) and report their findings and recommendations to the President immediately upon finishing their deliberations. They may recommend acceptance, alteration, or otherwise, of the President's proposal(s). If and when they are unable to achieve concurrence with the President, and the President yet judges that reductions must be made, the President will report to the Board of Trustees the proposed course of action. If there is a difference of views between the President and the committees, the President will ensure that the committees' proposals are forwarded to the Trustees with the President’s proposal(s). The Board of Trustees retains ultimate authority for approving proposals as to program and position reductions and terminations responding to financial contingency situations.
+
+After the completion and implementation of decisions for institutional contraction to deal with financial contingencies, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.
+
+
+
+	b.	Program or Department Discontinuance Due to Educational Decisions
+
+Termination of an appointment with tenure, or of a probationary faculty member before the end of the specified term, may occur as a result of the formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction due to educational considerations.  
+
+	Criteria
+
+The decision to discontinue an academic program or department of instruction will be based on long-range judgements that the educational mission of the University as whole will be enhanced by the discontinuance of an academic program or department.  Such a decision will not be based upon cyclical or temporary variations in enrollment.    
+
+For purposes of this policy, departments are defined as an academic department or unit of instruction offering majors and minors that existed prior to the decision to discontinue them. The term program means a group of courses leading to a major or minor, a sequence of courses with a common prefix, a service, or support area, or any curriculum area identified as such.
+
+	Making Academic Program or Department Discontinuation Decisions
+
+A proposal to discontinue an academic program or department is reviewed according to the following procedures: 
+
+A proposal may be initiated by the Committee on Academic Program, the Provost, the President, or the Board of Trustees. 
+
+Upon receipt of a proposal, the Provost shall call together a joint committee, comprising the Committee on Academic Programs and the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee (hereinafter referred to as the Joint Committee), which shall evaluate the proposal considering criteria used in the normal, periodic review of academic programs and departments.  As part of the evaluation, the Joint Committee will consult with the faculty of the impacted program or department. 
+
+At the discretion of the President, an advisory student committee may also be created.
+
+The recommendations of the Joint Committee concerning discontinuance of an academic program or department will be reported to the Faculty as a whole for review.
+
+The Faculty will then make a final recommendation on the matter to the Provost.  
+
+In the event the Provost disagrees with the Faculty’s recommendation, the Provost will meet with the Faculty to discuss the reasons for such disagreement, before making a final recommendation on the matter to the President.
+
+The Provost will then communicate a final decision and the reasons therefor in writing to the Faculty.
+
+Having considered the recommendations above and considered the vote of the Faculty, the Provost will make a final written recommendation to the President on the matter.  If the Provost disagrees with the Faculty recommendation, the Provost will forward the Faculty’s proposal to the President.
+
+The President will then transmit the above recommendation(s), along with the President’s independent recommendation, to the Board of Trustees for final action.
+
+If the Board of Trustees approves the discontinuation of the program or department, the President will charge the Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee, to recommend names of faculty members to be reduced.
+
+The President shall render the final decision on terminations for reasons of formal reduction or discontinuance of a degree or program area and shall notify the faculty member(s).
+
+
+
+Notice
+
+Notification of termination under Section 3.13.6 will be sent from the President to the faculty member by certified mail or personal delivery, with signature required for delivery. The notice will specify the reasons for such termination, the effective date of termination, the faculty member's right to retraining (if applicable), and right to an appeal.
+
+Appeal
+
+A tenured faculty member may appeal a proposed termination pursuant to the Faculty Grievance Policy.  Such an appeal will be limited to whether the Termination Policy and procedures were adhered to and must be filed with Provost no later than fifteen (15) academic days from the receipt of notice of reassignment or termination. 
+
+Benefits for Faculty Whose Positions Are Terminated
+
+															Certain services and benefits are provided by the University to persons whose full-time tenured or probationary employment is terminated because of the elimination of their positions due to financial contingencies and program or department discontinuations. In what follows, ""termination"" refers to the ending date of an appointment which ceases because the position has been eliminated.
+
+															Planning Assistance. One or more staff persons capable of providing career planning services will be available to work with terminated faculty, such services to include individual counseling, workshops, access to career literature, help with search skills, and contacts with alumni and other friends of the University.
+
+															Reassignment and Retraining. Subject to a review of qualifications (see Section 3.5.2 - Faculty Qualification) and retraining possibilities (see Section 3.10.3 – Retraining Leave), faculty members in positions to be eliminated will be considered for suitable vacancies at the University in administrative or teaching positions before the University issues notice of its intention to terminate an appointment. Tenured faculty who will receive preference in such consideration over non-tenured faculty., may explore such possibilities before electing early retirement or as an alternative to receiving termination payments (see below). The Provost will coordinate the identification of possible alternative assignments and the review of individual qualifications, making known the applicable procedures.  When 
+
+															no position is available within the University, with or without retraining, and the faculty member is not agreeable to any optional alternative courses of action (i.e., change in status to part-time), the faculty member’s appointment may be terminated.  
+
+Medical Coverage. Normal medical coverage will remain in force at University expense through December 31 of the next academic year, and can be continued at the individual's expense in accordance with the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act for the remainder of two years, after termination.
+
+															Termination Payments. 
+
+															Current Handbook Text
+
+															The University provides tenured faculty with termination payments to help offset costs of retraining and relocation in positions outside the University as well as to recognize services rendered. Such payments are made in lieu of providing unemployment compensation payments for such faculty. The plan is based in general terms on the system of severance payments under the University's early retirement plan, but involves payment on a foreshortened schedule and includes calculations involving years of service and the salary the person would have received for fulltime service in the year following termination.
+
+															The termination payments for an eligible tenured faculty member are determined as follows:
+
+															The calculation begins with the monthly rate of pay corresponding to 45% of the salary the individual would have received in the year following termination.
+
+															Because the terminated individual will not pay Social Security taxes on the faculty member’s termination benefit, the rate in 1 is reduced by the FICA (Social Security) individual tax rate at the time of termination.
+
+															The adjusted rate in 2 is hypothetically cumulated for 60 months (5 years), which total amount is then converted to an equivalent lump sum value by calculating its discounted present value (DPV) using the rate of interest on 5 year government securities in effect at the time of termination.
+
+															The proportion of the lump sum value in 3 to which the individual is entitled is calculated as the proportion of 20 years the individual has served the University, this proportion not to exceed unity. This proportion is multiplied by the lump sum benefit of 3 to obtain the adjusted lump sum benefit.
+
+															The adjusted lump sum benefit in 4 will be paid to the individual at a monthly rate equal to the individual's full salary rate that would have obtained in the year following termination reduced by the current FICA individual tax rate used in 2 above.
+
+															The payments in 5 above will continue for as many months as the adjusted lump sum entitlement provides, discounted (adjusted upwards) for the lower value of future income payments using the rate in 3 above. The monthly payments will begin ordinarily with the academic year following the year of termination.
+
+															If employment is obtained outside the University, severance payments from the University will be reduced one dollar for each two dollars per month earned in that employment.
+
+															
+
+															Alternative Model Text
+
+Termination Notice/Payment: Written notice or salary in lieu of notice that a faculty appointment has been terminated because of (1) a financial contingent situation or (2) the discontinuance of an academic program or department of instruction due to educational considerations will be given to the faculty member on the same schedule as for non-renewal (See Section 3.13.2.1 – Notification of Non-Renewal). 
+
+On the recommendation of the Faculty Personnel Committee or the President, the Board of Trustees, in determining what, if any, payments will be made beyond the effective date of termination, may take into account the length and quality of service of the faculty member.
+
+															Tuition Benefits. The same tuition benefits (OWU tuition remission and GLCA tuition exchange) available to children of tenured faculty shall be available to those already in college or high school (grades 9 through 12) at the time the tenured faculty parent or legal guardian is terminated.
+
+															Other Benefits. No fringe benefits will be paid by the University except those specifically provided for in this policy.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Pre-Draft - Separation from Service.txt [/INST] Separation from Service
+
+Faculty members may end their employment relationship with the University through: 
+
+resignation (Section 3.13.1) or 
+
+retirement (Section 3.13.2). 
+
+The University may end its employment relationship with a member of the faculty through: 
+
+non-renewal of appointment (Section 3.13.3), 
+
+dismissal for cause (Section 3.13.4), or
+
+termination (Section 3.13.5).
+
+This section of the Faculty Handbook sets out the procedures to be followed in such cases in order to preserve the rights and interests of both faculty members and the University. 
+
+Resignation
+
+Resignation is a means of separation by which faculty members ends their employment relationship with the University either at or prior to the end of a contractual term. Faculty members intending to resign should notify the appropriate Dean in writing at the earliest possible opportunity. Except in unusual circumstances, members of the faculty intending to resign will be expected to serve to the end of an academic year.  Faculty members may properly request a waiver of this expectation of notice in case of hardship or in a situation where they would otherwise be denied substantial professional advancement or other opportunity.
+
+Retirement
+
+Retirement is a means of separation by which faculty members ends their employment relationship with the University.  Faculty members who intend to retire should submit a letter to the Provost stating their intention to retire and specifying an effective date.  In consideration of the welfare of students and colleagues, a faculty member should provide notification to the University of intent to retire no less than nine (9) months prior to the effective date of the retirement. 
+
+Nonrenewal of Appointment 
+
+Nonrenewal of a regular or temporary nontenure full-time appointment to the teaching faculty may occur at the close of any contract period. Such nonrenewal occurs when the individual's work does not meet the applicable standards for reappointment or tenure as determined by the process of a faculty review or because the position occupied by the individual has been discontinued as provided for in Chapter V of this Handbook.
+
+Notification of Non-Renewal
+
+Written notice that a non-tenure full-time appointment is not to be renewed will be given to the faculty member as follows: 
+
+not later than March 1 of the first academic year of service if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if a one year appointment is not renewed during an academic year, at least three months in advance of its expiration;
+
+not later than December 15 of the second academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if an initial two year appointment expires during the academic year, at least six months in advance of its expiration; 
+
+not later than Commencement before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years in the institution.
+
+After completion of two years of service, nonrenewal of a regular non-tenure appointment to the teaching faculty will be accompanied by the offer of a one-year temporary appointment in the year following notification of nonrenewal. This period of employment is known as the terminal period as described in Section C.1.b.
+
+
+
+Policies and Procedures Governing Dismissal For Cause
+
+															l.	Dismissal Defined
+
+															Dismissal is a severance action by which the University ends its professional relationship with a tenured or non-tenured faculty member for adequate cause. Dismissal may remove a member from service, for adequate cause, either at or before the end of a current appointment.  Dismissal will not be used by the University to restrain faculty members in their exercise of academic freedom. 
+
+															2.	Adequate Cause Defined
+
+															Except in those instances where there has been a final judicial determination of a faculty member's legal conviction on a felony charge or on a charge involving moral turpitude, a faculty member shall be dismissed for cause only if after a hearing according to the provisions set forth below, the preponderance of evidence shall establish the faculty member’s unfitness to teach because of:
+
+															Incompetence: the faculty member either lacks, or is unwilling to demonstrate, the skills and abilities necessary to fulfill the duties of a faculty member, 
+
+															Continued neglect of duties in spite of written warnings, 
+
+															Lack of scholarly objectivity or integrity, 
+
+															Inability to perform the essential or inherent duties and responsibilities of a faculty position, with or without reasonable accommodation(s) by the University, upon exhaustion or declination of all authorized leaves,
+
+															Serious misuse of the classroom or of academic prestige, or 
+
+															Gross personal misconduct rendering the faculty member unfit for association with students or colleagues (e.g., physical assault, sexual or unlawful discrimination or harassment, violation of standards of professional ethics or conduct in teaching, scholarship, and service, such as would evoke general condemnation from the academic community generally.
+
+The burden of proof to establish the existence of adequate cause for dismissal rests with the administration of the University.  A faculty member accused of an action or actions that would constitute grounds for dismissal will be presumed innocent until adequate cause is established through a dismissal proceedings as described below. 
+
+Note: The parties may mutually stipulate in writing to modify the timelines set forth below in extraordinary circumstances and for good cause shown in order to achieve full and fair evaluations or resolution of disputes.
+
+															3.	Steps Prior to Dismissal
+
+A decision to seek dismissal of a faculty member will be preceded by: 
+
+Consultation between the Provost and the faculty member toward the goal of achieving a mutually agreeable settlement, and 
+
+Written notification to the faculty member of a statement of charges, framed with reasonable particularity, by the Provost.
+
+The Provost’s Consultation with the Faculty Member
+
+If the Provost has evidence that a faculty member has demonstrated or is demonstrating conduct that may constitute adequate cause for dismissal defined above, the Provost will meet with the faculty member to discuss the concerns and to consider the faculty member’s response. At the Provost’s discretion, the Provost may request further investigation into the matter by appropriate University staff or external agents before or after meeting with the faculty member. However, before moving beyond this stage, the Provost will afford the faculty member a reasonable opportunity to respond to any information that the Provost believes would constitute adequate cause for dismissal and, if possible, to arrive at a mutually agreeable settlement. 
+
+															4. Notification to Faculty Member of Intent to Dismiss for Cause
+
+															In those instances where a mutual resolution cannot be reached and the Provost deems it in the best interests of the University to recommend the dismissal of a faculty member's employment for cause, the following procedures shall apply:
+
+															At least thirty (30) days prior to the date on which the Provost plans to present to the President of the University a recommendation for dismissal of a faculty member's contract, the Provost shall notify the faculty member of the intended action either by registered mail (return receipt requested) to the faculty member’s home address or personal delivery, with signature required for delivery.  The Provost’s notification will set forth in specific terms the basis for the proposed action and inform the faculty member of the right to a formal hearing and adjudication of the case.
+
+															An email will also be sent to the faculty member’s University email address notifying the faculty member of the fact that a notice required by this Policy has been sent by one of the methods described above.  If the faculty member refuses to acknowledge the personal delivery or certified mailing by signature, the University will email the notice to the faculty member’s University email address, which shall be considered receipt of the notice.
+
+															5.	Faculty Member's Right to a Hearing Assured
+
+At the faculty member’s request, a hearing will be held, provided that the accused faculty has, within 30 days of receipt of the original notification of intent from the Provost, provided the Provost with a written request for such a hearing.  A faculty member who does not request a hearing within 30 days of receipt of the Provost’s correspondence waives all appeal and grievance rights pertaining to the dismissal action.
+
+If the faculty member fails to request a hearing within the 30 day deadline, the Provost will present to President of the University a recommendation that the faculty member be dismissed for cause.  If the President concurs with the Provost’s recommendation, the President will notify the faculty member in writing of the effective date of dismissal.  Such notice may be given either by registered mail (return receipt requested) to the faculty member’s home address or personal delivery, with signature required for delivery.  An email will also be sent to the faculty member’s University email address.  If the faculty member refuses to acknowledge the personal delivery or certified mailing by signature, the University will email the notice to the faculty member’s University email address, which shall be considered receipt of the notice.  Dismissal will take effect in accordance with the terms specified in the notice of dismissal, a hearing will not take place, and the faculty member will have waived all rights to a hearing or appeal.
+
+If, on the other hand, the faculty member waives a hearing, but replies in writing either denying the charges or asserting that the charges do not support a finding of adequate cause, the hearing panel will evaluate all available evidence and rest its recommendation upon the evidence in the record.
+
+															6.	Appointment, Composition and Duties of the Hearing Panel
+
+															In every case where an accused faculty member requests a formal hearing, the President of the University will assemble from the full-time teaching faculty a Faculty Hearing Panel (“Panel”).  
+
+															The Panel shall consist of three (3) persons selected by the President from among the elected members of the Standing Faculty Committees for that year, two (2) members of the Faculty appointed by the President from a list of nominees submitted by the accused faculty member, and two (2) members of the Faculty appointed by the President from a list of nominees submitted by the Provost. The Panel shall select its own chair from among the participating members of the Standing Faculty Committees for that year.
+
+															It is the duty of the Panel to:
+
+															hear the charges against the faculty member,
+
+															ascertain as nearly as possible all the relevant facts,
+
+															deliberate upon the matters before it, and
+
+															recommend to the President of the University a course of action not inconsistent with the highest academic, ethical, and moral ends of the University.
+
+7. Interim Suspension of Faculty Member
+
+Under authority delegated to the President by the Board of Trustees (Code Article VII, Section 1B (1), the President, pending the outcome of a dismissal for cause hearing, may summarily suspended the faculty member upon a finding of the President that there is good cause to believe that the continued presence of the faculty member on campus would endanger the safety or well-being of the faculty member or the safety and well-being of students, other Faculty, staff, or University property.  The faculty member's salary will continue during any suspension imposed by the President.
+
+															8. Pre-Hearing Conference
+
+The Panel will schedule and commence a pre-hearing meeting within ten academic days of being populated. 
+
+Purpose: The purpose of the pre-hearing is to:
+
+Simplify the issues,
+
+Effect stipulations of facts,
+
+Provide for the exchange of documentary or other information,
+
+Achieve such other appropriate pre-hearing objectives as will make the hearing fair, effective, and expeditious,
+
+Hear any challenges brought by the faculty member or the Provost regarding the disqualification of a Panel member for bias or a conflict of interest.
+
+Notice: All parties shall be notified of the pre-hearing date at least five academic days in advance, and such notice shall include:
+
+A statement as to the appointment and members of the Panel, and
+
+A statement of the time, place, and nature of the pre-hearing.
+
+Committee Member Challenges: 
+
+Challenges brought by the parties regarding the disqualification of a Panel member for a conflict of interest must be submitted on or before five academic days of the pre-hearing date.
+
+The chair of the panel shall decide any such challenge.  If the chair is challenged for disqualification based on an alleged conflict of interest, the President shall decide the challenge.  In the event of a disqualification, the President will appoint a replacement for each member so excused in advance of the hearing date.
+
+															9.	Time and Place of Hearing
+
+															The Panel shall issue notice to the parties and commence the hearing within ten academic days of the pre-hearing meeting.  The hearings of the Panel shall be held on the Ohio Wesleyan University campus in Delaware at such a time and place as may be designated by the chair of the Panel, after consultation with the faculty member charged and the Provost.
+
+															10.	Conduct of the Hearing
+
+															In the conduct of its hearing, the Faculty Hearing Panel shall be guided by such rules of procedure as will be most likely to elicit pertinent and accurate information relative to the facts at issue. It is not intended that hearing adhere to legal procedures of a court.  The chair of the Panel will conduct the proceedings and rule on all objections.
+
+The faculty member accused and Provost or other administrator assigned by the President to present the case for dismissal on behalf of the University will each be allowed to have outside legal aid (at the parties’ respective expense) and/or such faculty counsel as they may desire and shall have the right, directly or through counsel, to call and question witnesses in support of their case and to cross-examine all adverse witnesses presented. 
+
+Upon request of the faculty member and at no personal cost, a daily copy of the record or a video or audio recording of the proceedings will be made available prior to the commencement of the proceedings for the following day.  Recording failures that occur notwithstanding good faith attempts will not require a delay or affect the validity of the proceedings, but in such event the chair will prepare a written summary of the hearing.  In the event that a deaf or hard of hearing person is involved in the hearing or is a witness, the University will provide and arrange for a sign language interpreter with comprehensive skills certification, if requested by the faculty member(s) or other participants who are deaf or hard of hearing.  Likewise, at the completion of the hearing, the Panel will deliver to the faculty member at no personal cost a full and complete copy of the proceedings. and of the Hearing Panel's opinions and judgments, and recommendations to the President of the University.
+
+The chair of the Panel has discretion to grant adjournments to enable either party time for discovery, so long as such requests are reasonable and relate substantively to the hearing proceedings.  
+
+Within ten academic days of the conclusion of the hearing, the Chair of the Panel will present to the President written findings of fact and recommendations as to the review of the faculty member's dismissal; copies must at the same time be sent to the faculty member and the Provost. The Panel’s report must contain recommendations regarding whether adequate cause for dismissal has or has not been established by the preponderance of the evidence.  The Panel’s written findings of fact and recommendation will be based on a simple majority vote.  Any dissenting opinions will be included in the written report.
+
+11. President’s Review and Decision
+
+Within five academic days after receipt of the Panel’s findings and recommendations, the President, in light of the documented evidence and hearing record, will issue an independent written decision on the matter, with copies to the Panel, the faculty member, and Provost.  If the President does not accept the Panel’s decision, the President will state the reasons for doing so in the written decision.
+
+If the President sustains the Panel’s recommendation that adequate cause to dismiss the faculty member does not exist, the matter will be concluded.  
+
+If the President determines that additional consideration by the Panel is necessary, the President will remand the case back to the Panel with specific objections.  
+
+If the President concludes that the administration has established adequate cause for a dismissal, but that a sanction(s) less than dismissal or suspension would be more appropriate, the sanction(s) and effective date of sanction(s) will be stated in the President’s letter to the faculty member with supporting reasons.  
+
+If the President concludes that adequate cause for a dismissal exists and that dismissal or suspension is appropriate, the effective date of termination or suspension will be stated in the President’s letter to the faculty member.  On written request of the faculty member, the President shall transmit to the Board of Trustees the record of the case, the full report of the Panel, and the President’s recommendation in accordance with Step 12 below.  The faculty member’s request to a review by the Board of Trustees must be made in writing to the President within five academic days of receiving the President’s letter of termination or suspension.
+
+															12.	Faculty Member's Right to Appeal
+
+															If the recommendations of the Faculty Hearing Panel which are adverse to the faculty member are accepted by the President with a recommendation to the Board of Trustees or its Executive Committee that the faculty member be dismissed for cause, the faculty member accused may request and shall be entitled to a review of the case before the Board of Trustees or its Executive Committee or a special committee designated by one of these bodies.  
+
+															If requested by the faculty member, a review of the case before the Board of Trustees, its Executive Committee, or a special committee designated by either will be based upon the record made before the Faculty Hearing Panel and shall not constitute a rehearing of the evidence.  However, the faculty member accused and/or their counsel, as well as the administration’s representative(s), will be given the opportunity to present oral arguments on such review. The reviewing committee, in its discretion, may consider newly discovered evidence as part of its deliberations.
+
+The Board of Trustees or its designated committee may approve the faculty member’s dismissal, disapprove the faculty member’s dismissal, recommend to the President a lesser penalty if it believes that the conduct of the faculty member is sufficiently grave to justify such a sanction, or direct that further proceedings take place. The final decision of the Board of Trustees or its designated committee shall not be subject to review. If the Board of Trustees or its designated committee approves dismissal or recommends a lesser penalty to the President, the President is responsible for carrying out the Board’s decision. 
+
+															13.	Panel Hearings Closed
+
+															The hearing proceedings of the Panel shall be closed to all but the parties involved, their advisers and aides, provided always that the National Office of the American Association of University Professors may have an official observer present during the hearings.
+
+															14.	Salary for Faculty Member Dismissed for Cause
+
+															Current University Text
+
+															A faculty member dismissed for cause under the foregoing hearing procedure shall in every instance be paid his or her salary for one full year from the date of notification that the President has accepted the Panel's recommendations of dismissal in 6 above.
+
+Alternative Model
+
+A faculty member whose contract is terminated due to inability to perform the essential functions of the position due to physical or mental illness shall receive notice or normal salary in accordance with Section 3.13.3.  
+
+If the faculty member’s contract, however, is terminated due to a legal conviction on a felony charge or on a charge involving moral turpitude, incompetence, continued neglect of University duties and responsibilities, lack of scholarly objectivity or integrity, serious misuse of the classroom or of academic prestige, or gross personal misconduct, there are no requirements for provision of either notice or severance salary.
+
+
+
+Policies and Procedures Governing Imposition of Sanctions Other than Dismissal for Cause
+
+															Current University Policy
+
+															Major Sanctions
+
+															There may be instances in which the conduct of a faculty member, although not constituting adequate grounds for institution of dismissal proceedings, is nevertheless sufficiently inappropriate as to warrant imposition of a major sanction, such as suspension from service for a stated period without pay. A major sanction may be imposed only as a result of the due process proceeding specified in 1 through 12 of Section 3.13.3 above, the policies and procedures of which will apply with the proposed major sanction being substituted for dismissal throughout. The conduct judged by due process proceedings to be ""sufficiently inappropriate"" (above) shall be confined to the areas of professional incompetence, neglect of obligations and responsibilities as set forth in the Handbook or faculty legislation, and gross personal misconduct.
+
+															It is understood that major sanctions shall not be imposed to deny, restrict, or otherwise inhibit the exercise of academic freedom, as specified in the 1940 AAUP Statement of Principles of Academic Freedom and Tenure. The President, Provost, Faculty Personnel Committee, and the Hearing Panel (if it is brought to bear) have joint responsibility for assuring that major sanction proceedings are neither initiated nor pursued in violation of academic freedom.
+
+															Minor Sanctions
+
+															If the Provost believes that the conduct of a faculty member warrants imposition of a minor sanction such as, but not limited to, a written reprimand, the Provost will, after informal consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee, notify the faculty member of the basis for the proposed sanction and provide the individual with an opportunity to persuade the Provost that the proposed minor sanction letter of reprimand should not be sent implemented. A faculty member who believes that a minor sanction has been unjustly imposed may petition file a grievance with the Faculty Executive Committee Faculty Personnel Committee to seek the rescinding of the reprimand in accordance with the Faculty Grievance Policy (see Section  --). The provisions protecting academic freedom relative to major sanctions apply to minor sanctions as well.
+
+															
+
+															Alternative Model
+
+Informal Action 
+
+If the Provost receives or initiates a complaint about a faculty member involving alleged professional incompetence, neglect of obligations and responsibilities as set forth in the Handbook, or gross personal misconduct, the first step should be for the faculty member and Provost to determine whether the complaint appears to have merit and then to address the matter informally through conversation and mentoring, provided the nature of the complaint permits informal resolution. 
+
+Informal actions in response to a complaint may include, but are not limited to:
+
+clarification of the standards of conduct
+
+written warning
+
+recommendation for counseling or mentoring
+
+monitoring of the situation 
+
+support for self-help 
+
+mediation by a third party.
+
+Note: Allegation of sexual harassment or discrimination rendered against a faculty member will be investigated and resolved in accordance with either the University’s Title IX and Sexual Harassment Policy or the Non Title IX, Sexual Misconduct Policy as determined by the Title IX administrator(s).
+
+Sanctions 
+
+If the faculty member persists in failing to correct the behavior that has elicited the complaint, or if the basis of the complaint is sufficiently serious in the judgment of the Provost to warrant immediate formal action, the Provost will informally consult with the Faculty Personnel Committee regarding the proposed disciplinary sanction. The Provost may then either issue another warning letter, impose a sanction(s), or end the matter.  If the Provost imposes a sanction(s), the Provost will notify the faculty member of the basis for the proposed sanction and provide the individual with an opportunity to persuade the Provost that the proposed sanction should not be implemented.
+
+When the disciplinary action involves the imposition of a minor sanction--such as a written reprimand, denial of specific faculty privileges such as sabbatical, or removal from committee assignments or administrative duties--the faculty member may grieve the imposition of the sanction in accordance with the policies and procedures in Section --. 
+
+If the Provost believes that the conduct of a faculty member is sufficiently grave to justify suspension or dismissal, the faculty member shall have an opportunity of a hearing in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 3.13.3. 
+
+
+
+Termination
+
+															Current University Text
+
+															1.	Termination Defined
+
+															Termination is a severance action by which the University ends the service of a probationary faculty member before the expiration of a contract, or of a tenured faculty member at any time, without prejudice.
+
+															2.	Causes for Termination
+
+															Prolonged mental or physical illness or The elimination of faculty positions are the only causes for termination of faculty.
+
+															a.	Prolonged Mental or Physical Illness
+
+															Termination for medical reasons of an appointment with tenure, or of a nontenured appointment before the end of the contract period, will be based on clear and convincing medical evidence that the individual cannot continue to fulfill the terms and conditions of the appointment. The decision to terminate will be made by the President only after there has been appropriate consultation with the individual's department and the Faculty Personnel Committee, and after the individual, or someone representing the individual (say, a family member), has been informed of the basis of the proposed action and been afforded an opportunity to present the individual's position and to respond to the evidence. If the individual so requests, the Faculty Personnel Committee will review the matter and report its conclusions to the President before the President makes the final decision and notifies the faculty member.
+
+															Prior to the President's final decision, the individual concerned may, if eligible, elect to retire under the early retirement program with such severance payments as that program entails, making moot the matter of separation. Or the individual may be eligible for salary continuation or insurance payments under the University's disability program. Finally, upon the President's final decision to terminate the faculty member's appointment for medical reasons, the individual will receive earned salary or severance pay for three months from that date if the decision has been reached within the individual's first six months of service, for six months if the decision has been reached after six months but before 18 months of service, and for one academic year (nominal nine months) if the decision has been reached after 18 months of service.
+
+															b.	Elimination of Faculty Positions 
+
+Termination of a faculty appointment may occur through the elimination of a position by means of (1) the conclusion of a term appointment and the discontinuation of the position, (2) review of a tenure track position and discontinuation of the position, as provided for in Chapter V of this Handbook.
+
+Written notice or salary in lieu of notice at the discretion of the University that a faculty appointment has been terminated due to elimination of a position will be given to the faculty member on the same schedule as for non-renewal (See Section 3.13.2.1 – Notification of Non-Renewal), except that for the final year of a term position the initial contract letter specifying the termination of the position shall constitute notice of termination. Notification of a decision to continue the position will be provided as soon as it is made.
+
+
+
+Alternative Model
+
+															1.	Termination Defined
+
+															Termination is a means of separation by which the University ends its employment relationship with a tenured faculty member or, prior to the end of the term of appointment, with a tenure-track faculty member.  
+
+															2.	Causes for Termination
+
+															Termination may occur because of (1) a financial contingent situation or (2) the discontinuance of an academic program or department of instruction due to educational considerations.
+
+	a.	Termination Due to Financial Contingencies and Resource Allocation
+
+Termination of a tenured faculty member or, prior to the end of the term of appointment, of a tenure-track faculty member may occur because of the declaration of a financial contingent situation as described below. 
+
+		Criteria
+
+The criteria to be employed in financially contingent situations in allocating resources to University programs and services fall under three headings: Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality. These will at times compete and at other times converge. If and when Ohio Wesleyan University meets contingencies that require institutional contraction, these sets of criteria will be used in complementary fashion as guidelines. The order of their enumeration should not be taken to indicate their order of priority. Neither should it be presumed that all three will be weighed equally in making particular decisions. Particular circumstances may encourage the assignment of greater weight to one or another in particular cases, even though in financially contingent situations it is to be expected that fiscal pressure may emphasize reference to the criterion of cost effectiveness. What is important is that the campus community, in considering contingency reductions, identify and grapple directly with what are likely to be very difficult choices from among options that all carry significant costs and/or benefits in terms of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality. The objective must be to arrive at wise judgments.
+
+	MISSION
+
+Because Ohio Wesleyan University is a specific private university with a specific heritage, a major consideration associated with any reduction or change in size will be to preserve its essential character by maintaining those programs and activities judged to be more central to that character. To do so will require reference to several questions. How closely does the program or service in question fit the stated mission of Ohio Wesleyan University? How importantly does it contribute toward a non-curricular campus ambience vital to Wesleyan's liberal arts heritage? Is it essential in serving other programs?
+
+	COST EFFECTIVENESS & MARKETABILITY
+
+Attentiveness to the cost effectiveness and marketability of programs and services is a key characteristic of a well-run institution. Cost-effectiveness must be one guideline in determining staffing levels and whether or not to maintain programs or services. The University must therefore be sensitive to the constituencies it serves and to their preferences. While Ohio Wesleyan cannot mindlessly add or subtract staff or programs or services to track short-term fluctuations in cost effectiveness, neither can it ignore longer term or more profound shifts as it decides which subject areas, programs, or services to maintain and at what staffing levels. It must ask what is the relationship between direct expenses and revenues in a given area? What is the actual and relative cost of a graduation unit (or, in the case of non-academic areas, other service unit)? What is the trend line for both, and for enrollments and student/staff ratio? Is the program or service a ""native recruiter?"" Is it duplicative?  What is the present and future demand for the program among existing and protentional student populations as measured by labor market projections, external stakeholder feedback, and national and state policy/economic projections and placement data?
+
+	QUALITY
+
+Since the primary purpose of Ohio Wesleyan University is to provide excellent instruction in the liberal arts and selected career options, and comparable quality in non-academic services, it must consider program or service quality in making program, service, and staffing decisions. In dealing with any financially contingent situation, it will seek to retain its best personnel, programs, and services, as one top priority. It will strive to adjust programs and services and retain or retrain individuals so as to maintain the best possible teaching and learning environment. Major issues associated with this guideline are complex and difficult. Among them are the following: Is the program or service and its staff generally perceived by Faculty (staff, where non-academic services may be involved) and students to be of high quality? Do students, in or associated with it, perform throughout the University at average or higher levels? Is the staff versatile as well as strong?
+
+
+
+	The guidelines of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality are contradictory. Any one of them used exclusively could lead to very serious imbalances in the focus and operation of the University. Recognition that each of these three needs to be considered and that each provides an outward boundary for the decision process will encourage an intelligent and equitable response to financially contingent situations as well as to ordinary conditions.
+
+		Making Contingency Decisions
+
+If financially contingent situations require reductions in personnel and/or programs or services, the University will balance a need for timely action with the need for shared decision-making.  In both determining whether such a situation exists and in shaping difficult decisions that contingencies might require, the President will engage in extensive consultation with appropriate faculty committees, administrators, and where conditions allow, students, before making a recommendation to the Board of Trustees.  The Board of Trustees retains ultimate authority for declaring that a financial contingency situation exists.
+
+Responsibility for framing a proposal for program or services and/or personnel reductions to deal with a financial contingency will rest with the President.  The proposal, when it pertains to academic programs and/or personnel, will be referred to the Committee on Academic Programs as to curricular impact, to the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee as to the implications for the academic plan, to the Faculty Personnel Committee as to personnel implications, and to the affected programs. When the proposal pertains to non-academic programs, services, and/or personnel, it will be forwarded to the Governance Committee and the Senior Leadership Team Cabinet for consideration. These bodies will hold hearings as part of their deliberations. At the discretion of the President, an advisory student committee may also be created. These groups will severally consider the proposal(s) and in doing so may consult widely with faculty, students, and, where appropriate, with staff. They are to complete their deliberations within 30 calendar days of receipt of the President's proposal(s) and report their findings and recommendations to the President immediately upon finishing their deliberations. They may recommend acceptance, alteration, or otherwise, of the President's proposal(s). If and when they are unable to achieve concurrence with the President, and the President yet judges that reductions must be made, the President will report to the Board of Trustees the proposed course of action. If there is a difference of views between the President and the committees, the President will ensure that the committees' proposals are forwarded to the Trustees with the President’s proposal(s). The Board of Trustees retains ultimate authority for approving proposals as to program and position reductions and terminations responding to financial contingency situations.
+
+After the completion and implementation of decisions for institutional contraction to deal with financial contingencies, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.
+
+
+
+	b.	Program or Department Discontinuance Due to Educational Decisions
+
+Termination of an appointment with tenure, or of a probationary faculty member before the end of the specified term, may occur as a result of the formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction due to educational considerations not related to a financial contingent situations.  
+
+	Criteria
+
+The decision to discontinue an academic program or department of instruction will be based on long-range judgements that the educational mission of the University as whole will be enhanced by the discontinuance of an academic program or department.  Such a decision will not be based upon cyclical or temporary variations in enrollment.  Rather, the criteria of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality will inform the University’s decision (see Financial Contigencies and Resource Allocation above).  
+
+For purposes of this policy, departments are defined as an academic department or unit of instruction offering majors and minors that existed prior to the decision to discontinue them. The term program means a group of courses leading to a major or minor, a sequence of courses with a common prefix, a service, or support area, or any curriculum area identified as such.
+
+	Making Academic Program or Department Discontinuation Decisions
+
+A proposal to discontinue an academic program or department is reviewed according to the following procedures: 
+
+A proposal may be initiated by the Committee on Academic Program, the Provost, the President, or the Board of Trustees. 
+
+Upon receipt of a proposal, the Provost shall call together a joint committee, comprising the Committee on Academic Programs and the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee (hereinafter referred to as the Joint Committee), which shall evaluate the proposal considering criteria used in the normal, periodic review of academic programs and departments.  As part of the evaluation, the Joint Committee will consult with the faculty of the impacted program or department. 
+
+At the discretion of the President, an advisory student committee may also be created.
+
+The recommendations of the Joint Committee concerning discontinuance of an academic program or department will be reported to the Faculty as a whole for review.
+
+The Faculty will then make a final recommendation on the matter to the Provost.  
+
+In the event the Provost disagrees with the Faculty’s recommendation, the Provost will meet with the Faculty to discuss the reasons for such disagreement, before making a final recommendation on the matter to the President.
+
+The Provost will then communicate a final decision and the reasons therefor in writing to the Faculty.
+
+Having considered the recommendations above and considered the vote of the Faculty, the Provost will make a final written recommendation to the President on the matter.  If the Provost disagrees with the Faculty recommendation, the Provost will forward the Faculty’s proposal to the President.
+
+The President will then transmit the above recommendation(s), along with the President’s independent recommendation, to the Board of Trustees for final action.
+
+If the Board of Trustees approves the discontinuation of the program or department, the President will charge the Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee, to recommend names of faculty members to be reduced.
+
+The President shall render the final decision on terminations for reasons of formal reduction or discontinuance of a degree or program area and shall notify the faculty member(s).
+
+
+
+Notice
+
+Notification of termination under Section 3.13.6 will be sent from the President to the faculty member by certified mail or personal delivery, with signature required for delivery. The notice will specify the reasons for such termination, the effective date of termination, the faculty member's right to retraining (if applicable), and right to an appeal.
+
+Commitment to Reinstate Terminated Ranked Faculty Members
+
+In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial contingency, the place of the faculty member concerned will not be filled by a replacement within a period of three years, unless the released faculty member has been offered reinstatement and at least thirty days in which to accept or decline it.
+
+Appeal
+
+A tenured faculty member may appeal a proposed termination pursuant to the Faculty Grievance Policy.  Such an appeal will be limited to whether the Termination Policy and procedures were adhered and must be filed with Provost no later than fifteen academic days from the receipt of notice of reassignment or termination. 
+
+Benefits for Faculty Whose Positions Are Terminated
+
+															Certain services and benefits are provided by the University to persons whose full-time tenured or probationary employment is terminated because of the elimination of their positions due to financial contingencies and program or department discontinuations. In what follows, ""termination"" refers to the ending date of an appointment which ceases because the position has been eliminated.
+
+															Planning Assistance. One or more staff persons capable of providing career planning services will be available to work with terminated faculty, such services to include individual counseling, workshops, access to career literature, help with search skills, and contacts with alumni and other friends of the University.
+
+																														Reassignment and Retraining. Subject to a review of qualifications (see Section 3.5.2 - Faculty Qualification) and retraining possibilities (see Section 3.10.3 – Retraining Leave), faculty members in positions to be eliminated will be considered for suitable vacancies at the University in administrative or teaching positions before the University issues notice of its intention to terminate an appointment. Tenured faculty who will receive preference in such consideration over non-tenured faculty., may explore such possibilities before electing early retirement or as an alternative to receiving termination payments (see below). The Provost will coordinate the identification of possible alternative assignments and the review of individual qualifications, making known the applicable procedures.  When 
+
+															no position is available within the University, with or without retraining, and the faculty member is not agreeable to any optional alternative courses of action (i.e., change in status to part-time), the faculty member’s appointment may be terminated.  
+
+Medical Coverage. Normal medical coverage will remain in force at University expense through December 31 of the next academic year, and can be continued at the individual's expense in accordance with the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act for the remainder of two years, after termination.
+
+															Termination Payments. 
+
+															Current Handbook Text
+
+															The University provides tenured faculty with termination payments to help offset costs of retraining and relocation in positions outside the University as well as to recognize services rendered. Such payments are made in lieu of providing unemployment compensation payments for such faculty. The plan is based in general terms on the system of severance payments under the University's early retirement plan, but involves payment on a foreshortened schedule and includes calculations involving years of service and the salary the person would have received for fulltime service in the year following termination.
+
+															The termination payments for an eligible tenured faculty member are determined as follows:
+
+															The calculation begins with the monthly rate of pay corresponding to 45% of the salary the individual would have received in the year following termination.
+
+															Because the terminated individual will not pay Social Security taxes on the faculty member’s termination benefit, the rate in 1 is reduced by the FICA (Social Security) individual tax rate at the time of termination.
+
+															The adjusted rate in 2 is hypothetically cumulated for 60 months (5 years), which total amount is then converted to an equivalent lump sum value by calculating its discounted present value (DPV) using the rate of interest on 5 year government securities in effect at the time of termination.
+
+															The proportion of the lump sum value in 3 to which the individual is entitled is calculated as the proportion of 20 years the individual has served the University, this proportion not to exceed unity. This proportion is multiplied by the lump sum benefit of 3 to obtain the adjusted lump sum benefit.
+
+															The adjusted lump sum benefit in 4 will be paid to the individual at a monthly rate equal to the individual's full salary rate that would have obtained in the year following termination reduced by the current FICA individual tax rate used in 2 above.
+
+															The payments in 5 above will continue for as many months as the adjusted lump sum entitlement provides, discounted (adjusted upwards) for the lower value of future income payments using the rate in 3 above. The monthly payments will begin ordinarily with the academic year following the year of termination.
+
+															If employment is obtained outside the University, severance payments from the University will be reduced one dollar for each two dollars per month earned in that employment.
+
+															
+
+															Alternative Model Text
+
+Termination Notice/Payment: Written notice or salary in lieu of notice that a faculty appointment has been terminated because of (1) a financial contingent situation or (2) the discontinuance of an academic program or department of instruction due to educational considerations will be given to the faculty member on the same schedule as for non-renewal (See Section 3.13.2.1 – Notification of Non-Renewal). Notification of a decision to continue the position will be provided as soon as it is made.
+
+On the recommendation of the Faculty Personnel Committee or the President, the Board of Trustees, in determining what, if any, payments will be made beyond the effective date of termination, may take into account the length and quality of service of the faculty member.
+
+															Tuition Benefits. The same tuition benefits (OWU tuition remission and GLCA tuition exchange) available to dependents sons and daughters of continuing (tenured) faculty shall be available to those already in college or high school (grades 9 through 12) at the time the tenured faculty parent or legal guardian is terminated.
+
+															Other Benefits. No fringe benefits will be paid by the University except those specifically provided for in this policy.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Pre-Draft 2 - Faculty Compensation.txt [/INST] Faculty Compensation 
+
+Salary Administration
+
+Salary administration for members of the full-time faculty is developed in accordance with the following guidelines: 
+
+The Board of Trustees establishes the percentage of the University budget to be used for faculty salaries.  The Board of Trustees bases its decision on the recommendation of the President, who consults with the Committee on University Governance in developing an annual budget proposal for faculty salary adjustments and/or increases. 
+
+The method for the annual distribution faculty salary pool dollars, which is based on the Board of Trustee’s established budget percentage, is set forth in Section – below.  
+
+The Provost shall make available to the faculty a summary of full-time ranked faculty salaries for the current academic year; this summary will identify the range and median salary of faculty at each rank. 
+
+Payroll and Direct Deposits  
+
+Faculty salary payments are made in accordance with the Human Resources payroll calendar.  Please refer to Human Resources for current University policy regarding direct deposits, salary deductions, and other compensation policies applicable to all employees of the University.
+
+One-twelfth of the annual salary will be paid each month on the first day following the month in which the salary has been earned. If the first of the month is on Saturday or Sunday, payroll checks will be distributed on the preceding Friday. Checks for the month of December will always be paid on the first working day of the new year. This provision is made for income tax purposes so that one does not have thirteen paychecks in a calendar year. 
+
+Prior to the completion of an academic year, the faculty member will receive written official notice from the Provost regarding the following year's appointment. If an offer of employment is made for the following year (for those faculty members who have not received tenure), this information as well as the salary terms for the next year are included. To accept, the faculty member signs and returns one copy to the Office of the Provost. This action constitutes a mutual agreement, binding upon both parties for the period involved. 
+
+The payroll is prepared by the Payroll Human Resources Office and any questions of a specific nature, including but limited to salary deductions, should be referred to that source. 
+
+Salary Guidelines for Initial Appointment 
+
+
+
+Guidelines for starting salaries for full-time faculty are approved by the Board of Trustees on a periodic basis upon the recommendation of the President.  The Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee, develops proposed salary guidelines for the President’s approval based on an examination of recent national salary data from institutions similar to Ohio Wesleyan University for various ranks and disciplines.  Upon the Board of Trustee’s approval, the salary guidelines are reported to all faculty.  
+
+Salary Guidelines for Continuing Appointments 
+
+															The following general principles govern salary increments for full-time faculty, subject always to the availability of financial resources for such purposes.
+
+															All faculty members in good standing should be able to advance at regular intervals from their starting salaries.
+
+															There should be recognition for outstanding accomplishment which takes the form of merit raises and promotions, based on known criteria, and arrived at by methods which are as objective as possible. Full-time faculty members shall be eligible for consideration for merit increments every third year beginning with their third year of service.
+
+															As a means of implementing the above principles, the following sequence is applied with reference to the allocation of money approved by the Board of Trustees annually for faculty salary increments.
+
+															To provide promotions,To provide increments in salary that are equal in percentage for all full-time faculty.
+
+															To provide merit increments, and
+
+															To provide increments in salary that are equal in percentage for all full-time faculty.
+
+															Increments in salary for each item in the above sequence above shall be is established the allocated annually by the Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee and announced to all faculty.
+
+															
+
+Per Course Rate of Compensation 
+
+The per course rate of compensation for per-course, overload, and summer school teaching is be determined annually by the Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee, based on the percentage of the University budget approved by the Board of Trustees to be used for faculty salaries.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Pre-Draft 2 - Faculty Recruitment.txt [/INST] Faculty Recruitment, Initial Appointment, and Placement in Rank
+
+Ohio Wesleyan University seeks to recruit and appoint candidates who: 
+
+Demonstrate a willingness to commit to and support the University’s mission, aims, and values,
+
+Meet the qualifications specified in the position description,
+
+Are committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion and value teaching students from diverse backgrounds (e.g., first-generation students, students from low-income families, students of color, LGBT students, students with disabilities), and
+
+Have potential for excellence in teaching, scholarship or creative work, and service to the University.
+
+
+
+Position Authorization 
+
+Before any search may begin, the position must be authorized by the President in accordance with the Initial Authorization of Positions Policy (see Chapter V, Section 5.2.1).
+
+Search Procedures
+
+When the President authorizes a search for a new full-time faculty member, the procedures published in the Faculty Search Guide shall be employed.  The Faculty Search Guide is available on the Academic Affairs’ website.  Key details of the search process as summarized below:
+
+Constituting the Search Committee
+
+Search committees should strive to be diverse with regard to gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation and identity inasmuch as that is possible. The final composition of the search committee must be approved by the Provost, in consultation with the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee.  Each search committees must include an external Inclusion Advocate trained to help the committee evaluate candidates fairly and who functions as a voting member of the committee.  
+
+In general, Search Committees will be made up of those members who will be working with a new colleague into the future.  Retiring faculty may not be voting members of the committee.  Search Committees should also include representation from at least two students, who will act as non-voting members.  All members of the Search Committee are required to complete an online training module in order to serve on the committee.  The role of the search committee is to engage in an active search.
+
+Launching the Search and Development of Search Plan
+
+When the search committee is ready to begin its work, the search committee chair will schedule an initial search committee meeting to develop a search plan, establish a timeline for the search, and select criteria and procedures for screening, interviewing candidates, and keeping records.  All search plans must be approved by the Provost.
+
+Advertisements
+
+All advertisements must include a description that the position is part of a cluster of positions with which Ohio Wesleyan seeks to further diversify its curriculum and faculty; a description of Ohio Wesleyan University, a diversity/inclusion statement, required documents, and instructions how to apply.
+
+Evaluation of Candidates and Creation of Short List
+
+Search Committees should evaluate candidates using agreed-upon criteria. Once the search committee has evaluated candidates, they should rank order candidates on a short list.  At this point, Search Committees will evaluate the list to ensure that they will be interviewing a diverse pool of candidates.   Short lists must be submitted to the Provost, who will notify the search chair once the list of candidates has been approved to ensure that the process has been as inclusive as possible.  
+
+Preliminary 
+
+Candidates on the short list will be invited to a virtual interview. Once these interviews have been completed, search chairs will update the Selection Report and re-share with the Provost. The Selection Report must be approved by the Provost before finalists is invited to campus for interviews.  The typical finalist pool includes three candidates. Departments are not authorized to bring in a fourth finalist without prior approval of the Provost.
+
+Campus Interviews
+
+Campus interviews are arranged by the hiring department in conjunction with the Provost's Office. At a minimum, all final candidates must be interviewed by the individuals set forth in the most current iteration of the Faculty Search Guide.  
+
+During these interviews, candidates will be notified that any job offer is contingent upon successful completion of employment eligibility verification, background, academic credential and/or or tested experience verification, and reference checks, as well documentation of U.S. citizenship or appropriate visa status and work authorization.  Moreover, notice of the availability of the University’s Annual Security Report will be provided to the interviewees if the position was externally advertised.
+
+Final Selection
+
+Following the campus interviews, the search team will discuss the interview results and “rank” the candidates according to the ranking method(s) outlined in the approved search plan.  Search Chairs will submit the final rankings to the Provost and recommend a candidate to hire, but they may not make the final decision.  Prior to submitting a final candidate, the committee must verify that the candidate meets or exceeds the Higher Learning Commission (“HLC”) Assumed Practice B.2 requirements for faculty qualifications (see Section 3.5.5).
+
+A final candidate must be approved by the Provost before an offer of employment is made to the candidate.
+
+Offer
+
+With the approval of the Provost, the Search Chairs may phone candidates to let them know to expect a formal offer from the Provost.  Written employment offers may only be generated by the Provost Office.
+
+Rank and Salary of Initial Appointment
+
+Initial appointment to the full-time teaching faculty of Ohio Wesleyan shall be at a rank and salary commensurate with the individual's training in terms of degree or equivalents and the extent of experience in terms of the number of years of successful higher education teaching or its equivalent.  
+
+The salary of initial appointment at each rank shall be within a narrow range established by the Provost in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee and reported to all faculty.  Salary at the time of a faculty member’s initial appointment shall be within the salary guidelines approved by the Board of Trustees (see Section 3.12.1.3) and determined as a result of negotiation between the individual faculty member and the Provost.  Such factors as education, training, experience, impact, and equity will be considered in determining the faculty member’s appropriate salary level.  
+
+Prior Service Credit
+
+After receiving and considering recommendations from the search committee, the Provost may award credit toward fulfillment of tenure for faculty appointed to tenure-track positions.  The decision to grant prior service credit shall take into account the relevancy of the prior service to the University’s needs, the type of institution(s) at which service was provided, and the nature of the position being filled by the faculty member.  Evidence as to the quality of the prior service shall be entered into the individual's permanent personnel. 
+
+A maximum of two years of prior service credit may be awarded; exceptions to this maximum may be approved by the Provost after receiving and considering a recommendation from the Faculty Personnel Committee.  The amount of credit awarded will be stated in the faculty member’s initial contract of employment.  
+
+Faculty Qualifications  
+
+The University adheres to Higher Learning Commission (“HLC”) Assumed Practice B.2 requirements for faculty qualifications.  At Ohio Wesleyan, faculty qualifications are determined primarily by educational credentials, although exceptions to graduate work can be made for persons the University determines have additional certifications and/or significant work experience.
+
+Qualifications Based on Academic Credentials
+
+When determining acceptable academic credentials of its faculty, the University will require the following as evidence of acceptable academic qualifications:
+
+Tenure Track faculty members are expected to have earned the highest degree appropriate for their discipline (typically a PhD, though in some fields a terminal master’s degree is appropriate). Faculty who have not completed all of the requirements for the culminating degree in the discipline may be hired at the Instructor rank, but are expected to complete their degree within the first year of their employment. When the culminating degree in the discipline has been completed, the faculty member’s rank will be immediately advanced to Assistant Professor.
+
+Term and part-time faculty members will normally be expected to have earned at least a master’s degree in the discipline that they will be teaching, or a master’s in another related discipline, with at least 18 semester hours of graduate work in the discipline that they will be teaching. 
+
+Note: Term or part-time faculty teaching laboratory sections or other class meetings (similar to recitations) who are not the primary instructor for the course may supervise student learning, but not design the learning experiences. In these circumstances the instructor may have less than 18 semester hours of graduate work in the discipline, as they would be functioning as graduate assistants do at research institutions. Such instructors will be supervised and mentored by full-time tenure track or tenured faculty.
+
+Qualifications Based on Tested Experience
+
+The Higher Learning Commission recognizes that “tested experience” may substitute for an earned credential or portions thereof.  Therefore, exceptions to the specified graduate work above can be made for persons the University determines have additional certifications and/or significant work experience equivalent to the degree it would otherwise require for the faculty position.  Such experience must include a breadth and depth of experience outside of the classroom in real-world situations relevant to the discipline in which the faculty member will be teaching.  
+
+Candidates whose eligibility is based on a combination of credentials and tested experience must hold at least the lesser degree (i.e., a degree one level lower than those indicated above) and appropriate experience.  In these cases, Department Chairs, after consultation with department faculty who teach related courses, must submit a written request to the Provost explaining how the individual meets qualification requirements.  The Provost will approve or deny assigning the course(s) to the proposed faculty member.  
+
+Current University Guidelines 
+
+The following guidelines may be used in the approval process:
+
+Certifications such as a CPA can substitute for an advanced degree when the content knowledge and skill level required to pass the certification is related to at least 75% of the content of the course(s) that will be taught.
+
+Alternatively, a minimum of five years’ work experience is expected in a field related to the course(s) that will be taught.  In addition, skills and information needed for 75% of the course content should have been used by the potential non-credentialed candidate in their work setting.
+
+Term or part-time faculty teaching laboratory sections or other class meetings (similar to recitations) who are not the primary instructor for the course may supervise student learning, but not design the learning experiences. In these circumstances the instructor may have less than 18 semester hours of graduate work in the discipline, as they would be functioning as graduate assistants do at research institutions. Such instructors will be supervised and mentored by full-time tenure track or tenured faculty.
+
+
+
+
+
+Alternative Guidelines Model Text
+
+The following guidelines may be used in the approval process:
+
+Professional Experience –a minimum of five years of professional experience as evidenced by job title, or a minimum of three years of supervisory experience over professionals in the field
+
+Professional Accomplishment –additional evidence of exemplary work and accomplishment as a practitioner
+
+Clinical and Student Teaching Credentials – Appropriate licensure, registration, and/or certification for the discipline and nature of the assignment
+
+Third-party Credential – High-level industry certification, such as the CPA, resulting from rigorous training and at least five years of experience working in the field
+
+Artistic talent – Validation of expertise, ability, and talent through publications or wide and public acclaim
+
+Proficiency in a foreign language – Demonstration of qualifications as native or superior proficiency in a foreign language (for lower-level courses only)
+
+Pedagogical training – Evidence of training specifically related to the course or discipline.
+
+Documentation
+
+Any appointment offer is contingent upon verification of the candidate’s required academic credentials or tested experience. The candidate is responsible for having the official transcript(s) confirming the highest degree sent directly from the institution to Academic Affairs. The candidate may also be required to verify other licensures or certifications as may be applicable.  
+
+Documentation received in response to such a request will be placed in the faculty member’s personnel file.  With the exception of foreign academic credentials, only course work and degrees granted by a regionally accredited college or university will be accepted for credentialing purposes.  In the event the institution ceases to exist and there are no records or method of verification, references to support academic course work must be provided by candidate.
+
+In those instances where a candidate holds a degree and/or graduate credit hours from an institution in another country that is not accredited by regional accrediting agency, it will be necessary for the individual to obtain an independent evaluation of the teaching credentials.  The evaluation must be completed by an evaluation service acceptable to the University.  Costs, if any, associated with this service will be the responsibility of the candidate.
+
+Appointment of Foreign Nationals
+
+The appointment of a foreign national to a faculty position at Ohio Wesleyan University is contingent upon the appointee’s continuing ability to comply with verification requirements of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.  Loss of appropriate authorization to work in the United States may result in automatic termination of the faculty appointment, regardless of the kind of position or appointment.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Pre-Draft Faculty Compensation.txt [/INST] Faculty Compensation 
+
+Salary Administration
+
+Salary administration for members of the full-time faculty is developed in accordance with the following guidelines: 
+
+The Board of Trustees establishes the percentage of the University budget to be used for faculty salaries.  The Board of Trustees bases its decision on the recommendation of the President, who consults with the Committee on University Governance in developing an annual budget proposal for faculty salary adjustments and/or increases. 
+
+The method for the annual distribution faculty salary pool dollars, which is based on the Board of Trustee’s established budget percentage, is set forth in Section – below.  
+
+The Provost shall make available to the faculty a summary of full-time ranked faculty salaries for the current academic year; this summary will identify the range and median salary of faculty at each rank. 
+
+Payroll Period  
+
+One-twelfth of the annual salary will be paid each month on the first day following the month in which the salary has been earned. If the first of the month is on Saturday or Sunday, payroll deposits will take place on the preceding Friday. Deposits for the month of December will always be paid on the first working day of the new year. This provision is made for income tax purposes so that one does not have thirteen paychecks in a calendar year. 
+
+Prior to the completion of an academic year, the faculty member will receive written official notice from the Provost regarding the following year's appointment. If an offer of employment is made for the following year (for those faculty members who have not received tenure), this information as well as the salary terms for the next year are included. To accept, the faculty member signs and returns one copy to the Office of the Provost. This action constitutes a mutual agreement, binding upon both parties for the period involved. 
+
+The payroll is prepared by the Payroll Office and any questions of a specific nature, including but limited to salary deductions, should be referred to that source. 
+
+Salary Guidelines for Initial Appointment 
+
+
+
+Guidelines for starting salaries for full-time faculty are approved by the Board of Trustees on a periodic basis upon the recommendation of the President.  The Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee, develops proposed salary guidelines for the President’s approval based on an examination of recent national salary data from institutions similar to Ohio Wesleyan University for various ranks and disciplines.  Upon the Board of Trustee’s approval, the salary guidelines are reported to all faculty.  
+
+Salary Guidelines for Continuing Appointments 
+
+															The following general principles govern salary increments for full-time faculty, subject always to the availability of financial resources for such purposes.
+
+															All faculty members in good standing should be able to advance at regular intervals from their starting salaries.
+
+															There should be recognition for outstanding accomplishment which takes the form of merit raises and promotions, based on known criteria, and arrived at by methods which are as objective as possible. Full-time faculty members shall be eligible for consideration for merit increments every third year beginning with their third year of service.
+
+															As a means of implementing the above principles, the following sequence shall apply with reference to the allocation of money available for salary increments.
+
+															To provide promotions,To provide increments in salary that are equal in percentage for all full-time faculty.
+
+															To provide merit increments, and
+
+															To provide increments in salary that are equal in percentage for all full-time faculty.
+
+															Increments in salary for each item in the sequence above shall be established annually in accordance with the salary pool approved by the Board of Trustees by the Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee and announced to all faculty.
+
+Per Course Rate of Compensation 
+
+The per course rate of compensation for per-course, overload, and summer school teaching is be determined annually by the Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee, based on the percentage of the University budget approved by the Board of Trustees to be used for faculty salaries.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Pre-Draft Faculty Personnel Records.txt [/INST] Faculty Personnel Records
+
+The University maintains the following faculty employment and personnel files under secure conditions to protect both the confidentiality and integrity of these records.  Access to the files is restricted according to the policies described below. 
+
+Human Resources Employment Files 
+
+Human Resources maintains the University’s official permanent employment records for each employee, including faculty. These files contain routine human resource related documents that are accumulated over the course of the faculty member’s employment at the University (e.g., direct deposit information, information concerning participation in the University retirement and health insurance plans, etc.). 
+
+A faculty member’s employment records are maintained in Human Resources and are accessible only to the Director of Human Resources, other designated personnel in Human Resources, appropriate University administrators, and the faculty member. With reasonable notice, faculty members may review their employee personnel files during business hours on any working day. At the request of the faculty member, materials may be copied from the human resources personnel file by designated personnel in Human Resources. 
+
+															The University may permit access to and copying from the faculty member’s employment records as soon as a subpoena is received pursuant to lawful orders of federal or state agencies relevant to investigations, hearings, or other proceedings pending before such agencies or the courts. Human Resources will notify in writing any faculty member(s) whose employment records has/have been lawfully subpoenaed.
+
+Faculty Personnel Files 
+
+															Because the maintenance of an excellent Faculty is essential to the vitality of the University, there must be collected and preserved documentation as to the appointment and performance of each faculty member. Documentation may be collected in any format (on paper, electronic, etc.) and subsequently reproduced in any format necessary or convenient for review. 
+
+Academic Affairs maintain an official personnel file for each faculty member.  The personnel file includes records in both physical and electronic format documenting the appointment and performance of a member of the faculty.  Such records may subsequently be reproduced in any format necessary or convenient for review.
+
+															The official personnel file for each faculty member contains but need not be limited to the following: (a) the permanent file, containing confidential pre-employment materials such as the confidential dossier and/or letters of reference; and (b) the Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file, containing confidential materials collected in the completion of usual University performance reviews.
+
+Permanent File
+
+The permanent file contains, but is not limited to: 
+
+original signed copies of the letter of initial appointment and all subsequent contractual correspondence and contracts, 
+
+copies of official transcripts and other such formal records pertaining to credentials, 
+
+confidential pre-employment materials such as the confidential dossier and/or letters of reference,
+
+a current curriculum vitae (updated at the time of evaluation or more frequently at the initiative of the faculty member), 
+
+Letters and memoranda related to reappointment, promotion, or tenure application, final judgments, and feedback letters resulting from reappointment evaluations, promotion, tenure, and merit increment decisions, 
+
+correspondence relating to sabbaticals or other leaves of absence, 
+
+correspondence relating to awards (internal or external) or research grants (internal or external), 
+
+sabbatical or faculty scholarly leave reports, 
+
+official letters of commendation or reprimand, 
+
+other correspondence pertinent to the faculty member’s academic employment at the University, and 
+
+other items added at the request of the faculty member. 
+
+															Faculty Personnel Committee Evaluation File
+
+															The following items are considered part of the Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file: (a) self-report; (b) the tenure narrative; (c) the promotion narrative; (d) reviews by peers; (e) a curricula vitae; (f) course syllabi; (g) course evaluations; (h) reports of peer teaching observation reviews and responses to the reports; and (i) copies of or links to products of scholarly or creative work (journal articles, books, performances, etc.). The Faculty Personnel Committee may add other relevant materials. The curriculum vitae (item e) and course syllabi (item f) are not confidential and may be provided to others at the Provost’s discretion. Items (a), (b), (c), (e), (f), and (i) will be made available to peer evaluators. Student boards will be provided with the first section of item (a).
+
+															It is the responsibility of the Provost to maintain the official faculty personnel files and to ensure their confidentiality. They may be inspected, in strictest confidence, only by the Provost, Faculty Personnel Committee, and President.  Portions of the file will be provided to reviewers, who will treat all information from the personnel file as confidential.The official personnel file for each faculty member shall contain but need not be limited to the following: (a) the permanent file, containing confidential pre-employment materials such as the confidential dossier and/or letters of reference; (b) the Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file, containing confidential materials collected in the completion of usual University performance reviews.  For a valid reason, a faculty member may authorize in writing access to the file for a person not indicated here.
+
+With reasonable notice to Academic Affairs, faculty members may review their personnel file during business hours on any working day.  Faculty may also request copies, at their own cost, of any material contained in the file.  However, faculty may not remove items from the file or the file itself from the Office of Academic Affairs.  Individual faculty members enjoy the option of forwarding to the Provost for inclusion in their official personnel files any additional material. When this is done, such materials must contain a notation as to their inclusion at the request of the faculty member, and such materials are thereafter incorporated into the files. 
+
+															The University may permit access to and copying from official faculty personnel files as soon as a subpoena is received pursuant to lawful orders of federal or state agencies relevant to investigations, hearings, or other proceedings pending before such agencies or the courts. The Provost or an agent of the Provost must notify in writing any faculty member(s) whose official personnel file(s) has/have been lawfully subpoenaed.
+
+															Each faculty member's personnel file, including but not limited to materials collected for the Faculty Personnel Committee's yearly evaluation process, will be retained in accordance with the University’s record retention schedule.  for ten years, available only to the Provost, the President, and the Faculty Personnel Committee. After ten years these materials will be destroyed. On the other hand, each faculty member's permanent personnel file will be kept by the Provost until three years after the faculty member has separated from service at Ohio Wesleyan University, at which time it will be transferred to permanent secure storage, available only to the Provost, the President, and the Faculty Personnel Committee.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Pre-Draft Faculty Qualifications Guidelines.txt [/INST] Faculty Qualifications 
+
+The University adheres to Higher Learning Commission (“HLC”) Assumed Practice B.2 requirements for faculty qualifications.  At Ohio Wesleyan, faculty qualifications are determined primarily by educational credentials, although exceptions to graduate work can be made for persons the University determines have additional certifications and/or significant work experience.
+
+Qualifications Based on Academic Credentials
+
+When determining acceptable academic credentials of its faculty, the University will require the following as evidence of acceptable academic qualifications:
+
+Tenure Track faculty members are expected to have earned the highest degree appropriate for their discipline (typically a PhD, though in some fields a terminal master’s degree is appropriate). Faculty who have not completed all of the requirements for the culminating degree in the discipline may be hired at the Instructor rank, but are expected to complete their degree within the first year of their employment. When the culminating degree in the discipline has been completed, the faculty member’s rank will be advanced to Assistant Professor at the beginning of the next academic year.
+
+Term and part-time faculty members will normally be expected to have earned at least a master’s degree in the discipline that they will be teaching, or a master’s in another related discipline, with at least 18 semester hours of graduate work in the discipline that they will be teaching. 
+
+Note: Term or part-time faculty teaching laboratory sections or other class meetings (similar to recitations) who are not the primary instructor for the course may supervise student learning, but not design the learning experiences. In these circumstances the instructor may have less than 18 semester hours of graduate work in the discipline, as they would be functioning as graduate assistants do at research institutions. Such instructors will be supervised and mentored by full-time tenure track or tenured faculty.
+
+Qualifications Based on Tested Experience
+
+The Higher Learning Commission recognizes that “tested experience” may substitute for an earned credential or portions thereof.  Therefore, exceptions to the specified graduate work above can be made for persons the University determines have additional certifications and/or significant work experience equivalent to the degree it would otherwise require for the faculty position.  Such experience must include a breadth and depth of experience outside of the classroom in real-world situations relevant to the discipline in which the faculty member will be teaching.  
+
+Candidates whose eligibility is based on a combination of credentials and tested experience must hold at least the lesser degree (i.e., a degree one level lower than those indicated above) and appropriate experience.  In these cases, Department Chairs, after consultation with department faculty who teach related courses, must submit a written request to the Provost explaining how the individual meets qualification requirements.  The Provost will approve or deny assigning the course(s) to the proposed faculty member.  
+
+Current University Guidelines 
+
+The following guidelines may be used in the approval process:
+
+Certifications such as a CPA can substitute for an advanced degree when the content knowledge and skill level required to pass the certification is related to at least 75% of the content of the course(s) that will be taught.
+
+Alternatively, a minimum of five years’ work experience is expected in a field related to the course(s) that will be taught.  In addition, skills and information needed for 75% of the course content should have been used by the potential non-credentialed candidate in their work setting.
+
+Term or part-time faculty teaching laboratory sections or other class meetings (similar to recitations) who are not the primary instructor for the course may supervise student learning, but not design the learning experiences. In these circumstances the instructor may have less than 18 semester hours of graduate work in the discipline, as they would be functioning as graduate assistants do at research institutions. Such instructors will be supervised and mentored by full-time tenure track or tenured faculty.
+
+
+
+
+
+Alternative Guidelines Model Text
+
+The following guidelines may be used in the approval process:
+
+Professional Experience –a minimum of five years of professional experience as evidenced by job title, or a minimum of three years of supervisory experience over professionals in the field
+
+Professional Accomplishment –additional evidence of exemplary work and accomplishment as a practitioner
+
+Clinical and Student Teaching Credentials – Appropriate licensure, registration, and/or certification for the discipline and nature of the assignment
+
+Third-party Credential – High-level industry certification, such as the CPA, resulting from rigorous training and at least five years of experience working in the field
+
+Artistic talent – Validation of expertise, ability, and talent through publications or wide and public acclaim
+
+Proficiency in a foreign language – Demonstration of qualifications as native or superior proficiency in a foreign language (for lower-level courses only)
+
+Pedagogical training – Evidence of training specifically related to the course or discipline.
+
+
+
+Documentation
+
+Any appointment offer is contingent upon verification of the candidate’s required academic credentials or tested experience. The candidate is responsible for submitting an official transcript to confirm that they hold an appropriate degree. The candidate may also be required to verify other licensures or certifications. A faculty member who completes a degree after beginning employment at the University must provide an official transcript to verify the awarding of the degree. 
+
+Documentation received in response to such a request will be placed in the faculty member’s personnel file.  With the exception of foreign academic credentials, only course work and degrees granted by a regionally accredited college or university will be accepted for credentialing purposes.  In the event the institution ceases to exist and there are no records or method of verification, references to support academic course work must be provided by candidate.
+
+In those instances where a candidate holds a degree and/or graduate credit hours from an institution in another country that is not accredited by regional accrediting agency, it will be necessary for the individual to obtain an independent evaluation of the teaching credentials.  The evaluation must be completed by an evaluation service acceptable to the University.  Costs, if any, associated with this service will be the responsibility of the candidate.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Pre-Draft Faculty Recruitment.txt [/INST] Faculty Recruitment, Initial Appointment, and Placement in Rank
+
+Ohio Wesleyan University seeks to recruit and appoint candidates who: 
+
+Demonstrate a willingness to commit to and support the University’s mission, aims, and values,
+
+Meet the qualifications specified in the position description,
+
+Are committed to issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion and value teaching students from diverse backgrounds (e.g., first-generation students, students from low-income families, students of color, LGBT students, students with disabilities), and
+
+Have potential for excellence in teaching, scholarship or creative work, and service to the University.
+
+Position Authorization 
+
+Before any search may begin, the position must be authorized by the President in accordance with the Initial Authorization of Positions Policy (see Chapter V, Section 5.2.1).
+
+Search Procedures
+
+When the President authorizes a search for a new full-time faculty member, the procedures published in the Faculty Search Guide shall be employed.  The Faculty Search Guide is available on the Academic Affairs’ My OWU portal.  Key details of the search process as summarized below:
+
+Constituting the Search Committee
+
+Search committees should strive to be diverse with regard to gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation and identity inasmuch as that is possible. The final composition of the search committee must be approved by the Provost, in consultation with the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee.  Each search committees must include an external Inclusion Advocate trained to help the committee evaluate candidates fairly and who functions as a voting member of the committee.  
+
+In general, Search Committees will be made up of those members who will be working with a new colleague into the future.  Retiring faculty may not be voting members of the committee.  Search Committees should also include representation from at least two students, who will act as non-voting members.  All members of the Search Committee are required to complete an online training module in order to serve on the committee.  The role of the search committee is to engage in an active search.
+
+Launching the Search and Development of Search Plan
+
+When the search committee is ready to begin its work, the search committee chair will schedule an initial search committee meeting to develop a search plan, establish a timeline for the search, and select criteria and procedures for screening, interviewing candidates, and keeping records.  All search plans must be approved by the Provost.
+
+Advertisements
+
+All advertisements must include a description that the position is part of a cluster of positions with which Ohio Wesleyan seeks to further diversify its curriculum and faculty; a description of Ohio Wesleyan University, a diversity/inclusion statement, required documents, and instructions how to apply.
+
+Evaluation of Candidates and Creation of Short List
+
+Search Committees should evaluate candidates using agreed-upon criteria. Once the search committee has evaluated candidates, they should rank order candidates on a short list.  At this point, Search Committees will evaluate the list to ensure that they will be interviewing a diverse pool of candidates.   Short lists must be submitted to the Provost, who will notify the search chair once the list of candidates has been approved to ensure that the process has been as inclusive as possible.  
+
+Preliminary 
+
+Candidates on the short list will be invited to a virtual interview. Once these interviews have been completed, search chairs will update the Selection Report and re-share with the Provost. The Selection Report must be approved by the Provost before finalists is invited to campus for interviews.  The typical finalist pool includes three candidates. Departments are not authorized to bring in a fourth finalist without prior approval of the Provost.
+
+Campus Interviews
+
+Campus interviews are arranged by the hiring department in conjunction with the Provost's Office. At a minimum, all final candidates must be interviewed by the individuals set forth in the most current iteration of the Faculty Search Guide.  
+
+During these interviews, candidates will be notified that any job offer is contingent upon successful completion of employment eligibility verification, background, academic credential and/or or tested experience verification, and reference checks, as well documentation of U.S. citizenship or appropriate visa status and work authorization.  Moreover, notice of the availability of the University’s Annual Security Report will be provided to the interviewees if the position was externally advertised.
+
+Final Selection
+
+Following the campus interviews, the search team will discuss the interview results and “rank” the candidates according to the ranking method(s) outlined in the approved search plan.  Search Chairs will submit the final rankings to the Provost and recommend a candidate to hire, but they may not make the final decision.  Prior to submitting a final candidate, the committee must verify that the candidate meets or exceeds the Higher Learning Commission (“HLC”) Assumed Practice B.2 requirements for faculty qualifications (see Section 3.5.5).
+
+A final candidate must be approved by the Provost before an offer of employment is made to the candidate.
+
+Offer
+
+With the approval of the Provost, the Search Chairs may phone candidates to let them know to expect a formal offer from the Provost.  Written employment offers may only be generated by the Human Resources Department and Provost Office.
+
+Rank and Salary of Initial Appointment
+
+Initial appointment to the full-time teaching faculty of Ohio Wesleyan shall be at a rank and salary commensurate with the individual's training in terms of degree or equivalents and the extent of experience in terms of the number of years of successful higher education teaching or its equivalent.  
+
+At the time of initial appointment, the Provost will approve academic rank in consultation with the search committee. The salary of initial appointment at each rank shall be within a narrow range established by the Provost in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee and reported to all faculty.  Salary at the time of a faculty member’s initial appointment shall be within the salary guidelines approved by the Board of Trustees (see Section 3.12.1.3) and determined as a result of negotiation between the individual faculty member and the Provost.  Such factors as education, training, experience, impact, and equity will be considered in determining the faculty member’s appropriate salary level.  
+
+Prior Service Credit
+
+After receiving and considering recommendations from the search committee, the Provost may award credit toward fulfillment of tenure and/or promotion eligibility for faculty appointed to tenure-track positions.  The decision to grant prior service credit shall take into account the relevancy of the prior service to the University’s needs, the type of institution(s) at which service was provided, and the nature of the position being filled by the faculty member.  Evidence as to the quality of the prior service shall be entered into the individual's permanent personnel. 
+
+A maximum of two years of prior service credit may be awarded; exceptions to this maximum may be approved by the Provost after receiving and considering a recommendation from the Faculty Personnel Committee.  The amount of credit awarded will be stated in the faculty member’s initial contract of employment.  
+
+Faculty Qualifications  
+
+The University adheres to Higher Learning Commission (“HLC”) Assumed Practice B.2 requirements for faculty qualifications.  At Ohio Wesleyan, faculty qualifications are determined primarily by educational credentials, although exceptions to graduate work can be made for persons the University determines have additional certifications and/or significant work experience.
+
+Qualifications Based on Academic Credentials
+
+When determining acceptable academic credentials of its faculty, the University will require the following as evidence of acceptable academic qualifications:
+
+Tenure Track faculty members are expected to have earned the highest degree appropriate for their discipline (typically a PhD, though in some fields a terminal master’s degree is appropriate). Faculty who have not completed all of the requirements for the culminating degree in the discipline may be hired at the Instructor rank, but are expected to complete their degree within the first year of their employment. When the culminating degree in the discipline has been completed, the faculty member’s rank will be immediately advanced to Assistant Professor.
+
+Term and part-time faculty members will normally be expected to have earned at least a master’s degree in the discipline that they will be teaching, or a master’s in another related discipline, with at least 18 semester hours of graduate work in the discipline that they will be teaching. 
+
+Note: Term or part-time faculty teaching laboratory sections or other class meetings (similar to recitations) who are not the primary instructor for the course may supervise student learning, but not design the learning experiences. In these circumstances the instructor may have less than 18 semester hours of graduate work in the discipline, as they would be functioning as graduate assistants do at research institutions. Such instructors will be supervised and mentored by full-time tenure track or tenured faculty.
+
+Qualifications Based on Tested Experience
+
+The Higher Learning Commission recognizes that “tested experience” may substitute for an earned credential or portions thereof.  Therefore, exceptions to the specified graduate work above can be made for persons the University determines have additional certifications and/or significant work experience equivalent to the degree it would otherwise require for the faculty position.  Such experience must include a breadth and depth of experience outside of the classroom in real-world situations relevant to the discipline in which the faculty member will be teaching.  
+
+Candidates whose eligibility is based on a combination of credentials and tested experience must hold at least the lesser degree (i.e., a degree one level lower than those indicated above) and appropriate experience.  In these cases, Department Chairs, after consultation with department faculty who teach related courses, must submit a written request to the Provost explaining how the individual meets qualification requirements.  The Provost will approve or deny assigning the course(s) to the proposed faculty member.  
+
+Current University Guidelines 
+
+The following guidelines may be used in the approval process:
+
+Certifications such as a CPA can substitute for an advanced degree when the content knowledge and skill level required to pass the certification is related to at least 75% of the content of the course(s) that will be taught.
+
+Alternatively, a minimum of five years’ work experience is expected in a field related to the course(s) that will be taught.  In addition, skills and information needed for 75% of the course content should have been used by the potential non-credentialed candidate in their work setting.
+
+Term or part-time faculty teaching laboratory sections or other class meetings (similar to recitations) who are not the primary instructor for the course may supervise student learning, but not design the learning experiences. In these circumstances the instructor may have less than 18 semester hours of graduate work in the discipline, as they would be functioning as graduate assistants do at research institutions. Such instructors will be supervised and mentored by full-time tenure track or tenured faculty.
+
+
+
+
+
+Alternative Guidelines Model Text
+
+The following guidelines may be used in the approval process:
+
+Professional Experience –a minimum of five years of professional experience as evidenced by job title, or a minimum of three years of supervisory experience over professionals in the field
+
+Professional Accomplishment –additional evidence of exemplary work and accomplishment as a practitioner
+
+Clinical and Student Teaching Credentials – Appropriate licensure, registration, and/or certification for the discipline and nature of the assignment
+
+Third-party Credential – High-level industry certification, such as the CPA, resulting from rigorous training and at least five years of experience working in the field
+
+Artistic talent – Validation of expertise, ability, and talent through publications or wide and public acclaim
+
+Proficiency in a foreign language – Demonstration of qualifications as native or superior proficiency in a foreign language (for lower-level courses only)
+
+Pedagogical training – Evidence of training specifically related to the course or discipline.
+
+Documentation
+
+Any appointment offer is contingent upon verification of the candidate’s required academic credentials or tested experience. The candidate is responsible for having the official transcript(s) confirming the highest degree sent directly from the institution to Academic Affairs. The candidate may also be required to verify other licensures or certifications as may be applicable.  
+
+Documentation received in response to such a request will be placed in the faculty member’s personnel file.  With the exception of foreign academic credentials, only course work and degrees granted by a regionally accredited college or university will be accepted for credentialing purposes.  In the event the institution ceases to exist and there are no records or method of verification, references to support academic course work must be provided by candidate.
+
+In those instances where a candidate holds a degree and/or graduate credit hours from an institution in another country that is not accredited by regional accrediting agency, it will be necessary for the individual to obtain an independent evaluation of the teaching credentials.  The evaluation must be completed by an evaluation service acceptable to the University.  Costs, if any, associated with this service will be the responsibility of the candidate.
+
+Appointment of Foreign Nationals
+
+The appointment of a foreign national to a faculty position at Ohio Wesleyan University is contingent upon the appointee’s continuing ability to comply with verification requirements of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.  Loss of appropriate authorization to work in the United States may result in automatic termination of the faculty appointment, regardless of the kind of position or appointment.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Pre-Draft of Faculty Professional Development Policies.txt [/INST] Faculty Professional Development
+
+Regular Paid (Sabbatical) Leave 
+
+Current University Policy
+
+Pre-Tenure Regular Paid Leave for Full-Time Faculty 
+
+Members of the faculty with a full-time regular appointment who have not attained permanent tenure are eligible for a one-semester leave with pay in their fourth year following a successful retention review in their third year. 
+
+The course load for an untenured faculty member during a year with a Pre- Tenure Regular Paid Leave for Full-Time Faculty should be no less than three (3), except where adjustments must be made for department chairpersons or for other special duties. 
+
+The recipient of a Pre-Tenure Regular Paid Leave for Full-Time Faculty shall not accept full-time employment elsewhere. 
+
+Each faculty member shall submit a complete report of the leave-semester activity within the first five (5) weeks of the following semester to the Faculty Personnel Committee. This report will be considered in the next review of the faculty member. 
+
+A Pre-Tenure Regular Paid Leave for Full-Time faculty may not be taken by a faculty member with a terminal contract. 
+
+Tenured members of the faculty who have not received a Pre-Tenure Regular Paid Leave for Full-Time Faculty are eligible for a one-semester leave with pay (Regular Paid Leave for Tenured Full-Time Faculty) after they have served with the University for a period of six years as a full-time faculty member. 
+
+
+
+Regular Paid Leaves for Tenured Full-Time Faculty
+
+Tenured members of the full-time faculty are eligible for a one semester sabbatical leave with pay in the sixth year of full-time service at the University following their previous Regular Paid Leave for Tenured Full-Time Faculty or Pre-Tenure Regular Paid Leave for Full-Time Faculty.
+
+A tenured faculty member in his/her last regular year of service is eligible for a Regular Paid Leave for Full-Time Faculty during the first semester only.
+
+Department chairs should submit an approximate six year plan of leaves to the Faculty Personnel Committee by January 15 of the year preceding a six year cycle. The plan should spread leaves over the two semesters of the academic year so as to provide approximately an equal number of courses in each semester.
+
+The course load for a faculty member during a leave year should be no less than three (3), except where adjustments must be made for department chairs or for other special duties. Course adjustments should seek to minimize the impact on course options for students.
+
+A recipient shall not accept full-time employment elsewhere.
+
+Each faculty member shall submit a complete report of the leave semester activity within the first five (5) weeks of the following semester to the Faculty Personnel Committee. This report will be considered in the merit increment review of the faculty member. Faculty will be ineligible for a subsequent Regular Paid Leave until a report of the leave semester is submitted to the Faculty Personnel Committee.
+
+
+
+Alternative Model
+
+The purpose of the sabbatical leave program is to provide probationary and tenured faculty the opportunity to pursue scholarly, creative, or pedagogical activity that will contribute to their effectiveness as teaching scholars.  A sabbatical leave is an investment in the future and a privilege granted to tenure track faculty who meet the eligibility requirements set forth below.  It is not a reward for past service.
+
+Eligibility
+
+Pre-Tenure Faculty
+
+Non-tenured tenure track faculty are eligible to apply for a one-semester pre-tenure sabbatical leave with pay in their fourth year of full-time service at the University following a successful retention review in their third year.  A pre-tenure sabbatical leave may not be taken by a faculty member with a terminal contract.  A faculty member granted two or more years credit toward the probationary period for tenure at the time of initial appointment to Ohio Wesleyan University is not eligible for the pre-tenure sabbatical leave.  However, tenured members of the faculty who do not receive a pre-tenure sabbatical are eligible for a one-semester post-tenure sabbatical leave with pay after they have served with the University for a period of six years as a full-time faculty member.
+
+Tenured Faculty
+
+Tenured faculty members are eligible to apply for a one semester sabbatical leave with pay in the sixth year of full-time service at the University following their previous post-tenure or pre-tenure sabbatical leave.  A tenured faculty member in the last regular year of service at the University is eligible for the leave during the first semester only.  
+
+In the event a tenured faculty member elects not to take advantage of the eligibility for a sabbatical leave after six years of teaching at the University, the faculty member may elect apply any year thereafter.
+
+Six-Year Plan of Leaves
+
+Department Chairs are expected to submit an approximate six-year plan of leaves to the Faculty Personnel Committee by January 15 of the year preceding a six-year cycle. The plan must spread leaves over the two semesters of the academic year so as to provide approximately an equal number of courses in each semester.
+
+Procedures
+
+Faculty seeking a sabbatical leave must submit a written proposal for the sabbatical leave.  The proposal should include a project title, a short description of the project, budget requirements, a statement on how the project will impact the faculty member’s scholarly, creative, or pedagogical work (i.e., goals and objectives), and a clear indication of the semester in which the leave will be taken. Faculty will be informed between December 1 and April 1 of the status of their leave application for the following academic year.
+
+Requests for leaves will be approved as a matter of routine by the Provost, provided that the eligibility requirements set forth above are met and the faculty member applies for the leave by documenting a scholarly, creative, or pedagogical project with goals and objectives.  When eligibility questions arise or the Provost has concerns regarding the goals or objectives of a faculty member’s proposal, the Provost shall consult with the Faculty Personnel Committee. 
+
+Faculty members are expected to take the approved leave as scheduled unless extraordinary circumstances require a change. Any change to an approved leave schedule requires written approval of the Provost, who will consult with the faculty member’s Department Chair to determine the impact of a change.
+
+Upon return from leave, the faculty member’s course load during the academic year the leave is taken will be no less than three (3), except where adjustments must be made for Department Chairs or for other special duties (see Section --).  Course adjustments should seek to minimize the impact on course options for students. 
+
+Obligations and Conditions
+
+Acceptance of a sabbatical leave entails the following obligations and conditions:
+
+Agreement to pursue the approved leave project and refrain from serving as the instructor of record for any Ohio Wesleyan course, including but not limited to independent studies, directed readings, and internships.  Faculty on leave also agree not to carry service duties, such as serving Department Chair or serving as a member or chair of a faculty or University committee or task force. Similarly, faculty on leave may not accept full-time employment elsewhere during the leave without written approval from the Provost.  If some employment is a necessary component of the leave-semester activity, this must be detailed in the faculty member’s leave proposal application.
+
+Submission of a complete report of the leave-semester activity to the Faculty Personnel Committee within the first five (5) weeks of the following semester. This report will be considered in the next review of the faculty member.  
+
+Continued full-time service to the University for at least one year after returning from the leave unless other arrangements are agreed to in writing by the parties. 
+
+
+
+Special Released Time for Scholarly Production
+
+The purpose of the special scholarly leave program is to encourage eligible tenure track faculty members to participate in grant supported research or outstanding creative endeavors that require rigorous time commitments.  The program is administered by the Provost, in consultation with Faculty Personnel Committee.
+
+Program Funding
+
+The special scholarly leave program is funded annually as part of the University’s budget process.  In preparation of the University budget, certain professional development monies are set aside in a special account for the express purpose of encouraging faculty members with recognized expertise to enter into grant supported research or outstanding creative endeavors requiring rigorous commitments. When the University’s financial condition permits, these funds shall be adequate to replace one faculty member per year for one semester paid leave. As applicable, the funds shall provide a replacement up to the average salary level of a full professor.  The total remuneration during any semester for which a reduced load is granted, or during any semester for which special leave is granted, may not, however, exceed the regular salary of the grantee.
+
+Eligibility
+
+Support under the program is reserved for major and unique projects and must meet the following criteria:
+
+Normally, consideration will be given to those who have invested at least two years in their projects;
+
+T
+
+he project must hold promise for significant contribution to the University Community;
+
+The project must entail commitment to responsibilities, duties, time schedules or other obligations which cannot be accommodated within the framework of the University’s regular sabbatical leave program.
+
+Note: Applicants holding grants may not seek paid leave in violation of the conditions of their grants.
+
+Procedures
+
+Application for support shall be made jointly by the faculty member and the Department Chair, who will submit to the Provost and Faculty Personnel Committee, on or before the deadline published annually by Academic Affairs, a statement indicating the special nature of the proposed activity, the unique conditions requiring special leave, and a plan setting for the time span for which the request is made, as well as a proposal for coverage of teaching and other responsibilities.
+
+Applications will be considered jointly by the The program is administered by the Provost, in consultation with Faculty Personnel Committee. Provost and Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC).  If the Provost and FPC are in agreement regarding the final candidate, the Provost will issue a written recommendation to the President for final approval.  If the Provost and FPC do not agree on a final candidate, the Provost and Chair of the FPC shall issue separate written recommendations to the President, whose decision shall be final. 
+
+Obligations and Conditions
+
+Acceptance of a special scholarly leave entails the following obligations and conditions:
+
+Agreement to pursue the approved leave project and refrain from serving as the instructor of record for any Ohio Wesleyan course, including but not limited to independent studies, directed readings, and internships.  Faculty on leave also agree not to carry service duties, such as serving Department Chair or serving as a member or chair of a faculty or University committee or task force. Similarly, faculty on scholarly leave may not accept full-time employment elsewhere during the leave without written approval from the Provost.  If some employment is a necessary component of the leave-semester activity, this must be detailed in the faculty member’s leave proposal application.
+
+Submission of a complete report of the leave-semester activity to the Faculty Personnel Committee within the first five (5) weeks of the following semester. This report will be considered in the next review of the faculty member.  
+
+Continued full-time service to the University for at least one year after returning from the leave unless other arrangements are agreed to in writing by the parties.
+
+
+
+Retraining Leaves
+
+Upon application, full-time faculty members may be granted up to one year of paid leave to undergo professional retraining to equip them to take on new assignments which contribute to, or are the result of, reduction in faculty positions (see Section 3.13.5). 
+
+Upon receipt of the faculty member’s application, the Provost shall consult with the potential receiving department(s) to determine whether a limited period of additional training (i.e., one year or less) would lead to acceptance of the faculty member in the department(s).  In arriving at a recommendation, the Provost and department(s) must determine whether the faculty member, after receiving training, will be able to meet applicable accreditation guidelines with respect to faculty credentials.  If the Provost, after consultation with the affected department(s), determines that a limited period of additional training would lead to acceptances of the faculty member in another department(s), the Provost will recommend such leave to the Faculty Personnel Committee, which shall consult as necessary with the Academic Policy Committee and forward a recommendation to the President for final action.  The decision of the President is final.
+
+Any retraining permitted by such leaves shall be counted in faculty personnel evaluations as enhancement of the individual's expertise and credited under teaching, professional development, and/or service as appropriate and agreed at the time the leave is granted.
+
+
+
+Professional Development Leaves Without Pay
+
+The University recognizes that under some circumstances, extended faculty leaves for tenure track faculty members to pursue activities that enhance a faculty member’s professional development can benefit both the individual faculty member and the institution.  They may involve, but are not limited to, gainful employment in the academic world or elsewhere, retraining, or professional development.
+
+Applications for professional development leaves without pay for a period of one, two, or three years shall be made in writing to the Provost a minimum of eight months prior to the beginning of the leave. The faculty member’s application must include a short description of the scholarly, creative or professional development activities to be pursued during the leave, a statement on how the leave will impact the faculty member’s scholarly, creative, or pedagogical work (i.e., goals and objectives), and a clear indication of the length of the proposed leave.  
+
+Upon receipt of the application, the Provost shall consult with the affected department(s) and then make a written recommendation to the Faculty Personnel Committee, which shall in turn issue a written recommendation on the request to the President. In its deliberations, the committee and President will consider the costs and benefits of the leave to the University, including both tangible and intangible consequences.  The decision of the President is final.  If the President does not accept the committee’s recommendation, the President will convey the reasons therefore to both the applicant and the committee chair.
+
+Professional development leaves without pay are generally limited to one year in duration.  Requests beyond one year require special justification and unusual circumstances such as those that result in exceptional professional opportunities for the faculty member or those that clearly benefit the University.  They may involve gainful employment in the academic world or elsewhere, retraining, or professional development. During the leave, the faculty member will continue to accrue step increases to base salary and accumulate service toward promotion to Professor if the leave activities have been approved in advance by the Faculty Personnel Committee and President as bona fide professional development.  Time toward tenure, however, will not accrue. Moreover, the leave of absence shall defer eligibility for regular paid (sabbatical) leave by an equivalent period.  Tuition, life insurance, and health insurance benefits will be provided by the University as usual unless they are provided to the faculty member by another employer.  
+
+Faculty members on leave for a year or more must notify the Provost at least eleven months prior to the beginning of the semester of scheduled return from leave as to whether or not they are returning to the University.  The Provost will provide a reminder of that obligation and notice of the impending deadline thirty (30) days prior to the deadline.  Failure to respond by the deadline will be treated as a resignation from the faculty effective at the end of the contract period.  The position occupied by the faculty member will be considered vacated immediately. Although that resignation will serve to vacate the position immediately, the faculty member will continue to receive, until the end of the contract year, the same tuition, life insurance, and health insurance benefits as described above (unless they are being provided to the faculty member by another employer).
+
+
+
+
+
+Assistance With Faculty Travel 
+
+	Faculty Travel
+
+Professional development activities by faculty members may appropriately involve travel. This includes such travel as to conventions and conferences, to libraries or other resources not available locally, and to sites where the faculty member will work during a paid leave. The University makes available to each full-time faculty member a travel allowance in each fiscal year to assist with expenses for major travel for purposes of professional development. Major travel is defined as travel to points more than 100 miles from Delaware, except that travel to conventions and conferences is included without distance limit. 
+
+Legitimate expenses for such travel include transportation costs up to the amount of air coach fare; associated meals and lodging; and conference registration fees.  Please refer to the University’s Travel Policy for additional information.
+
+Travel advances and reimbursements are secured from the University Cashier. Reserved to the Cashier is the right to refer cases to the Provost when in doubt about whether the travel is supportable under this policy. A Travel Fund Report Form must be completed and taken to the Cashier within 10 days of return from a trip.
+
+
+
+Manuscript Preparation
+
+A modest sum of money is available to assist full-time faculty members with the preparation of final manuscripts of scholarly work. (Ordinarily costs for typing of speeches, notes, or informal papers should not be submitted, since the intent is to assist with preparation for publication.)
+
+A faculty member who has financial assistance from the University for typing, publication, or other costs, and who receives remuneration from sale or royalties for the work, is expected to repay the University.
+
+Out of Pocket Costs
+
+A modest sum of money is available for assistance with out of pocket costs of faculty research or creative projects (such as materials, microfilming, publication, postage, etc.). Proposals submitted to the Provost will be received at any time as long as money in this category is available. Ordinarily, the amounts of grants will be limited.
+
+A faculty member who has financial assistance from the University in this category, and who received remuneration from sale or royalties in connection with the work done, is expected to repay the University.
+
+Doctoral Tuition Costs
+
+A modest sum of money is available to assist faculty members on regular full-time appointment with tuition costs for doctoral study. Maxima by quarter or semester, and per degree, will be set. Assistance will be granted in order of application to the Provost (since advance planning is often difficult) up to the budget limit.</s>"
+<s>[INST] Pre-Draft OWU Updated Faculty HB (8.10).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Pre-Draft OWU Updated Faculty HB(August).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Pre-Draft Program Discontinuance.txt [/INST] Program Discontinuance Due to Educational Decisions
+
+Termination of an appointment with tenure, or of a probationary faculty member before the end of the specified term, may occur as a result of the formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction due to educational considerations not related to a financial contingent situations.  
+
+	a.	Criteria
+
+The decision to discontinue an academic program or department of instruction will be based on long-range judgements that the educational mission of the University as whole will be enhanced by the discontinuance of an academic program or department.  Such a decision will not be based upon cyclical or temporary variations in enrollment.  Rather, the criteria of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality will inform the University’s decision (see Section – ).  
+
+Note: For purposes of this policy, departments are defined as an academic department or unit of instruction offering majors and minors that existed prior to the decision to discontinue them. The term program designates a related cluster of credit-bearing courses that constitute a coherent body of study within a discipline or set of related disciplines.
+
+	b.	Making Academic Program or Department Discontinuation Decisions
+
+	Model 1 – Drew U
+
+	In the case of termination resulting from the discontinuance of a program or department, the following procedures will apply:
+
+	The decision to discontinue formally an academic program or department of instruction will be based upon educational considerations as determined by the Faculty or appropriate committees thereof. If, through the processes of review and final decision, the President and Board of Trustees differ with the faculty judgment, the reasons for the disagreement shall be stated and the Faculty shall have an opportunity for further consideration and further communication of its views.
+
+	Before the President issues notice to a faculty member of the intention to terminate an appointment because of formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction, the University will make every effort to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position.  If placement in another position would be facilitated by a reasonable period of training, financial and other support for such leave training may be proffered in accordance with the Retraining Leave Policy.  If no such position is available or the faculty member does not possess the appropriate credential even with appropriate training, the faculty member’s appointment may then be terminated, with provision for notice or salary in lieu of notice in accordance with Section 3.13.6.3 below.
+
+	A faculty member may appeal a proposed relocation or termination resulting from a discontinuance and has a right to a grievance in accordance with Section --. The hearing need not conform in all respects with a Dismissal for Cause proceeding, but the essentials of an on-the-record adjudicative hearing will be observed. The issues in such a hearing may include the University’s failure to satisfy any of the conditions specified in this section. In such a hearing, a faculty determination that a program or department is to be discontinued will be considered presumptively valid, but the burden of proof on other issues will rest on the administration.
+
+	
+
+	Model 2
+
+A proposal to discontinue an academic program or department is reviewed according to the following procedures: 
+
+A proposal to discontinued an academic program or department based on educational consideration may be initiated by the Committee on Academic Program, the Provost, the President, or the Board of Trustees. 
+
+Upon receipt of a proposal, the Provost shall call together a joint committee, comprising the Committee on Academic Programs and the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee (hereinafter referred to as the Joint Committee), which shall evaluate the proposal considering criteria used in the normal, periodic review of academic programs and departments.  As part of the evaluation, the Joint Committee will consult with the faculty of the impacted program or department. 
+
+The recommendations of the Joint Committee concerning discontinuance of an academic program or department will be reported to the Faculty as a whole for review.
+
+The Faculty will then make a final recommendation on the matter to the Provost.  
+
+In the event the Provost disagrees with that recommendation, the Provost will meet with the Faculty to discuss the reasons for such disagreement, before making a final recommendation on the matter to the President.
+
+The Provost will then communicate a final decision and the reasons therefor in writing to the Faculty.
+
+Having considered the recommendations above and considered the vote of the Faculty, the Provost will make a final written recommendation to the President on the matter.  If the Provost disagrees with the Faculty recommendation, the Provost will forward the Faculty proposal to the President.
+
+The President will then transmit the above recommendations, along with the President’s independent recommendation, to the Board of Trustees for final action.
+
+If the Board of Trustees approves the discontinuation of the program or department, the President will charge the Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee, to recommend names of faculty members to be reduced.
+
+The President shall render the final decision on terminations for reasons of formal reduction or discontinuance of a degree or program area and shall notify the faculty member(s).</s>"
+"<s>[INST] PREGNANT AND PARENTING STUDENT POLICY.txt [/INST] PREGNANT AND PARENTING STUDENT POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+Policy Number:
+
+VI – 6.
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+
+
+Applicability:
+
+Students participating in all aspects of the College’s education programs and activities.
+
+History:
+
+ 
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to ensure compliance with Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits discrimination against students on the basis of pregnancy and parenting. 
+
+POLICY
+
+Canisius College strives to provide an educational environment that is free from all forms of discrimination and harassment and is committed to providing an environment that values diversity and emphasizes the dignity and worth of every individual, and an environment in which every individual is treated with respect.  
+
+In furtherance of this commitment and in accordance with Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Canisius College prohibits discrimination against any student, or the exclusion of any student from participation in any part of a college education program or activity based on a student’s pregnancy or parental status.  The benefits and services provided to students affected by pregnancy will be no less than those provided to students with temporary disabilities. The college will treat pregnancy, childbirth, false pregnancy, termination of pregnancy, and recovery therefrom the same as any other temporary disability with respect to any hospital or medical benefit, service, plan, or policy for students.  Moreover, as detailed in the Procedures/Guidelines section below, the college will provide leave to a student for pregnancy, childbirth, false pregnancy, termination of pregnancy, or recovery therefrom, for as long as the student’s physician deems medically necessary. 
+
+Harassment or discrimination in any form is inimical to these goals and fundamentally at odds with the values of Canisius College.  It is an unacceptable behavior and will not be tolerated. Accordingly, faculty, staff, and other college employees are prohibited from interfering with a student’s right to take leave, seek reasonable accommodation, or otherwise exercise their rights under this policy.  Further, members of the college community are prohibited from retaliating against students for exercising the rights articulated by this policy.  Reports of harassment, discrimination or retaliation should be reported pursuant to the to the college’s Title IX Coordinator (see Reporting Procedures below).
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Pregnant—means pregnancy, childbirth, false pregnancy, termination of pregnancy or recovery therefrom.
+
+Parenting—means recovery from any of the above conditions, breast feeding and pumping. Pregnant and parenting students are entitled to reasonable accommodations under the following circumstances:
+
+When necessary to ensure pregnant and parenting student access to an educational program or activity, the college must make reasonable adjustments responsive to a student’s pregnancy or parenting status. These adjustments may include providing modification to the physical environment (such as accessible seating), appropriate restroom breaks, or mobility support (such as temporary access to elevators)
+
+Any special services, exceptions, or assistance provided to students with temporary medical conditions must also be provided to pregnant or parenting students.
+
+A pregnant or parenting student will only be required to obtain the certification of a physician that the student is physically and emotionally able to participate in an educational program or activity when such certification is required of all students for other physical or emotional conditions requiring the attention of a physician. For example, a student who has been hospitalized for childbirth will not be required to submit a medical certificate to return from leave unless a certificate is required of students who have been hospitalized for other physical conditions.
+
+The college may provide pregnant or parenting students with information or instructions of any health risks of participating in an educational program or activity, only if a description of those risks will also be provided to non-pregnant or parenting students.
+
+
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+Reasonable Accommodation of Students Affected by Pregnancy, Childbirth, or Pregnancy Related Conditions 
+
+Canisius College does not require pregnant or parenting students to limit their studies or participate in college activities due to a pregnancy or pregnancy-related condition.  Students who are pregnant may request reasonable accommodations so that they will not be disadvantaged in their course of study or research and may seek assistance from the Title IX Coordinator.  
+
+Although a student is not required to disclose a pregnancy, it is the student’s responsibility to disclose pregnancy status to request desired pregnancy accommodations or adjustments to ensure successful completion of the student’s education program. The University encourages pregnant students to work with the Title IX Coordinator as early as possible to develop an appropriate plan for meeting the student’s education needs. The Title IX Coordinator will communicate all reasonable accommodations granted under this policy to student’s faculty (which may necessitate, at times and in the college’s reasonable discretion, communicating the student’s pregnancy status) and coordinate accommodation/adjustment-related efforts with the advisors and faculty. Students are encouraged to work with their advisors and faculty members to reschedule course assignments, lab hours, examinations, or other requirements, and/or to reduce their overall course load, as appropriate, once authorization is received from the Title IX Coordinator. Any reasonable accommodations or adjustments that have been agreed upon will be documented in an Education Plan and signed by the student and the Title IX Coordinator. A leave of absence may also be available if a student chooses.   
+
+Reasonable accommodations may include, but are not limited to:
+
+Providing accommodations/adjustments requested by a pregnant student to protect the health and safety of the student and/or pregnancy (such as allowing the student to maintain a safe distance from hazardous substances);
+
+Making adjustments to the physical environment (such as accessible seating);
+
+Extending deadlines and/or allowing the student to make up tests or assignments missed for pregnancy-related absences;
+
+Excusing medically necessary absences; and 
+
+Granting leave or implementing incomplete grades for classes that will be resumed at a future date. 
+
+College personnel are available to advise pregnant students of the impact of any reasonable accommodations on the student’s ability to complete the student’s educational program. 
+
+Breastfeeding students will be provided reasonable time and space to express breast milk in a location that is private, clean, and reasonably accessible.  Dedicated permanent lactation space may be found in the basement level of Old Main, OM 009.
+
+Students who wish to request alternative spaces should contact the Title IX Coordinator or the Griff Center for Student Success, Student Accessibility Services (SAS) Office.
+
+Requesting Pregnant and Parenting Related Accommodations
+
+Disclosure of pregnant or parenting status is voluntary, and it is the pregnant or parenting student’s obligation to disclose and affirmatively seek any necessary accommodations and adjustments. Once a student discloses pregnant or parenting status, the College will collaborate with the student to develop an appropriate plan for continuation of the student’s education.
+
+A student seeking pregnant or parenting related accommodations or adjustments should contact the College’s Title IX Coordinator. The Canisius College Title IX Coordinator is
+
+Debbie Owens
+
+Title IX Coordinator/Associate Dean of Students
+
+Frisch Hall 006
+
+716-888-3781
+owens30@canisius.edu
+
+Specific accommodations or adjustments will be handled on a case-by-case basis and will depend on the circumstances, including but not limited to, the medical need and academic requirements involved. The Title IX Coordinator (or designee) will discuss the pregnant or parenting individual’s needs and may ask for documentation that supports the requested accommodations.  The Title IX Coordinator (or designee) and appropriate staff will work with the student and any faculty members to create a plan for completion of course work and continuation of the student’s education. Individual plans may be adjusted as circumstances change.
+
+
+
+Requesting Disability-Related Reasonable Accommodations
+
+In certain situations, pregnancy-related complications or disabilities may make it appropriate for the college to provide additional disability-related reasonable accommodations which are separate and apart from pregnant and parenting accommodations. In order for students to receive such accommodations, students must self-identify and register with the Griff Center for Student Success, Student Accessibility Services (SAS) Office by completing the appropriate Student Accessibility Services Intake Form and providing current documentation from a licensed or certified official that states the disability. 
+
+Modified Academic Responsibilities for Parenting Students 
+
+Students with parenting responsibilities who wish to remain engaged in their coursework while adjusting their academic responsibilities because of the birth or adoption of their child or placement of a foster child or other extraordinary parenting responsibilities may request an academic modification period of up to two weeks beginning with the first six months of either the child entering the home or when the extraordinary circumstances arose.  Extensions may be granted where additional time is required due to medical necessity or extraordinary parenting responsibilities. 
+
+During a granted modification period, the student’s academic requirements will be reasonably adjusted, and deadlines postponed as deemed appropriate by the college. 
+
+Students seeking a period of modified academic responsibilities should consult with the Title IX Coordinator to determine appropriate academic modification requests. The Title IX Coordinator will communicate all granted modifications under this policy to the student’s faculty and coordinate modification-related efforts with the student’s advisors. Students are encouraged to work with their advisors and faculty members to reschedule course assignments, lab hours, examinations, or other requirements, and/or to reduce their overall course load, as appropriate once authorization is received from the Title IX Coordinator. Any reasonable modifications that have been agreed upon will be documented in an Education Plan and signed by the student and the Title IX Coordinator.
+
+Students may request modified academic responsibilities under this policy regardless of whether they elect to take a leave of absence. 
+
+
+
+Academic Leave of Absence 
+
+As long as students can maintain appropriate academic progress, Canisius will not require them to take a leave of absence, or withdraw from or limit their studies as the result of pregnancy, childbirth, or related conditions, but nothing in this policy requires modification of the essential elements of any academic program. 
+
+The college will excuse a student’s absences due to pregnancy or pregnancy related conditions, including recovery from childbirth, for as long as the student’s doctor deems the absences to be medically necessary. 
+
+A student’s absences due to medical necessity of child or extraordinary parenting issues, such as caring for a sick child, are also excused (this includes mothers and fathers) as deemed appropriate by the college. 
+
+Students seeking a leave of absence should consult with the Title IX Coordinator to determine appropriate requests. As appropriate and depending on the student’s academic plan, faculty will work with students (and the Title IX Coordinator) to determine how to best make up missed work and points.  Granted academic leave of absences supersede any school or instructor-based attendance policies regarding allowable numbers of absences or ability to make up missed academic work. To the extent possible, the college will take reasonable steps to ensure that upon return from leave, students will be reinstated to their program in the same status as when the leave began, with no tuition penalty. 
+
+Student-Employee Leave 
+
+All student-employees will be entitled to the protections of the Family and Medical Leave Act.  Pregnancy and related conditions will be treated as any other temporary disability for job purposes, including leave and benefits. 
+
+Housing-Related Accommodations
+
+Pregnant students on-campus housing status will not be altered based on pregnancy status unless requested by the pregnant student(s). 
+
+Related Policy or Rights Violations
+
+Reporting to the College
+
+Violations of this policy or any rights associated with it should be reported to the Title IX Coordinator. More information regarding the policy and process for violations can be found in the Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy. 
+
+Reports can be made to the Title IX Coordinator in several ways:
+
+Bias Reporting Form
+
+Bias Reporting Hotline: 716-888-BIAS (2427)
+
+By mail or in person:
+
+Debbie Owens
+
+Title IX Coordinator/Associate Dean of Students
+
+Frisch Hall 006
+
+716-888-3781
+owens30@canisius.edu
+
+Please refer to the Title IX Coordinator and Reporting webpage for additional information.
+
+Reporting to the Office of Civil Rights
+
+Members of the College community may also file reports with the United States Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (OCR) by utilizing this form.
+
+Under OCR’s Case Processing Manual, complaints typically must be filed within 180 days of when the discrimination took place.
+
+To ask OCR to provide language access services or resources, which may include oral technical assistance or written translation of a publicly available OCR document, free of charge, contact OCR at 1-800-421-3481 (TDD: 1-800-877-8339), or email OCR@ed.gov. For information about the Department’s interpretation or translation services, please call 1-800-USA-LEARN (1-800-872-5327) (TTY: 1-800-437-0833) or email Ed.Language.Assistance@ed.gov. To request documents in alternate formats such as Braille or large print, please contact the Department at 202-260-0852 or om_eeos@ed.gov. 
+
+Training
+
+A copy of this policy will be made available to faculty, staff, and employees in annually required training and posted on the Canisius website. In addition, the College will alert all new students about this policy and the location of this policy as part of orientation. The Title IX Coordinator will make educational materials available to all members of the college community to promote compliance with this policy and familiarity with its procedures. 
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Anti-Discrimination and Harassment Policy 
+
+Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy
+
+Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct (Title IX) Policy</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Procedures of the Committee on Tenure.txt [/INST] Procedures of the Committee on Tenure 
+
+In evaluating a candidate for tenure, the Committee shall follow the then current ""Procedural Guidelines of the Committee on Tenure,"" including the provisions therein with respect to seeking information in writing about the candidate from such sources as professionals in the candidate's field within and beyond the College and from each tenured member of the candidate's department/program from the Provost, and from the President.  The Committee shall also appropriately evaluate student feedback.  Any faculty member may at any time upon request obtain from the Office of the Provost a copy of the then current ""Procedural Guidelines of the Committee on Tenure,"" as reviewed annually by the faculty and in addition the Committee shall furnish a copy thereof to each candidate for tenure six months in advance of its consideration of such candidate or upon learning that the faculty member is a candidate for tenure, whichever is later. 
+
+As part of its deliberations, the Committee shall review and discuss the faculty member’s performance in each category of performance, utilizing the evaluation criteria set forth in Article IV, Section 2.2.1, applicable academic unit criteria, and the standards for tenure (see Article IV, Section 4.2.1).  At the conclusion of its deliberations, the Committee will issue a written letter to the President and candidate indicating whether the faculty member has met the performance standards for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor, including a recommendation as to whether tenure and promotion should be granted or denied.  The final votes of the individual members of the Committee, as well as any dissenting opinions will be included in the Committee’s written recommendation letter.  For a recommendation of tenure, it shall be necessary that at least five three members of the voting members of the Committee affirmatively vote that the candidate 
+
+has met the applicable tenure standards in favor of such a recommendation.  If a member abstains from voting, such abstention shall have the force of a negative vote.  If tenure is not recommended, the candidate may request, and the Committee shall provide, additional written clarification of the Committee's decision, including the final votes of the individual members of the Committee.  
+
+The Committee's files with respect to a candidate shall be kept intact after the Committee decides whether to recommend such candidate for tenure.  However, in order to avoid unnecessary harm to the candidate and encourage full and frank expression of opinion, all confidential minutes and records shall be sealed, maintained, and disposed of in accordance with the College’s Record Retention Schedule and inaccessible, except to members of the Committee that heard the case, the President, and the Provost and except as may be otherwise provided by the College's then current ""Review and Appeals Procedures for Certain Faculty Grievances,"" for a period of 30 years.  After 30 years, these records shall be reviewed by the Provost, who shall decide, depending on the sensitivity of the records, whether they should be opened at that time or should be resealed or otherwise restricted for a further period not to exceed 20 years, provided that records regarding the case of an individual still an active member of the faculty, shall not be opened.  Once no longer restricted, the records shall be opened for the use of researchers. [October 7, 1983, p. 3631]
+
+Board of Trustees Review
+
+The President shall submit the Committee on Tenure’s vote, written report, and any minority report to the Board of Trustees, which shall vote in executive session whether to award the candidate tenure and promotion to Associate Professor.  
+
+The Provost, acting for the Board of Trustees, informs the faculty member in writing of the Board of Trustees’ decision.  The Provost also informs the campus community of all positive tenure cases.  
+
+Tenure, if granted, will become effective with the next academic year.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Process Text from Proposal.txt [/INST] The Process 
+
+	
+
+Context
+
+The Higher Education Community Vendor Assessment Tool (HECVAT) is a higher-education specific tool designed to help colleges and universities measure vendor risk. A completed HECVAT allows colleges and universities to assess whether a third-party solution provider has the appropriate cybersecurity and privacy controls in place to protect institutional information. 
+
+The HECVAT was intended to be a tool that is mutually beneficial to higher education institutions and the vendors that serve higher education. For colleges and universities, it provides a streamlined assessment of the security and privacy offered by service providers and shortens the procurement process. For vendors, it reduces the burden faced in responding to request for security assessments from higher education institutions. While the HECVAT is a security assessment tool, there is no denying that vendors that can quickly share a completed, passing score HECVAT for their products may have a competitive advantage in the higher education procurement process. 
+
+Grit Digital Health (Grit) offers several psychology-based well-being apps, some of which are marketed to colleges and universities. Having an accurate and complete HECVAT to share with colleges and universities, that reflects a passing HECVAT score, is critical to Grit Digital Health’s success within the higher education market. 
+
+Deliverables
+
+Through our flexible and collaborative approach, we will provide Grit Digital Health with: 
+
+A detailed understanding of the HECVAT and its uses. 
+
+A workshop with the Grit technology and information security teams to walk through the HECVAT and complete it for the You @ College student well-being portal and Nod application. We will use our knowledge and understanding of the higher education technology environment to ensure that the You @ College and Nod HECVAT responses are technically accurate and focus on the most relevant details for the campus information security analyst. 
+
+Implementation activities performed by a team of experienced information security professionals, with expertise in operational security activities, information security project management, training and awareness programs, policy and compliance implementation, and strategy assessment; and
+
+If necessary, updating and/or developing appropriate policies and procedures/controls on an as needed basis.
+
+Vantage’s deliverables to Grit Digital Health will include: 
+
+A completed HECVAT for the You @ College student well-being portal and Nod application. 
+
+Completion of implementation activities as agreed upon (e.g., completing an information security training and awareness presentation for Grit Digital Health use, advice regarding information security products needed for threat assessment and monitoring, etc.).
+
+Stevens Strategies’ deliverables to Grit Digital Health (if necessary) will include:
+
+Updating and/or developing appropriate policies and procedures/controls as needed based.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Task 1: Project Start and Information Gathering 
+(Led by Vantage)
+
+It is essential that each institutional project get off to a strong start. This task will ensure that all parties involved have a mutual understanding of the project scope and direction, thus reducing the possibility of misunderstandings and preventing lost time due to any false starts. Specifically, our goals are to: 
+
+Determine the composition of the core project team and how it will coordinate efforts. 
+
+Confirm the project scope and revise the methodology and approach as necessary. 
+
+Confirm deliverables, time frames, and project milestones for the project plan. 
+
+Set dates for the HECVAT workshop activities. 
+
+Establish information flows and reporting procedures. 
+
+Discuss the information required for the project and start the data-gathering processes. 
+
+As part of this task, Vantage will provide a list of desired documentation, but at a minimum, will request: 
+
+Organizational charts 
+
+Grit Digital Health’s information security policy and/or security program charter 
+
+Information security and privacy policies, standards, guidelines, and procedures 
+
+Relevant security architecture and configuration documents for the You @ College student well- being portal and Nod application. 
+
+A list of services and/or service providers that support the You @ College student well-being portal and Nod application. 
+
+Note that Vantage is not asking Grit Digital Health to create new data in response to the documentation request. We understand that some documentation is not available and may need to be prepared as part of this engagement to help Grit Digital Health improve its HECVAT score. 
+
+Estimated Vantage Hours: 6-10 depending on the level of effort needed to meet with the Grit Digital Health team and review documentation, includes project kickoff meeting between Vantage staff and the Grit Digital Health project team. 
+
+Task 2: HECVAT Workshop 
+(Led by Vantage) 
+
+This task work is designed to work with the Grit technology and information security teams to walk through the HECVAT and complete it for the You @ College student well-being portal and Nod application. We will use our knowledge and understanding of the higher education technology environment to ensure that the You @ College and Nod HECVAT responses are technically accurate and focus most on the details that colleges and universities expect. 
+
+To accomplish this task, we expect to spend 8 hours with the Grit technology and information security teams, walking through the full HECVAT questionnaire, discussing each question, and documenting Grit’s response. If necessary, we will ask additional questions to ensure that the data use, cybersecurity, and privacy status of the You @ College student well-being portal and Nod application are accurately and completely represented. We will use our knowledge of the HECVAT, our familiarity with higher education IT operations, and industry cybersecurity and privacy best practices to facilitate a thorough conversation with the Grit team. 
+
+Estimated Vantage Hours: 22 (prep, workshop time, and review for 2 Vantage staff members) 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+Task 3: Implementation Activities 
+(Led by Vantage)
+
+We understand that implementation engagements need to be flexible to focus on immediate information security priorities, while still moving forward in a strategic manner. We will work with Grit Digital Health to complete the additional implementation activities needed to improve their baseline HECVAT score (e.g., completing an information security training and awareness presentation for Grit Digital Health use, advice regarding information security products needed for threat assessment and monitoring, etc.) We expect regular communication with the Grit Digital Health project team to ensure that implementation activities are completed in a manner that will be useful and sustainable for Grit Digital Health. 
+
+Estimated Vantage Hours: To be estimated and provided to Grit Digital Health at the start of each implementation activity. General estimates for implementation activities include: 
+
+Preparation of a general information security training and awareness reusable PowerPoint deck based on Grit Digital Health’s information security policies, ~10 hours 
+
+Mapping Grit Digital Health’s information security policies to ISO 27002:2013 and NIST 800-53, ~10 hours 
+
+Security services and operations/tools advice applicable to the Grit Digital Health IT environment (including threat assessment tools), ~5 hours 
+
+
+
+Task 4: Updating and/or Developing Appropriate Policies and Procedures/Controls (If Necessary) (Led by Stevens Strategy)
+
+Stevens Strategy will update the policies and procedure/controls previously developed by Stevens Strategy if updates are needed based on the results of the HECVAT workshop and/or mapping activity (including addressing MAPP standards 01, 01 and 04 if needed).  Moreover, Stevens Strategy will develop new policy and procedures/controls as needed based on the results of the HECVAT workshop and/or mapping activity.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Professional Development Section (2nd Draft).txt [/INST] Alternative Model
+
+The purpose of the sabbatical leave program is to provide probationary and tenured faculty the opportunity to pursue scholarly, creative, or pedagogical activity that will contribute to their effectiveness as teaching scholars.  A sabbatical leave is an investment in the future and a privilege granted to tenure track faculty who meet the eligibility requirements set forth below.  It is not a reward for past service.
+
+Eligibility
+
+Pre-Tenure Faculty
+
+Non-tenured tenure track faculty appointed to the faculty without prior service credit are eligible to apply for a one-semester pre-tenure sabbatical leave with pay in their fourth year of full-time service at the University following a successful retention review in their third year.  Eligibility and scheduling of leaves for faculty who come to the University with one to two years of prior teaching experience will be determined at the time of appointment.  A faculty member granted three or more years credit toward the probationary period for tenure at the time of initial appointment to the University is not eligible for the pre-tenure sabbatical leave.  Moreover, a pre-tenure sabbatical leave may not be taken by a faculty member with a terminal contract.
+
+Tenured members of the faculty who do not receive a pre-tenure sabbatical are eligible for a one-semester post-tenure sabbatical leave with pay after they have served with the University for a period of six years as a full-time faculty member.
+
+Tenured Faculty
+
+Tenured faculty members are eligible to apply for a one semester sabbatical leave with pay in the sixth year of full-time service at the University following their previous post-tenure or pre-tenure sabbatical leave.  A tenured faculty member in the last regular year of service at the University is eligible for the leave during the first semester only.  
+
+In the event a tenured faculty member elects not to take advantage of the eligibility for a sabbatical leave after six years of teaching at the University, the faculty member may elect apply any year thereafter.
+
+Procedures
+
+Faculty seeking a sabbatical leave must submit a written proposal to Academic Affairs on or before September 1st.  The proposal should include a project title, a short description of the project, budget requirements, a statement on how the project will impact the faculty member’s scholarly, creative, or pedagogical work (i.e., goals and objectives), and a clear indication of the semester in which the leave will be taken. Faculty will be informed of the status of their leave application for the following academic year on before October 15th.
+
+It is the intent that requests for leaves will be approved by the Provost, provided that the eligibility requirements set forth above are met and the faculty member applies for the leave by documenting a scholarly, creative, or pedagogical project with goals and objectives.  
+
+Faculty members are expected to take the approved leave as scheduled unless extraordinary circumstances require a change. Any change to an approved leave schedule requires written approval of the Provost, who will consult with the faculty member’s Department Chair to determine the impact of a change.
+
+Upon return from leave, the faculty member’s course load during the academic year the leave is taken will be no less than three (3), except where adjustments must be made for Department Chairs or for other special duties (see Section --).  Course adjustments should seek to minimize the impact on course options for students. 
+
+Obligations and Conditions
+
+Acceptance of a sabbatical leave entails the following obligations and conditions:
+
+Agreement to pursue the approved leave project.  Faculty on leave may not serve as the instructor of record for any Ohio Wesleyan course, including but not limited to independent studies, directed readings, and internships.  Faculty on leave also agree not to carry service duties, such as serving Department Chair or serving as a member or chair of a faculty or University committee or task force. Similarly, faculty on leave may not accept full-time employment elsewhere during the leave without written approval from the Provost.  If some employment is a necessary component of the leave-semester activity, this must be detailed in the faculty member’s leave proposal application.
+
+Submission of a complete report of the leave-semester activity to the Faculty Personnel Committee within the first five (5) weeks of the following semester. This report will be considered in the next review of the faculty member.  
+
+Continued full-time service to the University for at least one year after returning from the leave unless other arrangements are agreed to in writing by the parties. If this commitment is not fulfilled, it is expected that the faculty member will then refund the salary received from the University during the leave, in full in case of no return, or in part according to negotiated, pro-rated basis for shorter periods.
+
+Special Released Time for Scholarly Production
+
+The purpose of the special scholarly leave program is to encourage eligible tenure track faculty members to participate in grant supported research or outstanding creative endeavors that require rigorous time commitments.  The program is administered by the Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee.
+
+Program Funding
+
+The special scholarly leave program is funded annually as part of the University’s budget process.  In preparation of the University budget, certain professional development monies are set aside in a special account for the express purpose of encouraging faculty members with recognized expertise to enter into grant supported research or outstanding creative endeavors requiring rigorous commitments. When the University’s financial condition permits, these funds shall be adequate to replace one faculty member per year for one semester paid leave. Should it be necessary, the funds shall provide a replacement up to the average salary level of a full professor.  The total remuneration during any semester for which a reduced load is granted, or during any semester for which special leave is granted, may not, however, exceed the regular salary of the grantee.
+
+Eligibility
+
+Support under the program is reserved for major and unique projects and must meet the following criteria:
+
+Normally, consideration will be given to those who have invested at least two years in their projects;
+
+The project must hold promise for significant contribution to the University Community;
+
+The project must entail commitment to responsibilities, duties, time schedules or other obligations which cannot be accommodated within the framework of the University’s regular sabbatical leave program.
+
+Note: Applicants holding grants may not seek paid leave in violation of the conditions of their grants.
+
+Procedures
+
+Application for support shall be made jointly by the faculty member and the Department Chair , who will submit to the Provost and Faculty Personnel Committee, on or before September 1st of the academic year preceding the leave, a statement indicating the special nature of the proposed activity, the unique conditions requiring special leave, and a plan setting for the time span for which the request is made, as well as a proposal for coverage of teaching and other responsibilities.
+
+Applications will be considered jointly by the Provost and Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC).  If the Provost and FPC are in agreement regarding the final candidate, the Provost will issue a written recommendation to the President for final approval.  If the Provost and FPC do not agree on a final candidate, the Provost and Chair of the FPC shall issue separate written recommendations to the President, whose decision shall be final. 
+
+Obligations and Conditions
+
+Acceptance of a special scholarly leave entails the following obligations and conditions:
+
+Agreement to pursue the approved leave project and refrain from serving as the instructor of record for any Ohio Wesleyan course, including but not limited to independent studies, directed readings, and internships.  Faculty on leave also agree not to carry service duties, such as serving Department Chair or serving as a member or chair of a faculty or University committee or task force. Similarly, faculty on scholarly leave may not accept full-time employment elsewhere during the leave without written approval from the Provost.  If some employment is a necessary component of the leave-semester activity, this must be detailed in the faculty member’s leave proposal application.
+
+Submission of a complete report of the leave-semester activity to the Faculty Personnel Committee within the first five (5) weeks of the following semester. This report will be considered in the next review of the faculty member.  
+
+Continued full-time service to the University for at least one year after returning from the leave unless other arrangements are agreed to in writing by the parties.  If this commitment is not fulfilled, it is expected that the faculty member will then refund the salary received from the University during the leave, in full in case of no return, or in part according to negotiated, pro-rated basis for shorter periods.
+
+Retraining Leaves
+
+Upon application, full-time faculty members may be granted up to one year of paid leave to undergo professional retraining to equip them to take on new assignments which contribute to, or are the result of a reduction in faculty positions (see Section 3.13.5).  
+
+Upon receipt of the faculty member’s application, the Provost shall consult with the potential receiving department(s) to determine whether a limited period of additional training (i.e., one year or less) would lead to acceptance of the faculty member in the department(s).  In arriving at a recommendation, the Provost and department(s) must determine whether the faculty member, after receiving training, will be able to meet applicable accreditation guidelines with respect to faculty credentials.  If the Provost, after consultation with the affected department(s), determines that a limited period of additional training would lead to acceptances of the faculty member in another department(s), the Provost will recommend such leave to the Faculty Personnel Committee, which shall consult as necessary with the Academic Policy Committee and forward a recommendation to the President for final action.  The decision of the President is final.
+
+Any retraining permitted by such leaves shall be counted in faculty personnel evaluations as enhancement of the individual's expertise and credited under teaching, professional development, and/or service as appropriate and agreed at the time the leave is granted.
+
+Professional Development Leave Without Pay
+
+The University recognizes that under some circumstances, extended faculty leaves for tenure track faculty members to pursue activities that enhance a faculty member’s professional development can benefit both the individual faculty member and the institution.  They may involve, but are not limited to, gainful employment in the academic world or elsewhere, retraining, or professional development.
+
+Applications for professional development leaves without pay for a period of one, two, or three years shall be made in writing to the Provost on or before September 1st the academic year prior to the beginning of the leave. The faculty member’s application must include a short description of the scholarly, creative or professional development activities to be pursued during the leave, a statement on how the leave will impact the faculty member’s scholarly, creative, or pedagogical work (i.e., goals and objectives), and a clear indication of the length of the proposed leave.  
+
+Upon receipt of the application, the Provost shall consult with the affected department(s) and then make a written recommendation to the Faculty Personnel Committee, which shall in turn issue a written recommendation on the request to the President. In its deliberations, the committee and President will consider the costs and benefits of the leave to the University, including both tangible and intangible consequences.  The decision of the President is final.  If the President does not accept the committee’s recommendation, the President will convey the reasons therefore to both the applicant and the committee chair.
+
+Professional development leaves without pay are generally limited to one year in duration.  Requests beyond one year require special justification and unusual circumstances such as those that result in exceptional professional opportunities for the faculty member or those that clearly benefit the University.  They may involve gainful employment in the academic world or elsewhere, retraining, or professional development. During the leave, the faculty member will continue to accrue step increases to base salary and accumulate service toward promotion to Professor if the leave activities have been approved in advance by the Faculty Personnel Committee and President as bona fide professional development.  Time toward tenure, however, will not accrue. Moreover, the leave of absence shall defer eligibility for regular paid (sabbatical) leave by an equivalent period.  Tuition, life insurance, and health insurance benefits will be provided by the University as usual unless they are provided to the faculty member by another employer.  
+
+Faculty members on leave for a year or more must notify the Provost at least eleven months prior to the beginning of the semester of scheduled return from leave as to whether or not they are returning to the University.  The Provost will provide a reminder of that obligation and notice of the impending deadline thirty (30) days prior to the deadline.  Failure to respond by the deadline will be treated as a resignation from the faculty effective at the end of the contract period.  The position occupied by the faculty member will be considered vacated immediately. Although that resignation will serve to vacate the position immediately, the faculty member will continue to receive, until the end of the contract year, the same tuition, life insurance, and health insurance benefits as described above (unless they are being provided to the faculty member by another employer).
+
+
+
+Individual Professional Development Accounts
+
+Ohio Wesleyan University provides each full-time member of the faculty with an individual professional development account (IPDA). The funds in each IPDA are intended to support the professional development of each faculty member throughout their career. The University annually makes available an annual allotment of funds for deposit in each IPDA. Funds carry over from year to year. Faculty may use these funds at their discretion without application or prior approval. IPDA balances for retiring faculty are returned to the University.  Please refer to the Professional Development Policy for additional information.
+
+
+
+Assistance With Travel and Other Professional Expenses
+
+	Faculty Travel
+
+Professional development activities by faculty members may appropriately involve travel. This includes such travel as to conventions and conferences, to libraries or other resources not available locally, and to sites where the faculty member will work during a paid leave. The University makes available to each full-time faculty member a travel allowance in each fiscal year to assist with expenses for major travel for purposes of professional development. Major travel is defined as travel to points more than 100 miles from Delaware, except that travel to conventions and conferences is included without distance limit. 
+
+Legitimate expenses for such travel include transportation costs up to the amount of air coach fare; associated meals and lodging; and conference registration fees.  
+
+Travel advances and reimbursements are secured from the University Cashier. Reserved to the Cashier is the right to refer cases to the Provost when in doubt about whether the travel is supportable under this policy. A Travel Fund Report Form must be completed and taken to the Cashier within 10 days of return from a trip.
+
+Manuscript Preparation
+
+A modest sum of money is available to assist full-time faculty members with the preparation of final manuscripts of scholarly work. (Ordinarily costs for typing of speeches, notes, or informal papers should not be submitted, since the intent is to assist with preparation for publication.)
+
+A faculty member who has financial assistance from the University for typing, publication, or other costs, and who receives remuneration from sale or royalties for the work, is expected to repay the University.
+
+Out of Pocket Costs
+
+A modest sum of money is available for assistance with out of pocket costs of faculty research or creative projects (such as materials, microfilming, publication, postage, etc.). Proposals submitted to the Provost will be received at any time as long as money in this category is available. Ordinarily, the amounts of grants will be limited.
+
+A faculty member who has financial assistance from the University in this category, and who received remuneration from sale or royalties in connection with the work done, is expected to repay the University.
+
+Doctoral Tuition Costs
+
+A modest sum of money is available to assist faculty members on regular full-time appointment with tuition costs for doctoral study. Maxima by quarter or semester, and per degree, will be set. Assistance will be granted in order of application to the Provost (since advance planning is often difficult) up to the budget limit.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Projected Project Days Revised CLU.txt [/INST] Projected Project Days CLU
+
+
+
+Phase One – 
+
+
+
+Project Calendar					SL - .25
+
+
+
+Faculty HB Analysis					SL - .25
+
+							OF - .25
+
+
+
+Virtual Meeting					SL - .25
+
+							OF - .25
+
+
+
+Best Practices Resources				SL – 1.0
+
+							OF - .25
+
+
+
+Interviews						SL – 1.0
+
+							OF – 1.0
+
+
+
+Survey Review						SL - .25
+
+
+
+Peer Data						SL - .50
+
+
+
+Recommendations					SL – 3.0
+
+							OF - .25
+
+
+
+Total							6.5 days for SL
+
+							1.75 days for OF
+
+
+
+Phase Two & Three – 
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Forum Attendance				SL - .25
+
+
+
+HB Draft 1						SL – 3.0
+
+							OF - .25
+
+
+
+Facilitations						SL – 1.0
+
+
+
+HB Draft 2						SL - .50
+
+
+
+HB Draft 3						SL - .50 
+
+
+
+HB Draft 4						SL - .25
+
+
+
+Faculty Forum						SL - .25
+
+
+
+HB Final						SL - .25
+
+ Extra							SL - .5
+
+
+
+Total							6.5 days for SL
+
+							.25 for OF
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+TOTAL = 
+
+
+
+
+
+SL Days = 13 days x 1200 = 15,600
+
+OF Days = 2 x 2000 =              4,000
+
+				19600
+
+				x25%
+
+				    4,900
+
+				+19,600
+
+Total = $24,500</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Proposed Calendar (1st Draft) .txt [/INST] PROJECT CALENDAR 
+
+	
+
+Proposed Date
+
+
+
+Completion Date
+
+Phase I – Introduction, Identify Needs, and Document Collection
+
+
+
+
+
+Project Manager is appointed.
+
+
+
+March 10
+
+Members appointed to the Working Group.
+
+Week of May 2nd
+
+May 20
+
+University posts all applicable internal faculty status-related documents (i.e., promotion and tenure guidelines, academic unit guidelines, etc.) and forms (e.g., evaluation forms), as well as a listing of peer schools.
+
+Week of May 2nd
+
+April 20
+
+Consultant meets with Working Group to provide overview of process, project goals, answer question, gain an understanding of current Faculty Legislation document’s strengths and opportunities for development.
+
+Week of May 9
+
+[Exact Date TBD]
+
+May 25
+
+Consultant delivers proposed Bylaw Table of Contents to Working Group for consideration and comment.
+
+May 16
+
+
+
+Consultant presents overview of process at Faculty Meeting.
+
+May 19
+
+May 19
+
+Zoom meeting with Working Group to discuss and finalize Table of Contents.
+
+May 20
+
+
+
+Phase II – Faculty Handbook Preparation
+
+		
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers first draft of updated Faculty Handbook.  
+
+June 20
+
+
+
+Working Group members review first draft & prepares for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+June 20 – June 27
+
+
+
+Consultant facilitates the Working Group’s review of the 1st draft.  These meetings should be scheduled in two-to-three-hour increments and will take roughly 18 to 24 hours to complete.  We will have a better sense of this after delivery of the first draft.
+
+June 27 – July 1
+
+July 18 - 22
+
+
+
+		Consultant implements Working Group’s requested revisions and delivers 2nd draft.
+
+August 1
+
+
+
+		Working Group members individually review the 2nd draft and prepare for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+		August 1 - 15
+
+
+
+		Consultant facilitates Working Group’s review of 2nd draft via a series of 2-hour virtual meetings.
+
+August 15 - 26 
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 3rd draft to Working Group.
+
+September 9
+
+
+
+Consultant facilitates Working Group’s review of 3rd draft via a series of 2-hour virtual meetings.
+
+Weeks of October 3rd & 10th
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase III – Approval Process
+
+		Projected Date
+
+Completion Date
+
+Draft 4 is submitted to the President.  
+
+October 24
+
+
+
+President submits comments and suggested revisions to Working Group.
+
+October 31
+
+
+
+Working Group and consultant meet virtually to discuss and address President’s comments.  If the Working Group disagrees with a revisions requested by the President, consultant will facilitate dialogue between parties.
+
+Week of November 7
+
+
+
+Consultant implements changes requested by the Working Group and delivers final version of the handbook, which is distributed to the Faculty.  
+
+November 18
+
+
+
+The consultant will, upon the College’s request, virtually attend a Faculty forum or meeting to answer any questions regarding the updated Faculty Bylaws document.
+
+Week of December 12 
+
+[Exact Dates to TBD]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+			         Page 1
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Proposed Calendar (2nd Draft) .txt [/INST] PROJECT CALENDAR
+
+	Description
+
+Proposed Date
+
+
+
+Completion Date
+
+SEGMENT ONE
+
+
+
+
+
+Consultants deliver preliminary draft of the Code of Regulations analysis report, including any suggested amendments to the Provost & President.
+
+April 29
+
+
+
+Virtual meeting with Provost & President to discuss report.
+
+May 2-3
+
+
+
+Consultants deliver final report.
+
+May 4
+
+
+
+Virtual meeting, if necessary, with the Board’s Faculty Handbook Task Force to discuss report and suggested amendments to the Articles in the Code of Regulations. 
+
+May 5-6
+
+[Specific Date TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultants submit final suggested amendments to the Articles in the Code of Regulations. 
+
+May 9
+
+
+
+SEGMENT TWO
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase I – Introduction, Identify Needs, and Document Collection
+
+
+
+
+
+Project Manager is appointed.
+
+
+
+April 15
+
+Members appointed to the Review Team.
+
+Week of April
+
+
+
+University posts all applicable internal faculty status-related documents (i.e., promotion and tenure guidelines, academic unit guidelines, etc.) and forms (e.g., evaluation forms), as well as a listing of peer schools.
+
+May 1
+
+
+
+Consultant meets with Review Team (either virtually or on campus at University’s request) to provide overview of process, project goals, answer questions and gain an understanding of current handbook’s strengths and opportunities for development.
+
+[Exact Date TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers proposed Table of Contents to Review Team and President for consideration and comment.
+
+Week of May 30
+
+[Exact Date TBD]
+
+
+
+Zoom meeting with Review Team and President to discuss Table of Contents.
+
+Week of June 6
+
+[Exact Date TBD]
+
+
+
+Final consensus reached for Table of Contents.  If consensus cannot be reached, the Board’s Faculty Handbook Task Force will be consulted.
+
+Week of June 27
+
+[Exact Date TBD]
+
+
+
+Phase II – Faculty Handbook Preparation
+
+		
+
+
+
+Consultants delivers first draft of updated Faculty Handbook.  
+
+August 17 
+
+
+
+Review Team members review first draft & prepares for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+August 17-Spetember 2
+
+
+
+Consultant visits campus to facilitate the Review Team’s review of the 1st draft.  Two full days will be required; however, these can be split up between two trips.  Many clients prefer to schedule two half-day sessions over the course of two days for each trip.  Some of these meetings can be held virtually if preferable.  Time should be reserved at the end of the two week window to hold a virtual meeting(s) in the event we do complete the review during the campus meetings.
+
+September 5-16
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+		Consultant implements Review Team’s requested revisions and delivers 2nd draft.
+
+October 3
+
+
+
+		Review Team members individually review the 2nd draft and prepare for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+		October 3-7
+
+
+
+		Consultant facilitates Review Team’s review of 2nd draft via a series of 2-hour virtual meetings.
+
+October 10-11 &-October 17-21
+
+[Exact Dates TBD] 
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 3rd draft to Review Team.
+
+November 7 
+
+
+
+Review Team and consultant meet virtually to approve/implement changes to handbook in anticipation of delivery of the 4th draft to the Faculty Executive Committee, Faculty Personnel Committee, and President for comments.
+
+Week of November 14
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 4th draft, which is distributed to the Faculty Executive Committee, Faculty Personnel Committee, and President for comments. 
+
+November 28
+
+
+
+		Faculty Executive Committee, Faculty Personnel Committee, and President deliver their respective comments to Review Team and consultant.
+
+December 16
+
+
+
+		Virtual meeting(s) is held with Review Team to review stakeholders’ comments.
+
+Week of January 9
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers 5th Draft for Review Team’s final approval.
+
+January 19
+
+
+
+		Virtual meeting(s) held with Review Team to approve 5th draft.
+
+Week of January 23
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 5th draft and executive summary of key changes to the Board of Trustees’ Faculty Handbook Task Force. 
+
+January 30
+
+
+
+Board Faculty Handbook Task Force delivers comments/requested changes to consultant.
+
+February 6
+
+
+
+		Consultant and Review Team meet virtually to discuss/implement any revisions requested by the Board Faculty Handbook Task Force.
+
+February 6-17
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers final draft of the handbook, which is distributed to Faculty at start of Phase III.
+
+February 17
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase III – Approval Process
+
+		Projected Date
+
+Completion Date
+
+Review Team approved draft is submitted to the Faculty.
+
+February 17
+
+
+
+Review Team holds faculty forum(s) to review key changes to the handbook and answer questions.  Consultant will attend forum upon client request.
+
+Week of March 6
+
+
+
+Consultant facilitates virtual meeting(s) with Review Team to discuss any issues raised during faculty forum(s).
+
+Week of March 20
+
+
+
+Consultant implements changes requested by the Review Team and delivers final version of the handbook.  Following delivery, the handbook will be submitted to Project Manager for distribution to the Faculty. The faculty and administration will then work independently from Stevens Strategy towards obtaining Faculty, President, and ultimately Board approval.
+
+March 31
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+			         Page 1
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Proposed Calendar (5.4.22 Draft).txt [/INST] PROJECT CALENDAR
+
+	
+
+Proposed Date
+
+
+
+Completion Date
+
+Phase I – Introduction, Identify Needs, and Document Collection
+
+
+
+
+
+Project Manager is appointed.
+
+
+
+April 15th
+
+Members appointed to the Review Team.
+
+Week of May 9
+
+
+
+University posts all applicable internal faculty status-related documents (i.e., promotion and tenure guidelines, academic unit guidelines, etc.) and forms (e.g., evaluation forms), as well as a listing of peer schools.
+
+Week of May 9
+
+May 3rd
+
+Consultant meets with Review Team on campus to provide overview of process, project goals, answer questions and gain an understanding of current handbook’s strengths and opportunities for development.
+
+Week of May 30th
+
+[Exact Day TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers proposed Table of Contents to Review Team and President for consideration and comment at initial meeting.
+
+
+
+
+
+Zoom meeting with Review Team and President to discuss Table of Contents.
+
+
+
+
+
+Final consensus reached for Table of Contents.  If consensus cannot be reached, the Board’s Faculty Handbook Task Force will be consulted.
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase II – Faculty Handbook Updating
+
+		
+
+
+
+Consultant analyzes Faculty Handbook.  During this time frame, the consultant may send questions to the Review Team regarding current University processes
+
+June 1 – July 15
+
+
+
+Consultant meets with Review Team to solicit the team’s feedback on select policy topics.  
+
+Week of July 18
+
+[Exact Date TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultants delivers first draft of updated Faculty Handbook.  
+
+August 17 
+
+
+
+Review Team members review first draft & prepares for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+August 17 – September 2
+
+
+
+Consultant visits campus to facilitate the Review Team’s review of the 1st draft.  Two full days will be required; however, these can be split up between two trips.  Many clients prefer to schedule two half-day sessions over the course of two days for each trip.  Some of these meetings can be held virtually if preferable.  Time should be reserved at the end of the two-week window to hold a virtual meeting(s) in the event we do complete the review during the campus meetings.
+
+September 5 – September 16
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+		Consultant implements Review Team’s requested revisions and delivers 2nd draft.
+
+October 3
+
+
+
+		Review Team members individually review the 2nd draft and prepare for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+		October 3-7
+
+
+
+		Consultant facilitates Review Team’s review of 2nd draft via a series of 2-hour virtual meetings.
+
+October 10-11 – October 17 – 21
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 3rd draft to Review Team.
+
+November 7
+
+
+
+Review Team and consultant meet virtually to approve/implement changes to handbook in anticipation of delivery of the 4th draft to the Faculty Executive Committee, Faculty Personnel Committee, and President for comments.
+
+Week of November 14 
+
+[Exact Date(s) TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 4th draft, which is distributed to the Faculty Executive Committee, Faculty Personnel Committee, and President for comments. 
+
+November 28
+
+
+
+		Faculty Executive Committee, Faculty Personnel Committee, and President deliver their respective comments to Review Team and consultant.
+
+December 16 
+
+
+
+		Virtual meeting(s) is held with Review Team to review stakeholders’ comments.
+
+Week of January 9
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers 5th Draft for Review Team’s final approval.
+
+January 19
+
+
+
+		Virtual meeting(s) held with Review Team to approve 5th draft.
+
+Week of January 23
+
+[Exact Date(s) TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 5th draft and executive summary of key changes to the Board of Trustees’ Faculty Handbook Task Force. 
+
+January 30
+
+
+
+Board Faculty Handbook Task Force delivers comments/requested changes to consultant.
+
+February 6
+
+
+
+		Consultant and Review Team meet virtually to discuss/implement any revisions requested by the Board Faculty Handbook Task Force.
+
+February 6 – 17
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers final draft of the handbook, which is distributed to the Faculty at start of Phase III.
+
+February 17
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase III – Approval Process
+
+		Projected Date
+
+Completion Date
+
+Review Team approved draft is submitted to the Faculty.
+
+February 17
+
+
+
+Review Team holds faculty forum(s) to review key changes to the handbook and answer questions.  Consultant will attend forum upon client request.
+
+Week of March 6
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant facilitates virtual meeting(s) with Review Team to discuss any issues raised during faculty forum(s).
+
+Week of March 20
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant implements changes requested by the Review Team and delivers final version of the handbook.  Following delivery, the handbook will be submitted to Project Manager for distribution to the Faculty. The faculty and administration will then work independently from Stevens Strategy towards obtaining Faculty, President, and ultimately Board approval.
+
+March 31
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 2
+
+
+
+			         Page 1</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Proposed Calendar (Final) .txt [/INST] PROJECT CALENDAR 
+
+	
+
+Proposed Date
+
+
+
+Completion Date
+
+Phase I – Introduction, Identify Needs, and Document Collection
+
+
+
+
+
+Project Manager is appointed.
+
+
+
+March 10
+
+Members appointed to the Working Group.
+
+Week of May 2nd
+
+May 20
+
+University posts all applicable internal faculty status-related documents (i.e., promotion and tenure guidelines, academic unit guidelines, etc.) and forms (e.g., evaluation forms), as well as a listing of peer schools.
+
+Week of May 2nd
+
+April 20
+
+Consultant meets with Working Group to provide overview of process, project goals, answer question, gain an understanding of current Faculty Legislation document’s strengths and opportunities for development.
+
+Week of May 9
+
+[Exact Date TBD]
+
+May 25
+
+Consultant delivers proposed Bylaw Table of Contents to Working Group for consideration and comment.
+
+May 16
+
+
+
+Consultant presents overview of process at Faculty Meeting.
+
+May 19
+
+May 19
+
+Zoom meeting with Working Group to discuss and finalize Table of Contents.
+
+May 20
+
+
+
+Phase II – Faculty Handbook Preparation
+
+		
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers first draft of updated Faculty Handbook.  
+
+June 20
+
+
+
+Working Group members review first draft & prepares for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+June 20 – June 27
+
+
+
+Consultant facilitates the Working Group’s review of the 1st draft.  These meetings should be scheduled in two-to-three-hour increments and will take roughly 18 to 24 hours to complete.  We will have a better sense of this after delivery of the first draft.
+
+June 27 – July 1
+
+July 18 - 22
+
+
+
+		Consultant implements Working Group’s requested revisions and delivers 2nd draft.
+
+August 1
+
+
+
+		Working Group members individually review the 2nd draft and prepare for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+		August 1 - 15
+
+
+
+		Consultant facilitates Working Group’s review of 2nd draft via a series of 2-hour virtual meetings.
+
+August 15 - 26 
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 3rd draft to Working Group.
+
+September 9
+
+
+
+Consultant facilitates Working Group’s review of 3rd draft via a series of 2-hour virtual meetings.
+
+Weeks of October 3rd & 10th
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase III – Approval Process
+
+		Projected Date
+
+Completion Date
+
+Draft 4 is submitted to the President.  
+
+October 24
+
+
+
+President submits comments and suggested revisions to Working Group.
+
+October 31
+
+
+
+Working Group and consultant meet virtually to discuss and address President’s comments.  If the Working Group disagrees with a revisions requested by the President, consultant will facilitate dialogue between parties.
+
+Week of November 7
+
+
+
+Consultant implements changes requested by the Working Group and delivers final version of the handbook, which is distributed to the Faculty.  
+
+November 18
+
+
+
+The consultant will, upon the College’s request, virtually attend a Faculty forum or meeting to answer any questions regarding the updated Faculty Bylaws document.
+
+Week of December 12 
+
+[Exact Dates to TBD]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+			         Page 1
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Proposed Calendar (No TOC Option).txt [/INST] PROJECT CALENDAR
+
+	Description
+
+Proposed Date
+
+
+
+Completion Date
+
+SEGMENT ONE
+
+
+
+
+
+Consultants deliver preliminary draft of the Code of Regulations analysis report, including any suggested amendments to the Provost & President.
+
+April 29
+
+
+
+Virtual meeting with Provost & President to discuss report.
+
+May 2-3
+
+
+
+Consultants deliver final report.
+
+May 4
+
+
+
+Virtual meeting, if necessary, with the Board’s Faculty Handbook Task Force to discuss report and suggested amendments to the Articles in the Code of Regulations. 
+
+May 5-6
+
+[Specific Date TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultants submit final suggested amendments to the Articles in the Code of Regulations. 
+
+May 9
+
+
+
+SEGMENT TWO
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase I – Introduction, Identify Needs, and Document Collection
+
+
+
+
+
+Project Manager is appointed.
+
+
+
+April 15
+
+Members appointed to the Review Team.
+
+Week of April
+
+
+
+University posts all applicable internal faculty status-related documents (i.e., promotion and tenure guidelines, academic unit guidelines, etc.) and forms (e.g., evaluation forms), as well as a listing of peer schools.
+
+May 1
+
+
+
+Consultant meets with Review Team on campus to provide overview of process, project goals, answer questions and gain an understanding of current handbook’s strengths and opportunities for development.
+
+August 29, 30 or 31st
+
+[Exact Date TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers proposed Table of Contents to Review Team and President for consideration and comment at initial meeting.
+
+September 7
+
+
+
+Zoom meeting with Review Team and President to discuss Table of Contents.
+
+Week of September 19
+
+
+
+Final consensus reached for Table of Contents.  If consensus cannot be reached, the Board’s Faculty Handbook Task Force will be consulted.
+
+By September 30
+
+
+
+Phase II – Faculty Handbook Preparation
+
+		
+
+
+
+Consultants delivers first draft of updated Faculty Handbook.  
+
+September 12 
+
+
+
+Review Team members review first draft & prepares for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+September 12-September 23
+
+
+
+Consultant visits campus to facilitate the Review Team’s review of the 1st draft.  Two full days will be required; however, these can be split up between two trips.  Many clients prefer to schedule two half-day sessions over the course of two days for each trip.  Some of these meetings can be held virtually if preferable.  Time should be reserved at the end of the two week window to hold a virtual meeting(s) in the event we do complete the review during the campus meetings.
+
+September 26-October 7
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+		Consultant implements Review Team’s requested revisions and delivers 2nd draft.
+
+October 21
+
+
+
+		Review Team members individually review the 2nd draft and prepare for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+		October 24-28
+
+
+
+		Consultant facilitates Review Team’s review of 2nd draft via a series of 2-hour virtual meetings.
+
+October 31 – November 11
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 3rd draft to Review Team.
+
+November 21
+
+
+
+Review Team and consultant meet virtually to approve/implement changes to handbook in anticipation of delivery of the 4th draft to the Faculty Executive Committee, Faculty Personnel Committee, and President for comments.
+
+December 5-9
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 4th draft, which is distributed to the Faculty Executive Committee, Faculty Personnel Committee, and President for comments. 
+
+December 17
+
+
+
+		Faculty Executive Committee, Faculty Personnel Committee, and President deliver their respective comments to Review Team and consultant.
+
+January 6 
+
+
+
+		Virtual meeting(s) is held with Review Team to review stakeholders’ comments.
+
+Week of January 9
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers 5th Draft for Review Team’s final approval.
+
+January 27
+
+
+
+		Virtual meeting(s) held with Review Team to approve 5th draft.
+
+February 6 – 10
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 5th draft and executive summary of key changes to the Board of Trustees’ Faculty Handbook Task Force. 
+
+February 20
+
+
+
+Board Faculty Handbook Task Force delivers comments/requested changes to consultant.
+
+February 27
+
+
+
+		Consultant and Review Team meet virtually to discuss/implement any revisions requested by the Board Faculty Handbook Task Force.
+
+March 6, 7, or 8th
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers final draft of the handbook, which is distributed to Faculty at start of Phase III.
+
+March 15
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase III – Approval Process
+
+		Projected Date
+
+Completion Date
+
+Review Team approved draft is submitted to the Faculty.
+
+March 15
+
+
+
+Review Team holds faculty forum(s) to review key changes to the handbook and answer questions.  Consultant will attend forum upon client request.
+
+Week of April 3rd
+
+
+
+Consultant facilitates virtual meeting(s) with Review Team to discuss any issues raised during faculty forum(s).
+
+Week of April  10
+
+
+
+Consultant implements changes requested by the Review Team and delivers final version of the handbook.  Following delivery, the handbook will be submitted to Project Manager for distribution to the Faculty. The faculty and administration will then work independently from Stevens Strategy towards obtaining Faculty, President, and ultimately Board approval.
+
+April 21
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+			         Page 1
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Proposed Calendar (No TOC-FEC-FPC Steps Option).txt [/INST] Description
+
+Proposed Date
+
+
+
+Completion Date
+
+SEGMENT ONE
+
+
+
+
+
+Consultants deliver preliminary draft of the Code of Regulations analysis report, including any suggested amendments to the Provost & President.
+
+April 29
+
+April 23
+
+Virtual meeting with Provost & President to discuss report.
+
+May 2-3
+
+
+
+Consultants deliver final report.
+
+May 4
+
+
+
+Virtual meeting, if necessary, with the Board’s Faculty Bylaws (Legislation) Task Force to discuss report and suggested amendments to the Articles in the Code of Regulations. 
+
+May 5-6
+
+[Specific Date TBD]
+
+
+
+Consultants submit suggested amendments to the Articles in the Code of Regulations. 
+
+May 9
+
+April 23
+
+SEGMENT TWO
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase I – Introduction, Identify Needs, and Document Collection
+
+
+
+
+
+Project Manager is appointed.
+
+
+
+April 15
+
+Members appointed to the Review Team.
+
+Week of April
+
+
+
+University posts all applicable internal faculty status-related documents (i.e., promotion and tenure guidelines, academic unit guidelines, etc.) and forms (e.g., evaluation forms), as well as a listing of peer schools.
+
+May 10
+
+
+
+Consultant meets with Review Team on campus to provide overview of process, project goals, answer questions and gain an understanding of current handbook’s strengths and opportunities for development.
+
+August 29, 30 or 31st
+
+[Exact Date TBD]
+
+
+
+Phase II – Faculty Bylaws (Legislation) Preparation
+
+		
+
+
+
+Consultants delivers first draft of updated Faculty Handbook.  
+
+September 19 
+
+
+
+Review Team members review first draft & prepares for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+September 19-October 7
+
+
+
+Consultant visits campus to facilitate the Review Team’s review of the 1st draft.  Two full days will be required; however, these can be split up between two trips.  Many clients prefer to schedule two half-day sessions over the course of two days for each trip.  Some of these meetings can be held virtually if preferable.  Time should be reserved at the end of the two week window to hold a virtual meeting(s) in the event we do complete the review during the campus meetings.
+
+October 10-14 & October 17-21
+
+[Exact Dates TBD]
+
+
+
+		Consultant implements Review Team’s requested revisions and delivers 2nd draft.
+
+November 7
+
+
+
+		Review Team members individually review the 2nd draft and prepare for the consultant-run facilitation meetings.
+
+		November 7 –18
+
+
+
+		Consultant facilitates Review Team’s review of 2nd draft via a series of 2-hour virtual meetings.
+
+November 21-23
+
+December 5-16
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 3rd draft to Review Team.
+
+December 16
+
+
+
+Review Team and consultant meet virtually to approve/implement changes to handbook in anticipation of delivery of the 4th draft to the Faculty Executive Committee, Faculty Personnel Committee, and President for comments.
+
+Week of January 9
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 4th draft, which is distributed to the Faculty Executive Committee, Faculty Personnel Committee, and President for comments. 
+
+
+
+
+
+		Faculty Executive Committee, Faculty Personnel Committee, and President deliver their respective comments to Review Team and consultant.
+
+
+
+
+
+		Virtual meeting(s) is held with Review Team to review stakeholders’ comments.
+
+
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers 4th 5th Draft for Review Team’s final approval.
+
+
+
+
+
+		Virtual meeting(s) held with Review Team to approve 4th 5th draft.
+
+
+
+
+
+Consultant delivers 4th 5th draft and executive summary of key changes to the Board of Trustees’ Faculty Bylaws (Legislation) Task Force and President. 
+
+January 20
+
+
+
+Board Faculty Bylaws (Legislation) Task Force and President delivers comments/requested changes to Review Team and consultant.
+
+February 3rd
+
+
+
+		Consultant and Review Team meet virtually to discuss/implement any revisions requested by the Board Faculty Bylaws (Legislation) Task Force & President.
+
+February 6-10
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers 5th draft of the handbook, which is distributed to Faculty at start of Phase III.
+
+February 17
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Phase III – Approval Process
+
+		Projected Date
+
+Completion Date
+
+Review Team approved 5th draft is submitted to the Faculty.
+
+February 17
+
+
+
+Review Team holds faculty forum(s) to review key changes to the handbook and answer questions.  Consultant will attend forum upon client request.
+
+Weeks of March 6 and 13
+
+
+
+Consultant facilitates virtual meeting(s) with Review Team to discuss any issues raised during faculty forum(s).
+
+Week of March 20
+
+
+
+Consultant implements changes requested by the Review Team and delivers final version of the handbook.  
+
+The faculty and administration will then work independently from Stevens Strategy towards obtaining Faculty, President, and ultimately Board approval.
+
+March 31
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Proposed Retirement Policy JAN 28 2022 (SS Comments).txt [/INST] Retirement Policy:
+
+
+
+Four options for all professors who are at least 60 years old and with at least 12 years of service a choice between:
+
+
+
+Option A:  A final year at prior year’s full salary/full benefits and reduced teaching load to ¾ (16-18 credits) with retirement effective at the conclusion of the year.
+
+
+
+Option B:  A full-time, full salary/full benefits semester (12 credits) followed by a semester without teaching responsibilities with half salary and full benefits.  This is essentially a ¾ pay year with only one semester teaching with retirement effective at the conclusion of the year.  
+
+
+
+Option C:  Faculty members with sabbatical eligibility could combine a half-time year (12 credits over either one semester or two semesters) with the sabbatical as terminal thus doing half-time teaching at full pay and being retired at the conclusion.  
+
+
+
+Option D: “Step-Down Program”  
+
+First Year–Full Pay and Benefits Reduced Teaching (16-18 credits)
+
+Second Year–Half Pay & Full Benefits, More Reduced Load (8-10 credits).
+
+Third Year – Retired
+
+ 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Model #1 – Canisius College
+
+The Faculty Resource Program (FRP) is offered to full-time faculty who are interested in a phased retirement option. Eligibility to participate in the Faculty Resource Program will begin at age 60 and continue through the age of 76; however, the maximum term is three years. Program participation is reduced by one year for every year past age 73, on a pro rata basis. Faculty members who are 76 years of age are not eligible to enter the program, but those who turn 76 during their participation period will continue through the end of that academic year.  The College will provide current full-time contribution levels for medical benefits to faculty in the FRP up to the age of 65.  At 65, faculty members in the FRP are considered to be part-time employees and as such eligible for Medicare.  The College will fund the cost of supplemental medical insurance for the faculty member so that the combination of Medicare and supplemental insurance provide the same level of coverage as was provided under the full-time employee benefit.  A participant’s out-of-pocket cost will not exceed the amount of her/his medical benefit contribution at the time of entry into the program but are subject to any annual percentage increases that impact full-time faculty.  Faculty members will remain in the College’s group health insurance plan if their spouse is under the age of 65 or their dependents are under the age of 26. 
+
+The Faculty Resource Program teaching component is defined as teaching half-time which requires teaching three courses during the academic school year.  Accordingly, faculty will receive half salary and TIAA contributions based on salary earned, and salary increments as these are made available to all full-time faculty.  The teaching schedule for the faculty member may be for one semester per year or for two determined mutually by the chair and the individual and subject to the approval of the Provost.  The specific courses taught will depend upon departmental needs. Non-monetary privileges include: 
+
+Protection as a full-time, tenured faculty member in any announced ""Layoff;” 
+
+Voting and participation rights in the department; 
+
+Access to parking, mailbox, library, athletic center, etc.; 
+
+The option of remaining in the faculty member’s regular office for the duration of participation in the FRP.  In extenuating circumstances, comparable space will be offered. 
+
+The College administration anticipates continuation of the program but reserves the right to suspend the admission of additional members into it at any time. In the event of financial exigency, the program could be eliminated.  All inquiries are confidential. 
+
+
+
+Model #2 – Thomas More University
+
+All tenured full-time Ranked Faculty having 15 or more years of full-time service at  are eligible to participate in the Tenured Faculty Voluntary Phased Retirement Program (“VPRP”).
+
+Program Features
+
+By voluntarily electing to enter into the VPRP, the faculty member understands that a terminal contract will be offered for a period of one year in duration (i.e., the 2022-2023 academic year), renewable for a second year (i.e., the 2023-2024 academic year) at the sole discretion of the College, provided the faculty member completes all teaching obligations and maintains professional behavior during the course of the first VPRP academic year.  
+
+The faculty member agrees to teach 12 credit hours during the academic year selected and will in turn receive an annual salary equal to one half of the base salary received in their contract for the period of the VPRP and paid in equal semi-monthly payments over the period selected.  The faculty member will not be assigned any mandatory responsibilities related to student advising, committee assignments, or departmental meetings.  The faculty member is invited to attend graduation, orientation, recruiting, and other College events. At the time of entering into the VPRP, the Faculty member will be given the choice of opting in or opting out of the faculty assembly.
+
+The faculty member accepting this plan will be eligible for all benefits with the exception of continued contributions by the College to the College’s retirement plan.   See the Director of Human Resources to learn about the details of the retirement fund.
+
+All tax obligations and other financial implications incurred by any individual as a result of accepting this offer are the sole responsibility of the faculty member.
+
+Acceptance of the plan is entirely voluntary and open only to qualified faculty members as stated above.  The faculty member understands that when voluntarily agreeing to enter into this program, the faculty member is relinquishing all tenure rights with the College, is permanently forfeiting his or her status as a tenured professor, and is voiding his or her pre-existing employment agreement with the College.  
+
+The College reserves the right to accept or deny any request for participation in the  VPRP due to budgetary reasons or allocation of departmental faculty resources.
+
+In exchange for the payments under the plan, a faculty member expressly agrees to waive all grievance procedures pertaining to full-time and/or tenured faculty contained in this Volume IV and further agrees not to apply for unemployment compensation.  A VPRP participating faculty member also waives and releases all claims against the College existing prior to the date of the faculty member’s entrance into the program, including but not limited to claims for breach of contract. 
+
+A VPRP agreement is offered as a final contract with no offer of full time or continued part-time re-employment at the end of the contract period. 
+
+Any faculty member interested in the VPRP should send a request to the Provost. It is preferred that this request be submitted by August preceding the final year of full-time employment to allow departments to accommodate the transition.  If approved, the Provost will generate an agreement for participation in the VPRP. The faculty member has seven days from the date of signing to revoke the agreement by informing the Provost in writing of such revocation.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Provost.txt [/INST] https://www.fmarion.edu/sacscoc/compliancereport/3-2-10-administrative-staff-evaluations/
+
+
+
+Washington and Lee
+
+https://my.wlu.edu/document/fgc-report-on-dean-and-provost-evaluations
+
+
+
+Miami University
+
+
+
+https://miamioh.edu/policy-library/employees/faculty/academic-administrators/faculty-committee-evaluation-administrators.html
+
+
+
+https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EL_JNATtZ5-Jst2vz0w18yO4FmL2j_Om/edit#gid=79395949
+
+
+
+Texas Tech
+
+Annual evaluation via a survey
+
+
+
+New Jersey Institute of Technology
+
+http://www5.njit.edu/facultysenate/sites/facultysenate/files/NJIT_Faculty_Handbook_July%202020%20FINAL.pdf
+
+With the knowledge and cooperation of the President, the Faculty Senate will conduct periodic evaluations (at least every three years) by the faculty of the Provost, Vice Presidents, Deans, and Department Chairpersons. The Council, after consultation with the President, may also evaluate the performance of other administrative officers whose work impacts academic affairs. The President of the Faculty Senate is responsible for transmitting the results of these evaluations to the Pr</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Provost_APR_23_Deans_Eval_Process_3_10_10.txt [/INST] APR: Dean’s Evaluation Process
+
+Western Carolina University
+
+March 5, 2010
+
+
+
+Introduction
+
+
+
+The evaluation of deans serves two purposes.  First, it is a developmental tool to promote effectiveness for both the deans and the university.  As such, the elements within the evaluation relate to those activities that assure success for both the individual and the university over time.  Second, it is a process to assess individual performance.  This portion of the evaluation is sensitive to skills and accomplishments that manifest themselves over both the short-term and long-term.  Therefore, the evaluation is organized into annual and three year timeframes that incorporate critical elements of a dean’s leadership and management skill set as well as the role a dean plays in helping the university meet initiatives related to its mission and vision. 
+
+
+
+Annual Evaluation
+
+Job Targets
+
+
+
+Characteristics.  In June of each year, the Deans are required to submit to the Provost annual job targets that cover specific areas of work expected during the year.  Targets may span a relatively short period of time, several months, or several years.  However, the set, usually fewer than 10, should always be high level activities critical to the success of the college and university.  They should never include on-going routine activities that all deans are to perform.  These routine activities will be covered via survey data.  Of course, some routine items may occasionally become a critical activity. For example, hiring a key staff member to resolve an ongoing issue may rise to the level of a job target.  These can be submitted to the Provost for discussion.  All job targets should be stated as outcomes that can be measured and documented.  [Job targets are submitted using the template included in appendix A.]   
+
+
+
+Categories.  As shown in appendix A, job targets must address four categories of dean responsibilities:  
+
+Vision and Leadership
+
+Management
+
+Resource Development
+
+University Initiatives Supporting Mission/Vision
+
+Although the meaning of vision and leadership, management, and resource development is rather straight forward, deans are urged to review the annual survey included in appendix B, to better understand how Western defines each conceptually.   The fourth category, University Initiatives Supporting Mission/Vision, obviously will change over time.  The Provost will notify the deans annually of any changes.  Currently, the priorities related to Mission/Vision include the following:
+
+Retention
+
+Recruitment
+
+Engagement
+
+QEP
+
+UNC-Tomorrow
+
+
+
+Evidence.  Deans must provide evidence to demonstrate the degree to which they accomplished each job target.  If the evidence is self evident (e.g. opened a building on a certain date, convened a new advisory group for the college), deans can simply list the event on the job target matrix.  If the evidence requires elaboration or is in a form that requires inspection (e.g. new mission and vision for college, new budgeting process for college), the dean should enter “See Portfolio” in the job target template and include the artifact in the portfolio.  
+
+
+
+Survey:  Formative Assessment of Dean’s Administrative Attributes
+
+
+
+The Office of Assessment will administer the survey(s) of administrative attributes [See Appendix B] each April to college/school faculty, department heads and support staff.  The summary report(s) will be shared with the dean and the dean and Provost will review the results together. The purpose of the annual survey is to provide constructive feedback from constituents so the deans can effectively lead their units.  
+
+
+
+Occasionally, the dean or Provost may wish to include other constituent groups in the annual survey process should their feedback be time sensitive and important to the dean’s formative development.  However, surveying other constituent groups should not be a regular practice because it will be required during the three year evaluation.  [Note:  These surveys may be tailored to fit the desired feedback from the constituent groups. The dean will work with the Provost and the Office of Assessment to customize the survey instrument(s) to meet your needs.]
+
+
+
+Third Year Evaluation
+
+
+
+Deans will undergo an extensive evaluation every three years.  This evaluation will include a summary assessment of their accomplishments, as evidenced by their job targets and their administrative performance as evidenced by survey results.  The three year evaluation builds upon the annual evaluation and includes most of its information and processes.  The major difference between the annual evaluation and the three year evaluation is the focus on cumulative outcomes and breadth of coverage.
+
+
+
+Oversight of Evaluation
+
+
+
+The Provost through the Executive Assistant will oversee the dean evaluation process.  In addition, the Director of Assessment will provide technical support as needed. Third year evaluations will be led by a dean per as selected by the Provost in consultation with the dean being evaluated.  The peer’s role is not to evaluate the dean but to act as liaison to constituent groups (e.g. they may conduct focus groups) and to gather and summarize data.  Peers will have the support of the offices of the Provost and Assessment.  All deans will be expected to participate as a peer liaison.  In addition to providing needed oversight in the evaluation process, peer led evaluation should have the following positive effects:
+
+
+
+Increases communication
+
+Reinforces a team atmosphere
+
+Reduces ‘silo’effect
+
+Promotes productive interpersonal behavior
+
+
+
+Rotation.  Deans will be placed on a three year rotation according to the schedule below:
+
+
+
+Third Year Evaluation Schedule
+
+Dean
+
+Year 
+
+Dean
+
+Year 
+
+Educational Outreach
+
+2009
+
+Fine and Performing Arts
+
+2010
+
+Graduate School
+
+2009
+
+Health and Human Science
+
+2010
+
+Honors College
+
+2009
+
+Education and Allied Sciences
+
+2012
+
+Arts and Science
+
+2010
+
+Kimmel School*
+
+2011
+
+Business 
+
+2010
+
+Library*
+
+2011
+
+*For 2010 only faculty surveys will be administered
+
+
+
+Primary Accomplishments:Job Targets.  Deans will submit results for their third year job targets just as they have for the annual evaluation.  In addition, they will also submit a self appraisal [not to exceed two pages] that summarizes their performance over the three year period.  This appraisal should highlight the most important accomplishments, explain why some outcomes weren’t reached and indicate the activities they wish to pursue in the future.
+
+
+
+Administrative Performance: Survey of Key Constituents.  During the third year the evaluation of the deans’ administrative performance will be expanded to include all key constituent groups.  At minimum the groups will include  (1) Faculty, (2) Department Heads, (3)Support Staff of the College and (4) the Council of Deans.Other University Administrators (Includes VCs and Associate VCs from outside the Provost Division) may also be included.  Surveys will be developed for each of these constituencies.
+
+
+
+In addition, each dean will be asked to identify key constituent groups that should assess his/her performance.  This could include students, alumni, community partners and the like.  Once the deans and provost agree to the groups, a matrix like the following will be completed:
+
+
+
+Dean of the Graduate School
+
+Constituent Group
+
+Frequency
+
+Required
+
+Method
+
+Faculty, Dept. Heads., Staff
+
+Annual
+
+Standard
+
+Survey
+
+Council of Deans
+
+3rd Year
+
+Standard
+
+Survey
+
+Other University Administrators
+
+3rd Year
+
+Standard
+
+Survey
+
+Graduate Council
+
+3rd Year
+
+Mutual 
+
+Survey
+
+Graduate Assistants
+
+3rd Year
+
+Optional
+
+Focus Groups
+
+
+
+
+
+Portfolio.  The portfolio is the vehicle by which deans present their evidence for evaluation.  It should be organized into two major sections: Primary Accomplishments and Administrative Performance.  Each section should begin with a summary statement that is also a self-appraisal.  The remainder of each section should include evidence/documentation that supports the evaluation.  Deans should make every effort to prepare concise portfolios. They should provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate their performance, but should avoid superfluous material. Portfolios are due to the Office of the Provost in May of the review year.
+
+
+
+Portfolio Content
+
+
+
+Section I:  Primary Accomplishments
+
+Summary and Self Appraisal (Two page Maximum)
+
+Job Target Templates
+
+Year 1
+
+Template
+
+Evidence
+
+Year 2
+
+Template
+
+Evidence
+
+Year 3
+
+Template
+
+Evidence
+
+
+
+Section II:  Administrative Performance
+
+Summary and Self Appraisal Two Page Maximum
+
+Survey Summaries
+
+Survey of Administrative Attributes:  Faculty
+
+Survey of Administrative Attributes: Department Heads
+
+Survey of Administrative Attributes: Support Staff
+
+Survey of Administrative Attributes:  Provost Council 
+
+Survey of Administrative Attributes:  Other University Administrators
+
+Survey of Administrative Attributes:  One or more tailored to unique target populations
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Appendix A: Job Target Template
+
+JOB TARGETS
+
+For FY 20_ _-20_ _
+
+
+
+
+
+Name
+
+
+
+Unit
+
+	
+
+Job Targets
+
+Major Strategies
+
+Performance Indicator
+
+6 Month Evaluation
+
+Final Evaluation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Evaluator’s Comments:
+
+Employee’s Signature:
+
+Date:
+
+Supervisor’s Signature:
+
+Date:
+
+Instructions:
+
+List no more than 10 job targets for the planning cycle.  Targets should be major tasks that go beyond normal day to day operations. For example, hiring faculty or staff is a typical job expectation of deans whereas developing a new assessment program is not.
+
+Job targets should be expressed as a product or outcome.  Use action verbs like create, implement, produce, resolve, increase. However, action verbs do not always produce acceptable targets.  For example, “Serve on the strategic planning committee” doesn’t produce a product, whereas “create a planning process for academic affairs” is an acceptable target because it produces a specific product/outcome.
+
+List the major strategies that you will use to address the target.  Although you may have many ideas, only list a couple (maximum of 4) to illustrate your action plan.  
+
+To fairly evaluate your performance we need to agree on how we will both know when you have accomplished the target.  Therefore, in the column labeled evidence, one or more performance indicators that can be used to measure the completion of the target.  Examples:  Target:  Increase the number of international students attending WCU; Performance Indicator: Fall 06 attendance = 120.  Target:  Implement an assessment program for the College; Performance Indicator:  All Departments have acceptable assessment plans on file, No less than 8 departments have filed assessment reports to demonstrate implementation.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Appendix B: Dean Evaluation Surveys
+
+
+
+The evaluation of deans serves two purposes. First, it is a developmental tool to promote effectiveness for both the deans and the university.  As such, the elements within the evaluation relate to those activities that assure success for both the individual and the university.  Second, it is a process to assess individual performance. This portion of the evaluation is sensitive to skills and accomplishments that manifest themselves over both the short-term and long-term.  Therefore, the evaluation is organized into annual and three year timeframes that incorporate critical elements of a dean’s leadership and management skill set as well as the role a dean plays in helping the university meet initiatives related to its mission and vision. The Provost discusses the results of the survey with each dean to promote effective performance and a positive work culture. The areas of evaluation are:
+
+	Vision and Leadership
+
+	Management
+
+	Resource Development
+
+	University Initiatives Supporting Mission/Vision
+
+
+
+All surveys items:
+
+1) include a space for comments after each section (Vision and Leadership, Management, etc.) 
+
+2) have the rating scale: 
+
+	very satisfied—satisfied—neither satisfied nor dissatisfied—dissatisfied—very dissatisfied—don’t know 
+
+3) reference the term “college” to include the Kimmel School and the Library
+
+
+
+Dean Evaluation by FACULTY (fixed term, tenure track, tenured—no Leadership Team members in this survey)
+
+Rate your level of satisfaction with  your dean concerning each of the items within the four categories below that define the major expectations of the dean’s responsibilities.  IF YOU DO NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT KNOWLEDGE TO RATE AN ITEM, PLEASE INDICATE “DON’T KNOW”.
+
+
+
+My dean …….
+
+
+
+Vision and Leadership
+
+Promotes a college culture to support mission and vision
+
+Advances clear and appropriate vision for the college
+
+Is perceived as an effective leader within the university
+
+Fosters a climate of continuous improvement
+
+Promotes effective planning and visioning
+
+ Is perceived to be good problem solver
+
+Makes decisions to support the college’s mission and vision
+
+ 
+
+Management
+
+Interacts  and responds in a professional manner
+
+Is open to  ideas and feedback
+
+Keeps faculty  informed about important college and university issues
+
+Responds timely to business that affects me
+
+Allows appropriate levels of independence and decision making at the departmental level
+
+Has the capacity to deal with unanticipated events and crises (ex. Budget cuts, personnel issues, bad publicity, etc.)
+
+Manages resources effectively to fund college priorities
+
+
+
+Resource Development
+
+Advocates for adequate resources to advance the mission of the college
+
+Creates opportunities for faculty professional development 
+
+Is working to expand extramural funding to support college programs.
+
+
+
+University Initiatives Supporting Mission/Vision
+
+Integrates the college’s strategic goals with the QEP
+
+Promotes university enrollment goals, including retention and graduation rates
+
+Supports engagement activities consistent with the university mission 
+
+
+
+Summary rating
+
+Overall, how satisfied are you with this dean?
+
+Open ended:
+
+Overall, what are the major strengths of this dean?
+
+Overall, how could this dean improve?
+
+
+
+Dean Evaluation by LEADERSHIP TEAM
+
+Rate your level of satisfaction with your dean concerning each of the items within the four categories below that define the major expectations of the dean’s responsibilities.  IF YOU DO NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT KNOWLEDGE TO RATE AN ITEM, PLEASE INDICATE “DON’T KNOW”.
+
+
+
+My dean…..
+
+
+
+Vision and Leadership
+
+Promotes a college culture to support mission and vision
+
+Advances a clear and appropriate vision for college
+
+Is perceived as an effective leader within the university
+
+Fosters a climate of continuous improvement
+
+Promotes effective planning
+
+Demonstrates leadership during times of crises or challenge
+
+Is perceived to be a good problem solver
+
+Makes decisions to support the college’s mission and vision
+
+Advocates for my department/division
+
+
+
+Management
+
+Encourages me to express my opinions and to offer suggestions about college issues
+
+Advocates for and implements retention and recruitment efforts for students
+
+Interacts with me in a professional manner
+
+Keeps me informed about important college and university issues
+
+Responds timely to business that affects me.
+
+Allows appropriate levels of independence and decision making at the department/division level
+
+Has the capacity to deal with unanticipated events and crises (ex. Budget cuts, personnel issues, bad publicity, etc.)
+
+Manages resources effectively to fund college priorities
+
+Takes responsibility for his/her actions
+
+Gives others appropriate credit for successes
+
+Solicits and considers feedback before making decisions
+
+Provides me with constructive feedback regarding my performance
+
+Is accessible to me (as appropriate)
+
+Is responsive to me (as appropriate)
+
+Conducts timely and efficient meetings
+
+Prioritizes internal funding requests consistent with college mission and objectives
+
+Promotes retention of qualified faculty and staff 
+
+
+
+Resource Development
+
+Advocates for adequate resources to advance the mission of the college
+
+Creates opportunities for faculty professional development 
+
+Is working to expand extramural funding to support college programs
+
+Encourages and assists in my professional development
+
+Manages college resources for program effectiveness
+
+Develops outside support and visibility for the college and its programs through networking and prospect development
+
+
+
+University Initiatives Supporting Mission/Vision
+
+Integrates the college’s strategic goals with overall goals of the university (e.g., UNC-Tomorrow, QEP, etc.)
+
+Promotes university enrollment goals, including retention and graduation rates
+
+Supports engagement activities consistent with the university mission
+
+
+
+Summary Responses: 
+
+Overall, how satisfied are you with this dean?
+
+Open ended:
+
+Overall, what are the major strengths of your dean?
+
+Overall, how could your dean improve?
+
+
+Dean Evaluation by SUPPORT STAFF (All full time support staff within the college)
+
+.  IF YOU DO NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT KNOWLEDGE TO RATE AN ITEM, PLEASE INDICATE “DON’T KNOW”.
+
+
+
+
+
+My Dean: 
+
+
+
+Overall, how satisfied are you with this dean?
+
+
+
+Open ended:
+
+Overall, what are the major strengths of this dean?
+
+Overall, how could this dean improve?
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Dean Evaluation by COUNCIL OF DEANS
+
+Rate your level of satisfaction with this dean’s effectiveness in the following areas.
+
+
+
+Maintains good interpersonal relationships with me as a Council of Deans member
+
+Interacts with me in a professional manner.
+
+Supports university goals
+
+Works effectively with me to address Council agendas
+
+Keeps me well-informed of college activities as appropriate
+
+Provides leadership in solving problems presented to the Council
+
+Provides leadership and/or support in developing appropriate agendas for the Council of Deans 
+
+Provides leadership to the Council concerning enrollment growth issues
+
+Advocates effectively for his/her college/division
+
+Supports the University mission and Vision
+
+Fosters collaboration among the Council members
+
+Responds timely to business that affects the Council of Deans
+
+
+
+Summary Ratings:
+
+Overall, how satisfied are you with this dean as a colleague? 
+
+
+
+Open ended:
+
+14. Overall, what are the major strengths of this dean?
+
+15. Overall, how could this dean improve?</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Questions and Notes.txt [/INST] Questions
+
+
+
+Teaching Faculty (see page 53) vs Ranked Faculty – is there a distinction?
+
+Explain the annual evaluation interview process –
+
+Applies only to non-tenured faculty?
+
+Include Part-time faculty?
+
+Do faculty submit an annual Self Evaluation report as part of process?
+
+What form is used for the interview process?
+
+Are goals set?
+
+Does faculty member have an opportunity to review?
+
+Interview results are sent to the Dean and Provost.
+
+Do either provide commentary?
+
+What file are these placed in?  Confidential File?
+
+Anticipate Special Appointment Faculty Evaluations to be included in this engagement?
+
+Evaluated Annually?  How?  YES
+
+2nd and 4th Year Evaluation:
+
+Teaching Evaluations: 
+
+Any formal policy addressing how these are conducted?
+
+These are not shared with the candidate?
+
+Should they be for formative purposes?
+
+Department Chair and Deans 2nd and 4th year evaluation (p. 56) reference to guidelines & forms –
+
+Is this the Chair Evaluation of Advising Form?
+
+Does ART use a standard report form?  Yes, a standard form.
+
+Does Provost add to the evaluation?
+
+Department Member evaluations for P&T:
+
+How determine who received these?
+
+Limited to Tenured faculty for tenure applications?
+
+University Contribution Form:
+
+Who is this form sent to?  
+
+Sent to faculty External to department
+
+Every department member receives another form
+
+CONSEQUENCES IF NOT FILLED OUT
+
+General thoughts from Tenured Faculty regarding the 6th year evaluation?
+
+Past discussions regarding current procedures?
+
+Any consideration ever given to adopting College/School or department-level:
+
+Evaluation criteria?
+
+ART committees?
+
+Why were proposed changes voted down?
+
+Addition of Professional Service rejected.  Why?
+
+Is this considered by the ART presently given the guidelines document?
+
+Is the Guidelines Document approved by the Ranked Faculty?
+
+Addition of Mentoring rejected under Service.  Why?</s>"
+"<s>[INST] RA-Handbook-comments.txt [/INST] Memo To: Prof. Broschart, President of Faculty Senate
+
+From: Dr. Raymond Addabbo, Professor Arts and Sciences
+
+Re: Faculty Handbook
+
+Date: April 21, 2016
+
+As per your request, I have spoken with several faculty members and have collected their opinions regarding the handbook. 
+
+Professor Broschart has indicated to me that no request was made of RA to speak to faculty members and collect their opinions about the handbook?  Given the inaccuracy of the opening statement, I question the validity of much of this document especially the use of the word “we”.
+
+In addition, the AAUP has been sent a copy of version 4 of the handbook. We have spoken with a representative of the AAUP who reviewed the handbook. His assessment is that the proposed handbook gets a grade of C/C-.
+
+Referring to my first statement, who is “we”?  Who did “we” speak to? Any communication with the AAUP should go through proper channels. 
+
+If we do officially send the handbook to the AAUP, I would expect a written report in return, not some “shooting from the hip” second hand interpretation that is being offered here.
+
+Finally, does the AAUP have a grading system or rubric for rating faculty handbooks?  No.
+
+An AAUP grade of C means that the handbook protects both sides.
+
+Having said this, I would love to see what the AAUP chapter would grade the old handbook.
+
+The major flaw is that the role of the faculty is replaced by administrators in key areas, such as grievance committees, reduction in force plans and the hiring of faculty. There also needs to be included a statement that the primary responsibility of faculty is in areas related to curriculum.
+
+There is no major flaw.  In this handbook as opposed to the current handbook the faculty is given a significantly increased role in all of these areas.  The role of faculty is not being “replaced”, rather it is being enhanced.
+
+I think the central counter to this argument is that in revising the handbook, faculty have been given a far greater role in all of the areas cited.  In the prior handbook, there was no faculty grievance policy.  Also, there was no reduction in force plan policy in place; rather, the old dismissal policy simply stated that Board may cancel tenure appointments should he college need to reduce the number of faculty positions.  Finally, there was no transparent hiring policy in the old handbook.
+
+As far as RA’s statement about curriculum, at Vaughn, curriculum has always been developed by the faculty. The most recent examples include our programs in Aeronautical Sciences, Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering and Mechatronics. All of these programs have been developed by faculty. If anyone feels otherwise, I suggest they ask the opinion of the department chairs who manage these programs. 
+
+Faculty Senate Bylaws clearly recognize the faculty’s role in this regard:
+
+“The Faculty Senate, functioning for the faculty through the organizational machinery hereinafter described, makes recommendations to the College President concerning issues of instruction, curriculum, academic policies, faculty welfare and concerns.”  See Article 1.
+
+“Acting on behalf of the faculty, the Faculty Senate serves the following purposes:
+
+							To study matters involving educational issues, policies and programs as it relates to the faculty and the overall welfare of Vaughn College…”
+
+Also, see also Section 1.8.1.6 (reprinted below), which was added to further expand on the text above:
+
+Subject to the authority of the Board of Trustees, full-time members of the faculty, by and through the the Faculty Senate, are responsible for the development, evaluation and improvement of the College’s curriculum.  This includes developing and enhancing current courses; participating in course and program review activities; and recommending academic requirements and policy.  Full-time faculty members generally engage in these activities via participation in the Faculty Senate, as well as through individual participation in department meetings and membership on applicable standing committees, task forces and working groups.
+
+Finally, we feel that issues with the handbook can be rectified within a fairly short amount of time. We are respectfully requesting that any vote regarding the handbook be postponed, until all faculty have the opportunity to review the handbook. In addition, we are also respectfully requesting that a final version of the handbook be voted on by all full time faculty with rank that are not holding administrative appointments.
+
+Given the above, RA serves as a faculty member with one opinion.  There is no place in this process for self-designated collectors of faculty opinions.  What’s more when he speaks of faculty not holding administrative appointments is he referring to chairs and/or department coordinators?  If so this is totally indicative of person looking to “stack the deck” of voters in a way unfair to all members of the faculty.  Finally, the senate has bylaws indicating the voting process.  The senate bylaws are what should be followed.
+
+My understanding it that all faculty have had a chance to review the past several drafts of the document.  This should be documented.
+
+The Senate Bylaws presently in force and effect should be followed.  Those permitted to vote at a Senate meeting are the individuals who should vote.  The full faculty has the ability to overturn Senate action if the voting threshold is met.  To do otherwise would violate the Senate bylaws and violate established shared governance practices at the College.
+
+The following specific issues with version 3 of the proposed handbook need to be addressed.
+
+Page 3 (1.1.3) - Arts and Sciences is one department, if a change is to be made the members of that department should initiate the change.
+
+The first sentence is just a leftover from the old handbook. Arts and Sciences is in fact one department.
+
+This is the College’s text and should be edited as necessary to reflect current College practice.
+
+The remaining portion of the comment is editorial on the part of RA. The board and the president will always have the option to restructure when it is in the best interest of the institution.
+
+Faculty should be involved in program realignment matters, with final decisions made by the Administration and Board; however, this is not something that needs to be addressed in this section of the Handbook.  He is simply pointing out an apparent typo in the College’s old text.  We should address this here and move on.
+
+Page 3 (Paragraph 2) The faculty should be making hiring recommendations. The faculty 
+
+in the department must be part of the process
+
+Page 3 Paragraph 2 does not reference hiring recommendations.
+
+I’m not sure what RA getting at. The faculty in the department are always part of the hiring process and this continues as stated in the new handbook.
+
+This is the College’s text.  The fact of the matter is that faculty are included in the hiring process, which is fully spelled out later in the handbook.  It is an easy fix to address this minor point.  We should simply reference the faculty search committee in the sentence being referenced and then add a cross-reference to the hiring policy.  I will add this.
+
+Page 10, (1.3.1.1) Faculty membership consists of all full time faculty with rank in tenure track positions or having tenure.
+
+No. Non tenure track faculty such as Rodney Dash, Jacob Glanzman, Deb Hennebery, and George Tracy are also part of the faculty.
+
+Nothing to add to this point.  The most accurate definition of full-time faculty needs to spelled out in this section of the handbook.  Of note, the definition in the current draft was reprinted in part from the Faculty Senate Bylaws.  
+
+
+
+It should be noted that full-time non-tenure track faculty are commonly afforded voting rights as members of the full-time faculty at most institutions.  I am certain the AAUP would advocate that they be involved in faculty governance and be permitted to participate in professional development funds, etc.
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 11 (1.3.2) Last paragraph, part time faculty should not be eligible for funds
+
+The statement in the handbook is that “in general this is true”, however in some instances the VPA may make exceptions. It is important to allow the most flexibility for the institution.
+
+The preference of RA, is completely inflexible and not in the best interests of the institution.
+
+It is institutional preference as to whether such funds should be provided to part-time faculty.  Certainly if the funds are available and full-time faculty are not being adversely impacted, it is in the interest of the College’s students to have adjunct faculty participate in development activities.  This is a territorial issue.  What the full-time faculty should be mindful of is the fact that adjunct faculty across the nation are starting to unionize.  Any involvement of part-time faculty in managerial matters and the affording of benefits such as development funds will help to deter such efforts.
+
+Page 13 (1.4.3) All faculty holding rank (assistant Professor and above) must have a doctorate (Ph.D.,Ed.D)
+
+We have several Assistant Professors (and associate) who only hold masters degrees. While in almost all instances, tenure track appointments should go to applicants who hold a doctorate, in the interests of the institution, we should allow for some flexibility for hiring those who may have exceptional expertise (such as former NTSB members)
+
+This is contrary to common higher education practice.  Obviously, it is preferable that the terminal degree be present.  However, policy should allow for the appointment of individuals who have equivalent professional experience to the terminal degree at these ranks.  This is very common to find at universities across the nation.
+
+Page 14, (1st Paragraph) A Recommendation to the Board for an initial appointment to full professor must come from a recommendation from the appropriate department. 
+
+Again this speaks to flexibility. I do not agree. The president may feel that an external candidate who brings exceptional experience to the college could also be recommended.
+
+The recommendation to the Board will be emanating from the hiring process outlined in 1.6.1, which includes a search committee comprised in part of department faculty members.  So, to a certain extent, the department is involved.  I have no objection to having the department involved in the initial appointment process.  The question really is does the full-time faculty want to have that additional service obligation and are the respective departments large enough to populate such committees?  The position being advocated here is followed at larger schools.  Again, I have no objection to setting it up this way so long as it is realistic and workable at Vaughn.
+
+Page 16 (1.5.2) Must include that if there is low enrollment in a full time faculty members class that gets cancelled the faculty member will be assigned another class that may result in the termination of an adjunct.
+
+I have no problem with this.  A first priority is that full time faculty have a full time load.
+
+I agree.  This can be added.
+
+Page 17 (1.6.1) Item 2, search committee must be determined by the appropriate department, not the Vice-President of Academic Affairs. Item 3 structure of the search committee must be determined by the faculty in that department. There is no need for members form another department to be on the search committee, if the current policy is followed then all faculty will have input.
+
+RA neglects to mention that the statement reads that the VPA will form the search committee in conjunction with the department chair. Collaboration in this process is necessary to insure a fair search process that follows best practices.
+
+As far as the second statement goes, given the size of our school and necessary interaction between departments it is essential that key members of other departments serve on the committee.
+
+On a personal note, I had significant issues with RA’s approach to chairing several of the committees that he was involved in. 
+
+Department committee members are represented on the committee.  So there is departmental involvement (as there should be).  The department faculty are experts in the discipline and best positioned to identify the ideal candidate.  When we developed this text, the committee structure was set up based on conversation with Paul to capture what the College has been doing over the past several years.  I am not opposed to modifying the makeup of the search committees and we can revise the text if the Review Team or Senate would like - either by having the department select the committee members or having the committee consult with the department about the candidate prior to identifying the final candidates.  Again, the approach being advocated by RA is found in larger schools.  The question really boils down to whether all the departments have the size to populate such search committees and want to take on this additional service responsibility (in addition to all the other areas where he is advocating departmental involvement).
+
+
+
+Page 20 (1.6.2) The department chair should determine the selection of adjuncts with consultation form members of the department.
+
+Generally, this is true.  I’m ok with removing VPA here
+
+OK by me.  The text simply captured the College’s current practice.  If it is erroneous or change wants to be made, that is not a problem.
+
+Page 21 (1.6.3) Administrators and staff should not be teaching
+
+This again is just the opinion of RA. Vaughn has staff with excellent academic credentials and have for years been used effectively to teach some courses. Allowing for this has been in the best interests of the institution. 
+
+While an examination of this process from the human resources department is ongoing, a statement by RA that flat out states they should not be teaching is highly inflexible and in my opinion detrimental.
+
+This is institutional preference.  If an administrator is qualified, then there is no reason why he or she can’t teach.  For example, Paul as the VPAA can teach a class.  The President at Wesley College regularly teaches online courses.
+
+Page 26 (1.7.2) First paragraph Statement must explicitly state that personnel files cannot be accessed except by the employee and human resources for routine use. Any other access must be asked for permission from the faculty member.  
+
+For routine use this makes complete sense.
+
+	We addressed this in the 5th draft.
+
+	Any other access? Does that mean in the case of say a criminal investigation that we need to ask the faculty members permission?  
+
+	The College needs to alert the faculty member of a subpoena so that he or she can determine an appropriate course of action.  This is addressed in the policy already.
+
+Page 28 (1.8.15, Ad Hoc Grievance) Due to the size of the faculty there should be a committee consisting of three tenured faculty and one alternate selected by each department. The selection must be determined by the faculty.
+
+We would be willing to go to a committee of 4 faculty members. 2 selected by the faculty senate president and 2 selected by the VPA. The selection should be shared to reduce the possibility of “stacking the deck” by either side. 
+
+On a personal note I can think of instances in the past when committees were stacked in such a a way that was obviously unfair to the faculty member and potentially damaging to the institution.
+
+Four faculty members is no good – it could result in a tie.  Three is fine by me if a change in number needs to be made.
+
+I do not object to having the Faculty Senate appoint the committee.  In fact, it is not uncommon for a grievance committee to be a standing committee of the faculty senate.  Of note, much of the issues being brought up in this memo deal with the population of committees.  The Faculty Senate should really have standing committees in place to address these matters.  For example, a standing Promotion and Tenure Committee, a Grievance Committee, an Appeals Committee, etc.
+
+But if the administration wants the VPAA to make an appointment, there are certainly examples of schools that do this.
+
+I would also note that the there is protection for the faculty member imbedded in the policy-as he or she is permitted two challenges.  Perhaps a compromise is 3 members, two appointed by the Faculty Senate and one by the VPAA?
+
+Page 29 (sec. 2, bullet 1 and 2) Not needed, too much authority given to Vice President Academic Affairs.
+
+Disagree, for same reasons as stated in 12. VPA should have this authority to insure proper resolution.
+
+The second bullet point is designed to address instances that do not fall within the definition of a grievance set forth earlier in the policy.  So, if the VPAA determines that the grievance definition is not met on the face of the grievance (in other words, we are dealing with a complaint as opposed to a grievance), then this bullet point allows for an alternative resolution process.  Bullet point needs some slight revision to reflect the accurate makeup of the committee but it should remain as again the purpose of the text is allow for the VPAA to make a determination of whether the definition of a grievance has been met on the face of written grievance.  Of note, some schools allow this decision to be made by the Chair of the Faculty Senate and I would not object to making that change.  But in general, it appears that RA is not completely understanding the intent of the two bullet points is meant to try to distinguish between whether a grievance or a complaint has been filed.
+
+Page 30 (1.8.16) Statement is not strong enough, an essential aspect of academic freedom is for full time faculty to determine curriculum, course content, contact hour and degree requirements.
+
+Again, appropriate faculty at Vaughn have always “determined curriculum, course content, contact hour and degree requirements”. 
+
+We can add this specific text to 1.8.1.6 if it will placate him– it was implied that these items are included in the text we added regarding the curriculum and certainly there was no intent to suggest otherwise.
+
+From my personal experience this seems to have to do with the rejection of a former chairs plan to have all calculus courses in the engineering program run at 4 credits while the chair of the engineering department wanted the credits to stay at 3. This was a case of a disagreement between two faculty members that needed to be resolved. Listening in to both sides and referring to research that we had done on best practices at other institutions, as chief academic officer I sided with the engineering chair on this. The former chair was annoyed and in fact the engineering chair commented to me that he did not want to discuss the matter further as the former chair “gets mad”.
+
+
+
+Page 31 (1.8.2.1 and 1.8.2.1.1) All reference to office hours should be four hours. The full time teaching load for all full time faculty including ATI should be 12 hours independent of the number of lecture or laboratory hours.
+
+The current faculty letters of agreement state that there should be one office hour for every three contact hours. Faculty members teaching 12 contact hours are required to have 4 office hours, faculty with 15 contact hours are required to have 5. The reworking of the handbook is not an opportunity to renegotiate office hours.
+
+ATI and Academic have different policies concerning a full time schedule. RA is not accurate in his statement about ATI hours. Again the redesign of the faculty handbook is not about renegotiating ATI hours. 
+
+This is an ‘in house’ issue.
+
+Pp. 41-45 (1.9) Most of the policies on faculty evaluations need to be rewritten. The standards of the profession should be taken from AAUP faculty evaluation policies. Tenured faculty do not need to be evaluated yearly. Non tenured faculty should have evaluations done with a tenured faculty member from the department. The personnel form in the appendix should be omitted; there are too many subjective criteria (appearance, conduct etc.)
+
+It would be helpful to have Stephen Lazarus weigh in on this.
+
+Not sure what he means by the “standards of profession” and the AAUP faculty evaluation procedures.
+
+The faculty evaluation criteria of teaching/scholarship/service are standard across academia.  This is bolstered by the opening paragraph in the following AAUP document addressing collegiality issues: http://www.aaup.org/report/collegiality-criterion-faculty-evaluation.
+
+Here are two other AAUP statement on teaching evaluations:
+
+http://www.aaup.org/NR/rdonlyres/2BE9B083-8942-4BB9-8315-8BF772CB57F9/0/StatementonTeachingEvaluation.pdf
+
+https://www.msudenver.edu/media/content/sri-taskforce/documents/observations-statement-on-teaching-evaluation.pdf
+
+I do not see any conflicts with either.
+
+The annual, student evaluation, promotion and tenure evaluation processes are all pretty standard.  We can add more departmental level involvement – but again I wonder whether this is realistic or wanted at Vaughn.
+
+With regard to the tenured faculty evaluation issue, we have been through this.  Schools are across the board on the issue of tenured faculty evaluations and we have submitted examples of peer school.  I am happy to revise this as necessary – but the College is within its rights to require either a limited annual or bi-annual review to include the submission of a self-report and regular student evaluations or a comprehensive post-tenure review of tenured faculty.  The AAUP recognizes the practice of tenured faculty undergoing annual reviews via the submission of reports (such as outlined in the policy) for determining salary increases.  It also incidentally has reluctantly recognized the right of a college to conduct post-tenure reviews.  So I would recommend that some sort of review of tenured faculty remain in the handbook.
+
+I have no objection to having a department level review by peers.  Is this really what the faculty wants?  This is a practice typically done by large state universities, particularly on 3rd year, promotion and tenure reviews.  Is he advocating that department faculty should be involved in the annual evaluations as well?  Again, this can be done – but it pushes the service commitment up in each department.  
+
+The form with its references to the appearance, etc. incorporated elements from 
+
+Page 49 (1.9.1.6, C) Review panel should be same structure as grievance committee; membership must be determined by the faculty.
+
+
+
+Here is what is written in the handbook draft
+
+Generally, the Review Panel will include a faculty member recommended by the Faculty Senate, a Department Chair recommended by the Vice President of Academic Affairs, who is from a department other than that of the individual appealing the promotion determination, and an administrator nominated by the President, who shall chair the Review Panel.
+
+
+
+My comment --
+
+Two out of three members of the panel are faculty. This is procedure that employs shared governance and insures that both the faculty member and the institution are treated fairly.
+
+
+
+The text above simply follows the same appeals process as the College’s tenure policy.  I am indifferent regarding the composition of the panel – but if a change is made it should mirror the tenure appeal panel.  The key is to have faculty peers reviewing the case.  If the current process has been working, why change it?  
+
+
+
+ Page 57 (Appeal of Tenure Denial) Panel must be made of faculty appointed by each department.
+
+
+
+the College will convene a Review Panel consisting of three individuals.  Generally the Review Panel will include a faculty member recommended by the Faculty Senate, an Academic Chair recommended by the Vice President of Academic Affairs, who is from a department other than that of the individual appealing the tenure determination, and an administrator nominated by the President, who shall chair the Review Panel.
+
+
+
+This was the college’s text.  If its not broken, why change it? Having said this, I have no objection to modifying the membership.
+
+
+
+Page 62 (1.12.3) - The schedule for notice of non-renewal of appointment should follow the following schedule, one year of service, three months, second year six months, third year nine months, four years or more of service should be given one full year.
+
+
+
+Needs more discussion with Sharon. Note this has to work with the tenure track guidelines.
+
+
+
+He is pushing for the AAUP notice guidelines, which we have discussed in the past.  The dates he has listed are technically not consistent with the AAUP notice provisions.  There is no requirement that the College follow AAUP notice provisions.  But they are industry standard.
+
+
+
+Page 62 (1.12.4) Sec. A Entire statement must be omitted, all other numbered items must be removed except for 6 and 11.
+
+
+
+I would like to hear Stephen Lazarus weigh in on this.
+
+
+
+It is standard for colleges and universities to list examples of conduct that rises to the level of dismissal for cause. 
+
+
+
+AAUP model policy reads: “Adequate cause for a dismissal will be related, directly and substantially, to the fitness of faculty members in their professional capacities as teachers or researchers.  Dismissal will not be used to restrain faculty members in their exercise of academic freedom or other rights of American citizens.”  But in 2004, the following AAUP document addressing termination and discipline was published (http://www.aaup.org/issues/appointments-promotions-discipline/termination-discipline-2004), which reads in part:
+
+
+
+“While AAUP provides extensive advice on the procedural protections to be afforded faculty who face dismissal for cause, the identification of the substantive grounds for the dismissal of faculty is left primarily to individual campuses.  The 1958 Statement observes:
+
+
+
+One persistent source of difficulty is the definition of adequate cause for the dismissal of a faculty member. Despite the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, and subsequent attempts to build upon it, considerable ambiguity and misunderstanding persist throughout higher education, especially in respective conceptions of governing boards, administrative officers, and faculties concerning this matter. The present statement assumes that individual institutions will have formulated their own definitions of adequate cause for dismissal, bearing in mind the 1940 Statement and standards which have developed in the experience of academic institutions.”
+
+
+
+“What conduct constitutes just cause should be sensitive to the nature of higher education. Professors Barbara Lee and William Kaplin suggest that ""[i]nstitutions should not comfortably settle for the bald adequate-cause standard.  Good policy and (especially for public institutions) good law should demand more.""  Accordingly, such definitions ""should be sufficiently clear to guide the decision-makers who will apply them and to forewarn the faculty members who will be subject to them."" Kaplin & Lee, The Law of Higher Education 277-78 (3rd ed. Jossey-Bass).”
+
+
+
+“Failure to clearly define adequate cause may lead courts to invalidate particular actions or other severe sanctions. See, e.g., Tuma v. Board of Nursing, 593 P.2d 711 (Idaho 1979) (invalidating suspension for ""unprofessional conduct""); Davis v. Williams, 598 F.2d 916 (5th Cir. 1979) (invalidating regulation prohibiting ""conduct prejudicial to good order""). But see Ohio Dominican College v. Krone, 560 N.E.2d 1340 (Ohio App. 1990) (state court declined to discuss whether the institution's standard of dismissal for ""grave cause"" was vague).”
+
+
+
+Based on the above, I submit that listed are examples of adequate cause conduct (with the exception of perhaps #4 –which was the college’s old policy and is not standard industry text) should remain.  Note that numbers 1-5 are reprinted from the college’s current Faculty Handbook. 
+
+
+
+Finally, if push comes to shove, the initial paragraph of the Policy covers the college.  It reads:
+
+
+
+Termination of a Full-time Faculty member’s appointment during the term of appointment may be only for adequate cause such as incompetence, misconduct, insubordination (failure to comply with the instructions of a superordinate - e.g., Department Chair (if applicable), the Vice President of Training (if applicable), Vice President of Academic Affairs, President - in the performance of his or her official duties), violation or intentional non-compliance with College or departmental policies, procedures or rules, or conduct unbecoming College faculty.  The burden of proof in establishing cause for dismissal rests on the College, and must be established by a preponderance of the evidence.  Dismissal will not be used to restrain a faculty member in his or her exercise of academic freedom or other rights consonant with the purposes and mission of the College.
+
+
+
+Page 63 (1.12.4) Sec. B Major and minor sanctions should be distinguished. The process for major sanction should be the same as for firing. Once again committee imposing sanctions must be from the faculty.
+
+
+
+I would like to hear Stephen Lazarus weigh in on this.
+
+DRAFT THIS
+
+He is advocating for the AAUP policy- which I do not object to.  The approach in the handbook allows for faculty due process protections in the form of a grievance but allows the administration to initially proceed without a hearing before imposing the sanction.  In other words, the faculty member must specifically elect to proceed with the filing of a grievance if he or she disagrees with the sanction.  The approach he is advocating would require a full committee hearing prior to imposing a major sanction.  This is fine and in accordance with AAUP practice – but will slow things down.  Some past clients (from the administrative perspective) have preferred a more streamline approach and faculty have agreed to go along at times knowing that there is a due process protection imbedded in the policy.  Other clients have adopted the AAUP approach.  So, really, it boils down to where the faculty and administration can reach a consensus on the best approach for Vaughn. 
+
+
+
+Page 64 (1.12.4) Sec. B Dismissal for Cause. Last paragraph, committee composed of faculty from the departments, same as grievance.
+
+
+
+I would like to hear Stephen Lazarus weigh in on this.
+
+
+
+As a practical matter, are the College’s departments large enough to field an unbiased committee, particularly if strikes are allocated?
+
+
+
+There is no requirement that department faculty get involved in such a deliberation.  In fact, this could potentially be harmful to the faculty member under certain circumstances as there may be department faculty that are at odds with one another.  This is typically handled by a standing faculty senate committee at most schools.  The AAUP policy statement does not require a departmental committee; rather, a committee comprised of faculty member peers.  I think the better practice is to have a nice mixture of faculty from various departments, including the faculty member’s department.
+
+
+
+Page 66 (1.12.5) The note after the first paragraph must be omitted.
+
+
+
+I would like to hear Stephen Lazarus weigh in on this.
+
+
+
+I have no objection to omitting it.  I can see why the AAUP would want that out.  It is a sentence that would be nice to have, but rarely passes through.
+
+
+
+Page 66 (1.12.5) Financial Exigency must be defined. Faculty must be involved in determining financial exigency and a program being discontinued.
+
+
+
+I’d like to hear the opinion of others, however I think this is something that we could really get bogged down with. Financial indicators are always shared with the faculty however, most faculty are not experts in their chosen field, not on the finances of an academic institution.
+
+
+
+Agree on the definition point-  I will add the AAUP definition, which is standards across the industry, to the 6th draft.
+
+
+
+Faculty are involved in the determining both events:
+
+
+
+Financial Exigency:
+
+…the Board will consult with the President and the Vice President of Finance and Business, as well as the Vice President of Academic Affairs and in the case of ATI the Vice President of Training, other senior administrators, and the officers of the Faculty Senate prior to making the Board’s declaration of a Financial Exigency.
+
+
+
+Program Discontinuation:
+
+
+
+The decision to formally discontinue or reduce an academic program, department of instruction will be based upon educational considerations, as determined the Board of Trustees upon the recommendation of the President and Vice President for Academic Affairs or the Vice President of Training as applicable, after consultation with the Faculty Senate.  
+
+
+
+The Financial exigency clause can be expended to include the full Senate as opposed to just officers if desireable.  The intent of the model was to include faculty in the process.  
+
+
+
+The role of the Senate can be expanded so that it mirrors the AAUP model policy.  Again, my intent was to capture the spirit of the AAUP text by involving faculty representatives, but not adopt the AAUP process verbatim.  There is, however, no requirement that the College adopt the AAUP text in total.  Here is the AAUP policy: http://www.aaup.org/report/recommended-institutional-regulations-academic-freedom-and-tenure.  See paragraph 4.
+
+
+
+Page 67 (1.12.5) Sec B. A reduction in force plan without faculty involvement should be omitted.
+
+There is faculty involvement – the faculty senate is involved. 
+
+This can be modified so that the primary criteria to determine what areas of the program are cut and whom are decided by the faculty.  See http://www.aaup.org/report/recommended-institutional-regulations-academic-freedom-and-tenure.
+
+Page 68. (1.12.5) Sec. E Review hearing should include challenging the basis for financial 
+
+The following should be added to the listing:
+
+I will add the following text to listing in the next draft of the document: “The existence and extent of the condition of financial exigency.”</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Recommendations.txt [/INST] Recommendations
+
+
+
+A.	Board Governance Policies, Procedures & Practices
+
+The ENS Board of Directors is committed to institutional success.  The Board, both as a whole and by and through its respective standing committees, routinely engages in the “Fiduciary” and “Strategic” modes of governance.  This is evidenced by the establishment of clearly articulated Mission, Vision, Objectives and Values statements, which were augmented by the now expired the ENS 2010-2015 Five Year Plan.  The Board and its standing committees, however, must better understand its governance role and not become involved with day-to-day management issues.  It can accomplish this by adopting policies that clarify the governance roles within the school & set limits of authority and responsibility; leading with policies; committing to goals & objectives; using data to inform strategy and track key metrics; managing itself; and routinely and purposefully engaging in all three modes of governance (Fiduciary, Strategic & Generative). 
+
+Recommendations
+
+Adopt Formal Board Bylaws
+
+Adopt the Following Board Governance Policies
+
+Board of Director and Individual Director Responsibility Statements
+
+Delegation of Authority Policy
+
+Professional Code of Ethics Statement
+
+Conflict of Interest Policy
+
+Decision-Making Matrix
+
+Develop a Board Manual
+
+Adopt a Policy on Policies
+
+Adopt a School Complaints Policy
+
+Develop a Comprehensive System-Wide Policy Manual
+
+Establish the Following Board Committees and Practices:
+
+Parent Advisory Committees
+
+Board Finance Committee
+
+Board Governance Committee
+
+Board Buildings and Grounds Committee
+
+School Complaints Committee
+
+School Development Committee
+
+Rotate Committee Membership
+
+Adopt the Following Board Governance Practices
+
+Adopt a New Strategic Plan & Corresponding Operational Plan
+
+Adopt an Institutional Effectiveness Plan and Adopt Board Dashboard Indicators
+
+Adopt a Crisis Management Plan
+
+Adopt a Communications Plan
+
+Adopt Succession Plans
+
+Engage in Board Development and Training Activities
+
+Perform Regular Board Performance Assessments 
+
+Rotate Location of Board Meetings & Attend Major School Events
+
+Engage in the Generative Mode Governance Activities
+
+B.	Organizational Structures and Functions of the School’s Central and Campus-level Administration
+
+ENS’s current organization structure allows campuses to be accountable for academic performance and that overall the organizational capacity of the campuses is improving.  It is evident, however, that the IT, HR, Registration, Housing, Transportation, Purchasing and Accounting functions are considered weak by campus personnel, without clearly described policy and service orientation.  There is also an overall lack of synergy between administrative service functions, academic functions and campus needs.  This is exacerbated by the fact that organizational charts are not current and readily accessible to the entire campus community, not all positions have job descriptions, and there is a lack of policy direction for all functional areas of the system.  ENS is very clearly moving from a founder-like early entrepreneurial, functional-structure, which is more control and efficiency oriented to a more mature geographical divisional structure which has more operational rules to maintain control systems and order but is more focused on effective program delivery at the campus level. 
+
+Recommendations:
+
+The Director General Should Report Directly to Full Board (Not the Executive Management Committee)
+
+Create Vice Director Positions to Oversee Major Functional Areas (IT, HR, Registration, Housing, Transportation, Purchasing and Accounting)
+
+Create Staff Experts Groups at the Campus-Level
+
+Decentralize Select Functions to Accommodate Growth Plans
+
+Adopt the Following System-wide Committees
+
+General Director’s Cabinet
+
+Campus Leadership Council
+
+School Complaints Committee
+
+School Development Committee
+
+Ad-Hoc School Opening Teams: 
+
+
+
+	C.	Internal and External Stakeholder Communications Recommendations
+
+	ENS is committed to stakeholder engagement, communication and support as evidenced by the recent hiring of a Communications Coordinator, the recognition of the need to develop a Communications Plan, investment in the administrative software (google docs, PowerSchool, ManageBac and Enterprise Resource Planning), the hiring of staff members at each campus dedicated to parent communications, and the distribution of the ADEC survey to parents annually.  Despite these strengths, there is an overall lack of continuity with respect to internal and external communications.  This is primarily due to the fact that ENS does not have a formal communications plan in place.  In terms of external communications, this has resulted in inconsistent home/school communications and overall confusion among staff and faculty.  Moreover, ENS does not have a formal Complaints Policy, which is mandated by ADEC Policy 21. Local campuses also lack the authority to communicate effectively with parents.  Interviewees also noted that current IT systems are ineffective and do not accommodate effective internal communication. Organizational charts and job descriptions are also not current, leading to confusion regarding decision-making authority and job responsibilities. 
+
+	Recommendations
+
+	Hire Campus-Level Communications Support Staff
+
+	Developing Communication Policies and Procedures
+
+	Emergency Communication Procedure
+
+	Parent Communication Policy
+
+	Parent Complaint Policy 
+
+	Parent Handbook 
+
+	Student Protection Policy 
+
+	Improve Internal Communication and Training
+
+	Develop Comprehensive New Employee Orientation Program: Interpretation and Use of Data, Use of Administrative Management Systems, Review of the ENS A-Z Staff Handbook, Distribution of Updated Organizational Chart, Teaching of Islamic Principles.
+
+	Create Job Descriptions for Every Position 
+
+	Ensure Access to Email Addresses and Directory Numbers
+
+	Routinely Survey Staff Members to Determine Whether Communication Networks and Technologies are Meeting Needs 
+
+	Design Staff Evaluation Processes that Generate Data and Action Items to Improve Professional Development
+
+	Ensure Face-to-Face Communication Opportunities
+
+	Occasionally Include Support Staff in Department Meetings
+
+	Create Staff Suggestion/Comments Opportunities
+
+	Provide Professional Learning Opportunities 
+
+	Provide Training on Conducting Effective Parent/Teacher Conferences
+
+	Providing Information to Stakeholders Using Multiple Methods
+
+	Address Language Barriers and Cultural Issues
+
+	Gather Feedback and Engage Stakeholders in Decision-Making: Parent-Teacher Association, Surveys, Volunteer Opportunities, Publishing Meeting Minutes, Curriculum Nights, Special Informational Programs, Open Forums, etc.
+
+
+
+	D.	Monitoring and Determining Institutional Effectiveness and Efficiency
+
+	As evidenced by the utilization of MAP system metrics to evaluate student academic performance and regular curriculum training sessions, ENS is committed to academic program assessment and introducing new initiatives in an effort to improve overall effectiveness.  Despite this commitment, ENS presently does not have a comprehensive Strategic Plan in place, which is the central component of a true Institutional Effectiveness system. Given the fact that the strategic plan is expired, it is not surprising that current KPIs, which are limited in scope to academic and financial areas, are poorly developed at the moment.  It follows further that there is no formal Institutional Effectiveness system and corresponding plan in place, which is critical to monitoring and determining institutional effectiveness and efficiency. 
+
+	Recommendations
+
+Develop a Comprehensive Institutional Effectiveness System and Plan
+
+Develop a New Strategic Plan & Operational Plan
+
+Identify Unit Goals and Key Performance Indicators on an Annual Basis
+
+Establish Dashboards and Qualitative Data Assessments
+
+Conduct Annually Assessments
+
+Other Institutional Effectiveness Activities
+
+Adopt Board Self-Assessment Activities
+
+Update Individual Performance Assessments Policies to Include Goal Setting & Evaluation Tied to the Strategic and Unit Goals
+
+Update Organizational Structure and Job Descriptions
+
+Develop a System-wide Policy Manual
+
+Develop Staff Retention, Satisfaction and Training/Development Programs
+
+Update Budget and Purchasing Processes
+
+Solicit Students and Parent/Guardians Views
+
+E.	Developing and Reviewing Strategic and Operational Plans 
+
+	ENS is committed is committed to the process of strategic planning and the development of goals and key performance indicators.  This is evidenced by the ENS 2010-2015 Five Year Plan, the recently developed IT Strategic Plan, individual campus strategic plans (and the in progress development of an academic strategic plan.  All of these actions demonstrate a school system that understands the need to regularly engage in strategic planning activities.  Despite this recognition, there is room for improvement.  ENS is presently not operating under a comprehensive, system-wide strategic plan and corresponding operational plan as the ENS 2010-2015 Five Year Plan has recently expired.  Moreover, the expired plan was limited in scope to academic strategies and goals and was developed with less than optimum institution-wide engagement.  The plan also had no corresponding operational plan nor a set of key performance metrics associated with the strategic initiatives – all key components of a successful strategic plan.  
+
+Recommendations
+
+Develop New Strategic and Operational Plans: Stevens Strategy advocates a 5–phased strategic planning process, which is discussed in detail in the SWOT Report.
+
+Adopt a Self-Sustaining Planning Process
+
+Identify a Staff Member to Lead Strategic Planning and the Institutional Effectiveness System</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Records Retention and Disposal Schedule Schedule (1).txt [/INST] Appendix A
+
+Records Retention and Disposal Schedule
+
+
+
+Type of Record
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+GOVERNANCE & CORPORATE RECORDS
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Articles of Incorporation, Amendments, Bylaws
+
+Permanent
+
+President’s Office
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Board Source
+
+Annual Reports
+
+30 Years
+
+Archives
+
+yes
+
+yes
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Organizational Charts
+
+10 years
+
+President
+
+yes
+
+yes
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes
+
+Permanent
+
+President & Archives
+
+
+
+
+
+Board Source
+
+Accreditation documents- Self Study and Accreditation Letters
+
+Self-study reports are retained until the next review; Visiting team documents and report and the accreditation are retained permanently.
+
+President & Archives
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Board Source; Historical Relevance
+
+Awards issued by the Board
+
+Record of candidates
+
+Permanent – part of Board minutes
+
+President & Archives
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Board of Trustee Member Records
+
+Permanent
+
+President & Archives
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Institutional Strategic Planning Records
+
+Permanent for final planning reports
+
+
+
+10 years for internal planning committee
+
+
+
+yes
+
+yes
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Mission Statements
+
+Permanent
+
+President
+
+yes
+
+yes
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Committee Records
+
+Permanent
+
+President Archives
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+STUDENT ACADEMIC RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+
+
+Authority
+
+Admissions – Enrolled Students
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Type of Record
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Admissions Letter
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO)
+
+Guideline
+
+Correspondence
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Application Materials
+
+– Enrolled Students
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Advanced Placement, CLEP, and PEP Records
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Applications for Admissions or Re- admissions
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Entrance Exam Reports
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Health,  Immunization and Other Documentation Records
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Supporting Documentations (e.g., Letters of Recommendation, Resumes and Essays)
+
+Until Admitted
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+High School and Other College Transcripts
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Military records
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Release from High School or Dual Enrollment forms
+
+3 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Residency Classification forms
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Test scores (other)
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+International Student Documents (enrolled)
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Alien registration receipt card
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+DS-2019
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+
+
+Type of Record
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Employment authorization
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+I-20
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+I-94
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Passport Number
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Statement of educational costs
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Statement of financial responsibility
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Admissions Records– Non-Enrolled Students
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Admissions Letters
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Correspondence
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Application for admission or re-admission
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Credit by Examination
+
+5 years after graduation or non-attendance
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Entrance Examinations/text scores
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Medical Records
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Letters of recommendation (Admissions)
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Military Records
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Placement text records/scores
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Residency classification forms
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Test scores (other)
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Transcripts
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+International Student Documents (non- enrolled)
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+
+
+Authority
+
+Alien registration receipt card
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+DS-2019
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+
+
+Type of Record
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Employment authorization
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+I-20
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+I-94
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Passport Number
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Statement of educational costs
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Statement of financial responsibility
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Curriculum, Instruction, Enrollment Report Records
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+
+
+Authority
+
+Course Enrollment Summaries; Graduation Summaries; Registration Reports; etc.
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Course Catalog and Schedule of Courses
+
+Permanent (1 Copy)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Course Proposals
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Degree Requirements
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Student Surveys (Instrument and Results)
+
+7 Years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+New Degree Records
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Program Development and Review Records
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Syllabi
+
+1 Academic Year
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Degree, Grade, Enrollment, and Racial/Ethnic Statistics
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+FINANCIAL AID RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Borrowers Loan Records (Institutional and Perkins Loans, Repayment Schedules, Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, Records of Actions Taken, Related Correspondence)
+
+3 Years after the loan is paid in full or assignment to the Department of Education
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+yes – student file
+
+
+
+34 C.F.R. §
+
+668.24
+
+
+
+Type of Record
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Federal Title IV, Program Records, Institutional Records
+
+	Accreditation Reviews and Reports
+
+	Any other record pertaining to factors of financial responsibility and standards of administrative capability
+
+	Audits and Program Reviews
+
+	Education Program Eligibility
+
+	Institutional Program Participation Agreement
+
+	Recertification
+
+Agreements: 6 years after expiration 3 years after the end of the award year in which the report was submitted;
+
+Records pertaining to audit and program reviews must be retained until resolution of the matter is reached.
+
+
+
+yes – student file
+
+
+
+34 CFR 668.24
+
+Federal Family Education Loan and Direct Program Records
+
+	Applications
+
+	Disbursement Records
+
+	Promissory Notes
+
+	Student Status Confirmation Reports
+
+3 years after the end of the award year in which the student borrower last attended the University
+
+
+
+no
+
+
+
+34 C.F.R. §
+
+668.24
+
+Financial Aid Annual Reports
+
+3 years after the end of the award year
+
+
+
+yes – student file
+
+
+
+34 C.F.R. §
+
+674.8(c)
+
+
+
+Type of Record
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Fiscal Records and Reports
+
+	Accreditation and Licensing Agency Reports
+
+	Annual Federal Fiscal Operations and Applications for Funds Report
+
+	Cash Disbursements
+
+	Federal Pell Grant Statements of Account
+
+	Federal Work-Study Payroll Records
+
+	General Ledgers
+
+	Refunds and Repayments
+
+	State Grant and Scholarship Award
+
+	Financial Aid Office Rosters and Reports
+
+	Title IV Program Reconciliation Reports
+
+3 years after the end of the award year for which the report was submitted
+
+
+
+yes – student file
+
+
+
+34 C.F.R. §
+
+674.8(c)
+
+Pell Grant Reports
+
+3 years after the end of the award year for which the award was submitted
+
+
+
+no
+
+
+
+34 CFR § 668.24
+
+Perkins Promissory Notes and Repayment Schedules
+
+Until loan is satisfied
+
+
+
+yes – student file
+
+
+
+34 CFR § 668.24
+
+Perkins Loan Repayment Records
+
+3 years from date loan assigned, cancelled, or repaid
+
+
+
+yes – student file
+
+
+
+34 CFR § 668.24
+
+Work Study Program Administrative Records
+
+3 years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes – student file
+
+
+
+34 CFR § 668.24
+
+STUDENT ACADEMIC RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+
+
+Authority
+
+Academic Advising Records
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Name Change Authorization
+
+10 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Audit Authorizations
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+
+
+Type of Record
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Student Academic Warning, Probation Records
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Academic Dismissal
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Academic Integrity Violations
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Change of Major/Minor, Certification of 2nd Major/Minors
+
+5 years after graduation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Student Requests for Nondisclosure of Directory Information and Consents to Disclose Identifiable Information
+
+Until terminated by the student or permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Changes of Course (Add/Drop)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Audit Authorizations
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Class Rosters/Lists
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Student Commencement Records
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Student Course Offerings
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Student Curriculum Change Authorizations
+
+5 Years After Graduation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Examinations, Tests, Term Papers, Homework
+
+5 Years After Graduation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Grade Reports to Registrar
+
+1 Year After Date Submitted
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Graduation Authorization
+
+5 Years After Graduation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Hold
+
+Until Released
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Internship Program Records
+
+5 Years After Graduation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Class Schedules
+
+1 Year After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Thesis and Dissertation Records
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Transcripts
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Transfer Credit Evaluations
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Withdrawal Authorizations
+
+5 Years After Graduation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Leaves of Absence
+
+2 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+
+
+Type of Record
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Study Abroad Records
+
+5 years After Separation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Study Abroad Student Records
+
+5 years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Certification/ Verification Records
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Enrollment Verification
+
+1 year after certification
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Residency Verification records
+
+6 years after submission
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Teacher certifications
+
+1 year after certification
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Student Transcript Requests
+
+1 Year After Requested
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+BUSINESS, FINANCE & ACCOUNTING RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Accounts Payable Ledgers & Schedules
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Accounts Receivable Ledgers & Schedules
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Audit Reports
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Bank Reconciliations
+
+2 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Bank Statements
+
+3 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Capital Stock & Bond Records: ledgers, transfer registers, stubs showing issues, record of interest coupons, options, etc.
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Cash Books
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Charts of Accounts
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Checks (cancelled –see exception below)
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Checks (cancelled for important payments – i.e., taxes, purchases of property, special contracts, etc. Checks should be filed with the
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+
+
+papers pertaining to the underlying transaction.)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Contracts, mortgages, notes, and leases (expired)
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Contracts, mortgages, notes & leases (still in effect)
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Correspondence (general)
+
+2 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Correspondence (legal & important matters)
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Correspondence (routine) with customers and/or vendors
+
+2 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Deeds, mortgages & bills of sale
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Depreciation schedules
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Duplicate deposit slips
+
+2 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Expenses analyses/expense distribution schedules
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Financial Statements (year-end, other optional)
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+General/private ledgers, year-end trial balance
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Insurance policies (expired)
+
+3 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Insurance records, current accident reports, claims, policies, etc.
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Internal Audit reports (longer retention periods may be desirable)
+
+3 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Internal Reports (miscellaneous)
+
+3 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Invoices (to customers, from vendors)
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Journals
+
+Permanently
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Business Bureau
+
+Notes receivable ledgers & schedules
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Option records (expired)
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Patents & related papers
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Petty Cash vouchers
+
+3 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Physical inventory tags
+
+3 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Plant cost ledgers
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Property appraisals by outside appraisers
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Property records, including costs, depreciation reserves, year-end balances, depreciation schedules, blueprints, and plans
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Purchase orders
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Receiving sheets
+
+1 year
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Requisitions
+
+1 year
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Sales records
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Scrap and salvage records (inventories, sales, etc.)
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Stocks and Bonds certificates (cancelled)
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Subsidiary ledgers
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Tax Returns & worksheets, revenue agents’ reports, and other documents relation to determination of income tax liability
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+
+
+Trademark registrations/copyrights and patents
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Training Manuals
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Voucher registers & schedules
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Vouchers for payment to venders, employees, etc. (including allowances and reimbursement of employees for travel and entertainment expenses)
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+RESEARCH & SPONSORED PROGRAMS RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+
+
+Authority
+
+Administrative and Financial Records
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements including funded proposals
+
+Three (3) years from date of submission of the final report unless a longer retention period is specified under the agreement or grant rules
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+20 USC §
+
+1232f(a); 34
+
+C.F.R. § 74.53; 2 CFR 215.53; OMB Circular A- 110 - subpart C-53
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+All financial records, documentation and reports pertinent to an award (Federal, State, Private)
+
+Three (3) years from date of submission of the final report unless a longer retention period is specified under the agreement or grant rules.
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+2 CFR 215.53;
+
+OMB Circular A- 110 - subpart C-53
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Supporting documents and statistical records pertinent to a federal, state or private award
+
+Three (3) years from date of submission of the final report unless a longer retention period is specified under the agreement or grant rules.
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+20 USC §
+
+1232f(a); 34
+
+C.F.R. § 74.53; 2 CFR 215.53; OMB Circular A- 110 - subpart C-53 Historical Relevance
+
+
+
+Basic Research Records
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Research Data
+
+Three (3) years after submission of the final report of the research to the sponsor, unless a longer retention period is specified under the agreement or grant rules.*
+
+* If pediatric research, until the youngest subject turns twenty-five years old.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+2 CFR 215.36
+
+/Intangible Property OMB Circular a-110 Subpart C-36
+
+Conflict of Interest forms (NSF and PHS funded studies)
+
+3 years or as determined by individual award agreement
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+NSF Grant Policy Manual Chapter V Section 510;
+
+42 CFR 50.604
+
+Research misconduct records
+
+7 years after completion of the proceeding or the completion of any PHS proceeding involving the research misconduct allegation under subparts D and E of 42 CFR
+
+93.317,
+
+whichever is later.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+42 CFR 93.317
+
+Human Subject Research
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Human Subject Research related records including research results, research and regulatory records, research proposals, publication, consent forms, etc.).
+
+Five years after the completion of the research, either electronically or as hard copy. In accordance with federal HIPAA privacy regulations,
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+45 CFR 46.115(b)
+
+and 21 CFR
+
+56.115(b); 45 CFR § 164.530(j)
+
+
+
+
+
+records containing protected health information (PHI) are retained for at least six years after the completion of the research.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Research Ethics and Review Board Records, including membership lists, training materials, review and approval records, policies and procedures, investigations of non-compliance, etc.).
+
+5 years after the completion of the research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+45 CFR 46.115(b)
+
+and 21 CFR 56.115(b)
+
+UNIVERSITY ADVANCEMENT, COMMUNICATIONS & GOVERNMENT RELATIONS
+
+
+
+Retention Period
+
+
+
+Official Repository
+
+
+
+Paper Copy
+
+
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+
+
+Authority
+
+University Advancement Records
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Gift Receipts
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+26 USC § 6501
+
+Fund Raising Records
+
+Current year plus seven years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Endowment - Donor Records and Agreements
+
+Permanent as determined by needs of University
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Planned Giving Documents
+
+Permanent as determined by needs of University
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Donor Agreements Related to all other Gifts/Donations
+
+Permanent as determined by needs of University
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+University Advancement Planning Records
+
+Permanent as determined by needs of University
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Monthly Gifts and Grant
+
+3 years after the submission of the
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Reports
+
+final financial report
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Giving Reports
+
+7 years after report is created
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Donor & Development Records (Records that document the efforts to establish relationships with alumni, the community groups, individuals, and businesses, to gain their assistance with the development and coordination of institutional programs. File may include reports, brochures, newsletters or publications, agendas, minutes, correspondence, and other related records)
+
+Retain agendas, minutes, publications, newsletters, brochures permanently.
+
+Retain all other records for current year plus 7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Disclosure of Foreign Gifts
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+20 USC §1011f(a)-(e)
+
+Alumni Records
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Alumni Membership Lists, Mailing List and Related Correspondence
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+University Communication Records
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Photographs, video, other Images (Including Supporting Photography Consent Form, Release, Waiver, or Similar Necessary Authorizations)
+
+Permanent as Determined by Historical Relevance – One Copy
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Advertising and Public Relations Materials
+
+Permanent as Determined by Historical Relevance (One Copy) or One year as determined by University
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance; 38
+
+USC § 3696
+
+University Publications (Including Source Records Supporting
+
+Permanent as Determined by Historical
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+
+
+Publications)
+
+Relevance – One Copy
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+University Wide Events Event Records (e.g.
+
+Guest List, Invitations, Seating Charts, Brochures, Agenda and Other Materials Memorializing the Event)
+
+Permanent as Determined by Historical Relevance – One Copy
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Government Relation Records
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Government & Community Relations Records (e.g. Federal, State and Local Lobbying & Legislative Records, Reports and Correspondence with Government Agencies)
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+STUDENT LIFE RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Student ADA Records
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ADA Student Accommodation Records File (e.g. Request for Accommodation, Supporting Documents, Letter of Accommodation, Signed Released Forms, Correspondence)
+
+5 Years from close of academic term
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 C.F.R. Section
+
+1602.14
+
+ADA Accommodation Records for Testing
+
+5 Years from close of academic term
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 C.F.R. Section
+
+1602.14
+
+Athletic Records
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Records maintained according to NCAA Bylaws
+
+Eligibility Records
+
+6 Years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Game Statistics
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+
+
+Individual Student- Athletes Records: Academics Eligibility Equipment Insurance
+
+Physical
+
+6 Years after separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+
+
+Compliance Records
+
+6 Years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+
+
+Press Clippings
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Recruiting Records
+
+6 Years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+
+
+Photographs (Student- Athletes, Coaches, Staff)
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Student Athlete Academic Advising Records
+
+7 Years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+
+
+Student Athlete Medical Records
+
+7 Years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+
+
+Non-Academic Student Records
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Student Judicial and Student Conduct Records (Findings of Violation and Related Case Files)
+
+5years after graduation or separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Grievances (not grade appeals)
+
+3 years after closure
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Organizations Event Records
+
+5 Years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+
+
+Student Organization Recognition Paperwork
+
+7 Years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+
+
+Student Tuition and Fee Charges
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Guideline
+
+HUMAN RESOURCE RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Job Announcements and Advertisements
+
+2 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+29 CFR §
+
+1627.3(b); Legal Counsel
+
+Individual Applicants Who Are Not Hired
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Employment Applications, Resumes
+
+3 years after search completed
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 CFR 1602.14
+
+29 CFR 1602.21;
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Background Investigation Results
+
+3 years after search completed
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 CFR 1602.14
+
+29 CFR 1602.21
+
+Resumes
+
+3 years after search completed
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 CFR 1602.14
+
+29 CFR 1602.21
+
+Letters of Recommendation
+
+3 years after search completed
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 CFR 1602.14;
+
+29 CFR 1602.21
+
+Employees
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Employee Personnel Files
+
+7 years following separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 USC 1027;
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Employee Benefit Files
+
+7 years after discontinuation or change of benefits
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 USC 1027;
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+403(b) Application) Records and Retirement Plan Documents
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+yes or
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Required Personal Information Employees (Name, Address, SS#, Pay, Hourly or Salaried)
+
+7 years after separation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Payroll records & summaries
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ADA Records
+
+5 years after separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 C.F.R. Section
+
+1602.14
+
+Continuation of Insurance Benefits (COBRA) Records
+
+4 years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Family and Medical Leave Case Files
+
+3 years after employee separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 C.F.R.
+
+§825.500.
+
+I-9 Forms and other Employment Verification Records
+
+3 years after hire or 1 year after separation, whichever comes later
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+8 U.S.C. §1324; 8
+
+C.F.R. § 274a.2
+
+Job Descriptions
+
+3 years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 CFR § 516.6;
+
+29 CFR § 1620.32
+
+Promotion and Salary Increase Records
+
+7 years after separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 USC 1027
+
+Unemployment Compensation Claims,
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+
+
+Unclaimed Salaries
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Workers’ Compensation Claims
+
+10 years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Faculty meeting minutes
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Faculty promotion, tenure records, and tenure-review records
+
+7 years after separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 USC 1027
+
+Student Evaluations of Faculty Courses
+
+3years after completion of course
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Payroll Records – Individual Employees
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Payroll Additions/Deductions Overtime Authorization
+
+4 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+FICA; 29 U.S.C.
+
+Sections 201-219;
+
+28 U.S.C. Section
+
+1658; 29 CFR
+
+516.5; 29 CFR
+
+516.6
+
+Time Cards or Sheets
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+29 U.S.C. Sections
+
+201-219; 28
+
+U.S.C. Section 1658; 29 CFR 1627.3
+
+Employment Tax Related Records (W-2, W-4, 1099, returns, schedules, etc.)
+
+Until superseded or 7 years after separation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+26 C.F.R. Sections
+
+31.6001-1 to
+
+31.6001-6;
+
+Garnishments
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS and Better Business Bureau
+
+INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+
+
+Authority
+
+Computer Performance Reports, Security Documentation
+
+5 years
+
+IT
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+System Documentation, Systems Maintenance Documents, Source Code Listings and Updates
+
+5 years
+
+IT
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Computer Performance Reports, Security Documentation
+
+5 years
+
+IT
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Vendor Service Orders, Tape Backup Records
+
+5 years
+
+IT
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+
+
+Website Records (records that document the development of a web site for a unit. File may include drafts of content, specifications, software product, and other related information)
+
+Retain until administrative usefulness is completed then dispose of.
+
+IT
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH & SAFETY RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+
+
+Authority
+
+Environmental Regulations Records (Documentation of institutional compliance with environmental laws and guidelines of federal, state, or local governments.)
+
+10 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Training Records (OSHA)
+
+30 years from the date on which training occurred after employee separates
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+29 CFR
+
+1910.1020
+
+Toxic Substance Exposure Records
+
+30 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+29 CFR
+
+1910.1020
+
+Fire Safety Records, Audit Reports
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Drug Screening, Employee Asbestos Monitoring, Employee Exposure Records, Employee Medical Records, Employee Medical and Exposure Records
+
+30 years after separation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+OSHA 1910.1001;
+
+OSHA 1910.20;
+
+OSHA 1910.1025
+
+Accident Reports (OSHA)
+
+30 years after termination
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Chemical and Hazardous Waste Disposal Records
+
+30 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+40 CFR 262.20
+
+Material Safety Data Sheets Records
+
+30 years from the date the substance was last received in the workplace
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+29 CFR
+
+1910.1020
+
+LEGAL RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+
+
+Contracts, Closing Documents, Due Diligence Files
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Patent Files, Research Files, Trademark Registrations, Copyright Registrations
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Regulatory Filings, Government Investigation Files
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Other Litigation and Investigations
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+SECURITY RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Dispatch Records
+
+3 years, or until case is adjudicated, whichever is longer
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Clery Act Crime and Fire Report and all supporting records (copies of crime reports; the daily crime logs; records for arrests and referrals for disciplinary action; timely warning and emergency notification reports; documentation, such as letters to and from local police having to do with Clery Act compliance; letters to and from campus security authorities; correspondence with us regarding Clery Act compliance; and copies of notices to students and employees about the availability of the annual security report)
+
+3 years from the latest publication of the report to which they apply (in effect 7 years)
+
+Public Safety
+
+yes
+
+yes
+
+20 USC § 1092
+
+Property Damage Reports
+
+4 years after report date or three years until case is
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+closed.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Vehicle Accident
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+DMV Lists
+
+Until superseded
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Key Issuance
+
+2 years after key is returned
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Parking Citations
+
+2 years after resolution
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Parking Permits
+
+2 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Bicycle License/Registration
+
+2 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+LIBRARY
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Requests for items to be put on reserves
+
+Current semester
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Security incident reports
+
+Permanent
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ILL records of request
+
+current semester
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Circulation for journals (not including patron record)
+
+1 year
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Materials checked out (by patron)
+
+Until returned
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Fine records
+
+Until paid
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Circulation system user records
+
+While user is active
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Initial order records for books, serials, and e- resources
+
+Permanent
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Accounting reports/deposit receipts from service desks
+
+10 years
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Library budget
+
+10 years
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Library statistics
+
+Permanent
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Library publications (e.g., manuals, handbooks, etc.)
+
+While active; then transfer to Archives
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Graduate Theses and Dissertations
+
+Permanent
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Appraisal of Library Materials
+
+Permanent
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Artifact Acquisition/Special Collection  Records
+
+Permanent
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Collection & Acquisition Exchange
+
+While active
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Serial Records
+
+While active
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+TITLE IX RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Title IX Audit Records
+
+3 Years
+
+Title IX Coordinator
+
+Yes
+
+Yes
+
+Per Title IX, An educational institution must evaluate its current policies and procedures as they affect the admission of students, treatment of students, and employment of both academic and non- academic personnel working in connection with the provider’s education program or activity. See Title IX Legal Manual, pp. 108-
+
+109
+
+Title IX Reporting, Investigation and Resolution Records: This series documents the investigation and outcome of alleged violations of the sexual misconduct policy.
+
+This series may include, but is not limited to: incident reports, notification of
+
+7 years from final resolution
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+allegation, hearing notes, decision statements, appeals documentation, and final report.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Vehicle Inspection
+
+4 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Vehicle Records
+
+4 years after disposal of vehicle
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Utilities System Operating & Maintenance
+
+3 years after equipment is no longer in service
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Work Order Requests
+
+4 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Permit drawings, record drawings
+
+Permanent/Life of facility
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Building /Land Inventory
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Certificates of Occupancy
+
+Permanent/Life of facility
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Building Permits
+
+Permanent/Life of facility
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Space/Facilities Use
+
+5 years for summary reports/Perman ent for overall historical information/ Archives receives perm. documents
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Plats, surveys, utility location maps
+
+Permanent/Life of facility
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Grade Distribution Reports
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Statistical Abstracts
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Statistical Year in Reviews
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Various Ad Hoc Reports
+
+5 years
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IPEDS Reports
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+State Ed Reports
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+NCAA Reports
+
+Permanent
+
+Athletics
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Commercial Surveys (US News, etc.)
+
+5 years
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Data
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Student Data
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Course Data
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Survey Data
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+NSF Data
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Department Reviews
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Records Retention and Disposal Schedule Schedule (Draft 1).txt [/INST] Appendix A
+
+Records Retention and Disposal Schedule
+
+
+
+
+
+Type of Record
+
+Retention Period
+Hardcopy/Electronic Records
+
+Official Repository
+
+Authority
+
+GOVERNANCE & CORPORATE RECORDS
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Articles of Incorporation, Amendments, Bylaws
+
+Permanent
+
+President’s Office
+
+Board Source
+
+Annual Reports
+
+30 Years
+
+Archives
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Organizational Charts
+
+10 years
+
+President
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes
+
+Permanent
+
+President & Archives
+
+Board Source
+
+Accreditation documents- Self Study and Accreditation Letters
+
+Self-study reports are retained until the next review; Visiting team documents and report and the accreditation are retained permanently.
+
+President & Archives
+
+Board Source; Historical Relevance
+
+Awards issued by the Board
+
+Record of candidates
+
+Permanent – part of Board minutes
+
+President & Archives
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Board of Trustee Member Records
+
+Permanent
+
+President & Archives
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Institutional Strategic Planning Records
+
+Permanent for final planning reports
+
+
+
+10 years for internal planning committee
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Mission Statements
+
+Permanent
+
+President
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Committee Records
+
+Permanent
+
+President Archives
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+STUDENT ACADEMIC RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+
+
+Authority
+
+Admissions – Enrolled Students
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Type of Record
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Admissions Letter
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO)
+
+Guideline
+
+Correspondence
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Application Materials
+
+– Enrolled Students
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Advanced Placement, CLEP, and PEP Records
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Applications for Admissions or Re- admissions
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Entrance Exam Reports
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Health,  Immunization and Other Documentation Records
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Supporting Documentations (e.g., Letters of Recommendation, Resumes and Essays)
+
+Until Admitted
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+High School and Other College Transcripts
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Military records
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Release from High School or Dual Enrollment forms
+
+3 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Residency Classification forms
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Test scores (other)
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+International Student Documents (enrolled)
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Alien registration receipt card
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+DS-2019
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+
+
+Type of Record
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Employment authorization
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+I-20
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+I-94
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Passport Number
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Statement of educational costs
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Statement of financial responsibility
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Admissions Records– Non-Enrolled Students
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Admissions Letters
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Correspondence
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Application for admission or re-admission
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Credit by Examination
+
+5 years after graduation or non-attendance
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Entrance Examinations/text scores
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Medical Records
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Letters of recommendation (Admissions)
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Military Records
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Placement text records/scores
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Residency classification forms
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Test scores (other)
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Transcripts
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+International Student Documents (non- enrolled)
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+
+
+Authority
+
+Alien registration receipt card
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+DS-2019
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+
+
+Type of Record
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Employment authorization
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+I-20
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+I-94
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Passport Number
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Statement of educational costs
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Statement of financial responsibility
+
+1 year after application
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Curriculum, Instruction, Enrollment Report Records
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+
+
+Authority
+
+Course Enrollment Summaries; Graduation Summaries; Registration Reports; etc.
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Course Catalog and Schedule of Courses
+
+Permanent (1 Copy)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Course Proposals
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Degree Requirements
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Student Surveys (Instrument and Results)
+
+7 Years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+New Degree Records
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Program Development and Review Records
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Syllabi
+
+1 Academic Year
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Degree, Grade, Enrollment, and Racial/Ethnic Statistics
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+FINANCIAL AID RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Borrowers Loan Records (Institutional and Perkins Loans, Repayment Schedules, Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, Records of Actions Taken, Related Correspondence)
+
+3 Years after the loan is paid in full or assignment to the Department of Education
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+yes – student file
+
+
+
+34 C.F.R. §
+
+668.24
+
+
+
+Type of Record
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Federal Title IV, Program Records, Institutional Records
+
+	Accreditation Reviews and Reports
+
+	Any other record pertaining to factors of financial responsibility and standards of administrative capability
+
+	Audits and Program Reviews
+
+	Education Program Eligibility
+
+	Institutional Program Participation Agreement
+
+	Recertification
+
+Agreements: 6 years after expiration 3 years after the end of the award year in which the report was submitted;
+
+Records pertaining to audit and program reviews must be retained until resolution of the matter is reached.
+
+
+
+yes – student file
+
+
+
+34 CFR 668.24
+
+Federal Family Education Loan and Direct Program Records
+
+	Applications
+
+	Disbursement Records
+
+	Promissory Notes
+
+	Student Status Confirmation Reports
+
+3 years after the end of the award year in which the student borrower last attended the University
+
+
+
+no
+
+
+
+34 C.F.R. §
+
+668.24
+
+Financial Aid Annual Reports
+
+3 years after the end of the award year
+
+
+
+yes – student file
+
+
+
+34 C.F.R. §
+
+674.8(c)
+
+
+
+Type of Record
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Fiscal Records and Reports
+
+	Accreditation and Licensing Agency Reports
+
+	Annual Federal Fiscal Operations and Applications for Funds Report
+
+	Cash Disbursements
+
+	Federal Pell Grant Statements of Account
+
+	Federal Work-Study Payroll Records
+
+	General Ledgers
+
+	Refunds and Repayments
+
+	State Grant and Scholarship Award
+
+	Financial Aid Office Rosters and Reports
+
+	Title IV Program Reconciliation Reports
+
+3 years after the end of the award year for which the report was submitted
+
+
+
+yes – student file
+
+
+
+34 C.F.R. §
+
+674.8(c)
+
+Pell Grant Reports
+
+3 years after the end of the award year for which the award was submitted
+
+
+
+no
+
+
+
+34 CFR § 668.24
+
+Perkins Promissory Notes and Repayment Schedules
+
+Until loan is satisfied
+
+
+
+yes – student file
+
+
+
+34 CFR § 668.24
+
+Perkins Loan Repayment Records
+
+3 years from date loan assigned, cancelled, or repaid
+
+
+
+yes – student file
+
+
+
+34 CFR § 668.24
+
+Work Study Program Administrative Records
+
+3 years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes – student file
+
+
+
+34 CFR § 668.24
+
+STUDENT ACADEMIC RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+
+
+Authority
+
+Academic Advising Records
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Name Change Authorization
+
+10 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Audit Authorizations
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+
+
+Type of Record
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Student Academic Warning, Probation Records
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Academic Dismissal
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Academic Integrity Violations
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Change of Major/Minor, Certification of 2nd Major/Minors
+
+5 years after graduation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Student Requests for Nondisclosure of Directory Information and Consents to Disclose Identifiable Information
+
+Until terminated by the student or permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Changes of Course (Add/Drop)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Audit Authorizations
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Class Rosters/Lists
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Student Commencement Records
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Student Course Offerings
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Student Curriculum Change Authorizations
+
+5 Years After Graduation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Examinations, Tests, Term Papers, Homework
+
+5 Years After Graduation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Grade Reports to Registrar
+
+1 Year After Date Submitted
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Graduation Authorization
+
+5 Years After Graduation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Hold
+
+Until Released
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Internship Program Records
+
+5 Years After Graduation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Class Schedules
+
+1 Year After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Thesis and Dissertation Records
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Transcripts
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Transfer Credit Evaluations
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Withdrawal Authorizations
+
+5 Years After Graduation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Leaves of Absence
+
+2 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+
+
+Type of Record
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Study Abroad Records
+
+5 years After Separation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Study Abroad Student Records
+
+5 years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Certification/ Verification Records
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Enrollment Verification
+
+1 year after certification
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Residency Verification records
+
+6 years after submission
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Teacher certifications
+
+1 year after certification
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Student Transcript Requests
+
+1 Year After Requested
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+BUSINESS, FINANCE & ACCOUNTING RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Accounts Payable Ledgers & Schedules
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Accounts Receivable Ledgers & Schedules
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Audit Reports
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Bank Reconciliations
+
+2 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Bank Statements
+
+3 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Capital Stock & Bond Records: ledgers, transfer registers, stubs showing issues, record of interest coupons, options, etc.
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Cash Books
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Charts of Accounts
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Checks (cancelled –see exception below)
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Checks (cancelled for important payments – i.e., taxes, purchases of property, special contracts, etc. Checks should be filed with the
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+
+
+papers pertaining to the underlying transaction.)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Contracts, mortgages, notes, and leases (expired)
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Contracts, mortgages, notes & leases (still in effect)
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Correspondence (general)
+
+2 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Correspondence (legal & important matters)
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Correspondence (routine) with customers and/or vendors
+
+2 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Deeds, mortgages & bills of sale
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Depreciation schedules
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Duplicate deposit slips
+
+2 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Expenses analyses/expense distribution schedules
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Financial Statements (year-end, other optional)
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+General/private ledgers, year-end trial balance
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Insurance policies (expired)
+
+3 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Insurance records, current accident reports, claims, policies, etc.
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Internal Audit reports (longer retention periods may be desirable)
+
+3 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Internal Reports (miscellaneous)
+
+3 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Invoices (to customers, from vendors)
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Journals
+
+Permanently
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Business Bureau
+
+Notes receivable ledgers & schedules
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Option records (expired)
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Patents & related papers
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Petty Cash vouchers
+
+3 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Physical inventory tags
+
+3 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Plant cost ledgers
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Property appraisals by outside appraisers
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Property records, including costs, depreciation reserves, year-end balances, depreciation schedules, blueprints, and plans
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Purchase orders
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Receiving sheets
+
+1 year
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Requisitions
+
+1 year
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Sales records
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Scrap and salvage records (inventories, sales, etc.)
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Stocks and Bonds certificates (cancelled)
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Subsidiary ledgers
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Tax Returns & worksheets, revenue agents’ reports, and other documents relation to determination of income tax liability
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+
+
+Trademark registrations/copyrights and patents
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Training Manuals
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Voucher registers & schedules
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+Vouchers for payment to venders, employees, etc. (including allowances and reimbursement of employees for travel and entertainment expenses)
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS/Better Business Bureau
+
+RESEARCH & SPONSORED PROGRAMS RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+
+
+Authority
+
+Administrative and Financial Records
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements including funded proposals
+
+Three (3) years from date of submission of the final report unless a longer retention period is specified under the agreement or grant rules
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+20 USC §
+
+1232f(a); 34
+
+C.F.R. § 74.53; 2 CFR 215.53; OMB Circular A- 110 - subpart C-53
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+All financial records, documentation and reports pertinent to an award (Federal, State, Private)
+
+Three (3) years from date of submission of the final report unless a longer retention period is specified under the agreement or grant rules.
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+2 CFR 215.53;
+
+OMB Circular A- 110 - subpart C-53
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Supporting documents and statistical records pertinent to a federal, state or private award
+
+Three (3) years from date of submission of the final report unless a longer retention period is specified under the agreement or grant rules.
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+20 USC §
+
+1232f(a); 34
+
+C.F.R. § 74.53; 2 CFR 215.53; OMB Circular A- 110 - subpart C-53 Historical Relevance
+
+
+
+Basic Research Records
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Research Data
+
+Three (3) years after submission of the final report of the research to the sponsor, unless a longer retention period is specified under the agreement or grant rules.*
+
+* If pediatric research, until the youngest subject turns twenty-five years old.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+2 CFR 215.36
+
+/Intangible Property OMB Circular a-110 Subpart C-36
+
+Conflict of Interest forms (NSF and PHS funded studies)
+
+3 years or as determined by individual award agreement
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+NSF Grant Policy Manual Chapter V Section 510;
+
+42 CFR 50.604
+
+Research misconduct records
+
+7 years after completion of the proceeding or the completion of any PHS proceeding involving the research misconduct allegation under subparts D and E of 42 CFR
+
+93.317,
+
+whichever is later.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+42 CFR 93.317
+
+Human Subject Research
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Human Subject Research related records including research results, research and regulatory records, research proposals, publication, consent forms, etc.).
+
+Five years after the completion of the research, either electronically or as hard copy. In accordance with federal HIPAA privacy regulations,
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+45 CFR 46.115(b)
+
+and 21 CFR
+
+56.115(b); 45 CFR § 164.530(j)
+
+
+
+
+
+records containing protected health information (PHI) are retained for at least six years after the completion of the research.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Research Ethics and Review Board Records, including membership lists, training materials, review and approval records, policies and procedures, investigations of non-compliance, etc.).
+
+5 years after the completion of the research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+45 CFR 46.115(b)
+
+and 21 CFR 56.115(b)
+
+UNIVERSITY ADVANCEMENT, COMMUNICATIONS & GOVERNMENT RELATIONS
+
+
+
+Retention Period
+
+
+
+Official Repository
+
+
+
+Paper Copy
+
+
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+
+
+Authority
+
+University Advancement Records
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Gift Receipts
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+26 USC § 6501
+
+Fund Raising Records
+
+Current year plus seven years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Endowment - Donor Records and Agreements
+
+Permanent as determined by needs of University
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Planned Giving Documents
+
+Permanent as determined by needs of University
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Donor Agreements Related to all other Gifts/Donations
+
+Permanent as determined by needs of University
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+University Advancement Planning Records
+
+Permanent as determined by needs of University
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Monthly Gifts and Grant
+
+3 years after the submission of the
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Reports
+
+final financial report
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Giving Reports
+
+7 years after report is created
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Donor & Development Records (Records that document the efforts to establish relationships with alumni, the community groups, individuals, and businesses, to gain their assistance with the development and coordination of institutional programs. File may include reports, brochures, newsletters or publications, agendas, minutes, correspondence, and other related records)
+
+Retain agendas, minutes, publications, newsletters, brochures permanently.
+
+Retain all other records for current year plus 7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Disclosure of Foreign Gifts
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+20 USC §1011f(a)-(e)
+
+Alumni Records
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Alumni Membership Lists, Mailing List and Related Correspondence
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+University Communication Records
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Photographs, video, other Images (Including Supporting Photography Consent Form, Release, Waiver, or Similar Necessary Authorizations)
+
+Permanent as Determined by Historical Relevance – One Copy
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Advertising and Public Relations Materials
+
+Permanent as Determined by Historical Relevance (One Copy) or One year as determined by University
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance; 38
+
+USC § 3696
+
+University Publications (Including Source Records Supporting
+
+Permanent as Determined by Historical
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+
+
+Publications)
+
+Relevance – One Copy
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+University Wide Events Event Records (e.g.
+
+Guest List, Invitations, Seating Charts, Brochures, Agenda and Other Materials Memorializing the Event)
+
+Permanent as Determined by Historical Relevance – One Copy
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Government Relation Records
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Government & Community Relations Records (e.g. Federal, State and Local Lobbying & Legislative Records, Reports and Correspondence with Government Agencies)
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+STUDENT LIFE RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Student ADA Records
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ADA Student Accommodation Records File (e.g. Request for Accommodation, Supporting Documents, Letter of Accommodation, Signed Released Forms, Correspondence)
+
+5 Years from close of academic term
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 C.F.R. Section
+
+1602.14
+
+ADA Accommodation Records for Testing
+
+5 Years from close of academic term
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 C.F.R. Section
+
+1602.14
+
+Athletic Records
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Records maintained according to NCAA Bylaws
+
+Eligibility Records
+
+6 Years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Game Statistics
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+
+
+Individual Student- Athletes Records: Academics Eligibility Equipment Insurance
+
+Physical
+
+6 Years after separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+
+
+Compliance Records
+
+6 Years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+
+
+Press Clippings
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Recruiting Records
+
+6 Years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+
+
+Photographs (Student- Athletes, Coaches, Staff)
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Student Athlete Academic Advising Records
+
+7 Years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+
+
+Student Athlete Medical Records
+
+7 Years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+
+
+Non-Academic Student Records
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Student Judicial and Student Conduct Records (Findings of Violation and Related Case Files)
+
+5years after graduation or separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Grievances (not grade appeals)
+
+3 years after closure
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Student Organizations Event Records
+
+5 Years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+
+
+Student Organization Recognition Paperwork
+
+7 Years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+
+
+Student Tuition and Fee Charges
+
+5 Years After Separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+AACRAO
+
+Guideline
+
+HUMAN RESOURCE RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Job Announcements and Advertisements
+
+2 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+29 CFR §
+
+1627.3(b); Legal Counsel
+
+Individual Applicants Who Are Not Hired
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Employment Applications, Resumes
+
+3 years after search completed
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 CFR 1602.14
+
+29 CFR 1602.21;
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Background Investigation Results
+
+3 years after search completed
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 CFR 1602.14
+
+29 CFR 1602.21
+
+Resumes
+
+3 years after search completed
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 CFR 1602.14
+
+29 CFR 1602.21
+
+Letters of Recommendation
+
+3 years after search completed
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 CFR 1602.14;
+
+29 CFR 1602.21
+
+Employees
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Employee Personnel Files
+
+7 years following separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 USC 1027;
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Employee Benefit Files
+
+7 years after discontinuation or change of benefits
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 USC 1027;
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+403(b) Application) Records and Retirement Plan Documents
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+yes or
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Required Personal Information Employees (Name, Address, SS#, Pay, Hourly or Salaried)
+
+7 years after separation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Payroll records & summaries
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ADA Records
+
+5 years after separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 C.F.R. Section
+
+1602.14
+
+Continuation of Insurance Benefits (COBRA) Records
+
+4 years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Family and Medical Leave Case Files
+
+3 years after employee separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 C.F.R.
+
+§825.500.
+
+I-9 Forms and other Employment Verification Records
+
+3 years after hire or 1 year after separation, whichever comes later
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+8 U.S.C. §1324; 8
+
+C.F.R. § 274a.2
+
+Job Descriptions
+
+3 years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 CFR § 516.6;
+
+29 CFR § 1620.32
+
+Promotion and Salary Increase Records
+
+7 years after separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 USC 1027
+
+Unemployment Compensation Claims,
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+
+
+Unclaimed Salaries
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Workers’ Compensation Claims
+
+10 years
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Faculty meeting minutes
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Historical Relevance
+
+Faculty promotion, tenure records, and tenure-review records
+
+7 years after separation
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+29 USC 1027
+
+Student Evaluations of Faculty Courses
+
+3years after completion of course
+
+
+
+yes
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Payroll Records – Individual Employees
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Payroll Additions/Deductions Overtime Authorization
+
+4 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+FICA; 29 U.S.C.
+
+Sections 201-219;
+
+28 U.S.C. Section
+
+1658; 29 CFR
+
+516.5; 29 CFR
+
+516.6
+
+Time Cards or Sheets
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+29 U.S.C. Sections
+
+201-219; 28
+
+U.S.C. Section 1658; 29 CFR 1627.3
+
+Employment Tax Related Records (W-2, W-4, 1099, returns, schedules, etc.)
+
+Until superseded or 7 years after separation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+26 C.F.R. Sections
+
+31.6001-1 to
+
+31.6001-6;
+
+Garnishments
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IRS and Better Business Bureau
+
+INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+
+
+Authority
+
+Computer Performance Reports, Security Documentation
+
+5 years
+
+IT
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+System Documentation, Systems Maintenance Documents, Source Code Listings and Updates
+
+5 years
+
+IT
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Computer Performance Reports, Security Documentation
+
+5 years
+
+IT
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Vendor Service Orders, Tape Backup Records
+
+5 years
+
+IT
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+
+
+Website Records (records that document the development of a web site for a unit. File may include drafts of content, specifications, software product, and other related information)
+
+Retain until administrative usefulness is completed then dispose of.
+
+IT
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH & SAFETY RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+
+
+Authority
+
+Environmental Regulations Records (Documentation of institutional compliance with environmental laws and guidelines of federal, state, or local governments.)
+
+10 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Training Records (OSHA)
+
+30 years from the date on which training occurred after employee separates
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+29 CFR
+
+1910.1020
+
+Toxic Substance Exposure Records
+
+30 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+29 CFR
+
+1910.1020
+
+Fire Safety Records, Audit Reports
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Drug Screening, Employee Asbestos Monitoring, Employee Exposure Records, Employee Medical Records, Employee Medical and Exposure Records
+
+30 years after separation
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+OSHA 1910.1001;
+
+OSHA 1910.20;
+
+OSHA 1910.1025
+
+Accident Reports (OSHA)
+
+30 years after termination
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Chemical and Hazardous Waste Disposal Records
+
+30 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+40 CFR 262.20
+
+Material Safety Data Sheets Records
+
+30 years from the date the substance was last received in the workplace
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+29 CFR
+
+1910.1020
+
+LEGAL RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+
+
+Contracts, Closing Documents, Due Diligence Files
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Patent Files, Research Files, Trademark Registrations, Copyright Registrations
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Regulatory Filings, Government Investigation Files
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+Other Litigation and Investigations
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Legal Counsel
+
+SECURITY RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Dispatch Records
+
+3 years, or until case is adjudicated, whichever is longer
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Clery Act Crime and Fire Report and all supporting records (copies of crime reports; the daily crime logs; records for arrests and referrals for disciplinary action; timely warning and emergency notification reports; documentation, such as letters to and from local police having to do with Clery Act compliance; letters to and from campus security authorities; correspondence with us regarding Clery Act compliance; and copies of notices to students and employees about the availability of the annual security report)
+
+3 years from the latest publication of the report to which they apply (in effect 7 years)
+
+Public Safety
+
+yes
+
+yes
+
+20 USC § 1092
+
+Property Damage Reports
+
+4 years after report date or three years until case is
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+closed.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Vehicle Accident
+
+7 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+DMV Lists
+
+Until superseded
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Key Issuance
+
+2 years after key is returned
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Parking Citations
+
+2 years after resolution
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Parking Permits
+
+2 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Bicycle License/Registration
+
+2 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+LIBRARY
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Requests for items to be put on reserves
+
+Current semester
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Security incident reports
+
+Permanent
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ILL records of request
+
+current semester
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Circulation for journals (not including patron record)
+
+1 year
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Materials checked out (by patron)
+
+Until returned
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Fine records
+
+Until paid
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Circulation system user records
+
+While user is active
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Initial order records for books, serials, and e- resources
+
+Permanent
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Accounting reports/deposit receipts from service desks
+
+10 years
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Library budget
+
+10 years
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Library statistics
+
+Permanent
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Library publications (e.g., manuals, handbooks, etc.)
+
+While active; then transfer to Archives
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Graduate Theses and Dissertations
+
+Permanent
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Appraisal of Library Materials
+
+Permanent
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Artifact Acquisition/Special Collection  Records
+
+Permanent
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Collection & Acquisition Exchange
+
+While active
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Serial Records
+
+While active
+
+LIB
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+TITLE IX RECORDS
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Title IX Audit Records
+
+3 Years
+
+Title IX Coordinator
+
+Yes
+
+Yes
+
+Per Title IX, An educational institution must evaluate its current policies and procedures as they affect the admission of students, treatment of students, and employment of both academic and non- academic personnel working in connection with the provider’s education program or activity. See Title IX Legal Manual, pp. 108-
+
+109
+
+Title IX Reporting, Investigation and Resolution Records: This series documents the investigation and outcome of alleged violations of the sexual misconduct policy.
+
+This series may include, but is not limited to: incident reports, notification of
+
+7 years from final resolution
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+allegation, hearing notes, decision statements, appeals documentation, and final report.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Vehicle Inspection
+
+4 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Vehicle Records
+
+4 years after disposal of vehicle
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Utilities System Operating & Maintenance
+
+3 years after equipment is no longer in service
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Work Order Requests
+
+4 years
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Permit drawings, record drawings
+
+Permanent/Life of facility
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Building /Land Inventory
+
+Permanent
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Certificates of Occupancy
+
+Permanent/Life of facility
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Building Permits
+
+Permanent/Life of facility
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Space/Facilities Use
+
+5 years for summary reports/Perman ent for overall historical information/ Archives receives perm. documents
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Plats, surveys, utility location maps
+
+Permanent/Life of facility
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH
+
+Retention Period
+
+Official Repository
+
+Paper Copy
+
+Electronic Copy
+
+Authority
+
+Grade Distribution Reports
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Statistical Abstracts
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Statistical Year in Reviews
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Various Ad Hoc Reports
+
+5 years
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IPEDS Reports
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+State Ed Reports
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+NCAA Reports
+
+Permanent
+
+Athletics
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Commercial Surveys (US News, etc.)
+
+5 years
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Data
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Student Data
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Course Data
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Survey Data
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+NSF Data
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Department Reviews
+
+Permanent
+
+Institutional Research</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Recruitment and Appointment of Part.txt [/INST] Recruitment and Appointment of Part-time (Adjunct) Faculty
+
+Part-time (Adjunct) Faculty members are appointed by either the Vice President of Academic Affairs or the Vice President of Training according to the following procedures:
+
+																							Upon the recommendation of, and in consultation with the applicable Department Chair, the Vice President of Academic Affairs will review and assess the needs of the particular academic department and approve the need to fill the position.  For ATI appointments, the Vice President of Training will review and assess the needs of the particular department and approve the need to fill the position.
+
+																							Following approval, the Department Chair (or designee), in consultation with the Vice President of Academic Affairs, develops a description of the position and determines criteria, procedures, advertising needs and a timeline for application in compliance with the Employee Handbook’s General Recruitment policies.  For ATI positions, the Vice President of Training or a designee will accomplish these tasks.  All recruiting practices utilized by the Department Chair or Vice President of Training as applicable will be consistent with the College’s commitment to equal opportunity.
+
+																							The Department Chair or Vice President of Training as applicable reviews the applications and supporting documents and decides which candidate(s) to interview, including the frequency of the interviews.
+
+																							Initial interviews for academic department candidates on campus will include meetings with the applicable Department Chair and the Vice President of Academic Affairs.  The Vice President of Training and any designees will conduct initial interviews with ATI candidates.  Applicants may give a lecture as part of the interview process.  
+
+																							During the interview process, all candidates will be notified that any job offer is contingent upon successful completion of employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks (see the College’s Verification of Data Policy in the Employee Handbook).  Moreover, notice of the availability of the College’s annual security report will be provided to the interviewee if the position was advertised.
+
+																							The Department Chair will recommend to the Vice President of Academic Affairs final academic department candidates for final interviews.  The Vice President of Training will select final candidates for ATI positions.  The final decision to extend an appointment offer rests with the President.
+
+																							The Vice President of Academic Affairs (or his or her designee) or Vice President of Training as applicable will extend a verbal offer to the final candidate that is contingent upon verification of the candidate’s academic or alternative qualification credentials (see Faculty Qualifications Policy in Section 1.6.3) and the successful completion of requisite background and reference checks (see College’s Verification of Data Policy in the Employee Handbook).  
+
+																							Following verification of the candidate’s credentials and the successful completion of the background and reference screens, the Vice President of Academic Affairs or Vice President of Training as applicable will issue a formal term appointment letter of agreement stating the terms of employment including the position, length of appointment, course(s) to be taught and the date by which the signed contract must be returned.  
+
+																							In order for the appointment to become valid, the candidate must sign and return to the Vice President of Academic Affairs’ Office or Vice President of Training as applicable on or before the date indicated in the offer the appointment contract.  Offers of employment not accepted and returned within the date indicated in the contract will be considered null and void.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] REDLINE w SS Add- Canisius College Alcohol and Drug Prevention Policy vs. 2.2.1 Alcohol and Drug Prevention Policy Original 4.5.21-C (002).txt [/INST] 2.2.1        Alcohol and Drug Prevention Program Policy
+
+
+
+ALCOHOL, MARIJUANA AND ILLEGAL DRUG USE PREVENTION PROGRAM POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+May 8, 2017
+
+Policy Number:
+
+II – 2.2.1
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Vice President for Student Affairs
+
+Applicability:
+
+All members of the Canisius College community.
+
+History:
+
+ 
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to adopt and implement a program to educateprovide a living and prevent the unlawful possession,learning environment that is free from illegal use, or distribution of illicit drugs orand marijuana and the abuse of alcohol and to educate the college community about the health risks and legal penalties associated with their use.  
+
+
+
+POLICY
+
+In accordance with the Canisius College commitment to providing a healthy and productive educational environment and the Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act Amendments of 1989, it is the policy of Canisius College to annually inform the campus community about the college’s policies on drugs and, alcohol and marijuana and about the health risks and legal penalties associated with their use.
+
+The abuse of alcohol and the use of illegal use of drugs and marijuana by members of the Canisius community, on college property or by participants in college activities, are incompatible with the goals of an academic institution.  In order to ensure that alcohol and marijuana and illegal drugs do not interfere with the goals of the college, substance abuse programs have been developed which apply to the college as both an educational institution and a workplace.  The programs are designed to:
+
+Establish and enforce clear policies for employees and students that promote an educational environment free from the illegal use of drugs, use of marijuana and the abuse of alcohol and illegal drugs.
+
+Educate all members of the campus community about the health risks associated with the use of illegal use of drugs and marijuana and the abuse of alcohol.
+
+Create a campus environment that promotes and reinforces healthy, responsible living and respect for community and campus standards and regulations.
+
+Provide a reasonable level of care for individuals experiencing chemical use and abuse problems through counseling, treatment and referral.
+
+POLICY
+
+Canisius College prohibits the following conduct on all of its property, in all of its vehicles and as part of any of its activities:
+
+the unauthorized possession, use, manufacture, distribution, transportation or sale of alcohol and alcoholic beverages by its employees or students on its property or as part of any of its activities. Further, while on its property or as part of any college activity employees and students are prohibited from using drugs, possessing drugs or drug paraphernalia and from selling or otherwise distributing drugs.all persons; 
+
+the possession, use, sale, cultivation, processing, distribution or transportation of marijuana by all persons;  
+
+the possession, use, sale, manufacture, distribution or transportation of any controlled substance, except use of a controlled substance under supervision by a licensed health care professional as allowed by federal law or other uses authorized by the Controlled Substances Act or other provision of federal law; 
+
+the possession, use, sale, manufacture, distribution  or transportation of any drug, including marijuana, paraphernalia.
+
+Canisius employees are also prohibited from working under the influence or when impaired by alcohol, marijuana or other controlled substance.   
+
+Violations of these policies will result in immediate sanctions consistent with the college’s employee and student disciplinary procedures, college policies and regulations, and local, state and federal law. This may include but is not limited to counseling, mandatory participation in an appropriate rehabilitation program, fines, participation in community service, unpaid suspension from employment, loss of certain campus privileges, termination of employment, and/or referral for prosecution.  Student disciplinary action may include the applicable disciplinary sanctions described above and/or suspension or expulsion from the residence halls or the college.  The Canisius College Student Handbook, available in the Griff Center, Old Main 013, and on MyCanisius provides a complete listing of rules of the Community Standards and of the student disciplinary procedures.
+
+The college’s Alcohol and Drug Prevention Program is reviewed annually by the Office of Student Life to determine effectiveness and to implement changes (if needed) to ensure that the College’s disciplinary sanctions are consistently enforced.  The college’s review includes a determination as to: (a) the number of drug- and ,  alcohol and marijuana-related violations and fatalities occurring on the Canisius college campuses or as part of college-sanctioned activities that are reported to campus officials; and, (b) the number and types of sanctions the college imposed on students and employees as a result of such violations or fatalities.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Alcohol or Alcoholic Beverage—any liquid suitable for drinking by human beings, except prescription drugs or over-the-counter medications, which contains one-half of one percent or more of alcohol by volume.
+
+Marijuana - all parts of the plant of the genus Cannabis, whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin or oil extracted from any part of the plant and every compound, manufacture, salt,  derivative, mixture, preparation or product of the plant, its seeds, resin or oil regardless of the amount contained therein.  
+
+Controlled Substance or Illegal Drug— a drug, substance, or immediate precursor as identified in Articles 220 and 221 of NY Penal Law; or a drug or other substance, or immediate precursor, included in schedule I, II, III, IV, or V of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as amended).  (Although New York law permits the adult (age 21 and over) use of marijuana, it remains a controlled substance under the federal Controlled Substances Act and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act.  Accordingly, the possession, use, sale, cultivation, processing, distribution or transportation of marijuana or being under the influence of marijuana in any form by Dominican College community members on College grounds or property or in the course of a College-sponsored activity is prohibited). 
+
+Illegal Drug Use - the use of any drug, the possession or distribution of which is unlawful under the Controlled Substances Act, but not including the use of a drug taken under supervision by a licensed health care professional or other uses authorized by the Controlled Substances Act of other provision of federal law.
+
+Public Places—residence hall entrances and lobbies, lounges, hallways, and stairways, or common grounds of the college to which the general public by specific or implied invitation has access and in which an individual could have no reasonable expectation of privacy.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+Federal Student Financial Aid Penalties for Drug Law Violations
+
+As prescribed in section 484(r) of the Higher Education Act, a student who, during a period of enrollment for which the student was receiving any Federal grant, loan, or work assistance, is convicted of any offense under any Federal or State law involving the possession or sale of a controlled substance shall not be eligible to receive any additional grant, loan, or work assistance from the date of that conviction for the period of time specified in the following table:
+
+
+
+ 
+
+Sale of Illegal Drugs
+
+Possession of Illegal Drugs
+
+1st offense
+
+1 year from date of conviction
+
+2 years from date of conviction
+
+2nd offense
+
+2 years from date of conviction
+
+Indefinite period
+
+3+ offenses
+
+Indefinite period
+
+Indefinite period
+
+(If the student was convicted of both possessing and selling illegal drugs, and the periods of ineligibility are different, the student will be ineligible for the longer period.)
+
+Students denied eligibility for an indefinite period can regain it only after successfully completing an approved rehabilitation program or if a conviction is reversed, set aside, or removed from the student’s record so that fewer than two convictions for sale or three convictions for possession remain on the record.  In such cases, the nature and dates of the remaining convictions will determine when the student regains eligibility.
+
+Student Responsibilities if Convicted During Period of Enrollment
+
+If a student is convicted of a drug offense after receiving Federal aid, they must notify the Office of Student Records and Financial Services immediately.  If a student has been convicted of a drug offense while applying to receive Title IV Federal financial aid, they are required to report the conviction on item number 23 of the FAFSA.
+
+
+
+Criminal Sanctions
+
+The unlawful possession, use, manufacture, sale, abuse or distribution of illegal drugscontrolled substances and alcohol and marijuana is punishable by sanctions imposed by the US Government and/or by the state of New York.  Where appropriate or necessary, the College will cooperate fully with the law enforcement agencies.
+
+State Criminal Penalties
+
+Information about New York State statutes and applicable penalties for violations can be found in the library and by contacting Canisius Public Safety at Ext. 2330.
+
+Federal Penalties for Illicit DrugsControlled Substances
+
+The following are federal trafficking penalties for illegal drugs took under the Controlled Substance Acts (CSA).
+
+CSA I and II Penalties
+
+For possession of 10–99 gram (gm) or 100–999 gm mixture of methamphetamine or PCP; 100–999 gm mixture of heroin; 500–4,999 gm mixture of cocaine; 5–49 gm mixture of cocaine base; 1–10 gm mixture of LSD; 40–399 gm mixture of fentanyl; 10–99 gm mixture of fentanyl analogue, the penalty is:
+
+First offense: not less than five years or more than 40 years of imprisonment; if death or serious injury occurs, not less than 20 years of imprisonment or more than life; a fine of not more than $2 million for individuals or $5 million for other than individual.
+
+Second offense: not less than 10 years of imprisonment or more than life; if death or serious injury occurs, not less than life imprisonment; a fine of not more than $4 million for individuals, $10 million for other than individual.
+
+For possession of 100 gm or more, or one kg or more mixture of methamphetamine or PCP; one kg or more mixture of heroin; five kg or more mixture of cocaine; 50 gm or more mixture of cocaine base; 10 gm or more mixture of LSD; 400 gm or more mixture of fentanyl; 100 gm or more mixture of fentanyl analogue; the penalty is:
+
+First offense: not less than 10 years of imprisonment or more than life; if death or serious injury occurs, not less than 20 years of imprisonment or more than life; a fine of not more than $4 million for individuals, or $10 million if other than individual.
+
+Second offense: not less than 20 years of imprisonment or more than life; if death or serious injury occurs, not less than life imprisonment; a fine of not more than $8 million for individuals, $20 million for other than individual.
+
+For other drugs, not including marijuana, hashish, or hash oil, the penalty is:
+
+First offense: not more than 20 years of imprisonment; if death or serious injury occurs, not less than 20 years of imprisonment or more than life; a fine of $1 million for individuals, $5 million for other than individual.
+
+Second offense: not more than 30 years of imprisonment; if death or serious injury occurs, life imprisonment; a fine of $2 million individuals, $10 million for other than individual.
+
+CSA III, IV, and V Penalties
+
+For CSA III drugs, not more than five years of imprisonment: a fine of not more than $250,000 for individuals, or
+
+$1 million for other than individual.
+
+Second offense: penalties double that of first offense.
+
+For CSA IV drugs:
+
+First offense: not more than three years of imprisonment; a fine of not more than $250,000 for individuals, or
+
+$1 million for other than individual.
+
+Second offense: penalties double that of first offense.
+
+For CSA V drugs:
+
+First offense: not more than one year of imprisonment; a fine of not more than $100,000 for individuals, or $250,000 for other than individual.
+
+Second offense: penalties double that of first offense.
+
+Marijuana, Hashish, and Hashish Oil
+
+For possession of 1,000 kilogram (kg) or more, or 1,000 or more plants, of marijuana or mixture containing discernible quantity: 
+
+First offense: not less than 10 years of imprisonment, not more than life imprisonment. If death or serious injury occurs, not less than 20 years of imprisonment, not more than life imprisonment; a fine of not more than $4 million for individuals, $10 million for other than individual.
+
+Second offense: not less than 20 years of imprisonment or not more than life imprisonment; if death or serious injury occurs, not less than life imprisonment; a fine of not more than $8 million for individuals, $20 million for other than individual.
+
+For possession of 100 kg to 1,000 kg, or 100–999 plants, of marijuana or mixture containing discernible quantity: 
+
+First offense: not less than five years of imprisonment, not more than 40 years of imprisonment. If death or serious injury occurs, not less than 20 years of imprisonment, not more than life imprisonment; a fine of not more than $2 million for individuals, $5 million for other than individual.
+
+Second offense: not less than 10 years of imprisonment or more than life imprisonment; if death or serious injury occurs, not less than life imprisonment; a fine of not more than $4 million for individuals, $10 million for other than individual.
+
+For possession of 50 to 100 kg, or 50–99 plants, of marijuana; 10 to 100 kg hashish; or 1 to 100 kg hashish oil: First offense: not more than 20 years of imprisonment. If death or serious injury occurs, not less than 20 years of imprisonment, not more than life imprisonment; a fine of $1 million for individuals, $5 million for other than individual.
+
+Second offense: not more than 30 years of imprisonment. If death or serious injury occurs, life imprisonment, a fine of $2 million for individuals and $10 million for other than an individual.
+
+For possession of under 50 kg of marijuana, less than 10 kg of hashish, less than 1 kg of hashish oil:
+
+First offense: not more than five years of imprisonment; a fine of not more than $250,000 for individuals, $1 million for other than individual.
+
+Second offense: not more than 10 years of imprisonment; a fine of not more than $500,000 for individuals, $2 million for other than individual.
+
+Health Risks of Alcohol and IllicitIllegal Drugs
+
+Canisius is committed to educating members of the community on alcohol abuse and other drug use. Teaching and learning can be impaired by alcohol and drug use. The college, therefore, has an explicit concern for the alcohol and drug use of its students, faculty, and staff.
+
+Alcohol — Alcohol consumption causes a number of changes in behavior. Even small amounts significantly impair the judgment and coordination required to drive a car safely. Low to moderate amounts of alcohol can increase the incidence of a variety of aggressive acts, including harassment and assault. There is an increase in violence associated with alcohol use including suicide, homicide, and sexual violence. Other negative effects include alcohol poisoning which requires hospital emergency room treatment. Long term health effects include high blood pressure, heart disease, liver disease, cancer, stroke and memory and learning problems. Alcohol use can lead to anxiety and depression, social problems, lost productivity, family problems and economic instability.
+
+Cannabis (Marijuana, Hashish) — Users of marijuana can experience increased heart rate, dry mouth, and throat and increased appetite. Smoking marijuana irritates the lungs and can lead to chronic cough, phlegm production, and lung infections. Some research has identified a link between marijuana use and increased risk for mental illnesses such as depression, psychosis, anxiety and personality disorders. Additional research suggests that marijuana use affects brain development when used by adolescents and young adults. In this age group there is a decline in cognitive functioning that could be permanent.
+
+In 2014 New York State passed the Compassionate Care Act, whichlaw allows the use of non-smokeable marijuana for medical purposes for individuals with identified medical conditions that are severely debilitating or life threatening for which marijuana is likely to be therapeutic or palliative. Use of medical marijuana at work or school can threaten productivity, work quality, personal and work place safety.
+
+Heroin—is an illegal addictive opiate associated with very high incidents of overdose. Heroin usage and death from heroin overdose is an epidemic in Erie County and the United States. Illegal use of heroin has increased in both men and women, all age groups and all socioeconomic groups. The greatest risk factor of heroin addiction is addiction to opioid painkillers. Heroin can cause slow, shallow breathing, coma and death. It is typically injected but can also be snorted or smoked. Those who inject heroin are at risk of serious long term viral infections such as HIV, Hepatitis B and C, and bacterial infections of the skin, bloodstream and heart. There is no control over the purity of street heroin so the user is never sure of the amount of drug or drugs they are using. Heroin is often mixed with acetyl fentanyl, another very powerful opioid. It can be 5 to 15 times stronger than heroin and can lead to a more rapid onset of overdose that is more difficult to reverse using accepted medical treatment and Narcan.
+
+Prescription Opioid— Opioid pain killers, such as hydrocodone, oxycodone, lortab, vicodin or other opiate derivatives, either medically prescribed or illicit use, can lead to physical and psychological dependency. Opiate pain medication has been identified as a risk factor and possible gateway drugs for heroin use. Health effects from opiates can include drowsiness, anxiety, nausea, mood swings, impaired judgment, delayed response or reaction, and emotional numbness.  Use of opiates while at work or school can threaten productivity, work quality, personal safety and the safety of co-workers, fellow students and the entire campus community.
+
+Hallucinogens—Lysergic acid (LSD), mescaline, and psilocybin cause illusions and hallucinations. The physical effects may include dilated pupils, elevated body temperature, increased heart rate and blood pressure, loss of appetite, sleeplessness and tremors. The user may experience panic, confusion, suspicion, anxiety, and loss of control. Delayed effects, or flashback, can occur even when use has ceased.
+
+Phencyclidine (PCP) —interrupts the functions of the neocortex, the section of the brain that controls the intellect and keeps instincts in check. Because the drug blocks pain receptors, violent PCP episodes may result in self-inflicted injuries. The effects of PCP vary, but users frequently report a sense of distance and estrangement. Speech is incoherent, coordination worsens, and senses are dulled. In later stages of chronic use, users often exhibit paranoid and violent behavior and experience hallucinations.
+
+Cocaine/Crack—Cocaine users often have a stuffy, runny nose with eczema around the nostrils and possible perforation of the nasal septum. Immediate effects of cocaine include dilated pupils and elevated blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, and body temperature. Crack or freebase rock cocaine is extremely addictive, and its effects are felt within 10 seconds. Crack and cocaine can cause delirium, hallucinations, blurred vision, severe chest pain, muscle spasms, convulsions, and even death.
+
+Synthetic Cathinones (“Bath Salts”) —The term “bath salts” refers to an emerging family of drugs containing one or more synthetic chemicals related to cathinone, an amphetamine-like stimulant found naturally in the Khat plant. Reports of severe intoxication and dangerous health effects associated with the use of bath salts have made these drugs a serious and growing public health and safety issue. Bath salts are typically taken orally, inhaled, or injected, with the worst outcomes being associated with snorting or needle injection. The synthetic cathinones in bath salts can produce euphoria and increased sociability and sex drive, but some users experience paranoia, agitation, and hallucinatory delirium; some even display psychotic and violent behavior, and deaths have been reported in several instances.
+
+MDMA (Ecstasy or Molly) —MDMA (3,4-methylenedioxy-methamphetamine), popularly known as ecstasy or, more recently, as Molly, is a synthetic, psychoactive drug that has similarities to both the stimulant amphetamine and the hallucinogen mescaline. MDMA is taken orally, usually as a capsule or tablet. It produces feelings of increased energy, euphoria, emotional warmth and empathy toward others, and distortions in sensory and time perception. Health effects include increased heart rate and blood pressure, which are particularly risky for people with circulatory problems or heart disease. MDMA users may experience other symptoms such as muscle tension, involuntary teeth clenching, nausea, blurred vision, faintness, and chills or sweating. Some heavy MDMA users experience long-lasting confusion, depression, sleep abnormalities, and problems with attention and memory.
+
+Barbiturates—In small doses, barbiturates produce calmness, relaxed muscles and lowered anxiety. Larger doses cause slurred speech, staggering gait and altered perception. Very large doses, or doses taken in combination with other central nervous system depressants (e.g., alcohol), may cause respiratory depression, coma and even death. A person who uses barbiturates may have poor muscle control, appear drowsy or drunk, become confused, irritable, or inattentive, or have slowed reactions.
+
+Amphetamines—Amphetamines, methamphetamines or other stimulants can cause increased heart and respiratory–rates, elevated blood pressure and dilated pupils. Larger doses cause rapid or irregular heartbeat, tremors and physical collapse. An amphetamine injection creates a sudden increase in blood pressure that can result in stroke, high fever, heart failure and death. An individual using amphetamines might begin to lose weight, have the sweats and appear restless, anxious, moody and unable to focus. Extended use may produce psychosis, including hallucinations, delusions and paranoia.
+
+Designer Drugs—Designer drugs are synthetic chemical modifications of older drugs of abuse that are designed and manufactured in covert laboratories and sold at great profit for recreational use.  These drugs can be several hundred to several thousand times stronger than the drugs they are designed to imitate.  Designer drugs similar to opiates include fentanyl, demerol, and “china white.”  The narcotic analogs of designer drugs can cause symptoms such as those seen in Parkinson's disease - uncontrollable tremors, drooling, impaired speech, paralysis and irreversible brain damage.  Analogs of amphetamines and methamphetamines cause nausea, blurred vision, chills or sweating and faintness.  Psychological effects include anxiety, depression and paranoia.  Withdrawal problems include sweating, diarrhea, fever, insomnia, irritability, nausea and vomiting, and muscle and joint pain.
+
+Please note the above list is only a sampling of drugs, and by no means a complete one. Non-labeled use of prescription drugs, abuse of prescription drugs, unsafe use of prescription drugs, club drugs, nicotine, as well as inhalants are other drugs that pose health risks. For a complete list, go to the National Institute on Drug Abuse web site at http://www.drugabuse.gov/. All members of the Canisius community are urged to familiarize themselves with the specific policies on alcohol and drug use. Additional information about the health risks associated with use and abuse can be found in the library, the Student Health Center, and the Counseling Center.  Information about New York State statutes and applicable penalties for violations can be found in the library and by contacting Canisius Public Safety at Ext. 2330.
+
+Confidential Assistance
+
+The Employee Assistance Program (EAP) provides professional confidential help and referral to persons troubled by their own or another’s use of alcohol or drugs. Their website address is: www.cfsbny.org/programs/eap.  Call 716-681-4300 to schedule an appointment or if assistance is needed in accessing the website.
+
+The group health insurance plans sponsored by the college for employees and their eligible dependents provide inpatient detoxifications coverage and outpatient visits for alcohol and substance abuse counseling.  For names of approved counselors, co-pays, limits and further information, please contact Human Resources. The student sickness and accidents plans provide coverage for alcohol and substance abuse as mandated by New York State.
+
+In addition to the campus and health plan options, several local agencies provide confidential help. They are as follows:
+
+Canisius College Employee Assistance Program (EAP): 1-800-386-7055; www.ibhworklife.com 
+
+Alcoholics Anonymous: 853-0388; http://www.aa.org/
+
+Al-Anon: 856-2520 (supporting family and friends) www.al-anon.org
+
+Crisis Services Addiction hotline: 831-7007; http://crisisservices.org
+
+Kids Escaping Drugs: 827-9462; www.ked.org
+
+Substance Abuse Treatment Helpline: 1 800-662-HELP; http://findtreatment.samhsa.gov (a referral service)
+
+National Council on Alcoholism (NCA): 1 800-NCA-CALL (a referral service)
+
+National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA): 1 800-729-6686; www.nida.nih.gov (a referral service to cocaine abuse centers)
+
+Additional resources faculty and staff may utilize to help Canisius College students are the Counseling Center, located in Bosch Room 105, 888-2620, and the Student Health Center, located in the lower level of Frisch, 888-2610.
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Event Alcohol Policy
+
+Event Management Policy for External Clients
+
+Event Management Policy for Internal Users
+
+Community Standards. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Doc #9614213.1
+
+ 
+
+Document comparison by Workshare 10.0 on Thursday, April 8, 2021 5:00:01 PM
+
+Input:
+
+Document 1 ID
+
+file://C:\Users\set\Desktop\2.2.1 Alcohol and Drug Prevention Policy Original 4.5.21.docx 
+
+Description
+
+2.2.1 Alcohol and Drug Prevention Policy Original 4.5.21 
+
+Document 2 ID
+
+iManage://bu-dms-work.plllp.local/BUFFALO/9614213/1 
+
+Description
+
+Canisius College Alcohol and Drug Prevention Policy#BUFFALOv9614213<bu-dms-work.plllp.local> 
+
+Rendering set
+
+Standard
+
+
+
+Legend:
+
+Insertion 
+
+Deletion 
+
+Moved from 
+
+Moved to 
+
+Style change 
+
+Format change 
+
+Moved deletion 
+
+Inserted cell
+
+ 
+
+Deleted cell
+
+ 
+
+Moved cell
+
+
+
+Split/Merged cell
+
+
+
+Padding cell
+
+
+
+
+
+Statistics:
+
+
+
+Count
+
+Insertions
+
+46
+
+Deletions
+
+21
+
+Moved from
+
+1
+
+Moved to
+
+1
+
+Style change
+
+0
+
+Format changed
+
+0
+
+Total changes
+
+69</s>"
+"<s>[INST] REDUCTION IN FORCE.txt [/INST] REDUCTION IN FORCE (STAFF) POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+[TBD]
+
+Policy Number:
+
+III – 3.3.19
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable. 
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+[TBD]
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+[TBD]
+
+Applicability:
+
+
+
+All Regular Full-and Part-time Administrative Staff and Staff (hereinafter “staff” or “employee”).  Faculty are excluded from this Policy.
+
+History:
+
+
+
+
+
+												PURPOSE
+
+												The purpose of this policy is to set forth the criteria and procedures to guide the fair and equitable treatment of regular full and part time staff in the event it becomes necessary for the college to eliminate positions because of a lack of funds, lack of work, program restructuring for economic or programmatic reasons, reorganization, or other business needs.
+
+POLICY
+
+The president of Canisius College shall declare a reduction in force.  The president’s recommendation in turn will be based on a reduction in force analysis and plan, which shall be developed under the supervision of the applicable area vice president.  Determination and notification of staff or staff position(s) to be due eliminated due to a reduction in force will be governed by the procedures and policy guidelines set forth herein.  Reduction in force decisions will be made without respect to age, race, religion or creed, color, sex, national or ethnic origin, sexual orientation, marital status, military status, genetic predisposition or carrier status, gender identity, familial status, domestic victim status, pregnancy, citizen status, disability, or any other status protected by state or federal law.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+												Reduction in Forcea separation from employment due to lack of funds, lack of work, program restructuring for economic or programmatic reasons, reorganization, or other business needs, with no likelihood or expectation that the employee will be recalled because the position itself is eliminated.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+General Guidelines
+
+Prior to implementing a reduction in force, the college may consider other alternatives such as reducing administrative or staff personnel as applicable by attrition, hiring freezes, changing employee work schedules or reducing work hours, voluntary time-off, or early retirement options.
+
+Reduction in Force Procedures
+
+Determination of Necessity for Reduction in Force
+
+Step One: Initiating Reduction in Force Plan
+
+When circumstances exist which warrant a reduction in the college’s work force to assure the continued financial security, quality, or efficiency of the college’s offices and programs, the president will request that a reduction in force analysis and plan be developed under the supervision of the senior leadership team.  The plan will include a rationale for eliminating or reducing positions, programs and/or services and set forth the objectives to be achieved by the reduction in force.  
+
+College, school, and/or department functions, needs, and responsibilities must be carefully analyzed to determine which areas, activities, programs, organizations, and/or employee classifications should be reduced.  In addition, the jobs and functions that will need to be performed after the reductions are implemented must be identified.  Finally, the plan will determine those positions which will be restructured or eliminated.  Such a determination will specify positions by job title, department, and full or part-time status.
+
+Step 2: Position Selection
+
+The selection of employees for layoff within a designated layoff college, school, and/or department and within a particular job classification and grade level will be made in the following sequence and in accordance with the following criteria:
+
+Positions of temporary and introductory staff within a designated layoff college, school, and/or department and within a particular job classification and grade level will be eliminated before any regular administrators, librarians, or staff.
+
+Regular staff who have completed their introductory periods will be selected for layoff in accordance with the following criteria:
+
+Qualifications (knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to staff the positions remaining);
+
+Level of performance, as determined on the basis of documented performance evaluations and complete personnel files;
+
+Presence or absence of documentation of poor job performance or unsatisfactory conduct; and
+
+If all other factors are equal, seniority will govern (least senior employees will be selected for layoff first, with seniority measured by years of continuous college service).
+
+Layoff of senior administrative staff may occur based on operational needs and without regard to job classification or level.
+
+
+
+Step 3: Reduction-in-Force Plan Review and Approval Process
+
+The associate vice president for human resources and compliance will review the draft of the written plan, including the positions selected for elimination, to determine that all work force reduction recommendations are consistent with this policy and that affected personnel are treated in an equitable and consistent manner, as well as to ensure that legally protected classes are not disproportionately affected by the reduction-in-force recommendations.
+
+The associate vice president for human resources and compliance will then forward the plan with his/her recommendations to the senior leadership team and president for approval.
+
+Step 4: 
+
+Positions made vacant by a reduction-in-force may not be filled for at least 12 months from the effective date of the reduction notification, except by following the recall provisions of this policy.  This requirement applies even if, following the reduction in force, the affected position is reclassified into another similar position.
+
+Notice
+
+Written notification of layoff must be given to affected employees at least two weeks before the effective date of the layoff.  A department may, however, provide 2 weeks pay in lieu of this notice. The notification must include (a) the effective date of the layoff, (b) a summary of the reasons for the layoff, (c) an explanation of the amount of severance pay and accrued paid leave for which the employee qualifies, and (d) an explanation of the employee’s appeals process, if otherwise eligible.
+
+
+
+Staff members must be given as much advance notice as possible when being notified of a layoff. In no case should any employee be given less than a four-week notice or asked to leave in less than a four-week timeframe. In very limited circumstances, the CHRO of the University may approve less than a four-week notice period after consultation with the University President. Any request for a reduced notice period must be submitted in writing and approved by the CHRO in advance of any communication to impacted employees. It is an expectation that each staff member impacted by a layoff be treated with the utmost respect, dignity and compassion. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Rights of Employees
+
+Each employee whose position has been made vacant by a reduction-in-force shall receive information on continuation of health benefits (COBRA) in the mail as required by law.
+
+Benefits
+
+The following benefit guidelines will be followed for each employee whose position has been made vacant by a reduction-in-force:
+
+If able to financially, the college will pay severance payment to benefit eligible staff in the amount of one week of pay for every year worked at the college;
+
+The college will pay all accrued vacation leave;
+
+Sick leave balances accrued at the time of layoff will be restored if the employee is rehired by the college within one year of the employee’s separation date;
+
+COBRA regulations allow the conversion of the health insurance policy, provided the employee pays the total monthly premium for the coverage;
+
+A vested right to all contributions made by the college to the employee’s TIAA/CREF retirement fund and annuity plans;
+
+Long term disability (LTD) is not available for continuation;
+
+Life insurance is available for conversion to a private policy;
+
+Employees or their dependents who are receiving tuition assistance may continue to receive this benefit through the balance of the semester in which their last day of work falls.
+
+	Reinstatement
+
+Employees whose positions has been made vacant by a reduction-in-force shall be placed on a reinstatement list for eighteen months and receive priority consideration before all other candidates for vacancies for which they are qualified.  Refusal for interview, failure to attend a scheduled interview, or failure to accept a job offer will cause the person to lose all reinstatement rights.  Separated employees must maintain current mailing addresses and telephone numbers with Human Resources in order to continue to be considered for vacancies.
+
+Employees reinstated to the same position they formerly held will not be required to serve a new introductory period (if applicable) and will receive their former pay.  Employees reinstated to a different position will complete a new introductory period.  Pay will be in accordance with applicable policy.  Previously accrued seniority will be reinstated for all personnel.  In no case will personnel accrue seniority while in a non-work status.  These procedures do not in any manner guarantee any individual who has separated as a result of a reduction in force a right to return to employment with the college.
+
+Outplacement Services
+
+Human Resources may provide career guidance and/or outplacement services to affected employees if approved by the senior leadership team. 
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Problem Resolution (Administrative Staff) Policy
+
+Problem Resolution (Librarians) Policy
+
+Problem Resolution (Staff) Policy
+
+Separation from Employment (Administrative Staff) Policy
+
+Separation from Employment (Librarians) Policy
+
+Separation from Employment (Staff) Policy</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Removal of Committee Members Draft Section.txt [/INST] Section 11.	In instances of a committee chair or committee member’s persistent lack of attendance or consistent disrespect for the orderly operation of a committee, the Executive Committee may be called upon to facilitate the review of such allegations, or execute removal of the committee chair or member.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Removed Merit Models.txt [/INST] Removed Merit Models
+
+Model 1 – No Scoring Rubric
+
+1. Evaluation File
+
+On or before the published deadline, full-time faculty eligible for a salary merit increment shall upload to the online web portal the following materials for inclusion in their Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file:
+
+A completed Faculty Personnel Information Sheet (Self-Report)
+
+A current curriculum vitae
+
+Course syllabi 
+
+Products or links to products of scholarly or creative work
+
+Academic Affairs will then upload to the evaluation file the following materials:
+
+Student Course Evaluations
+
+Rating Sheets from Peer Colleagues and the Student Faculty Board of the Department
+
+Peer Teaching Observation Reviews
+
+2. The Faculty Personnel Committee Evaluation
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee evaluates the faculty member’s performance since the last merit cycle (or initial appointment) in each of the three categories of performance - teaching, scholarly or creative work, and University and community service - based on the information in the faculty member’s Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file. By majority vote the Committee characterizes the faculty member’s work in each category by one of the following levels of achievement. 
+
+Does not meet minimum expectations for rank or reappointment
+
+Needs improvement
+
+Meets expectations for rank or reappointment
+
+Exceeds expectations for rank or reappointment
+
+Exceptional performance
+
+Faculty may only be awarded merit if their work in each category of evaluation is characterized as at least meeting expectations for their rank or reappointment status. For those who meet expectations in all three categories, the following criteria will be used to determine awards for Superior Merit, High Merit, and Merit.
+
+Superior Merit
+
+To receive an award at the Superior Merit level, a faculty member’s work must demonstrate exceptional performance in each of the two categories of teaching and scholarly or creative contributions and at least meet expectations in service for their rank or reappointment status. 
+
+High Merit
+
+To receive an award at the High Merit level, a faculty member must demonstrate that they exceed expectations in teaching and that they at least meet expectations in scholarly or creative contributions and service.
+
+Merit
+
+To receive an award at the Merit level, a faculty member must demonstrate that they at least meet expectations in all three categories of evaluation: teaching, scholarly or creative activity, and service.
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee shall use the criteria in Section 3.9.1 (and any applicable departmental criteria delineated in an approved memorandum of understanding) to evaluate the faculty member’s comparative accomplishments in each of the three categories of performance to assign a level of achievement. After assigning final merit ratings for each faculty member in the cohort, the Faculty Personnel Committee submits the individual ratings to the Provost.
+
+3.  Awarding of Merit Pay 
+
+Following receipt and review of the Faculty Personnel Committee’s summary of each faculty member’s level of achievement in each category, the Provost will review the summary for the cohort to determine that both the University’s procedures were followed and that all categories of faculty performance were considered in the evaluation. If the summary of levels of achievement are accepted, the Provost will approve the summary. If the Provost has any concerns, the Provost will consult with the Faculty Personnel Committee before making a final determination on a faculty member’s merit award level.
+
+When the process is completed, the Provost issues a letter to the faculty member evaluated advising of the outcome of the evaluation.  The letter will include the committee’s evaluations in each of the three performance categories.  If merit was not awarded, the Provost’s letter will clarify expectations and make suggestions on an area(s) to strengthen.
+
+-End of Model 1-
+
+
+
+Model 2 – Scoring Rubric with Weight Percentages
+
+1. Evaluation File
+
+On or before the published deadline, full-time faculty eligible for a salary merit increment shall upload to the online web portal the following materials for inclusion in their Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file:
+
+A completed Faculty Personnel Information Sheet (Self-Report)
+
+A current curriculum vitae
+
+Course syllabi 
+
+Products or links to products of scholarly or creative work  
+
+Academic Affairs will then upload to the evaluation file the following materials:
+
+Student Course Evaluations
+
+Rating Sheets from Peer Colleagues and the Student Faculty Board of the Department
+
+Peer Teaching Observation Reviews
+
+2. The Faculty Personnel Committee Evaluation
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee evaluates the faculty member’s performance since the last merit cycle (or initial appointment) in each of the three categories of performance – teaching, scholarly or creative work, and University and community service based on the information in the faculty member’s Faculty Personnel Committee evaluation file and using the 5-point scale set forth below: 
+
+
+
+Points
+
+Does Not Meet Minimum Expectation for Rank or Reappointment 
+
+0
+
+Needs Improvement
+
+1
+
+Meets Expectation for Rank or Reappointment
+
+2
+
+Exceeds Expectation for Rank or Reappointment
+
+3
+
+Exceptional Performance
+
+4
+
+
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee shall use the criteria in Section 3.8.1 (and any applicable departmental criteria delineated in an approved memorandum of understanding) to evaluate the faculty member’s performance in each of the three categories of performance and to assign a rating using the scale above.
+
+Determining the Merit Category 
+
+The Faculty Personnel Committee, by majority vote, assigns the individual faculty member a rating of 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4 in each of the three categories.  For each category, the rating is multiplied by the weight percentage of the category. The default weighting formula is 60-30-10 (with teaching rating multiplied by 0.40, scholarly and creative contributions by 0.30, and service by 0.10); however, the individual faculty member may submit in the Faculty Personnel Information Sheet (Self-Report) a proposed alternative weighting formula.  When submitting proposed weighting percentages, the faculty member should set forth the reasons why the Committee should consider an alternative weighting formula.  The weighted scores are then summed to produce an overall total points score that ranges between 0.0 and 4.0.
+
+The faculty member’s final score determines the merit award category, as follows: 
+
+Total Points
+
+Merit Category
+
+0.00 – 1.99
+
+No Merit
+
+2.00 – 2.79
+
+Merit 1
+
+2.8 – 3.79
+
+Merit 2
+
+3.80 – 4.00
+
+Merit 3
+
+
+
+After assigning final merit scores for each faculty member in the cohort, the Faculty Personnel Committee submits the individual scores to the Provost. 
+
+If the Faculty Personnel Committee determines that a faculty member is not meeting the minimum expectations for rank or reappointment in one or more evaluation categories, the committee will document its findings in a written report to the faculty member and Provost.  At the committee’s discretion, it may refer the faculty member to the Provost for the development of an improvement plan.
+
+3.  Awarding of Merit Pay 
+
+Following receipt and review of the merit scores, the Provost will review the scores for the cohort to determine that both the University’s procedures were followed and that all categories of faculty performance were considered in the review. If the rankings are accepted, the Provost will approve the scores.  If the Provost has any concerns, the Provost will consult with the Committee before making a final determination on a faculty member’s merit score.
+
+Following the Provost’s approval of the merits score, Academic Affairs will tabulate the total merit scores in the cohort, order them from highest to lowest score, and then group them into three tiers of similar scores to indicate the three orders of merit pay. 
+
+When the process is completed, the Provost issues a letter to the faculty member evaluated advising of the outcome of the evaluation. The letter will include the committee’s evaluations in each of the three performance categories.  If merit was not awarded, the Provost’s letter will clarify expectations and make suggestions on an area(s) to strengthen.
+
+-End of Model 2-</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Removed Termination Due to Financially Contingent Situations and Resource Allocation.txt [/INST] Termination Due to Financially Contingent Situations and Resource Allocation
+
+Termination of a tenured faculty member or, prior to the end of the term of appointment, of a tenure-track faculty member may occur because of the declaration of a financially contingent situation as described below. 
+
+For purposes of this policy, a “financially contingent situation” is a serious financial condition that is likely in the future to threatens the fiscal soundness of the University’s programs or services. It is not required that the university invade or deplete capital prior to determining that there is a financially contingent situation. It is also not required that the viability of the institution as a whole is threatened prior to determining that there is a financially contingent situation.
+
+	Criteria
+
+The criteria to be employed in financially contingent situations in allocating resources to University programs and services fall under three headings: Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality. These will at times compete and at other times converge. If and when Ohio Wesleyan University meets contingencies that require institutional contraction and reorganization, these sets of criteria will be used in complementary fashion as guidelines. The order of their enumeration should not be taken to indicate their order of priority. Neither should it be presumed that all three will be weighed equally in making particular decisions. Particular circumstances may encourage the assignment of greater weight to one or another in particular cases, even though in financially contingent situations it is to be expected that fiscal pressure may emphasize reference to the criterion of cost effectiveness. What is important is that the campus community, in considering contingency reductions, identify and grapple directly with what are likely to be very difficult choices from among options that all carry significant costs and/or benefits in terms of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality. The objective must be to arrive at wise judgments.
+
+	MISSION
+
+Because Ohio Wesleyan University is a specific private university with a specific heritage, a major consideration associated with any reduction or change in size will be to preserve its essential character by maintaining those programs and activities judged to be more central to that character. To do so will require reference to several questions. How closely does the program or service in question fit the stated mission of Ohio Wesleyan University? How importantly does it contribute toward a non-curricular campus ambience vital to Ohio Wesleyan's liberal arts heritage? Is it essential in serving other programs?
+
+	COST EFFECTIVENESS & MARKETABILITY
+
+Attentiveness to the cost effectiveness and marketability of programs and services is a key characteristic of a well-run institution. Cost-effectiveness must be one guideline in determining staffing levels and whether or not to maintain programs or services. The University must therefore be sensitive to the constituencies it serves and to their preferences. While Ohio Wesleyan cannot mindlessly add or subtract staff or programs or services to track short-term fluctuations in cost effectiveness, neither can it ignore longer term or more profound shifts as it decides which subject areas, programs, or services to maintain and at what staffing levels. The following non-prescriptive questions related to cost effectiveness and marketability must be asked: What is the relationship between direct expenses and revenues in a given area? What is the actual and relative cost of a graduation unit (or, in the case of non-academic areas, other service unit)? What is the trend line for both, and for enrollments and student/staff ratio? Is the program or service a ""native recruiter?"" Is it duplicative?  What is the present and future demand for the program among existing and potential student populations as measured by internal data sets (e.g., enrollments, numbers of majors, programs served, etc.), labor market projections, external stakeholder feedback, and national and state policy/economic projections and placement data?
+
+	QUALITY
+
+Since the primary purpose of Ohio Wesleyan University is to provide excellent instruction in the liberal arts and selected career options, and comparable quality in non-academic services, it must consider program or service quality in making program, service, and faculty staffing decisions. In dealing with any financially contingent situation, it will seek to retain its best personnel, programs, and services, as one top priority. It will strive to adjust programs and services and retain or retrain individuals so as to maintain the best possible teaching and learning environment. Major issues associated with this guideline are complex and difficult. Among them are the following: Is the program or service and its staff faculty generally perceived by Faculty (staff, where non-academic services may be involved), students, and alumni to be of high quality? Do students, in or associated with it, perform throughout the University at average or higher levels? Is the staff faculty versatile as well as strong?
+
+	The guidelines of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality are contradictory. Any one of them used exclusively could lead to very serious imbalances in the focus and operation of the University. Recognition that each of these three needs to be considered and that each provides an outward boundary for the decision process will encourage an intelligent and equitable response to financially contingent situations as well as to ordinary conditions.
+
+	Making Contingency Decisions
+
+If financially contingent situations require reductions in personnel and/or academic departments or programs resulting in the termination of faculty appointments or services , the University will balance a need for timely action with the need for shared decision-making.  In both determining whether such a situation exists and in shaping difficult decisions that contingencies might require, the President will engage in extensive consultation with appropriate faculty committees, administrators, and where conditions allow, students, before making a recommendation to the Board of Trustees as follows:  
+
+Determination of Financial Contingent Situation
+
+The Board of Trustees is solely authorized to determine that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent.
+
+The University Governance Committee shall be invited to be present when the Board of Trustees considers matters related to financial contingency and may, at the discretion of the Chair of the Board of Trustees, be invited to address the Board on behalf of the faculty as part of the Board's deliberations. The President shall present relevant financial data to the Committee of University Governance (UGC) that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent, and that reasonable means for coping with the situation have been exhausted without resorting to the elimination of faculty positions. 
+
+Framing of Proposal to Address Financial Contingent Situation
+
+Responsibility for framing a proposal for program or services and/or personnel reductions to deal with a financially contingent situation will rest with the President.  The proposal, when it pertains to academic programs and/or personnel, will be referred to the Committee on Academic Programs as to curricular impact, to the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee as to the implications for the academic plan, to the Faculty Personnel Committee as to personnel implications, and to the affected programs. When the proposal pertains to non-academic programs, services, and/or personnel, it will be forwarded to the Governance Committee and the Senior Leadership Team Cabinet for consideration. These bodies will hold hearings as part of their deliberations. At the discretion of the President, an advisory student committee may also be created. These groups will severally consider the proposal(s) and in doing so may consult widely with faculty, students, and, where appropriate, with staff. They are to complete their deliberations within 30 calendar days of receipt of the President's proposal(s) and report their findings and recommendations to the President immediately upon finishing their deliberations. They may recommend acceptance, alteration, or otherwise, of the President's proposal(s). If and when they are unable to achieve concurrence with the President, and the President yet judges that reductions must be made, the President will report to the Board of Trustees the proposed course of action. If there is a difference of views between the President and the committees, the President will ensure that the committees' proposals are forwarded to the Trustees  with the President’s proposal(s). The Board of Trustees retains ultimate authority for approving proposals as to program and position reductions and terminations responding to a financially contingent situation.
+
+After the completion and implementation of decisions for institutional contraction to deal with a financially contingent situation, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.
+
+In the event that the Board of Trustees declares that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent, the President shall be responsible for framing a proposal for addressing the situation.  If the proposal might require reductions in academic departments or interdisciplinary programs and the termination of faculty positions, the President, prior to framing the proposal, shall engage in an extensive academic program review process.
+
+Academic Program Review Process
+
+Step 1: The initial step in the Academic Program Review process will be the development by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness of a set of common quantitative data for all academic programs at the University showing trends in course enrollments, student credits delivered, graduated majors, declared majors, direct instructional expense, and other performance metrics agreed upon by Academic Affairs, Academic Planning and Allocation Committee (APAC), and UGC. The data will be made available transparently to all faculty through appropriate means such as live data dashboards. 
+
+Step 2. Following the publication of the data, each academic department and interdisciplinary program will be charged by Academic Affairs to complete self-studies, following criteria set by APAC. 
+
+Step 3. Following receipt of the department and program self-studies, APAC will evaluate each department in relation to Mission, Cost-Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality (see above) and issue a report to the President.
+
+Step 4. The President shall convene a Joint Committee comprised of eight faculty members, six of which are elected by the faculty (or appointed by the Executive Committee if an election is unsuccessful) from individuals serving on each of the following faculty committees: UGC, Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC), Committee on Academic Programs (CAP), and APAC; and two of which are appointed by the President from the tenure-line faculty.  In addition, the Joint Committee shall include the Provost and appropriate academic administrators responsible for data and curriculum as designated by the Provost.  From the faculty membership, the President shall appoint the convener of the Joint Committee.
+
+After considering the department self-studies and APAC report, the Joint Committee shall:
+
+Develop recommendations for the appropriate number and size of departments and interdisciplinary programs, as well as the appropriate number of majors and minors;
+
+Identify opportunities for program enhancement; and
+
+Suggest the optimal configuration of departments and interdisciplinary programs. 
+
+In addressing these areas, the committee’s recommendations may include (a) the discontinuation and/or reduction of departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors; (b) the elimination of faculty positions; (c) recommendations about reconfiguring departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors by reassigning positions; (d) enhancement of programs; and (e) changes in policies and procedures that would improve the functioning or efficiency of the academic program. 
+
+The President, following consultation with the Executive Committee of the Faculty, will determine the date by which the Joint Committee’s recommendations to the President must be provided.  Following its deliberations, the Joint Committee shall issue its formal recommendations in writing to the President.  
+
+Step 5. The President will review the Joint Committee report and issue a written proposal to the members of the faculty addressing the financially contingent situation.  The President’s written proposal will also be referred to CAP as to curricular impact, to APAC as to the implications for the academic plan, to the FPC as to personnel implications, and to the affected departments and interdisciplinary programs identified in the proposal.  
+
+Each committee and affected department and interdisciplinary program will have a 30-day period to develop their recommendations to the President.  The manner in which the committees and affected departments and interdisciplinary programs arrive at their recommendations is at their respective discretion.
+
+Step 6. Following the hearings, The respective committees and affected departments and interdisciplinary programs may submit to the President written recommendations for changes to the proposal.  The President will consider the recommendations. If the President adopts the recommendations, the President will incorporate them into the final plan submitted to the Board of Trustees. If the President does not adopt the recommendations, the President will transmit to the Board of Trustees both the President’s final proposal and the alternative proposal(s) prepared by the faculty committees and affected departments and interdisciplinary programs.  The Board of Trustees shall approve the final plan to address the financial contingent situation and retains ultimate authority for approving proposals as to department or interdisciplinary program and position reductions and terminations responding to a financially contingent situation.
+
+Step 7. The President shall render the final decision on terminations for reasons of financial contingency and notify the faculty member(s) involved in accordance with the Notification provisions below. 
+
+Step 8. After the completion and implementation of decisions for institutional contraction to deal with a financially contingent situation, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.
+
+
+
+Priorities 
+
+In making recommendations and final decisions on individual faculty reductions in accordance with the Academic Program Review Process procedures above, the following sequence and criteria shall apply:
+
+Sequence:
+
+Consideration of faculty attrition resulting from resignation, retirement, or other severance actions. 
+
+Termination of Part-time and Visiting faculty positions within the affected department(s) or interdisciplinary program(s). 
+
+Termination of tenure-track and/or tenured positions within the affected department(s) or interdisciplinary program(s).  The appointment of a faculty member with tenure within the same department or program will not be terminated in favor of retaining a full-time tenure-track faculty member, except in circumstances where a serious distortion of the department or interdisciplinary program would otherwise result.  
+
+Criteria: 
+
+The qualifications of faculty members as documented in official personnel files and as judged relative to the needs of the University and the potentially affected department or interdisciplinary program
+
+Given relatively equal standing as determined in a above, seniority as determined by length of service at the University
+
+Notification
+
+Notification of termination will be sent from the President to the faculty member. The notice will specify the reasons for such termination, the effective date of termination, the faculty member's right to retraining (if applicable), and right to an appeal.
+
+In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial contingency, full-time non-tenure faculty members will be given notice or severance salary in accordance with Section 3.13.3.1.  Tenured faculty will be provided with termination payments in accordance with Section 3.13.5.1.
+
+Appeals
+
+If the administration issues notice to a tenure line faculty member of an intention to terminate the appointment because of financial contingency, the faculty member will have the right to file a grievance in accordance with Section 3.14.3. 
+
+Reassignment and Retraining
+
+Before the President issues notice to a tenure line faculty member of the University’s intention to terminate an appointment because of a formal discontinuance of a department or interdisciplinary program, the University, subject to a review of qualifications (see Section 3.4.5 - Faculty Qualification) and retraining possibilities (see Section 3.10.3 – Retraining Leave), will consider the faculty member for suitable administrative or teaching position vacations within the University.  See Section 3.13.5.1 below for additional information.
+
+When a suitable position is not available within the University, with or without retraining, and the faculty member is not agreeable to any optional alternative courses of action (i.e., change in status to part-time), the faculty member’s appointment may be terminated.
+
+Reinstatement Rights
+
+In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial contingency, the place of the faculty member concerned will not be filled by a replacement within a period of three years, unless the released faculty member has been offered reinstatement and at least thirty days in which to accept or decline it.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Removed Text- Termination of Appointment Due to Financial Exigency.txt [/INST] Termination of Appointment Due to Financial Exigency
+
+Termination of an appointment with tenure, or of a tenure track, Professor of the Practice, or Visiting Faculty appointment before the end of the specified term, may occur under extraordinary circumstances because of a demonstrably bona fide financial exigency, i.e.,  a serious financial condition that threatens the academic integrity of the College as a whole and that cannot be alleviated by less drastic means.  Academic programs reduced or eliminated for educational reasons (see Article IV, Section 8.2.3) shall not be included within the scope of this definition.  Moreover, academic program reorganization shall not be included in this definition unless it results in the layoff of tenured faculty and is motivated by financial exigency.
+
+Authority for declaring a state of financial exigency and the measures adopted to alleviate it rests with the Board of Trustees.  The following standards and procedures to ensure faculty involvement in potential faculty terminations due to financial exigency shall apply:
+
+Step 1: Formation of Joint Committee. In anticipation of a state of financial exigency that might result in faculty dismissals, the President shall call together a joint committee, comprising the Advisory Committee and the Educational Policy Committee (hereinafter referred to as the Joint Committee) which shall participate in the decision that a condition of financial exigency exists or is imminent, and that all feasible alternatives to termination of appointments have been pursued. 
+
+Step 2: The President Presents Case for Financial Exigency to Joint Committee. At the outset of the crisis, the President will present to the Joint Committee evidence of the financial condition of the College.  The Joint Committee will review the evidence within the time prescribed by the President and transmit to the President and Board of Trustees either: 
+
+An endorsement of the President’s assessment of the situation; or 
+
+Its own assessment, explicitly stating its point(s) of disagreement with the President. 
+
+The Board shall not make a determination on financial exigency until it has received the report from the Joint Committee or the deadline prescribed by the President has elapsed.  These proceedings and resulting document(s) shall be considered private and confidential unless both the President and the Joint Committee both agree to make all or portions of them public. 
+
+Step 3: President Presents Remedies to the Joint Committee. In the event that the Board of Trustees declares a state of financial exigency, the President shall as soon as possible from that declaration present to the Joint Committee a report on the administration’s plan, covering the full range of cost-saving measures it proposes and an estimate, with as much specificity as possible under the circumstances, of the anticipated savings to be achieved through possible program or faculty terminations, if any.  
+
+The Joint Committee shall review the administration’s plan and transmit to the Board on or before the deadline established by the Board either:
+
+An endorsement of the administration’s plan; or
+
+Its own assessment, explicitly stating its point(s) of disagreement with the plan.
+
+These proceedings and resulting documents shall be considered confidential unless the President and the Joint Committee both agree to make all or portions of them public.
+
+Step 4: Joint Committee Recommends Appointments to be Terminated. In the event that the Board of Trustees declares a state of financial exigency, the Joint Committee shall have primary responsibility for: 
+
+Recommending on the basis of educational policy (including affirmative action), where, within the overall academic program, termination of faculty appointments should occur; and 
+
+Determining the criteria for identifying the individuals whose faculty appointments are to be terminated. These criteria may appropriately include considerations of age and length of service. 
+
+The Joint Committee shall recommend to the Provost and the President the individuals whose appointments are to be terminated.  If the recommendations of the Joint Committee are accepted and approved by the Board of Trustees, the President will issue notice of termination to the affected faculty members.  If the recommendations are not approved by the Board of Trustees, the President will review with the Joint Committee the reasons for rejecting the Joint Committee’s recommendations and the basis for any other proposed action.
+
+The President shall propose to the Joint Committee the individuals whose appointments are to be terminated, utilizing the criteria established by the Joint Committee. The Joint Committee, after consultation with any affected academic department or program, will respond with recommendations to the President, including but not limited to any other cost-saving options that may be available short of faculty terminations.  If the Joint Committee does not respond within the time prescribed by the Board, the President will be entitled to act.  If the Joint Committee does respond, the President will consider the committee’s recommendation before taking further action.  If the recommendations are not approved by the Board of Trustees, the President will review with the Joint Committee the reasons for rejecting the Joint Committee’s recommendations and the basis for any other proposed action.
+
+Additional Guidelines
+
+When the elimination of faculty positions due to a state of financial exigency is considered, tenure rights and tenured appointments will be protected insofar as possible and the following standards will apply: 
+
+Where possible, any necessary reductions in force will be achieved through normal attrition (e.g., resignations, retirements, non-reappointments). 
+
+New Appointments: If the College, because of financial exigency, terminates appointments, it will not at the same time make new appointments or initiate new academic programs or departments, except in extraordinary circumstances where a serious distortion in the academic program or exacerbation of the College’s financial problems would otherwise result. 
+
+Order of Termination: The appointment of a faculty member with tenure will not be terminated in favor of retaining a faculty member without tenure, except in extraordinary circumstances where a serious distortion of the academic program would otherwise result. 
+
+Transfer Eligibility: Before terminating an appointment because of financial exigency, the Provost, with faculty participation, will make every effort to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position within the College for which the faculty member is qualified. When, in the opinion of the Provost, placement within the College is not a viable alternative, the College will assist the tenured faculty member in finding outside employment.  The final decision on reassignment is within the discretion of the Provost.
+
+Notice: In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial exigency, the faculty member concerned will be given notice or severance salary not less than as prescribed in Article II, Subsection 2.2.2. 
+
+Commitment to Reinstate: In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial exigency, the  faculty member’s position  will not be filled by a replacement within a period of three years, unless the released faculty member has been offered reinstatement and a reasonable time in which to accept or decline it. 
+
+Appeals
+
+If the administration issues notice to a particular faculty member of an intention to terminate the appointment because of financial exigency, the faculty member will have the right to a full hearing before the Appeals and Hearing Committee.  
+
+The filing of an appeal to the Appeals and Hearing Committee must be submitted in writing by the faculty member with the Office of the College Provost no later than fifteen business days from the receipt of notice of reassignment or termination and address one or more of the issues set forth below (i.e., extent of exigency, validity of judgement, application of criteria).  A faculty member who does not request a hearing in writing within the indicated time forfeits the right to a hearing.  
+
+The Appeals and Hearing Committee, which will be constituted in the manner prescribed in Article IV, Section 9.1 of the ""Review and Appeals Procedures for Certain Faculty Grievances”, shall address the matter within 15 business days, giving both the faculty member and administration a full opportunity to present their respective cases.  By mutual agreement of the Chair of the Appeals and Hearing Committee and the President (or the President’s designee), more than one case may be heard simultaneously. 
+
+The issues in this hearing are limited to: 
+
+Extent of Exigency: The existence and extent of the condition of financial exigency.   The burden will rest on the administration to prove the existence and extent of the condition. The findings of the Joint Committee may be introduced.  Moreover, the findings of the Appeals and Hearing Committee in a previous proceeding involving the same issue may be introduced.
+
+Validity of Judgments: The educational judgments and the criteria for identification for termination; but the recommendations of the Joint Committee on these matters will be considered presumptively valid. 
+
+Application of Criteria: Proper application of the Board approved criteria in the individual case.
+
+The hearing will be conducted according to standard Appeals and Hearing Committee procedures.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Termination of Appointment Due to Program Discontinuation
+
+
+
+Termination of an appointment with  tenure, or of a tenure track, Professor of the Practice, or Visiting Faculty  appointment before the end of the specified term may occur as a result of a bona fide formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction.
+
+The following standards and procedures will apply: 
+
+The decision to discontinue formally a program or department of instruction will be based essentially upon educational considerations, as determined primarily by the faculty as a whole after consideration by the Joint Committee.
+
+For this purpose, educational considerations do not include temporary variations in enrollment.  They must reflect long-range judgments that the educational mission of the College as a whole will be enhanced by the discontinuance. 
+
+The decision to discontinue an academic program or department of instruction will be based on educational considerations related to the mission of the College.  The decision must reflect long-range judgements that the educational mission of the College as whole will be enhanced by the discontinuance.  Such a decision will not be based upon cyclical or temporary variations in enrollment; however, it may legitimately include financial considerations. 
+
+Those involved in making a decision to discontinue an academic program or department will consider advice from the concerned program or department on the short- and long-term implications of any proposed course of action.  Since these are areas in which the faculty has a significant interest and responsibility, the faculty as a whole after consideration by the Joint Committee will participate in the decision.  However, final administrative authority concerning the levels of staffing of academic programs and departments rests with the President; final authority to approve or modify an academic program or department rests with the Board of Trustees. 
+
+The decision-making process set forth above will routinely follow the steps below: 
+
+Such an action may be proposed by a standing faculty committee, by the Provost, the President, or the Board of Trustees. 
+
+Upon receipt of a proposed action, the President shall call together a joint committee, comprising the Advisory Committee and the Educational Policy Committee (hereinafter referred to as the Joint Committee), which shall evaluate the proposal considering criteria used in the normal, periodic review of academic programs and departments.  As part of the evaluation, the Joint Committee will consult with the faculty of the impacted program or department. 
+
+The recommendations of the Joint Committee concerning discontinuance of an academic program or department will be reported to the Faculty for review.
+
+The Faculty shall make a final recommendation on the matter to the Provost.  
+
+In the event the Provost disagrees with that recommendation, the Provost shall meet with the Faculty to discuss the reasons for such disagreement, before making a final recommendation on the matter to the President. 
+
+The Provost will then communicate a final decision and the reasons therefore in writing to the Faculty.
+
+Having considered the recommendations above and considered the vote of the Faculty, the Provost will make a final written recommendation to the President on the matter.  If the Provost disagreed with the Faculty’s recommendation, the Provost will communicate the reasons therefore in the written recommendation to the President.
+
+The President will then refer the above recommendations, along with the President’s independent recommendation, to the Board of Trustees for final action.
+
+Additional Guidelines
+
+Transfer Eligibility: Before the administration issues notice to a full-time faculty member of its intention to terminate an appointment because of formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction, the Provost, in consultation with the potential receiving academic department/program ,will make every effort to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position within the College for which the faculty member is qualified. When, in the opinion of the Provost, placement within the College is not a viable alternative, the College will assist the faculty member in finding outside employment. The final decision on reassignment is within the discretion of the Provost.
+
+Retraining: If consultation with a receiving academic department/program can establish placement in another position would be facilitated by a reasonable period of training, financial and other support for such training will be offered at the request of the faculty member.  Assistance may include, but need not be limited to, granting a paid leave for retraining or participation in other faculty development programs.  If retraining is approved by the President, it will normally not exceed one (1) calendar year.  If, in the judgement of the Provost, no position is available within the College with or without retraining, the faculty member’s appointment then may be terminated, but only with provision for notice not less than as prescribed in Article II, Section 2.2.2 or severance salary in lieu of notice equitably adjusted to the faculty member’s length of past and potential service. 
+
+Subject to the foregoing, the Board of Trustees shall have final authority for termination of appointments by the College.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Removed- Review and Allocation of New Programs and New Faculty Positions.txt [/INST] Review and Allocation of New Programs and New Faculty Positions
+
+The addition of new programs and associated faculty positions may be proposed to meet the strategic needs and goals of the University. Proposals for new programs and positions may come from faculty, departments, committees, task forces, or the administration. In each case, mission, program quality, market and cost-effectiveness should be assessed, using internal and external data as evidence. Such proposals may be submitted at any time during the academic year.
+
+Proposals should follow the format set forth by the Provost and be submitted to the Provost for distribution to relevant faculty committees who will assess the programs according to committee purview. Relevant committees include APAC, CAP, ECF, FPC and UGC who will each delineate procedures for assessing and ensuring the success of all new programs. Ad-hoc committees may be created and tasked with new program development, and will be involved throughout the process as appropriate. Committee recommendations on proposals will be sent to the Provost who will review and forward the recommendations to the President. If the Provost disagrees with the faculty committee recommendations, consultation with the committees should resolve differences before forwarding recommendations to the President. The President will make the final recommendation on the new Programs and positions to the Board of Trustees. 
+
+If new programs and faculty positions are provisional, the process for review and conversion of the programs and faculty positions will follow the procedures outlined for such provisional new programs and positions as developed by t and the Provost. Provisional new programs should be, by faculty vote, added to the curriculum or eliminated within a timeframe established by the Provost, relevant committees and in consultation with the new program.  
+
+Provisional faculty positions may take different forms, including one-year faculty positions, multiple-year faculty positions, or tenure-line positions subject to provisional or scheduled review. Provisional positions are not included in the maximum count of faculty positions as determined by the Board of Trustees and President. 
+
+Provisional faculty positions should be evaluated with the new programs they are associated with, in the evaluation timeframe established by the Provost, relevant committees and in consultation with the new program . Assessment and conversion of provisional faculty positions to tenure-track faculty positions can happen at any time and will then be included in the maximum count of faculty positions as determined by the Board of Trustees and President.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Review and Allocation of New Programs and New Faculty Positions
+
+The addition of new programs and associated faculty positions may be proposed to meet the strategic needs and goals of the University. Proposals for new programs and positions may come from faculty, departments, committees, task forces, or the administration. In each case, mission, program quality, market and cost-effectiveness should be assessed, using internal and external data as evidence. Such proposals may be submitted at any time during the academic year.
+
+Proposals should follow the format set forth by the Provost and be submitted to the Provost for distribution to relevant faculty committees who will assess the programs according to committee purview. Relevant committees include APAC, CAP, ECF, FPC and UGC who will each delineate procedures for assessing and ensuring the success of all new programs. Committee recommendations on proposals will be sent to the Provost who will review and forward the recommendations to the President. If the Provost disagrees with the faculty committee recommendations, consultation with the committees should resolve differences before forwarding recommendations to the President. The President will make the final recommendation on the new Programs and positions to the Board of Trustees. 
+
+If new programs and faculty positions are provisional, the process for review and conversion of the programs and faculty positions will follow the procedures outlined for such provisional new programs and positions as developed by APAC, CAP, ECF, FPC, UGC and the Provost. Provisional new programs should be either eliminated or voted on by faculty within three years of being established. 
+
+Provisional faculty positions may take different forms, including one-year faculty positions, renewable for three years, or tenure-line positions subject to provisional or scheduled review. Provisional positions are not included in the maximum count of faculty positions as determined by the Board of Trustees and President. 
+
+Provisional faculty positions should be evaluated with the new programs they are associated with, no longer than three years after being established. Assessment and conversion of provisional faculty positions to tenure-track faculty positions can happen at any time and will then be included in the maximum count of faculty positions as determined by the Board of Trustees and President.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Reportable Business Relationship Policy.txt [/INST] REPORTABLE BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+[TBD]
+
+Policy Number:
+
+III – 3.3.25
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable. 
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President, Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+
+
+
+
+All Canisius College employees who are “State Persons” as defined by New York’s Public Integrity Reform Act, as well as the college’s trustees and officers.
+
+History:
+
+
+
+
+
+												REPORTABLE BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS 
+
+												PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to comply with New York’s Public Integrity Reform Act, which requires the college to publicly disclose Reportable Business Relationships with State Persons.
+
+APPLICABILITY
+
+All Dominican College employees who are “State Persons” as defined by New York’s Public Integrity Reform Act, as well as the College’s trustees and officers.
+
+POLICY
+
+It is the policy of Canisius College to comply with New York’s Public Integrity Reform Act (hereinafter “Act”), which requires the college, as both a registered lobbyist and a client of a lobbying firm(s), to publicly disclose information about Business Relationships with State Persons, regardless of when the relationship commenced, if the criteria for a Reportable Business Relationship exists (see Definitions).  
+
+Moreover, as required by the Act, it is also the policy of the college to report each Reportable Business Relationship of all its High-Level Individuals (i.e., college trustees and officers).  This includes Reportable Business Relationships entered into by a High-Level Individual in his or her personal capacity, as well as Reportable Business Relationships entered into by another entity at the direction or request of the High-Level Individual.
+
+In the higher education setting, the types of relationships described above most often arise in the context of the college employing a State Person (e.g., as an adjunct faculty member or staff employee) or from transactions between the college or one of its trustees or officers and outside businesses in which a State Person may be a partner or shareholder (e.g., law, accounting, or engineering firms).
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Aggregation: if the college has multiple Relationships with the same State Person, the same entity or entities in which a State Person has the Requisite Involvement, then the value of the Compensation paid for goods, services or anything of value relating to such Relationships must be aggregated. If the aggregated value of such Compensation is more than $1,000 annually (within 12 consecutive months), then each relationship is a Reportable Business Relationship (assuming all other criteria are satisfied). 
+
+Compensation: any salary, fee, gift, payment, benefit, loan, advance or any other thing of value. It does not include: commercially available consumer and business loans or lines of credit as available to the general public; goods and services and discounts available to the general public; dividends or payments related to stock purchases; or contributions reportable under Article 14 of the New York State Election Law. 
+
+High Level Individuals: at Canisius College, the trustees of the college’s governing board, the president, the provost, and other vice presidents are High-Level Individuals. 
+
+Intended to be Performed or Provided: the goods, services or anything of value have not yet been performed or provided, but the college reasonably anticipates such goods, services, or value to be performed or provided in the future.
+
+Performed or Provided: State Person or an entity in which the State Person has the Requisite Involvement either (i) actually performed or provided the goods, services or anything of value, or (ii) had a significant, but not necessarily exclusive or primary role, in performing or providing the goods, services or anything of value.
+
+Reason to Know: whether the college has “reason to know” that (i) an individual is a State Person, or (ii) a State Person has the Requisite Involvement with an entity, is based on an examination of the totality of the facts and circumstances.  If a reasonable person, looking at all the facts and circumstances, would conclude that the college should know that an individual is a State Person or that a State Person has the Requisite Involvement with the relevant entity, then the “reason to know” standard has been satisfied.  Some, but not all, factors that may be considered in this analysis are: Origins of the relationship between the parties; Length of such relationship; The type and actual value of the goods, services or items provided; and/or Whether the fact that the individual is a State Person or the Requisite Involvement of the State Person with the entity at issue is generally known to the public.  The college will be deemed to have had reason to know if the lack of knowledge results from willfully ignoring information that would lead a reasonable person to: conclude that the individual was a State Person, or that a State Person had the Requisite Involvement, or, undertake further research to determine whether either fact exists.
+
+Reportable Business Relationship: a relationship, regardless of when the relationship commenced, in which a formal or informal agreement or understanding exists in which Canisius College or a High-Level Individual of the college pays, has paid or promises Compensation to: 
+
+An individual whom the college knows or has reason to know is a State Person; 
+
+A non-governmental entity for which the college knows or has reason to know that the State Person is a proprietor, partner, director, officer or manager of a non-governmental entity, or owns or controls 10% or more of the stock of such entity (or 1% in the case of a corporation whose stock is regularly traded on an established securities exchange) (These roles and positions are referred to as the “Requisite Involvement.”); or, 
+
+A third-party as directed by the State Person or as directed by the entity in which the State Person has the Requisite Involvement; 
+
+and 
+
+The payment or promise of Compensation is or was in exchange for goods, services or anything of value, the total value of which exceeds $1,000 annually, either performed or provided or intended to be performed or provided by the State Person or an entity in which the State Person has the Requisite Involvement.
+
+Exclusions: A Relationship in which the college or High-Level Individual provides Compensation to a State Person or an entity in which the State Person has Requisite Involvement that relate to the following are excluded from reporting requirements: Medical, dental and mental health services and treatment; and legal services with respect to: investigation or prosecution by law enforcement authorities; bankruptcy; and domestic relations matters. 
+
+Requisite Involvement in an Entity: when a State Person is a proprietor, partner, director, officer, or manager of a non-governmental entity, or owns or controls 10% or more of the stock of a non-governmental entity (or 1% in the case of a corporation whose stock is regularly traded on an established securities exchange).
+
+State Person: individuals who are (i) statewide elected officials; (ii) members of the legislature or legislative employees; (iii) heads of State departments and their deputies and assistants, other than members of the board of regents of the university of the State of New York who receive no compensation or are compensated on a per diem basis; (iv) officers and employees of statewide elected officials; (v) officers and employees of State departments, boards, bureaus, divisions, commissions, councils, or other State agencies; and (vi) employees of public authorities (other than multi-state authorities), public benefit corporations and commissions at least one of whose members is appointed by the governor, and members or directors of such authorities, corporations, and commissions who are compensated other than on a per diem basis. 
+
+$1,000 Threshold: a Relationship whose total aggregated value of Compensation paid to the State Person or an entity in which the State Person has the Requisite Involvement exceeds $1,000 annually (within 12 consecutive months). Such threshold is met once more than $1,000 in Compensation is paid or owed to such State Person or entity for services Performed or Provided or Intended to be Performed or Provided.
+
+POLICY AND PROCEDURES
+
+I.	Reporting to the College
+
+In order for the college to comply with the Act, Canisius College requires that all full-time or part-time college employees who are also employed by the State of New York report their State Person status in writing or via email to the Canisius College Human Resources Office.  Such reporting must occur at the time of securing State Person status, regardless of whether the outside employment activity is performed during non-college working hours.  In addition, Human Resources will send an email notice to all college employees requesting disclosure of State Person status prior to the college’s semi-annual reporting deadline to the New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics.
+
+In addition, all college trustees and officers are required to immediately disclose Reportable Business Relationships with State Persons to the secretary of the Board of Trustees, as well as complete the Reportable Business Questionnaire (see Appendix) on a semi-annual basis.  The college uses, and relies upon in good faith, responses to the questionnaire to determine whether such persons have business relationships that must be reported to the New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics.  
+
+II.	Reporting to the New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics
+
+[Human Resources or the Secretary of the Board of Trustees as applicable] will complete a Reportable Business Relationship Form and submit it to the New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics within 10 (ten) days of being notified of the Reportable Business Relationship’s existence.  For ongoing Reportable Business Relationships, [Human Resources or the secretary of the Board of Trustees as applicable] will disclose the relationship on a Reportable Business Relationship Form filed with the college’s Statements of Registration and/or Semi-Annual Reports covering periods in which the Reportable Business Relationship is in existence.
+
+For each Reportable Business Relationship, the following information within the Reportable Business Relationship Form will be provided: 
+
+The name and public office address of the State Person or entity with which the State Person has the Requisite Involvement; 
+
+A description of the general subject or subjects of the transactions between the college and/or High-Level Individual and the State Person (or the entity with which the State Person has the Requisite Involvement); and 
+
+The actual or anticipated amount of Compensation, including reimbursable Expenses, to be paid and paid to the State Person (or entity with which the State Person has the Requisite Involvement) by virtue of the business relationship. 
+
+When multiple Relationships exist with the same State Person, the same entity, or entities in which a State Person has the Requisite Involvement, then the value of the Compensation paid for goods, services, or anything of value relating to such relationships will be aggregated.  If the aggregated value of such Compensation is more than $1,000 annually (within 12 consecutive months), then each relationship is a Reportable Business Relationship (assuming all other criteria are satisfied). 
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Policy No. - : Lobbying Activities 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+QUESTIONNAIRE – REPORTABLE BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP
+
+This questionnaire is being sent to all Canisius College board members, officers, officers, directors or High-Level Individuals pursuant to the Reportable Business Relationship Policy.  Such members of the college community are subject to certain disclosure requirements if they have a Reportable Business Relationship with a State Person.
+
+To assist the college in determining whether a Reportable Business Relationship exits that requires the college to file a report with the New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics, we request that you answer the following questions.  Please complete, attach any requested additional detailed information, sign the acknowledgment below, and return this questionnaire to the Secretary of the Board of Trustees.
+
+For purposes of this questionnaire, please refer to the following definitions and the definitions set forth in the Reportable Business Relationship Policy:
+
+Name:		_____________________________________
+
+Title:		_____________________________________
+
+Address:	_____________________________________
+
+
+
+1. Do you currently have any business relationships in which you purchased or will purchase goods or services valued at more than $1,000 annually from a person or entity located within the State of New York? 
+
+Yes: ____ No: ____
+
+If “Yes,” go to Question #2. If “No,” sign and date the form. 
+
+NOTE: Reportable Business Relationships include formal and informal relationships that may or may not be based on written contracts. 
+
+The value of any outstanding Compensation owed as well the value of goods or services to be performed must be considered when determining if the $1,000 threshold is met. 
+
+
+
+2. Do the services you are purchasing fall into one or more of the following categories:
+
+Treatments for medical, dental, and mental health services; 
+
+Legal services with respect to: investigation or prosecution by law enforcement; bankruptcy; domestic relations. 
+
+Yes: ____ No: ____
+
+If “Yes,” go to Question #3. If “No,” sign and date the form. 
+
+3. (a) If the business relationship is with a person, is that individual a New York State employee or a New York State elected official? 
+
+Yes: ____ No: ____ Not that I am aware of: ____ 
+
+NOTE: The answer “Not that I am aware of” is only appropriate when, based on the totality of the circumstances, the person signing this form does not have a “reason to know” that the business relationship is with a New York State employee or a New York State elected official. 
+
+3.(b) If the business relationship is with an entity, is a New York State employee or a New York State elected official a proprietor, partner, director, officer, or manager of the entity? 
+
+Yes: ____ No: ____ Not that I am aware of: ___ 
+
+NOTE: The answer “Not that I am aware of” is only appropriate when, based on the totality of the circumstances, the person signing this form does not have a “reason to know” that the business relationship is with an entity in which a New York State employee or a New York State elected official is the proprietor, partner, director, officer, or manager. 
+
+3. (c) If the business relationship is with an entity, does a New York State employee or a New York State elected official own or control 10% or more of the stock of the entity (or 1% in the case of a corporation whose stock is regularly traded on an established securities exchange)? 
+
+Yes: ____ No: ____ Not that I am aware of: ____ 
+
+NOTE: The answer “Not that I am aware of” is only appropriate when, based on the totality of the circumstances, the person signing this form does not have a “reason to know” that the business relationship is with an entity in which a New York State employee or a New York State elected official owns or controls 10% or more of the stock of the entity (or 1% in the case of a corporation whose stock is regularly traded on an established securities exchange). 
+
+
+
+
+
+I attest and affirm that the foregoing information is, to the best of my knowledge, true and accurate. 
+
+_____________________________________________________________________________
+
+Name 												Date</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Reportable Business Relationships Policy.txt [/INST] REPORTABLE BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+[TBD]
+
+Policy Number:
+
+III – 3.3.25
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable. 
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President, Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+
+
+
+
+All Canisius College employees who are “State Persons” as defined by New York’s Public Integrity Reform Act, as well as the college’s trustees and officers.
+
+History:
+
+
+
+
+
+												PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to comply with New York’s Public Integrity Reform Act, which requires the college to publicly disclose Reportable Business Relationships with State Persons.
+
+POLICY
+
+It is the policy of Canisius College to comply with New York’s Public Integrity Reform Act (hereinafter “Act”), which requires the college, as both a registered lobbyist and a client of a lobbying firm(s), to publicly disclose information about Business Relationships with State Persons, regardless of when the relationship commenced, if the criteria for a Reportable Business Relationship exists (see Definitions).  
+
+Moreover, as required by the Act, it is also the policy of the college to report each Reportable Business Relationship of all its High-Level Individuals (i.e., college trustees and officers).  This includes Reportable Business Relationships entered into by a High-Level Individual in his or her personal capacity, as well as Reportable Business Relationships entered into by another entity at the direction or request of the High-Level Individual.
+
+In the higher education setting, the types of relationships described above most often arise in the context of the college employing a State Person (e.g., as an adjunct faculty member or staff employee) or from transactions between the college or one of its trustees or officers and outside businesses in which a State Person may be a partner or shareholder (e.g., law, accounting, or engineering firms).
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Aggregationif the college has multiple Relationships with the same State Person, the same entity or entities in which a State Person has the Requisite Involvement, then the value of the Compensation paid for goods, services or anything of value relating to such Relationships must be aggregated. If the aggregated value of such Compensation is more than $1,000 annually (within 12 consecutive months), then each relationship is a Reportable Business Relationship (assuming all other criteria are satisfied). 
+
+Compensationany salary, fee, gift, payment, benefit, loan, advance or any other thing of value. It does not include: commercially available consumer and business loans or lines of credit as available to the general public; goods and services and discounts available to the general public; dividends or payments related to stock purchases; or contributions reportable under Article 14 of the New York State Election Law. 
+
+High Level Individualsat Canisius College, the trustees of the college’s governing board, the president, the provost, and other vice presidents are High-Level Individuals. 
+
+Intended to be Performed or Providedthe goods, services or anything of value have not yet been performed or provided, but the college reasonably anticipates such goods, services, or value to be performed or provided in the future.
+
+Performed or ProvidedState Person or an entity in which the State Person has the Requisite Involvement either (i) actually performed or provided the goods, services or anything of value, or (ii) had a significant, but not necessarily exclusive or primary role, in performing or providing the goods, services or anything of value.
+
+Reason to Knowwhether the college has “reason to know” that (i) an individual is a State Person, or (ii) a State Person has the Requisite Involvement with an entity, is based on an examination of the totality of the facts and circumstances.  If a reasonable person, looking at all the facts and circumstances, would conclude that the college should know that an individual is a State Person or that a State Person has the Requisite Involvement with the relevant entity, then the “reason to know” standard has been satisfied.  Some, but not all, factors that may be considered in this analysis are: Origins of the relationship between the parties; Length of such relationship; The type and actual value of the goods, services or items provided; and/or Whether the fact that the individual is a State Person or the Requisite Involvement of the State Person with the entity at issue is generally known to the public.  The college will be deemed to have had reason to know if the lack of knowledge results from willfully ignoring information that would lead a reasonable person to: conclude that the individual was a State Person, or that a State Person had the Requisite Involvement, or, undertake further research to determine whether either fact exists.
+
+Reportable Business Relationshipa relationship, regardless of when the relationship commenced, in which a formal or informal agreement or understanding exists in which Canisius College or a High-Level Individual of the college pays, has paid or promises Compensation to: 
+
+An individual whom the college knows or has reason to know is a State Person; 
+
+A non-governmental entity for which the college knows or has reason to know that the State Person is a proprietor, partner, director, officer or manager of a non-governmental entity, or owns or controls 10% or more of the stock of such entity (or 1% in the case of a corporation whose stock is regularly traded on an established securities exchange) (These roles and positions are referred to as the “Requisite Involvement.”); or, 
+
+A third-party as directed by the State Person or as directed by the entity in which the State Person has the Requisite Involvement; 
+
+and 
+
+The payment or promise of Compensation is or was in exchange for goods, services or anything of value, the total value of which exceeds $1,000 annually, either performed or provided or intended to be performed or provided by the State Person or an entity in which the State Person has the Requisite Involvement.
+
+Exclusions: A Relationship in which the college or High-Level Individual provides Compensation to a State Person or an entity in which the State Person has Requisite Involvement that relate to the following are excluded from reporting requirements: Medical, dental and mental health services and treatment; and legal services with respect to: investigation or prosecution by law enforcement authorities; bankruptcy; and domestic relations matters. 
+
+Requisite Involvement in an Entitywhen a State Person is a proprietor, partner, director, officer, or manager of a non-governmental entity, or owns or controls 10% or more of the stock of a non-governmental entity (or 1% in the case of a corporation whose stock is regularly traded on an established securities exchange).
+
+State Personindividuals who are (i) statewide elected officials; (ii) members of the legislature or legislative employees; (iii) heads of State departments and their deputies and assistants, other than members of the board of regents of the university of the State of New York who receive no compensation or are compensated on a per diem basis; (iv) officers and employees of statewide elected officials; (v) officers and employees of State departments, boards, bureaus, divisions, commissions, councils, or other State agencies; and (vi) employees of public authorities (other than multi-state authorities), public benefit corporations and commissions at least one of whose members is appointed by the governor, and members or directors of such authorities, corporations, and commissions who are compensated other than on a per diem basis. 
+
+$1,000 Threshold a Relationship whose total aggregated value of Compensation paid to the State Person or an entity in which the State Person has the Requisite Involvement exceeds $1,000 annually (within 12 consecutive months). Such threshold is met once more than $1,000 in Compensation is paid or owed to such State Person or entity for services Performed or Provided or Intended to be Performed or Provided.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+I.	Reporting to the College
+
+In order for the college to comply with the Act, Canisius College requires that all full-time or part-time college employees who are also employed by the State of New York report their State Person status in writing or via email to the Canisius College Human Resources Office.  Such reporting must occur at the time of securing State Person status, regardless of whether the outside employment activity is performed during non-college working hours.  In addition, Human Resources will send an email notice to all college employees requesting disclosure of State Person status prior to the college’s semi-annual reporting deadline to the New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics.
+
+In addition, all college trustees and officers are required to immediately disclose Reportable Business Relationships with State Persons to the secretary of the Board of Trustees, as well as complete the Reportable Business Questionnaire (see Appendix) on a semi-annual basis.  The college uses, and relies upon in good faith, responses to the questionnaire to determine whether such persons have business relationships that must be reported to the New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics.  
+
+II.	Reporting to the New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics
+
+[Human Resources or the Secretary of the Board of Trustees as applicable] will complete a Reportable Business Relationship Form and submit it to the New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics within 10 (ten) days of being notified of the Reportable Business Relationship’s existence.  For ongoing Reportable Business Relationships, [Human Resources or the secretary of the Board of Trustees as applicable] will disclose the relationship on a Reportable Business Relationship Form filed with the college’s Statements of Registration and/or Semi-Annual Reports covering periods in which the Reportable Business Relationship is in existence.
+
+For each Reportable Business Relationship, the following information within the Reportable Business Relationship Form will be provided: 
+
+The name and public office address of the State Person or entity with which the State Person has the Requisite Involvement; 
+
+A description of the general subject or subjects of the transactions between the college and/or High-Level Individual and the State Person (or the entity with which the State Person has the Requisite Involvement); and 
+
+The actual or anticipated amount of Compensation, including reimbursable Expenses, to be paid and paid to the State Person (or entity with which the State Person has the Requisite Involvement) by virtue of the business relationship. 
+
+When multiple Relationships exist with the same State Person, the same entity, or entities in which a State Person has the Requisite Involvement, then the value of the Compensation paid for goods, services, or anything of value relating to such relationships will be aggregated.  If the aggregated value of such Compensation is more than $1,000 annually (within 12 consecutive months), then each relationship is an Reportable Business Relationship (assuming all other criteria are satisfied). 
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Outside Activities (Faculty) Policy 
+
+Outside Activities (Staff) Policy 
+
+
+
+
+QUESTIONNAIRE – REPORTABLE BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP
+
+This questionnaire is being sent to all Canisius College board members, officers, officers, directors or High-Level Individuals pursuant to the Reportable Business Relationship Policy.  Such members of the college community are subject to certain disclosure requirements if they have a Reportable Business Relationship with a State Person.
+
+To assist the college in determining whether a Reportable Business Relationship exits that requires the college to file a report with the New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics, we request that you answer the following questions.  Please complete, attach any requested additional detailed information, sign the acknowledgment below, and return this questionnaire to the Secretary of the Board of Trustees.
+
+For purposes of this questionnaire, please refer to the following definitions and the definitions set forth in the Reportable Business Relationship Policy:
+
+Name:		_____________________________________
+
+Title:		_____________________________________
+
+Address:	_____________________________________
+
+
+
+1. Do you currently have any business relationships in which you purchased or will purchase goods or services valued at more than $1,000 annually from a person or entity located within the State of New York? 
+
+Yes: ____ No: ____
+
+If “Yes,” go to Question #2. If “No,” sign and date the form. 
+
+NOTE: Reportable Business Relationships include formal and informal relationships that may or may not be based on written contracts. 
+
+The value of any outstanding Compensation owed as well the value of goods or services to be performed must be considered when determining if the $1,000 threshold is met. 
+
+
+
+2. Do the services you are purchasing fall into one or more of the following categories:
+
+Treatments for medical, dental, and mental health services; 
+
+Legal services with respect to: investigation or prosecution by law enforcement; bankruptcy; domestic relations. 
+
+Yes: ____ No: ____
+
+If “Yes,” go to Question #3. If “No,” sign and date the form. 
+
+3. (a) If the business relationship is with a person, is that individual a New York State employee or a New York State elected official? 
+
+Yes: ____ No: ____ Not that I am aware of: ____ 
+
+NOTE: The answer “Not that I am aware of” is only appropriate when, based on the totality of the circumstances, the person signing this form does not have a “reason to know” that the business relationship is with a New York State employee or a New York State elected official. 
+
+3.(b) If the business relationship is with an entity, is a New York State employee or a New York State elected official a proprietor, partner, director, officer, or manager of the entity? 
+
+Yes: ____ No: ____ Not that I am aware of: ___ 
+
+ NOTE: The answer “Not that I am aware of” is only appropriate when, based on the totality of the circumstances, the person signing this form does not have a “reason to know” that the business relationship is with an entity in which a New York State employee or a New York State elected official is the proprietor, partner, director, officer, or manager. 
+
+3. (c) If the business relationship is with an entity, does a New York State employee or a New York State elected official own or control 10% or more of the stock of the entity (or 1% in the case of a corporation whose stock is regularly traded on an established securities exchange)? 
+
+Yes: ____ No: ____ Not that I am aware of: ____ 
+
+NOTE: The answer “Not that I am aware of” is only appropriate when, based on the totality of the circumstances, the person signing this form does not have a “reason to know” that the business relationship is with an entity in which a New York State employee or a New York State elected official owns or controls 10% or more of the stock of the entity (or 1% in the case of a corporation whose stock is regularly traded on an established securities exchange). 
+
+
+
+
+
+I attest and affirm that the foregoing information is, to the best of my knowledge, true and accurate. 
+
+_____________________________________________________________________________
+
+Name 												Date</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Reporting of Financial Responsibility Actions.txt [/INST] Reporting of Financial Responsibility Actions
+
+														
+
+														Policy Number: -- 8.3.10
+
+														
+
+														Responsible Individual: --
+
+															
+
+														
+
+														Policy Effective Date:--
+
+														      Month DD, YYYY 
+
+														
+
+														Next Review Date: --
+
+															Month DD, YYYY
+
+
+
+REPORTING OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ACTIONS
+
+ 
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to comply with the financial responsibility regulations found at 34 CFR 668.721, as augmented by the Borrower’s Defense Rule.  Under this rule, the financial responsibility regulations found at 34 CFR 668.171 have been augmented to require all institutions of higher education to report a wide range of events to the Department of Education.
+
+APPLICABILITY
+
+Financial Affairs and Financial Aid offices.
+
+POLICY STATEMENT
+
+Pursuant to the “Borrower’s Defense Rule” (“BDR”), the financial responsibility regulations found at 34 CFR 668.171 have been augmented to require all institutions of higher education to report a wide range of events to the Department of Education (“ED”). 
+
+In compliance with the BDR, it is the policy of Dominican College to notify the ED of the events set forth in the following tables.  It is the responsibility of Fiscal Services, with the assistance of Financial Aid, to report the such events to the ED.  Failure to report in compliance with the rule may result in the ED taking administrative action against the College, to include the initiation of a proceeding to fine, limit, suspend, or terminate Dominican's participation in federal financial aid programs. 
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+POLICY AND PROCEDURES
+
+
+
+Submission of Arbitral and Judicial Records
+
+
+
+Reportable Events
+
+Reporting Time Frame
+
+Citations (34 CFR)
+
+Judicial Records. Institutions must submit a copy of the following records to ED for any claim concerning a borrower defense claim filed in a lawsuit by the school against the student or by any party, including a government agency, against the school: the complaint and any counterclaim; any dispositive motion filed by a party to the suit; and the ruling on any dispositive motion and the judgment issued by the court.
+
+Submit judicial records within 30 days of filing or receipt, as applicable, of the complaint, answer, or dispositive motion, and within 30 days of receipt of any ruling on a dispositive motion or a final judgment
+
+685.300(h); 2019 Guidance.
+
+Arbitral Records. Institutions must submit a copy of the following records to ED for any claim filed in arbitration by or against the school concerning a borrower defense claim: The initial claim and any counterclaim; The arbitration agreement filed with the arbitrator or arbitration administrator; The judgment or award, if any, issued by the arbitrator or arbitration administrator; If an arbitrator refuses to administer or dismisses a claim due to the school’s failure to pay required fees, any communication the school receives from the arbitrator related to such a refusal; and Any communication the school receives from an arbitrator that a pre dispute arbitration agreement regarding educational services provided by the school does not comply with the administrator’s fairness principles, rules or
+
+similar requirements.
+
+Submit arbitral records within 60 days of filing by the school of any such record with the arbitrator and within 60 days of receipt by the school of any such record filed or sent by someone other than the school, such as the arbitrator or the student.
+
+685.300(g); 2019 Guidance
+
+
+
+III.	Notification Procedures
+
+Financial Affairs will transmit notifications to the ED as follows: 
+
+Notifications of Financial Responsibility: Notifications of financial responsibility actions, events, or conditions will be sent to FSAFRN@ed.gov. 
+
+Submission of Arbitral and Judicial Records: Arbitral and judicial records swill be sent to borrowerdefense@ed.gov. 
+
+At the discretion of Financial Affairs, when reporting financial responsibility actions to the ED, the College may also include an explanation showing that: 
+
+The matter has been resolved and no longer poses a risk. 
+
+The institution has insurance that will cover all or part of the liabilities that might arise from the event.
+
+For suits by a federal or state agency, the amount claimed is too high and exceeds the potential recovery. 
+
+The creditor has waived the violation of a loan agreement, with details on any other penalties or requirements the creditor imposed.
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+TBD
+
+HISTORY
+
+Date
+
+Summarize Change
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+FORMS
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+APPENDIX
+
+Not Applicable.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Reproductive HC.txt [/INST] 2.1.17    Reproductive Health Care Decisions Policy 
+
+REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE DECISIONS POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+December 18, 2019
+
+Policy Number:
+
+II-2.1.17
+
+Supersedes:
+
+
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President for Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+All members of the Canisius College community.
+
+History:
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to comply with Section 203-e of the New York Labor Law.
+
+POLICY
+
+It is the policy of Canisius College to act in accordance with the requirements of Section 203-e of the New York Labor Law.
+
+Reproductive Health Care Decisions
+
+Section 203-e of the New York Labor Law prohibits employers from discriminating against employees based on an employee’s or a dependent’s reproductive health decision making and accessing such information regarding an employee or an employee’s dependents without the employee’s prior informed affirmative written consent.  The law also prohibits employers from requiring employees to sign a waiver or other document which purports to deny an employee the right to make their own reproductive health care decisions.  Reproductive health care decisions include, but are not limited to, the decision to use or access a particular drug, device or medical services.
+
+Section 203-e also prohibits retaliation against employees because of the reproductive health care decisions of an employee or his or her dependents and for an employee making or threatening to make a complaint to Canisius College, a co-worker or a public body that rights guaranteed under the law have been violated, causing to be instituted any proceeding under or related to the law, or providing information to, or testifying before, any public body conducting an investigation, hearing or inquiry into an alleged violation of the law or any of its rules and regulations.  Employees may bring a civil action in court of competent jurisdiction for any alleged violation of Section 203-e and if a violation is found to have occurred the court may award damages, injunctive relief, reinstatement and/or liquidated damages. 
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Reproductive Health Decision—any decision by an individual to receive services, which are arranged for or offered or provided to individuals relating to sexual and reproductive health, including the reproductive system and its functions.” Services include, but are not limited to: Fertility-related medical procedures; Sexually transmitted disease prevention, testing, and treatment; and Family planning services and counseling, such as birth control drugs and supplies, emergency contraception, sterilization procedures, pregnancy testing, and abortion.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+Employees who believe that their rights under this policy and/or New York Labor Law 203-e have been violated are encouraged to make a report to the Human Resources Portal or the Human Resources Department as soon as practicable. The College will promptly investigate and take appropriate remedial action commensurate with the circumstances in accordance with the College’s Anti-Discrimination and Harassment Policy or the Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy, as determined by the Title IX Coordinator. Individuals who have been found to have violated this policy will be subject to discipline, up to and including termination of employment.
+
+Employees may also bring a civil action lawsuit alleging a violation of their rights under New York Labor Law 203-e to seek other remedies as provided under the law.
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Anti-Discrimination and Harassment Policy 
+
+Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy
+
+Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct (Title IX) Policy</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Research Summary.txt [/INST] Research Summary
+
+
+
+Champlain College
+
+
+
+Champlain College in Vermont created Champlain College Online in 2015 as separate and distinct entity from the campus college.  https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/05/15/champlain-college-expands-online-adult-learner-market
+
+ 
+
+Champlain College Online’s leadership structure is summarized below:
+
+
+
+President (same as Champlain College)
+
+Vice President of Online Education
+
+Executive Director, Marketing and Enrollment Management, Champlain College Online
+
+Chief Learning Officer
+
+Director of Academic Advising and Student Success, Champlain College Online
+
+Chair, Cybersecurity Programs, Champlain College Online
+
+Assistant Dean, Business and Accounting, Champlain College Online
+
+Program Director, General Education, Champlain College Online
+
+Program Director, Business Management, Champlain College Online
+
+Program Director, Healthcare Administration, Champlain College Online
+
+Program Director, Marketing & Communication, Champlain College Online
+
+ 
+
+We were unable to locate a separate faculty handbook for Champlain College Online.  The Faculty Handbook for Champlain College, however, is available here:  https://catalog.champlain.edu/index.php.  Of note, Section 3.5 of the handbook lists Champlain College Online as an “academic unit” of the College, which is led by the VP for Online Education.  It is not clear whether the Faculty or the Faculty Senate plays a role in developing the curriculum for Champlain College Online.  Unfortunately, the Faculty Senate Bylaws are password protected.  However, the Section 3.5 of the handbook states that the “academic divisions work separately and in concert supporting the overall mission, goals and priorities of the College, as identified by the President and Provost.”
+
+
+
+Of note, Section 3.3.3 of the Faculty Handbook addressed the role of faculty in the governance of the College (no distinction is made with regard to the Online College).  The section indicates that the faculty has a number of roles, including primary responsibility for policy on the curriculum. It also states that the faculty participate in policies proposals regarding the “establishment, dissolution, and changes in the degree programs.”  In all instances, faculty recommendations are advisory in nature.
+
+
+
+
+Lynn University
+
+
+
+Lynn University’s online programs report to the Dean of the applicable College, who supervises all programs, regardless of delivery format.  In some instances, the online programs have separate coordinators from the undergrad in person programs.  In such instances, the online program coordinators report to the applicable College Dean.
+
+
+
+The curriculum committee, which is comprised of two elected representatives from each College, reviews all proposals for new programs and courses, regardless of delivery format, and recommend them for approval (or don’t). That committee is notified of any non-substantive changes and is notified when a program closes.
+
+
+
+Of note, the faculty at Lynn is not required to initiate new academic programs. If the administration decides that a new academic program should be developed, the Dean of the College requests that the college faculty develop the program or course.  Following this step, the proposal is submitted to the curriculum committee.   Of note, the online programs utilize the same course numbers as on-ground programs. As a result, they often don’t even need to go through committee to put a version of the program online. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Maryville University (Second fastest-growing private university in US)
+
+ 
+
+
+
+Maryville partnered with Pearson in 2018 to significantly increase its online presence.   See the following article:  https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/article/2018/04/11/small-private-college-partners-pearson-go-national-online
+
+
+
+Maryville University’s current academic leadership structure is summarized below:
+
+
+
+Academic Leadership
+
+President
+
+Vice President for Academic Affairs
+
+Vice President for Enrollment
+
+Dean of the Walker College of Health Professions/Professor of Physical Therapy
+
+Dean of the School of Adult and Online Education
+
+Executive Director, Strategic Marketing & Communications
+
+ 
+
+Each Dean has a curriculum committee.
+
+
+
+The University’s faculty policies are unfortunately password protected.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Linfield University (Portland, OR)
+
+
+
+
+
+Linfield University offers online baccalaureate degree programs in management, international business, business information systems, accounting, and marketing.  In terms of organizational structure, the University’s Director of Online and Continuing Ed leads these online programs.  A summary of the director’s role, which is reprinted from the University’s Faculty Handbook, is described below.  All new courses for the online programs are approved by the full Faculty Assembly.  Of note, the University has a separate Carnegie Classification for its Online and Continuing Ed.
+
+
+
+The Director of Online and Continuing Education is responsible for the administration of the current off-campus baccalaureate degree programs in management, international business, business information systems, accounting, and marketing; is involved in developing new clientele, primarily off-campus, and initiating new programs to serve them (through processes established by the Faculty Assembly); markets new, non- traditional offerings as well as traditional liberal arts courses; coordinates the summer session; and oversees the office of conferences. The director, with oversight of academic departments, continually develops a pool of qualified adjunct faculty and regular faculty appropriate for new programs and locations; works with various committees of the Faculty Assembly; and administers the budget for the Online and Continuing Education. 
+
+  
+
+VII.9 Online and Continuing Education (OCE)
+
+
+
+Online and Continuing Education extends the benefits of the Linfield liberal arts educational tradition to those enrolled in the online courses. The quality of instruction, range of curricular offerings, composition of programs and implementation of policies and procedures conform to Linfield standards. The program seeks maximum involvement of Linfield faculty members in establishing guidelines, hiring adjunct faculty members, and teaching in order to achieve teaching excellence, innovation, and superior support for all users.
+
+
+
+Linfield Online and Continuing Education administers a wide variety of educational programs, including:
+
+Bachelor’s degree programs
+
+Certificate programs for non-degree students
+
+Non-credit educational programs</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Research- President & Provost Faculty Membership.txt [/INST] Faculty Membership
+
+U of Pacific
+
+U of Redlands
+
+Pacific Lutheran
+
+Santa Clara
+
+Loyola Marymount
+
+St. Edwards
+
+President
+
+Yes
+
+Yes, non-voting
+
+Yes
+
+No
+
+No
+
+No
+
+Provost
+
+Yes
+
+Yes (senior administrator)
+
+Unclear.  Administrative Faculty are members.
+
+No
+
+No
+
+No
+
+Deans
+
+Yes
+
+See below.
+
+Administrative Faculty are members
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Other Administrators w/ Faculty Rank
+
+Yes
+
+Yes – Academic Administrators holding Faculty appointments (i.e., less than a half-time teaching load)
+
+Yes</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Retirement Plan Investments.txt [/INST] Retirement Plan Investments
+
+														
+
+														Policy Number: -- 8.3.11
+
+														
+
+														Responsible Individual: --
+
+															
+
+														
+
+														Policy Effective Date:--
+
+														      Month DD, YYYY 
+
+														
+
+														Next Review Date: --
+
+															Month DD, YYYY
+
+
+
+RETIREMENT PLAN INVESTMENTS
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of the Retirement Investment Policy is to assist the College’s 403b Committee in effectively structuring an appropriate investment menu.  This includes establishing a prudent process for selecting, monitoring and, as necessary, replacing funding options.  Specifically, this Policy:
+
+Defines the Defined Contribution Retirement Plan's investment objectives and guidelines;
+
+Defines the roles and responsibilities of those responsible for the Defined Contribution Retirement Plan's investments;
+
+Establishes criteria and procedures for selecting investment options;
+
+Establishes procedures for monitoring and reporting on investment options;
+
+Establishes termination and replacement procedures for investment options that fail to satisfy established objectives;
+
+Establishes criteria for monitoring the Defined Contribution Retirement Plan’s cost; and
+
+ Describes the types of participant education and communication materials to be provided to Defined Contribution Retirement Plan participants and beneficiaries.
+
+APPLICABILITY
+
+All employees participating in the College’s Defined Contribution Retirement Plan.
+
+POLICY STATEMENT
+
+Dominican College’s Defined Contribution Retirement Plan (“Plan”) is intended to provide eligible employees the opportunity to generate the long-term accumulation of retirement savings through employee and/or employer contributions to individual participant accounts and the earnings thereon.
+
+The Plan is an employee benefit plan (defined contribution plan) intended to comply with all applicable federal/state laws and Internal Revenue Service regulations.  The College (“Plan Sponsor”) determines membership in the Retirement Planning Committee (the “Committee”) and delegates authority to the Committee to choose and monitor plan funding options.  It is the intent of the Committee to provide a range of funding options under the Plan that will enable participants to invest according to varying risk tolerances, savings time horizons and other financial goals.  The funding options offered under the Plan shall be administered solely in the interests of the Plan participants and their beneficiaries.  The Committee is responsible for maintaining a written record of its decisions and steps taken in connection with the monitoring of the Plan’s funding options.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+POLICY AND PROCEDURES
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Policy No. HR - : Health and Welfare Benefits 
+
+HISTORY
+
+Date
+
+Summarize Change
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+FORMS
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+APPENDIX
+
+Not Applicable.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Revised Academic Program Review Process.txt [/INST] Academic Program Review Process
+
+Step 1: The initial step in the Academic Program Review process will be the development by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness of a set of common quantitative data for all academic programs at the University showing trends in course enrollments, student credits delivered, graduated majors, declared majors, direct instructional expense, and other performance metrics agreed upon by Academic Affairs, Academic Planning and Allocation Committee (APAC), and UGC. The data will be made available transparently to all faculty through appropriate means such as live data dashboards. 
+
+Step 2. Following the publication of the data, each academic department and interdisciplinary program will be charged by Academic Affairs to complete self-studies, following criteria set by APAC. 
+
+Step 3. Following receipt of the department and program self-studies, APAC will evaluate each department in relation to Mission, Cost-Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality (see above) and issue a report to the President.
+
+Step 4. The President shall convene a Joint Committee comprised of eight faculty members, six of which are elected by the faculty (or appointed by the Executive Committee if an election is unsuccessful) from individuals serving on each of the following faculty committees: UGC, Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC), Committee on Academic Programs (CAP), and APAC; and two of which are appointed by the President from the tenure-line faculty.  In addition, the Joint Committee shall include the Provost and appropriate academic administrators responsible for data and curriculum as designated by the Provost.  From the faculty membership, the President shall appoint the convener of the Joint Committee.
+
+After considering the department self-studies and APAC report, the Joint Committee shall:
+
+Develop recommendations for the appropriate number and size of departments and interdisciplinary programs, as well as the appropriate number of majors and minors;
+
+Identify opportunities for program enhancement; and
+
+Suggest the optimal configuration of departments and interdisciplinary programs. 
+
+In addressing these areas, the committee’s recommendations may include (a) the discontinuation and/or reduction of departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors; (b) the elimination of faculty positions; (c) recommendations about reconfiguring departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors by reassigning positions; (d) enhancement of programs, and (e) changes in policies and procedures that would improve the functioning or efficiency of the academic program. 
+
+The President, following consultation with the Executive Committee of the Faculty, will determine the date by which the Joint Committee’s recommendations to the President must be provided.  Following its deliberations, the Joint Committee shall issue its formal recommendations in writing to the President.  
+
+Step 5. The President will review the Joint Committee report and issue a written proposal to the members of the faculty addressing the financially contingent situation.  The President’s written proposal will also be referred to CAP as to curricular impact, to APAC as to the implications for the academic plan, to the FPC as to personnel implications, and to the affected departments and interdisciplinary programs identified in the proposal.  
+
+Each committee and affected department and interdisciplinary program will have a 30-day period to develop their recommendations to the President.  The manner in which the committees and affected departments and interdisciplinary programs arrive at their recommendations is at their respective discretion.
+
+Step 6. Following the hearings, The respective committees and affected departments and interdisciplinary programs may submit to the President written recommendations for changes to the proposal.  The President will consider the recommendations. If the President adopts the recommendations, the President will incorporate them into the final plan submitted to the Board of Trustees. If the President does not adopt the recommendations, the President will transmit to the Board of Trustees both the President’s final proposal and the alternative proposal(s) prepared by the faculty committees and affected departments and interdisciplinary programs.  The Board of Trustees shall approve the final plan to address the financial contingent situation and retains ultimate authority for approving proposals as to department or interdisciplinary program and position reductions and terminations responding to a financially contingent situation.
+
+Step 7. The President shall render the final decision on terminations for reasons of financial contingency and notify the faculty member(s) involved in accordance with the Notification provisions below. 
+
+Step 8. After the completion and implementation of decisions for institutional contraction to deal with a financially contingent situation, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.
+
+Reassignment and Retraining
+
+Before the President issues notice to a tenure line faculty member of the University’s intention to terminate an appointment because of a formal discontinuance of a program or department, the University will, subject to a review of qualifications (see Section 3.4.5 - Faculty Qualification) and retraining possibilities (see Section 3.10.3 – Retraining Leave), consider the faculty member for suitable administrative or teaching position vacations within the University.  See Section 3.13.5.1 below for additional information.
+
+When a suitable position is not available within the University, with or without retraining, and the faculty member is not agreeable to any optional alternative courses of action (i.e., change in status to part-time), the faculty member’s appointment may be terminated.
+
+Notice
+
+Notification of termination will be sent from the President to the faculty member. The notice will specify the reasons for such termination, the effective date of termination, and right to an appeal.
+
+Full-time non-tenured faculty members will be given notice or severance salary in accordance with Section 3.13.3.1.  Tenured faculty will be provided with termination payments in accordance with Section 3.13.5.1.
+
+Appeal
+
+If the administration issues notice to a tenure line faculty member of an intention to terminate the appointment because of the formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction due to educational considerations, the faculty member will have the right to file a grievance in accordance with Section 3.14.3. 
+
+	2.	Program or Department Discontinuance Due to Educational Decisions
+
+Termination of an appointment with tenure, or of a tenure track faculty member before the end of the specified term, may occur as a result of a bona fide formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction due to educational considerations not related to a financially contingent situation.  
+
+	Criteria
+
+The decision to discontinue an academic program or department of instruction will be based on long-range judgements that the educational mission of the University as whole will be enhanced by the discontinuance of an academic program or department.  Such a decision will not be based upon cyclical or temporary variations in enrollment.
+
+For purposes of this policy, academic programs and departments are defined as an academic department or program offering majors and minors that existed prior to the decision to discontinue them. The term program means a group of courses leading to a major or minor, a sequence of courses with a common prefix, a service, or support area, or any curriculum area identified as such.
+
+	Making Academic Program or Department Discontinuation Decisions
+
+A proposal to discontinue formally a program or department of instruction may be initiated by the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee, the Committee on Academic Programs, the Provost, or the President.
+
+The decision to discontinue a program or department of instruction will be based essentially upon educational considerations, as determined according to the Academic Program Review Process procedures in the Termination Due to Financially Contingent Situations and Resource Allocation Policy (see Section 3.13.5(2)(b)(2) above).</s>"
+"<s>[INST] REVISED ANTI-DISCRIMINATION POLICY (DRAFT 2).txt [/INST] ANTI-DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT POLICY 
+
+Effective Date:
+
+ October 9, 2018
+
+Policy Number:
+
+II – 2.1.1
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President for Human Resources and Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+All members of the Canisius College community.
+
+History:
+
+ Replaces prior policy effective May 8, 2017
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to ensure compliance with applicable federal and state laws prohibiting unlawful discrimination and harassment and to foster the college’s commitment to providing an educational and working environment free from discrimination and harassment.
+
+POLICY
+
+I.  Statement of Policy
+
+Canisius College strives to provide an educational and working environment that is free from all forms of discrimination and harassment and is committed to providing an environment that values diversity and emphasizes the dignity and worth of every individual, an environment in which every individual is treated with respect.  As part of this commitment, Canisius College does not discriminate on the basis of age, race, religion or creed, color, sex, national or ethnic origin, sexual orientation, marital status, military status, genetic predisposition or carrier status, gender identity, gender expression, familial status, domestic violence victim status, pregnancy, citizenship or immigration status, disability, criminal conviction or any other status protected by local, state or federal law in administration of its educational policies, employment practices, admissions policies, scholarship and loan programs, and athletic and other school administered programs.
+
+Discrimination or harassment in any form is inimical to these goals and fundamentally at odds with the values of Canisius College.  They are unacceptable behaviors and will not be tolerated.  Accordingly, individuals who discriminate against or harass others in violation of this policy, regardless of whether such conduct rises to the level of unlawful discrimination or harassment, may be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment, association with the college, or dismissal from the college. The college also prohibits retaliation by any person against any person for filing or supporting a complaint under this policy.  
+
+II.	Scope
+
+A.	Generally
+
+This policy applies to prohibited discrimination or harassment conduct in all college education programs and activities and to all participants in such education programs and activities, including administrators, faculty, staff, students, volunteers, contractors, and guests. This policy covers prohibited conduct that occurs on campus, in connection with an official college program or activity (regardless of location), and to off-campus conduct when the conduct could deny or limit a person’s ability to participate in or benefit from the college’s programs and activities or when the college, in its sole discretion, has an identifiable interest in the off-campus conduct.
+
+B.	Interaction with Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct (Title IX) & Sexual Harassment Prevention Policies  
+
+In support of its commitment to provide an educational and working environment free from all forms of discrimination and harassment, Canisius College has adopted this policy prohibiting discrimination and harassment in all forms identified below (the “Anti-Discrimination/Harassment Policy” or the “policy”).  In addition, Canisius College maintains a separate Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct (Title IX) Policy and a separate Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy that will govern certain allegations of sexual and gender-based misconduct and harassment.  These separate policies may be summarized, in general, as follows:
+
+Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy: Canisius College is committed to eliminating Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct, preventing its recurrence, and addressing and remedying its effects.  In compliance with Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972 and 34 CFR Part 106, the Violence Against Women Act as reauthorized by the Campus SaVE Act, and New York’s Enough is Enough Law, the college has adopted a Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy that specifically addresses incidents of Sex and Gender-Based Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, Sexual Assault, Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, and Stalking.  The entirety of this Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy may be accessed here.  
+
+Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy:  Canisius College is committed to maintaining a workplace free from sexual harassment.  In compliance with New York State law, the college has adopted a Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy that specifically addresses sexual harassment against employees, applicants for employment, interns and non-employees providing services in the workplace pursuant to a contract with the college or any of their employees, regardless of immigration status.  Sexual harassment covered by the policy includes any harassment based on a person’s sex, sexual orientation, self-identified or perceived sex, gender expression, gender identify and the status of being transgender.  The policy also prohibits retaliation for reporting or complaining about sexual harassment or providing information, testifying or assisting in any investigation or proceeding involving sexual harassment.  The entirety of this Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy may be accessed in Volume II. 
+
+All members of the college community are expected to carefully review the Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy and are responsible for complying with its terms.  Violations of the College’s Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy may result in the imposition of sanctions up to and including termination, dismissal, or expulsion.
+
+All employees also are expected to carefully review the Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy and are responsible for complying with its terms.  Violations of the College’s Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy may result in sanctions up to and including termination.
+
+The college has also adopted this Anti-Discrimination/Harassment Policy to ensure a prompt and equitable resolution of all reports or complaints of discrimination and harassment not falling within either the Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct or Sexual Harassment Prevention policies.  
+
+This policy is designed to do the following:
+
+Reaffirm the college’s commitment to providing a positive, supportive and tolerant environment for study and work, free from discrimination, harassment, and retaliation;
+
+Let all members of the college community know what kind of conduct is expected, and what kind of conduct is proscribed;
+
+Inform victims of discrimination, harassment, and retaliation of their options and rights vis-à-vis complaints of discrimination, harassment, or retaliation;
+
+Inform all members of the college community about the procedures available at the college for addressing, investigating, and resolving discrimination, harassment, and retaliation complaints filed under this Policy;
+
+Protect the rights of all parties to confidentiality of complaints to the extent reasonably possible; and
+
+Prevent retaliation against persons making complaints under this policy, as well as persons who participate in or cooperate with an investigation under this policy.
+
+All members of the college community are expected to carefully review this policy and are responsible for complying with its terms.  Violations may result in the imposition of sanctions up to and including termination, dismissal, or expulsion.
+
+There will be instances where conduct alleged to be in violation of this Anti-Discrimination/Harassment Policy also would constitute a reported violation of the college’s Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy and/or Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy.  All allegations of sex discrimination which rise to the level of sexual harassment occurring within the college’s education programs and activities as defined by the college’s Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy will be handled exclusively pursuant to the procedures outlined in that policy.  When the alleged misconduct does not meet the definition of sexual harassment occurring within the college’s education programs and activities as defined by the college’s Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy, then the college’s investigation and resolution efforts will be guided by this policy or the Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy, as may be applicable based on the facts of the individual allegation.  The determination of which policy or policies will govern is in the sole discretion of the college.
+
+
+
+
+III. Prohibited Conduct Defined
+
+The following are categories of conduct that are prohibited by this policy (“prohibited conduct”) and may result in disciplinary action when committed by college employees or students. 
+
+A.    Discrimination 
+
+Discrimination is conduct directed at a specific individual or a group of identifiable individuals that subjects the individual or group to treatment that adversely affects their education or employment because of their age, race, religion or creed, color, gender, sex, national or ethnic origin, sexual orientation, marital status, military status, genetic predisposition or carrier status, gender identity or expression, familial status, domestic violence victim status, pregnancy, citizen status, disability, criminal conviction history, or any other status protected by local, state or federal law.
+
+Listed below are examples of conduct that can constitute discrimination if based on an individual’s protected characteristic(s).  This list is not all-inclusive; in addition, each situation will be considered in light of the specific facts and circumstances to determine if discrimination has occurred.
+
+Singling out or targeting an individual for different or adverse treatment (e.g., more severe discipline, lower salary increase) because of his or her actual or perceived protected characteristic(s);
+
+Failing or refusing to hire or admit an individual because of his/her actual or perceived protected characteristic(s); and
+
+Terminating an individual from employment or an educational program or activity based on his/her actual or perceived protected characteristic.
+
+Other Forms of Discrimination—In addition to the above, the following acts of discrimination are prohibited by this policy:
+
+Causing physical harm, verbally abusing, intimidating or engaging in other conduct that threatens the health or safety of any member of the college community based on his or her actual or perceived protected characteristic;
+
+Hazing (defined as acts likely to cause physical or psychological harm or social exclusion or humiliation) any member of the college community based on his or her actual or perceived protected characteristic; and
+
+Bullying (defined as repeated and/or severe aggressive behavior likely to intimidate or intentionally hurt, control or degrade another person physically or mentally) any member of the college community based on his or her actual or perceived protected characteristic.
+
+B.    Harassment 
+
+Harassment is any conduct against an individual on the basis of his or her age, race, religion or creed, color, gender, sex, national or ethnic origin, sexual orientation, marital status, military status, genetic predisposition or carrier status, gender identity or expression, familial status, domestic violence victim status, pregnancy, citizen status, disability, criminal conduct or any other status protected by local, state or federal law, when the conduct is either:
+
+Sufficiently serious (i.e., severe, pervasive, or persistent) and objectively offensive so as to deny or limit the individual’s ability to participate in or benefit from the college’s programs or activities; or
+
+The conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s employment or education. 
+
+The determination of whether an environment is hostile must be based on all of the circumstances, giving consideration to whether a reasonable person in a similar situation would have perceived the conduct as objectively offensive.  Also, the following factors will be among those considered by the college in assessing whether a “hostile” environment has been created, maintained or promoted: (a) the degree to which the conduct affected one or more students’ education or individual’s employment; (b) the nature, scope, frequency, duration, severity, and location of incident or incidents; (c) the intent, purpose or objective(s) of the participants involved in the conduct; and (d) the identity, number, and relationships of persons involved.  While the intent of the actors involved will be considered as part of the overall assessment of whether a “hostile” environment has been created, maintained or promoted, the absence of intent to offend, demean, injure or harass will not be determinative of the issue.
+
+A single or isolated incident of harassment may create (and may support a finding of) a hostile environment if the incident is sufficiently severe.  The more severe the conduct, the less need there is to show a repetitive series of incidents in finding a hostile environment, particularly if the harassment is physical in nature.
+
+The foregoing also must be interpreted in light of one of the fundamental purposes of a Canisius College education which is to teach students to think, write, and express themselves critically.  This is a demanding skill and students must confront in stark and sometimes painful ways the comfortable assumptions that they bring to the college experience.  Instruction in critical thinking very well may involve saying or presenting materials that are felt by individuals to be offensive or embarrassing.  In such cases, students should communicate directly with the faculty member involved, the department chair or the associate dean of the applicable school.  (See Section IV below regarding Academic Freedom.)  Nor is this policy intended to address normal differences of opinion that arise but are not based on a person’s protected status.  
+
+In the case of students, those matters can be addressed through the procedures set forth in the Community Standards.  
+
+In the case of employees, those matters can be addressed through procedures set forth in the Faculty Handbook or Volume III of Canisius College Policy Manual as applicable.
+
+C.   Sexual Harassment and Sexual Violence  
+
+For the same reasons listed above, it is the policy of Canisius College that all faculty, staff, students, and visitors work, learn, and participate in an environment free from sexual harassment and/or sexual violence, which are prohibited and may also violate federal, state and local law.  
+
+Claims of sexual or gender-based harassment and/or violence are governed by the college’s separate  Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy and/or the college’s separate  Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy. 
+
+C. 	Sexual Exploitation
+
+Sexual exploitation occurs when a person takes non-consensual or abusive sexual advantage of another for his/her own benefit, or to benefit anyone other than the affected individual, and that behavior does not otherwise constitute other prohibited conduct.  Examples of sexual exploitation include but are not limited to the following:
+
+Creating pictures, movies, web cam, tape recording, graphic written narrative or other means of memorializing sexual behavior or a state of undress of another person without the other’s knowledge and consent;
+
+Sharing items described above, beyond the boundaries of consent where consent was given.  For example, showing a picture to friends where consent to view it was given for oneself only;
+
+Observing or facilitating observation by others of sexual behavior or a state of undress of another person without the knowledge and/or consent of that person;
+
+“Peeping Tom”/Voyeuristic behaviors;
+
+Engaging in sexual behavior with knowledge of an illness or disease (HIV or STD) that could be transmitted by the behavior;
+
+Encourage others to engage in sexual behavior in exchange for money;
+
+Surreptitiously providing drugs (including so-called “date-rape” drugs such as Rohypnol or GHB), or alcohol to a person for the purpose of sexual exploitation; and
+
+Causing another person to be exposed to pornographic material without the person’s advance knowledge or consent.
+
+D.	Other Unprofessional/Inappropriate Conduct
+
+Behavior or conduct of a sexual nature that is unprofessional and/or inappropriate for the educational and/or working environment, but does not rise to the level of sexual harassment or other form of prohibited conduct outlined above is also prohibited by this policy.
+
+E.    Retaliation 
+
+Retaliation means any action taken against a person who has filed a complaint under this policy, or who has participated in or cooperated with an investigation or a process under this policy, in reprisal for having done so, that might dissuade a reasonable person from making or supporting a complaint or participating in a process under this policy.
+
+G.	Other Definitions
+
+Complainant means an individual who is alleged to be the victim of prohibited conduct.
+
+Respondent means an individual who has been reported to be the perpetrator of prohibited conduct.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IV. Reporting Procedures
+
+A.    Reporting to the College
+
+Complaints of violations of this policy, including complaints of retaliation, should be made to the college’s Associate Vice President for Human Resources and Compliance (“AVP HR”).  The AVP for HR is:
+
+Linda M. Walleshauser
+
+Associate Vice President for Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Old Main 100
+
+walleshl@canisius.edu
+716 888-2244
+
+
+
+In the event that the AVP for HR is the subject of a complaint under this policy, the Vice President for Business & Finance will assume the AVP HR role.  If the president is the subject of a complaint, the chair of the board of trustees will assume the president’s role in the process.
+
+Students who perceive themselves to be the victim of discrimination, harassment, or retaliation by another student may also report the incident via the reporting procedures outlined in the Community Standards.
+
+While verbal reports of prohibited conduct will be received and responded to as appropriate considering the wishes of the reporting individual(s) and the circumstances of each case, the college strongly recommends reports of violations of this policy be submitted in writing. The written complaint should:
+
+Identify the parties involved; 
+
+Describe the policy violation, including when and where it occurred; and
+
+ Identify by name or description any witnesses and/or evidence. 
+
+Written complaints will be treated as confidentially as practical and shared only on a need-to-know basis.  
+
+B.    External Complaints
+
+The availability and use of this policy does not prevent a member of the college community from filing an inquiry with external agencies such as the Office for Civil Rights or the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
+
+Students: Students and student applicants may file formal complaints with the following agency:
+
+Office for Civil Rights (OCR), Headquarters
+
+400 Maryland Avenue, SW
+
+Washington, DC 20202-1100
+
+Customer Service Hotline: (800) 421-3481
+
+TDD: (877) 521-2172
+
+Facsimile: (202) 453-6012
+
+Email: OCR@ed.gov
+
+Web: http://www.ed.gov/ocr
+
+Employees, Employment Applicants, Volunteers and other 3rd Parties: Employees, applicants for employment and other 3rd Parties may file formal complaints with the following agencies:
+
+U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
+
+Two Gateway Center
+
+Suite 1703
+
+283-299 Market Street
+
+Newark, NJ 07102
+
+Phone: 1-800-669-4000
+
+Fax: 973-645-4524
+
+TDD: 1-800-669-6820
+
+The New York State Division of Human Rights
+
+One Fordham Plaza 4th Floor
+
+Bronx, New York 10458
+
+Phone: (718) 741-8400
+
+TDD: 1-718-741-8300
+Website: https://dhr.ny.gov/ 
+
+
+
+The City of Buffalo Commission on Citizens’ Rights and Community Relations
+
+City Hall
+
+Room 1316-C
+
+Buffalo, NY, 14202
+716-851-8000
+
+
+
+V. Investigation and Resolution
+
+No more than five (5) business days after a report is received, the appropriate administrator (or designee) as applicable will meet separately with the parties to discuss the complaint.  If the parties choose not to participate, such non-participation will not prevent the matter from proceeding.
+
+After meeting with the parties, the appropriate administrator (or designee) as applicable will make a determination as to whether:
+
+							The matter can possibly be resolved through Informal Resolution; 
+
+							A formal investigation is warranted to resolve the case; or 
+
+							There are no reasonable grounds for believing that the alleged incident(s) constitutes discrimination, harassment and/or retaliation in violation of this policy.
+
+In the event that the appropriate administrator (or designee) as applicable determines there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the conduct at issue constitutes discrimination, harassment and/or retaliation as defined by this policy, the matter will be closed and the parties will be promptly notified of such resolution in writing. 
+
+A.	Informal Resolution
+
+At any time prior to the review of an investigative report, a party may request an informal resolution of the complaint.  All parties and the appropriate administrator (or designee) as applicable must agree to informal resolution for this option to be used.  The administrator (or designee) will assess the request for an informal resolution against the severity of the alleged violation and the potential risks to college community members.  If the administrator (or designee) determines that an informal resolution is appropriate, the parties will be notified. 
+
+The administrator (or designee) will facilitate a dialogue with the parties in an attempt to reach an amicable resolution.  The matter will be deemed resolved when the parties expressly agree to an outcome that is acceptable to them, which is approved by administrator (or designee).  A party may withdraw from the informal resolution process at any time.  The administrator (or designee) may also reinitiate an investigation at any time deemed appropriate.  If these efforts are unsuccessful, the Formal Resolution process will commence.
+
+B.	Formal Resolution
+
+If the administrator (or designee) determines that a formal investigation is warranted to resolve a complaint, the college will determine whether an employee or student is responsible for a violation of this policy and what, if any, corrective action is appropriate, in accordance with the procedures described below.
+
+Assignment of Investigator
+
+The administrator (or designee) will appoint an investigator or investigative team with experience investigating allegations of discrimination and harassment. The investigator(s) may be an employee of the college or an external investigator engaged to assist the college in its fact gathering.
+
+The Investigation
+
+The investigation will be conducted in a manner appropriate in light of the circumstances of the case. The investigation may include, but is not limited to, conducting interviews of the complainant(s), the respondent(s), and any witnesses (witnesses must have observed the acts in question or have information relevant to the incident); reviewing law enforcement investigation documents, if applicable; reviewing  personnel files; and gathering, examining, and preserving other relevant documents and physical, written, and electronic evidence (including text messages and other phone records, social media posts, security camera footage, etc.). The parties will be afforded an opportunity to identify and present relevant witnesses and evidence to the investigator, as well as identify witnesses who may have relevant information. 
+
+The Investigator’s Report and Conclusions
+
+The investigator will make conclusions as to whether the respondent violated any provision of this policy. The standard of proof shall be by a preponderance of the evidence. The investigator’s findings and conclusions may be shared with the administrator in a written report. 
+
+Determination of No Policy Violation. If the investigator determines that the respondent did not violate any provision of this policy, the administrator (or designee) will determine and document the appropriate resolution of the complaint and notify the parties of that determination. Appropriate resolutions may include, but are not limited to, dismissal of the complaint, conferences with one or more of the parties, and the introduction of remedial and community-based efforts such as educational initiatives and/or trainings.
+
+Determination of a Policy Violation. If the investigator determines there is sufficient information to find, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the respondent violated this policy, the matter will be referred for corrective action.
+
+Appeals 
+
+Appeals of findings of responsibility against student-respondents will be handled pursuant to the Community Standard appeals process. 
+
+Appeals of findings of responsibility against employee-respondents will be handled pursuant to the applicable faculty or staff personnel policies.
+
+Corrective Action
+
+If the respondent is found responsible by the preponderance of the evidence, the matter will be referred as applicable to either Student Affairs (student respondents), Academic Affairs (faculty respondents), Human Resources (staff respondents), or the Associate Vice President for Business and Human Resources (third-party respondents) for the imposition of corrective action(s).  The range of corrective action sanctions include:
+
+Employee Respondents: Sanctions and/or responsive action for employees or volunteers may include work restrictions, requirement to seek or secure counseling, requirement to attend and complete conduct-focused education or training, other discretionary sanctions,, salary reduction or limitation, loss or reduction of an employment-related benefit or privilege, an oral warning, a written reprimand, suspension from employment, and/or dismissal from or termination of employment. 
+
+Student Respondents: Sanctions and/or responsive action for students found responsible for Policy violations may include warnings, fines, restitution, requirement to seek or secure counseling, requirement to attend and complete conduct-focused education or training, other discretionary sanctions, assignment to complete an educational program or activity on a different timeline or in a different format, loss of campus privileges, residence hall probation, administrative relocation, residence hall suspension, suspension or removal from a college team, club or activity, termination of recognized status as a college team, club or activity, residence hall expulsion, college probation, college suspension, college expulsion, revocation of admission and/or degree, and/or withholding or revocation of a degree (whether or not that degree has been conferred).   
+
+Third-Party Respondents: For policy violations by contractors, vendors, and others doing business with the college, the Associate Vice President for Business and Human Resources will consult with the contracting department to determine the appropriate resolution, up to and including termination of a contractual relationship.
+
+Note: The above listing is not exclusive, but is intended to be illustrative of the common forms of sanction that may be issued upon a finding of responsibility. 
+
+
+
+VI.	Miscellaneous
+
+Supportive Measures
+
+Regardless of the complaint resolution process utilized in response to a complaint of prohibited conduct, the college will, to the extent practicable based on the college’s resources, provide the complainant with support and resources to restore or preserve equal access to the college’s education programs and activities and/or employment. Such measures are designed to protect the safety of all parties implicated by a report or to deter prohibited conduct. Supportive measures may include, but are not limited to: counseling, extensions of academic or other deadlines, course-related adjustments, modifications to work or class schedules, campus escort services, changes in work or housing locations, leaves of absence, increased security and monitoring of certain areas of campus, and other similar measures. Supportive measures may also include mutual restrictions on contact between the parties implicated by a report.
+
+Confidentiality
+
+All actions taken to investigate and resolve complaints through this procedure will be conducted with as much privacy and discretion as possible without compromising the thoroughness and fairness of the investigation.  All persons involved are to treat the situation with respect.  To conduct a thorough investigation, the investigators may discuss the complaint with witnesses and those persons involved in or affected by the complaint, and those persons necessary to assist in the investigation or to implement appropriate disciplinary actions.
+
+Any person who knowingly and intentionally makes an unauthorized disclosure of confidential information contained in a complaint or otherwise relating to the investigation of a complaint under this policy is subject to disciplinary action.
+
+Standard of Proof
+
+All findings and determinations of responsibility under this policy will be made using a preponderance of the evidence standard. This standard requires the determination of whether it is more likely than not (>50%) that a fact exists or that a violation of this policy occurred.
+
+Time Frames
+
+Time frames mentioned in these procedures may be extended for good cause, such as holidays or when classes are not in session, or when it is necessary to complete an investigation due to difficulties reaching witnesses or parties to the complaint.
+
+Duty of Truthfulness
+
+All parties and witnesses are obligated to be completely truthful during the course of the entire process set forth in this policy. Any person who knowingly makes a false statement, either explicitly or by omission, in connection with any part of the process, may be subject to separate disciplinary action. A report made in good faith, however, is not considered false merely because the evidence does not ultimately support or refute the allegation of violation of the policy. 
+
+Duty of Cooperation
+
+All parties and witnesses are obligated to cooperate with any persons charged with implementing this policy and these procedures. Any person who knowingly interferes with the actions taken to implement the reporting, investigation, or resolution of matters under this policy may be subject to separate and/or additional disciplinary action. 
+
+Participation in Proceedings 
+
+To enable the most accurate and fair review of the facts, the parties are expected to attend and participate in meetings during the course of an investigation under this policy. If an individual chooses not to attend one or more meetings, the allegations will be reviewed on the basis of the information and evidence available, and a decision will be made. Although no inference may be drawn against an individual failing to attend a meeting or remaining silent, the process will proceed and the conclusion will be based on the evidence presented. No decision shall be based solely on the failure of the respondent to attend one or more meetings, to participate in such meeting(s) or to answer the allegations. 
+
+Advisers
+
+During the investigation and resolution process, the parties may designate and thereafter be accompanied by an advisor at meetings and interviews at which they are present; however, no advisor may examine witnesses or otherwise actively participate in a meeting or interview pursuant to this policy.  
+
+An adviser is subject to the same confidentiality expectations applicable to others in attendance. 
+
+Accommodations, including scheduling of interviews or reviews, generally will not be made for any advisers if they unduly delay the process.  
+
+Without prior approval of the area vice president or dean (as applicable), the adviser is not permitted to attend a meeting or proceeding without the complainant or respondent.  
+
+The college reserves the right to take appropriate action regarding any adviser who disrupts the process, or who does not abide by the restrictions on their participation. 
+
+Recording Proceedings
+
+The parties are not permitted to make video, audio, or other electronic, photographic, or digital recordings of any meetings or proceedings held under this policy or these procedures, including the Investigative Report.  The area vice president or dean as applicable may make exceptions to this prohibition in limited circumstances upon written request of the party seeking the recording. 
+
+Accommodations for Individuals with Disabilities
+
+Reasonable accommodations will be provided to an individual with disabilities in accordance with applicable law. An individual with a disability who requires an accommodation for any meeting or process this policy must request an accommodation through the area vice president or dean, who in consultation with the appropriate office will make a determination regarding the request and notify the appropriate parities 
+
+Record Retention
+
+Generally, records will be retained for seven (7) years after the date of an incident unless:
+
+							The college is mandated to maintain the record in compliance with federal, state, or local law or other college policy; and/or 
+
+							The case resulted in an expulsion, termination or rescission of acceptance, in which case the individuals entire file will be retained indefinitely.
+
+Effect on Pending Actions
+
+The filing of a discrimination, harassment or retaliation complaint will not stop or delay any evaluation or disciplinary action related to the complainant or who has violated other college policies.
+
+Relationship of Complaint Process to Outside Agency Time Limits
+
+The filing of a discrimination, harassment or retaliation complaint under this policy does not excuse the complainant from meeting the time limits of outside agencies.
+
+Special Situations
+
+The college retains the right to determine, in its sole discretion, if it will address a report of conduct under this policy administratively and outside of the process described herein when the safety of the college community is at risk, if the material facts are undisputed, if there are extenuating circumstances involving either of the parties, or if the applicable vice president or associate dean, in consultation with appropriate administrators, determines it is in the best interest of the college and/or the community to do so.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] REVISED ANTI-DISCRIMINATION POLICY.txt [/INST] ANTI-DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT POLICY 
+
+Effective Date:
+
+ October 9, 2018
+
+Policy Number:
+
+II – 2.1.1
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President for Human Resources and Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+All members of the Canisius College community.
+
+History:
+
+ Replaces prior policy effective May 8, 2017
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to ensure compliance with applicable federal and state laws prohibiting unlawful discrimination and harassment and to foster the college’s commitment to providing an educational and working environment free from unlawful discrimination and harassment.
+
+POLICY
+
+I.  Statement of Policy
+
+Canisius College strives to provide an educational and working environment that is free from all forms of discrimination and harassment and is committed to providing an environment that values diversity and emphasizes the dignity and worth of every individual, an environment in which every individual is treated with respect.  As part of this commitment, Canisius College does not discriminate on the basis of age, race, religion or creed, color, sex, national or ethnic origin, sexual orientation, marital status, military status, genetic predisposition or carrier status, gender identity, gender expression, familial status, domestic violence victim status, pregnancy, citizenship or immigration status, disability, criminal conviction or any other status protected by local, state or federal law in administration of its educational policies, employment practices, admissions policies, scholarship and loan programs, and athletic and other school administered programs.
+
+Discrimination or harassment in any form is inimical to these goals and fundamentally at odds with the values of Canisius College.  They are unacceptable behaviors and will not be tolerated.  Accordingly, individuals who discriminate against or harass others in violation of this policy, regardless of whether such conduct rises to the level of unlawful discrimination or harassment, may be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment, association with the college, or dismissal from the college. The college also prohibits retaliation by any person against any person for filing or supporting a complaint under this policy.  These prohibitions apply to discrimination and harassment incidents occurring between members of the college community occurring on or off campus at any college academic, educational, co-curricular, athletic, study abroad, residential or other college-sponsored program occurring within or outside of the United States, as well off-campus incidents not associated with college programs or activities if the conduct has the effect of creating a hostile environment impacting a member(s) of the college community.  
+
+In support of its commitment to provide an educational and working environment free from all forms of discrimination and harassment, Canisius College has adopted this policy prohibiting discrimination and harassment in all forms identified below (the “Anti-Discrimination/Harassment Policy” or the “policy”).  In addition, Canisius College maintains a separate Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct (Title IX) Policy and a separate Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy that will govern certain allegations of sexual and gender-based misconduct and harassment.  These separate policies may be summarized, in general, as follows:
+
+Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy: Canisius College is committed to eliminating Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct, preventing its recurrence, and addressing and remedying its effects.  In compliance with Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972 and 34 CFR Part 106, the Violence Against Women Act as reauthorized by the Campus SaVE Act, and New York’s Enough is Enough Law, the college has adopted a Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy that specifically addresses incidents of Sex and Gender-Based Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, Sexual Assault, Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, and Stalking.  The entirety of this Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy may be accessed here.  Only Formal Complaints alleging sexual harassment falling within the Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy’s definition of sexual harassment will be investigated and, if appropriate, brought to a live hearing through the grievance process defined in the Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy.  Allegations of sexual harassment or discrimination not meeting the Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct (Title IX) Policy’s definition of sexual harassment will either be resolved pursuant to the Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy (employee respondents) or this Policy, as applicable.
+
+Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy:  Canisius College is committed to maintaining a workplace free from sexual harassment.  In compliance with New York State law, the college has adopted a Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy that specifically addresses sexual harassment against employees, applicants for employment, interns and non-employees providing services in the workplace pursuant to a contract with the college or any of their employees, regardless of immigration status.  Sexual harassment covered by the policy includes any harassment based on a person’s sex, sexual orientation, self-identified or perceived sex, gender expression, gender identify and the status of being transgender.  The policy also prohibits retaliation for reporting or complaining about sexual harassment or providing information, testifying or assisting in any investigation or proceeding involving sexual harassment.  The entirety of this Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy may be accessed in Volume II. 
+
+All members of the college community are expected to carefully review the Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy and are responsible for complying with its terms.  Violations of the College’s Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy may result in the imposition of sanctions up to and including termination, dismissal, or expulsion.
+
+All employees also are expected to carefully review the Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy and are responsible for complying with its terms.  Violations of the College’s Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy may result in sanctions up to and including termination.
+
+The college has also adopted this Anti-Discrimination/Harassment Policy to ensure a prompt and equitable resolution of all reports or complaints of discrimination and harassment not falling within either the Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct or Sexual Harassment Prevention policies.  
+
+This policy is designed to do the following:
+
+Reaffirm the college’s commitment to providing a positive, supportive and tolerant environment for study and work, free from discrimination, harassment, and retaliation;
+
+Let all members of the college community know what kind of conduct is expected, and what kind of conduct is proscribed;
+
+Inform victims of discrimination, harassment, and retaliation of their options and rights vis-à-vis complaints of discrimination, harassment, or retaliation;
+
+Inform all members of the college community about the procedures available at the college for addressing, investigating, and resolving discrimination, harassment, and retaliation complaints filed under this Policy;
+
+Protect the rights of all parties to confidentiality of complaints to the extent reasonably possible; and
+
+Prevent retaliation against persons making complaints under this policy, as well as persons who participate in or cooperate with an investigation under this policy.
+
+All members of the college community are expected to carefully review this policy and are responsible for complying with its terms.  Violations may result in the imposition of sanctions up to and including termination, dismissal, or expulsion.
+
+There will be instances where conduct alleged to be in violation of this Anti-Discrimination/Harassment Policy also would constitute a reported violation of the college’s Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy and/or Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy.  If the alleged conduct, if true, includes conduct that would constitute covered sexual  harassment prohibited by Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy and conduct that would not constitute covered sexual  harassment prohibited by Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy, the Title IX investigation and grievance hearing process will be applied in the investigation and adjudication of all of the allegations.  When the alleged misconduct would not constitute a reported violation of the college’s Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy, then the college’s investigation and resolution efforts will either be guided by this policy or the Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy, as may be applicable based on the facts of the individual allegation.  The determination of which policy or policies will govern is in the sole discretion of the college.
+
+II. Prohibited Conduct Defined
+
+A.    Discrimination 
+
+Discrimination is unlawful conduct that is based upon an individual’s age, race, religion or creed, color, gender, sex, national or ethnic origin, sexual orientation, marital status, military status, genetic predisposition or carrier status, gender identity or expression, familial status, domestic violence victim status, pregnancy, citizen status, disability, criminal conviction or any other status protected by local, state or federal law.
+
+Listed below are examples of conduct that can constitute discrimination if based on an individual’s protected characteristic(s).  This list is not all-inclusive; in addition, each situation will be considered in light of the specific facts and circumstances to determine if discrimination has occurred.
+
+Singling out or targeting an individual for different or adverse treatment (e.g., more severe discipline, lower salary increase) because of his or her actual or perceived protected characteristic(s);
+
+Failing or refusing to hire or admit an individual because of his/her actual or perceived protected characteristic(s); and
+
+Terminating an individual from employment or an educational program or activity based on his/her actual or perceived protected characteristic.
+
+Other Forms of Discrimination—In addition to the above, the following acts of discrimination are prohibited by this policy:
+
+Causing physical harm, verbally abusing, intimidating or engaging in other conduct that threatens the health or safety of any member of the college community based on his or her actual or perceived protected characteristic;
+
+Hazing (defined as acts likely to cause physical or psychological harm or social exclusion or humiliation) any member of the college community based on his or her actual or perceived protected characteristic; and
+
+Bullying (defined as repeated and/or severe aggressive behavior likely to intimidate or intentionally hurt, control or degrade another person physically or mentally) any member of the college community based on his or her actual or perceived protected characteristic.
+
+B.    Harassment 
+
+Harassment is any conduct against an individual on the basis of his or her age, race, religion or creed, color, gender, sex, national or ethnic origin, sexual orientation, marital status, military status, genetic predisposition or carrier status, gender identity or expression, familial status, domestic violence victim status, pregnancy, citizen status, disability, criminal conduct or any other status protected by local, state or federal law, when the conduct is either:
+
+Sufficiently serious (i.e., severe, pervasive, or persistent) and objectively offensive so as to deny or limit the individual’s ability to participate in or benefit from the college’s programs or activities; or
+
+The conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s employment or education. 
+
+The determination of whether an environment is “hostile” or harassing must be based on all of the circumstances, giving consideration to whether a reasonable person in a similar situation would have perceived the conduct as objectively offensive.  Also, the following factors will be among those considered by the college in assessing whether a “hostile” environment has been created, maintained or promoted: (a) the degree to which the conduct affected one or more students’ education or individual’s employment; (b) the nature, scope, frequency, duration, severity, and location of incident or incidents; (c) the intent, purpose or objective(s) of the participants involved in the conduct; and (d) the identity, number, and relationships of persons involved.  While the intent of the actors involved will be considered as part of the overall assessment of whether a “hostile” environment has been created, maintained or promoted, the absence of intent to offend, demean, injure or harass will not be determinative of the issue.
+
+A single or isolated incident of harassment may create (and may support a finding of) a hostile environment if the incident is sufficiently severe.  The more severe the conduct, the less need there is to show a repetitive series of incidents in finding a hostile environment, particularly if the harassment is physical in nature.
+
+The foregoing also must be interpreted in light of one of the fundamental purposes of a Canisius College education which is to teach students to think, write, and express themselves critically.  This is a demanding skill and students must confront in stark and sometimes painful ways the comfortable assumptions that they bring to the college experience.  Instruction in critical thinking very well may involve saying or presenting materials that are felt by individuals to be offensive or embarrassing.  In such cases, students should communicate directly with the faculty member involved, the department chair or the associate dean of the applicable school.  (See Section IV below regarding Academic Freedom.)  Nor is this policy intended to address normal differences of opinion that arise but are not based on a person’s protected status.  
+
+In the case of students, those matters can be addressed through the procedures set forth in the Community Standards.  
+
+In the case of employees, those matters can be addressed through procedures set forth in the Faculty Handbook or Volume III of Canisius College Policy Manual as applicable.
+
+C.   Sexual Harassment and Sexual Violence  
+
+For the same reasons listed above, it is the policy of Canisius College that all faculty, staff, students, and visitors work, learn, and participate in an environment free from sexual harassment and/or sexual violence, which are prohibited and may also violate federal, state and local law.  
+
+Claims of sexual or gender-based harassment and/or violence are governed by the college’s separate  Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy and/or the college’s separate  Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy. 
+
+C..    Retaliation 
+
+Retaliation means any action taken against a person who has filed a complaint under this policy, or who has participated in or cooperated with an investigation or a process under this policy, in reprisal for having done so, that might dissuade a reasonable person from making or supporting a complaint or participating in a process under this policy.
+
+III. Reporting Procedures
+
+A.    Reporting to the College
+
+Complaints of violations of this policy, including complaints of retaliation, should be made to the college’s Associate Vice President for Human Resources and Compliance (“AVP HR”).  The AVP for HR is:
+
+Linda M. Walleshauser
+
+Associate Vice President for Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Old Main 100
+
+walleshl@canisius.edu
+716 888-2244
+
+
+
+In the event that the AVP for HR is the subject of a complaint under this policy, the Vice President for Business & Finance will assume the AVP HR role.  If the president is the subject of a complaint, the chair of the board of trustees will assume the president’s role in the process.
+
+Students who perceive themselves to be the victim of discrimination, harassment, or retaliation by another student may also report the incident via the reporting procedures outlined in the Community Standards.
+
+B.    External Complaints
+
+The availability and use of this policy does not prevent a member of the college community from filing an inquiry with external agencies such as the Office for Civil Rights or the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
+
+Students: Students and student applicants may file formal complaints with the following agency:
+
+Office for Civil Rights (OCR), Headquarters
+
+400 Maryland Avenue, SW
+
+Washington, DC 20202-1100
+
+Customer Service Hotline: (800) 421-3481
+
+TDD: (877) 521-2172
+
+Facsimile: (202) 453-6012
+
+Email: OCR@ed.gov
+
+Web: http://www.ed.gov/ocr
+
+Employees, Employment Applicants, Volunteers and other 3rd Parties: Employees, applicants for employment and other 3rd Parties may file formal complaints with the following agencies:
+
+U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
+
+Two Gateway Center
+
+Suite 1703
+
+283-299 Market Street
+
+Newark, NJ 07102
+
+Phone: 1-800-669-4000
+
+Fax: 973-645-4524
+
+TDD: 1-800-669-6820
+
+The New York State Division of Human Rights
+
+One Fordham Plaza 4th Floor
+
+Bronx, New York 10458
+
+Phone: (718) 741-8400
+
+TDD: 1-718-741-8300
+Website: https://dhr.ny.gov/ 
+
+
+
+The City of Buffalo Commission on Citizens’ Rights and Community Relations
+
+City Hall
+
+Room 1316-C
+
+Buffalo, NY, 14202
+716-851-8000
+
+
+
+IV. Investigation and Resolution
+
+
+
+No more than five (5) business days after a report is received, the appropriate administrator (or designee) as applicable will meet separately with the parties to discuss the complaint.  If the parties choose not to participate, such non-participation will not prevent the matter from proceeding.
+
+After meeting with the parties, the appropriate administrator (or designee) as applicable will make a determination as to whether:
+
+							The matter can possibly be resolved through Informal Resolution; 
+
+							A formal investigation is warranted to resolve the case; or 
+
+							There are no reasonable grounds for believing that the alleged incident(s) constitutes discrimination, harassment and/or retaliation in violation of this policy.
+
+In the event that the appropriate administrator (or designee) as applicable determines there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the conduct at issue constitutes discrimination, harassment and/or retaliation as defined by this policy, the matter will be closed and the parties will be promptly notified of such resolution in writing. 
+
+A.	Informal Resolution
+
+At any time prior to the review of an investigative report, a party may request an informal resolution of the complaint.  All parties and the appropriate administrator (or designee) as applicable must agree to informal resolution for this option to be used.  The administrator (or designee) will assess the request for an informal resolution against the severity of the alleged violation and the potential risks to college community members.  If the administrator (or designee) determines that an informal resolution is appropriate, the parties will be notified. 
+
+The administrator (or designee) will facilitate a dialogue with the parties in an attempt to reach an amicable resolution.  The matter will be deemed resolved when the parties expressly agree to an outcome that is acceptable to them, which is approved by administrator (or designee).  A party may withdraw from the informal resolution process at any time.  The administrator (or designee) may also reinitiate an investigation at any time deemed appropriate.  If these efforts are unsuccessful, the Formal Resolution process will commence.
+
+B.	Formal Resolution
+
+A.	Investigation Phase
+
+Notice of an Investigation
+
+If it is determined that formal resolution is required, the following offices will be responsible for overseeing a formal investigation of a complaint against alleging discrimination, harassment or retaliation in violation of this policy:
+
+The Associate Dean of Students (or designee) will be responsible for conducting a formal investigation of a complaint against a student alleging discrimination, harassment, or retaliation in violation of this policy;
+
+The Office of Human Resources will be responsible for conducting a formal investigation of a complaint against faculty, staff or other third-parties alleging discrimination, harassment, or retaliation in violation of this policy; and
+
+In the event that a respondent is a student and an employee, Human Resources, in consultation with the Associate Dean of Students (or designee), will make a determination whether the alleged discriminatory act(s) relates to the respondent’s employment.  Human Resources will only initiate an investigation and/or informal resolution if it determines that the alleged discriminatory act(s) relates to the respondent’s employment.  
+
+If a complaint is directed against an individual who would otherwise play a role in investigating and attempting to resolve the complaint, the function assigned to that person by these procedures will be delegated to another person by the appropriate vice president.
+
+Advisers
+
+During the resolution and grievance process, the parties may designate and thereafter be accompanied by an advisor at meetings and interviews at which they are present; however, no advisor may examine witnesses or otherwise actively participate in a meeting or interview pursuant to this Policy.  
+
+An adviser is subject to the same confidentiality expectations applicable to others in attendance. 
+
+Accommodations, including scheduling of interviews or reviews, generally will not be made for any advisers if they unduly delay the process.  
+
+Without prior approval of the area vice president or dean (as applicable), the adviser is not permitted to attend a meeting or proceeding without the complainant or respondent.  
+
+The college reserves the right to take appropriate action regarding any adviser who disrupts the process, or who does not abide by the restrictions on their participation. 
+
+Investigative Process 
+
+The above referenced office (see paragraph 1 above) will appoint an investigator or an investigative team (“investigator”) either internal or external to the college who has specific training and experience investigating allegations of discrimination, harassment, or retaliation.  The appropriate office will notify both the complainant and the respondent in writing of the formal investigation and the name of the investigator(s).  
+
+The respondent and the complainant may protest the appointment of the investigator(s) by identifying a possible conflict of interest in writing to the appropriate office within twenty-four (24) hours after the appointment of the Investigator(s).  The appropriate vice president or dean with oversight of the office will carefully consider such statements and will assign a different investigator(s) if it is determined that a material conflict of interest exists.
+
+The assigned investigator(s) will interview both parties and persons who are considered to have pertinent factual information related to the complaint. The investigator(s) will also gather and examine documents relevant to the complaint.  Facts will be considered on the basis of what is reasonable to persons of ordinary sensitivity and not on the particular sensitivity or reaction of an individual.  Findings will be based on the totality of circumstances surrounding the conduct complained of, including but not limited to the context of that conduct, its severity, frequency, and whether it was physically threatening, humiliating, or was simply offensive in nature.
+
+Submission of Evidence
+
+During the complaint investigation process, the parties should provide the appropriate office with all documents and the identity of witnesses with a summary of the information the witness can provide regarding the issues raised in the complaint.
+
+B.	Report of Findings 
+
+							The investigator will provide a proposed statement of findings, copies of relevant documents and any physical evidence considered to the Associate Dean of Students or AVP for HR (or designees) within twenty business days of being assigned to conduct the investigation, unless unusual circumstances require more time.
+
+							The Associate Dean of Students or AVP for HR (or designees) and the investigator will meet within fifteen (15) working days to discuss the findings and review the record.  
+
+							If a faculty member is a respondent, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will also participate in the meeting.
+
+							Within fifteen (15) working days from that meeting, the Associate Dean of Students or AVP for HR (or designees) as applicable will take one of the following actions: 
+
+							Request further investigation into the complaint; 
+
+							Dismiss the complaint if the results of the completed investigation are inconclusive or there is insufficient reasonable, credible evidence to support the allegation(s); or 
+
+							Refer the matter as applicable to either the Community Standards (student respondents), the Committee on Faculty Status (faculty respondents) or Human Resources (staff) for final resolution if the results of the completed investigation establish sufficient reasonable, credible evidence to support the allegation(s).
+
+
+
+V.	Miscellaneous
+
+A.	Confidentiality
+
+All actions taken to investigate and resolve complaints through this procedure will be conducted with as much privacy and discretion as possible without compromising the thoroughness and fairness of the investigation.  All persons involved are to treat the situation with respect.  To conduct a thorough investigation, the investigators may discuss the complaint with witnesses and those persons involved in or affected by the complaint, and those persons necessary to assist in the investigation or to implement appropriate disciplinary actions.
+
+Any person who knowingly and intentionally makes an unauthorized disclosure of confidential information contained in a complaint or otherwise relating to the investigation of a complaint under this policy is subject to disciplinary action.
+
+B.	Standard of Proof
+
+All findings and determinations of responsibility under this policy will be made using a preponderance of the evidence standard. This standard requires the determination of whether it is more likely than not (>50%) that a fact exists or that a violation of this policy occurred.
+
+C.	Time Frames
+
+Time frames mentioned in these procedures may be extended for good cause, such as holidays or when classes are not in session, or when it is necessary to complete an investigation due to difficulties reaching witnesses or parties to the complaint.
+
+D.	Duty of Truthfulness
+
+All parties and witnesses are obligated to be completely truthful during the course of the entire process set forth in this policy. Any person who knowingly makes a false statement, either explicitly or by omission, in connection with any part of the process, may be subject to separate disciplinary action. A report made in good faith, however, is not considered false merely because the evidence does not ultimately support or refute the allegation of violation of the policy. 
+
+E.	Duty of Cooperation
+
+All parties and witnesses are obligated to cooperate with any persons charged with implementing this policy and these procedures. Any person who knowingly interferes with the actions taken to implement the reporting, investigation, or resolution of matters under this policy may be subject to separate and/or additional disciplinary action. 
+
+F.	Participation in Proceedings 
+
+To enable the most accurate and fair review of the facts, the parties are expected to attend and participate in meetings during the course of an investigation under this policy. If an individual chooses not to attend one or more meetings, the allegations will be reviewed on the basis of the information and evidence available, and a decision will be made. Although no inference may be drawn against an individual failing to attend a meeting or remaining silent, the process will proceed and the conclusion will be based on the evidence presented. No decision shall be based solely on the failure of the respondent to attend one or more meetings, to participate in such meeting(s) or to answer the allegations. 
+
+G.	Recording Proceedings
+
+The parties are not permitted to make video, audio, or other electronic, photographic, or digital recordings of any meetings or proceedings held under this policy or these procedures, including the Investigative Report.  The area vice president or dean as applicable may make exceptions to this prohibition in limited circumstances upon written request of the party seeking the recording. 
+
+H.	Accommodations for Individuals with Disabilities
+
+Reasonable accommodations will be provided to an individual with disabilities in accordance with applicable law. An individual with a disability who requires an accommodation for any meeting or process this policy must request an accommodation through the area vice president or dean, who in consultation with the appropriate office will make a determination regarding the request and notify the appropriate parities 
+
+I.	Record Retention
+
+Generally, records will be retained for seven (7) years after the date of an incident unless:
+
+							The college is mandated to maintain the record in compliance with federal, state, or local law or other college policy; and/or 
+
+							The case resulted in an expulsion, termination or rescission of acceptance, in which case the individuals entire file will be retained indefinitely.
+
+J.	Effect on Pending Actions
+
+The filing of a discrimination, harassment or retaliation complaint will not stop or delay any evaluation or disciplinary action related to the complainant or who has violated other college policies.
+
+K.	Relationship of Complaint Process to Outside Agency Time Limits
+
+The filing of a discrimination, harassment or retaliation complaint under this policy does not excuse the complainant from meeting the time limits of outside agencies.
+
+L.	Special Situations
+
+The college retains the right to determine, in its sole discretion, if it will address a report of conduct under this policy administratively and outside of the process described herein when the safety of the college community is at risk, if the material facts are undisputed, if there are extenuating circumstances involving either of the parties, or if the applicable vice president or associate dean, in consultation with appropriate administrators, determines it is in the best interest of the college and/or the community to do so.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Revised Campus Citizenship & New Models.txt [/INST] Campus Citizenship – Edited Version of Original Clause
+
+Citizenship is not a distinct capacity to be assessed independently, but rather it should be understood as a part of the established evaluation areas of teaching, scholarly/creative productivity, and service.  Responsible citizenship relates to collaboration and constructive cooperation and consists of attitudes and actions which show respect for the campus as a whole, including faculty, staff, administrators, and students.   While not a separate category of evaluation, campus citizenship is a consideration in tenure and/or promotion, woven into the three evaluation areas of teaching effectiveness, scholarly or creative productivity, and effective service.  The American Association of University Professors’ “Statement on Professional Ethics” (endorsed and quoted in its entirety in the Code of Professional Ethics Policy above [LINK TO POLICY]) is a guideline to the general meaning of campus citizenship, which includes taking on one’s fair and collaborative role in the work of the University, taking part in shared governance, supporting the academic freedom of one’s peers, and showing due respect for the opinion of others and students as individuals.  
+
+For purposes of consideration in the tenure and promotion process, campus citizenship is defined as a sense of responsibility to the University and the academic unit, and an ability to contribute constructively with fellow faculty members, staff, administrators, and students.  A deficiency in or complete lack of citizenship may directly and negatively impact a faculty member’s professional performance.  For example, a candidate’s lack of campus citizenship may be addressed in the teaching effectiveness category when it impinges on the faculty member’s ability to work with colleagues in mentoring students or in preparing them for prerequisites for more advanced courses, or in preparing them for group activities required of the academic discipline; or in scholarly or creative productivity when it impinges on the candidate’s ability to work collaboratively or respectively with colleagues in developing research grant proposals or organizing conferences; or in service when it prevents academic unit, or university-wide committees or programs from functioning as they should.
+
+In all instances, the evaluator’s focus with respect to campus citizenship solely relates to respectful collaboration and constructive cooperation associated with a faculty member’s overall performance in one of the three evaluation categories.  Campus citizenship is a professional, not a personal, consideration relating to performance in the areas of teaching, scholarly/creative productivity, and service duties.  Considerations of campus citizenship must not be confused with conformity, sociability, or likability and may not be interpreted in a way that violates the principles of academic freedom.  Moreover, such considerations may not be used to promote orthodoxy of opinion on academic matters.  Professional disagreements among colleagues are entirely consistent with demonstrating campus citizenship.  However, all faculty members are expected to express those disagreements in a professional, constructive, and respectful manner. The University affirms that campus citizenship does not preclude vigorous debate, dissent, or protest in academic and/or intellectual matters and in issues concerning the governance of the institution—these are all vital components of a healthy intellectual environment.  An absence of campus citizenship, by itself, will not constitute a basis for denial of tenure or dismissal.  No parties to the tenure and promotion process (colleagues, immediate administrative supervisors, the ART Committee, the Provost, President, or the Board of Trustees) shall appeal to campus citizenship as a reason not to support a candidate because the candidate has academic views or has spoken critically about instructional matters in line with their rights and responsibilities as a faculty member.
+
+
+
+New Truncated Citizenship Model
+
+While teaching, scholarship, and service constitute the only criteria for promotion and tenure, those criteria are affected by a faculty member’s interaction with colleagues, staff, administrators, and students.  Citizenship is not a distinct capacity to be assessed independently, but rather it should be understood as a part of the established evaluation areas of teaching, scholarly/creative productivity, and service. As a hallmark of professional ethics (see Code of Professional Ethics Policy above [LINK TO POLICY), faculty members are expected to work cooperatively and constructively with their colleagues and to treat staff members, administrators, and students with respect.  Tolerance for differing points of view and the capacity to give civil expression to one′s own position are highly prized.
+
+The University affirms that campus citizenship does not preclude vigorous debate, dissent, or protest in academic and/or intellectual matters and in issues concerning the governance of the institution—these are all vital components of a healthy intellectual environment.  No parties to the tenure and promotion process (colleagues, immediate administrative supervisors, the ART Committee, the Provost, President, or the Board of Trustees) shall appeal to campus citizenship as a reason not to support a candidate because the candidate has academic views or has spoken critically about instructional matters in line with their rights and responsibilities as a faculty member.
+
+New Model Example– Arkansas Tech University
+
+Faculty members are expected to be effective teachers, engage in scholarly or creative productivity activities, and provide meaningful service to the university, profession, and community. Overarching expectations of all faculty include professionalism and collegiality in these three areas. Collegiality is not a separate criterion upon which any faculty member is assessed, but is assumed to be an integral aspect of the faculty member’s professional life. The absence of collegiality in all aspects of a faculty member’s professional life is considered to be a deficiency. Collegiality among peers involves appreciation of and respect for differences in expertise, ideas, and background, as well as cooperation and collaboration in achieving academic unit and university goals. The concept of collegiality, however, should be distinguished from congeniality; to be congenial is parallel with sociability and agreeableness, while collegiality is a positive and productive association with colleagues. A faculty member need not be congenial to be collegial. 
+
+
+
+
+
+New Model Example– Virginia State University
+
+While demonstrating quality in the areas of 1) teaching, 2) scholarly research/creative activity, and 3) service, the candidate for tenure must demonstrate professional collegiality.  Concerning collegiality, the University concurs with the following statement from the AAUP Statement on Collegiality as a Criterion for Faculty Evaluation, (1999): 
+
+“Collegiality, in the sense of collaboration and constructive cooperation, identifies important aspects of a faculty member’s overall performance. A faculty member may legitimately be called upon to participate in the development of curricula and standards for the evaluation of teaching, as well as in peer review of the teaching of colleagues. Much research, depending on the nature of the particular discipline, is by its nature collaborative and requires teamwork as well as the ability to engage in independent investigation. And committee service of a more general description, relating to the life of the institution as a whole, is a logical outgrowth of the Association’s view that a faculty member is an “officer” of the college or University in which he or she fulfills professional duties. . . . Understood in this way, collegiality is not a distinct capacity to be assessed independently of the traditional triumvirate of scholarship, teaching, and service. It is rather a quality whose value is expressed in the successful execution of these three functions. Evaluation in these three areas will encompass the contributions that the virtue of collegiality may pertinently add to a faculty member’s career. . . . Certainly an absence of collegiality ought never, by itself, to constitute a basis for non-reappointment, denial of tenure, or dismissal for cause.”
+
+Collegiality should not be confused with sociability or popularity. Collegiality should be understood in professional, not personal, terms, and relates to the performance of a faculty member’s duties. The requirement that a candidate demonstrate collegiality does not mean faculty should expect conformity to their views. The “elementary principles of academic freedom . . . protect a faculty member’s right to dissent from the judgments of colleagues and administrators. . . . Criticism and opposition do not necessarily conflict with collegiality. Gadflies, critics of institutional practices or collegial norms, even the occasional malcontent, have all been known to play an invaluable and constructive role in the life of academic departments and institutions. They have sometimes proved collegial in the deepest and truest sense” (AAUP, Collegiality 1999). 
+
+Matters relevant to collegiality include the following: Are the candidate’s professional abilities and relationships with colleagues compatible with the University and academic unit’s mission and with its long- term goals? Has the candidate exhibited an ability and willingness to engage in shared academic and administrative tasks that must often be performed and to participate with some measure of reason and knowledge in discussions germane to university and academic unit policies and programs? Does the candidate maintain high standards of professional integrity in accordance with the Code of Professional Ethics? 
+
+The Department of History affirms the Faculty Handbook statement on collegiality, acknowledging that while teaching, scholarship, and service constitute the only criteria for promotion and tenure, those criteria are affected by a faculty member’s interaction with colleagues and others.  The department also affirms that collegiality does not preclude vigorous debate, dissent, and protest in academic and/or intellectual matters and in issues concerning the governance of the institution—these are all vital components of a healthy intellectual environment.  We affirm that collegiality does not require conformity to any unspecified personality profile.  Collegiality standards should not be used to enforce conformity and to either marginalize or punish faculty members who might hold dissenting opinions or who have simply crossed a senior colleague or a person in position of authority.  Thus, it is necessary to exercise extreme caution when using collegiality as a criteria for evaluating faculty performance.  It is, therefore, incumbent on the chair and the personnel committee to investigate and address alleged breakdowns in collegiality in a manner that is fair, open, and transparent, and that allows for amendment of behavior.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Revised Campus Citizenship & New Models_MGEdits.txt [/INST] Campus Citizenship – Edited Version of Original Clause
+
+Citizenship is not a distinct capacity to be assessed independently, but rather it should be understood as a part of the established evaluation areas of teaching, scholarly/creative productivity, and service.  Responsible citizenship relates to collaboration and constructive cooperation and consists of attitudes and actions which show respect for the campus as a whole, including faculty, staff, administrators, and students.   Campus citizenship is not a distinct capacity to be assessed independently of the three evaluation areas, but instead is woven into the teaching effectiveness, scholarly or creative productivity, and service categories. The American Association of University Professors’ “Statement on Professional Ethics” (endorsed and quoted in its entirety in the Code of Professional Ethics Policy above [LINK TO POLICY]) is a guideline to the general meaning of campus citizenship, which includes taking on one’s fair and collaborative role in the work of the University, taking part in shared governance, supporting the academic freedom of one’s peers, and showing due respect for the opinion of others and students as individuals.  
+
+For purposes of consideration in the tenure and promotion process, campus citizenship is defined as a sense of responsibility to the University and the academic unit, and an ability to contribute constructively with fellow faculty members, staff, administrators, and students.  A deficiency in or complete lack of citizenship may directly and negatively impact a faculty member’s professional performance.  For example, a candidate’s lack of campus citizenship may be addressed in the teaching effectiveness category when it impinges on the faculty member’s ability to work with colleagues in mentoring students or in preparing them for prerequisites for more advanced courses, or in preparing them for group activities required of the academic discipline; or in scholarly or creative productivity when it impinges on the candidate’s ability to work collaboratively or respectively with colleagues in developing research grant proposals or organizing conferences; or in service when it prevents academic unit, or university-wide committees or programs from functioning as they should.
+
+In all instances, the evaluator’s focus with respect to campus citizenship solely relates to respectful collaboration and constructive cooperation associated with a faculty member’s overall performance in one of the three evaluation categories.  Campus citizenship is a professional, not a personal, consideration relating to performance in the areas of teaching, scholarly/creative productivity, and service duties.  Considerations of campus citizenship must not be confused with conformity, sociability, or likability and may not be interpreted in a way that violates the principles of academic freedom.  Moreover, such considerations may not be used to promote orthodoxy of opinion on academic matters.  Professional disagreements among colleagues are entirely consistent with demonstrating campus citizenship.  However, all faculty members are expected to express those disagreements in a professional, constructive, and respectful manner. The University affirms that campus citizenship does not preclude vigorous debate, dissent, or protest in academic and/or intellectual matters and in issues concerning the governance of the institution—these are all vital components of a healthy intellectual environment.  An absence of campus citizenship, by itself, will not constitute a basis for denial of tenure or dismissal.  No parties to the tenure and promotion process (colleagues, immediate administrative supervisors, the ART Committee, the Provost, President, or the Board of Trustees) shall appeal to campus citizenship as a reason not to support a candidate because the candidate has academic views or has spoken critically about instructional matters in line with their rights and responsibilities as a faculty member.
+
+
+
+New Truncated Citizenship Model
+
+T
+
+eaching, scholarship, and service constitute the three major criteria for promotion and tenure, but those categories are affected by a faculty member’s interaction with colleagues, staff, administrators, and students.  Campus citizenship is not a distinct capacity to be assessed independently, but rather it should be understood as a part of the established evaluation areas of teaching, scholarly/creative productivity, and service. As a hallmark of professional ethics (see Code of Professional Ethics Policy above [LINK TO POLICY), faculty members are expected to work cooperatively and constructively with their colleagues and to treat staff members, administrators, and students with respect.  Tolerance for differing points of view and the capacity to give civil expression to one′s own position are highly prized.
+
+The University affirms that campus citizenship does not preclude vigorous debate, dissent, or protest in academic and/or intellectual matters and in issues concerning the governance of the institution—these are all vital components of a healthy intellectual environment.  No parties to the tenure and promotion process (colleagues, immediate administrative supervisors, the ART Committee, the Provost, President, or the Board of Trustees) shall appeal to campus citizenship as a reason not to support a candidate because the candidate has academic views or has spoken critically about instructional matters in line with their rights and responsibilities as a faculty member.
+
+New Model Example– Arkansas Tech University
+
+Faculty members are expected to be effective teachers, engage in scholarly or creative productivity activities, and provide meaningful service to the university, profession, and community. Overarching expectations of all faculty include professionalism and collegiality in these three areas. Collegiality is not a separate criterion upon which any faculty member is assessed, but is assumed to be an integral aspect of the faculty member’s professional life. The absence of collegiality in all aspects of a faculty member’s professional life is considered to be a deficiency. Collegiality among peers involves appreciation of and respect for differences in expertise, ideas, and background, as well as cooperation and collaboration in achieving academic unit and university goals. The concept of collegiality, however, should be distinguished from congeniality; to be congenial is parallel with sociability and agreeableness, while collegiality is a positive and productive association with colleagues. A faculty member need not be congenial to be collegial. 
+
+
+
+
+
+New Model Example– Virginia State University
+
+While demonstrating quality in the areas of 1) teaching, 2) scholarly research/creative activity, and 3) service, the candidate for tenure must demonstrate professional collegiality.  Concerning collegiality, the University concurs with the following statement from the AAUP Statement on Collegiality as a Criterion for Faculty Evaluation, (1999): 
+
+“Collegiality, in the sense of collaboration and constructive cooperation, identifies important aspects of a faculty member’s overall performance. A faculty member may legitimately be called upon to participate in the development of curricula and standards for the evaluation of teaching, as well as in peer review of the teaching of colleagues. Much research, depending on the nature of the particular discipline, is by its nature collaborative and requires teamwork as well as the ability to engage in independent investigation. And committee service of a more general description, relating to the life of the institution as a whole, is a logical outgrowth of the Association’s view that a faculty member is an “officer” of the college or University in which he or she fulfills professional duties. . . . Understood in this way, collegiality is not a distinct capacity to be assessed independently of the traditional triumvirate of scholarship, teaching, and service. It is rather a quality whose value is expressed in the successful execution of these three functions. Evaluation in these three areas will encompass the contributions that the virtue of collegiality may pertinently add to a faculty member’s career. . . . Certainly an absence of collegiality ought never, by itself, to constitute a basis for non-reappointment, denial of tenure, or dismissal for cause.”
+
+Collegiality should not be confused with sociability or popularity. Collegiality should be understood in professional, not personal, terms, and relates to the performance of a faculty member’s duties. The requirement that a candidate demonstrate collegiality does not mean faculty should expect conformity to their views. The “elementary principles of academic freedom . . . protect a faculty member’s right to dissent from the judgments of colleagues and administrators. . . . Criticism and opposition do not necessarily conflict with collegiality. Gadflies, critics of institutional practices or collegial norms, even the occasional malcontent, have all been known to play an invaluable and constructive role in the life of academic departments and institutions. They have sometimes proved collegial in the deepest and truest sense” (AAUP, Collegiality 1999). 
+
+Matters relevant to collegiality include the following: Are the candidate’s professional abilities and relationships with colleagues compatible with the University and academic unit’s mission and with its long- term goals? Has the candidate exhibited an ability and willingness to engage in shared academic and administrative tasks that must often be performed and to participate with some measure of reason and knowledge in discussions germane to university and academic unit policies and programs? Does the candidate maintain high standards of professional integrity in accordance with the Code of Professional Ethics?</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Revised Classrom Evaluation From.txt [/INST] FACULTY MEMBER NAME:
+
+       
+
+DATE:
+
+     
+
+DEPARTMENT:
+
+     
+
+CURRENT RANK:
+
+     
+
+EVALUATION PERIOD:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+												CLASSROOM/LABORATORY EVALUATION FORM
+
+
+
+												I.	PERSONAL QUALITIES:
+
+a.	Personal Appearance:
+
+			3 – Exceeds Standards
+
+			2 – Acceptable
+
+			1 – Needs Improvement
+
+
+
+Comment:
+
+	
+
+
+
+
+
+b.	Attitude Towards Class:
+
+			3 – Exceeds Standards
+
+			2 – Acceptable
+
+			1 – Needs Improvement
+
+
+
+Comment:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+c.	Voice Expression:
+
+			3 – Exceeds Standards
+
+			2 – Acceptable
+
+			1 – Needs Improvement
+
+
+
+Comment:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+d.	Professional Poise:
+
+			3 – Exceeds Standards
+
+			2 – Acceptable
+
+			1 – Needs Improvement
+
+
+
+Comment:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+e.	Clarity of Session’s Objectives:
+
+			3 – Exceeds Standards
+
+			2 – Acceptable
+
+			1 – Needs Improvement
+
+
+
+Comment:
+
+
+
+
+
+f.	Knowledge of Subject Demonstrated:
+
+			3 – Exceeds Standards
+
+			2 – Acceptable
+
+			1 – Needs Improvement
+
+
+
+Comment:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+g.	Organization of Class Presentation:
+
+			3 – Exceeds Standards
+
+			2 – Acceptable
+
+			1 – Needs Improvement
+
+
+
+Comment:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+h.	Relevance of Material to Lesson Objectives:
+
+			3 – Exceeds Standards
+
+			2 – Acceptable
+
+			1 – Needs Improvement
+
+
+
+Comment:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+i.	Use of Audio Visual/Illustrative Materials:
+
+			3 – Exceeds Standards
+
+			2 – Acceptable
+
+			1 – Needs Improvement
+
+
+
+Comment:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+												II.	INSTRUCTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS:
+
+a.	Student Interest:
+
+			3 – Exceeds Standards
+
+			2 – Acceptable
+
+			1 – Needs Improvement
+
+
+
+Comment:
+
+	
+
+
+
+
+
+b.	Ability to Question Students:
+
+			3 – Exceeds Standards
+
+			2 – Acceptable
+
+			1 – Needs Improvement
+
+
+
+Comment:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+c.	Ability to Answer Questions:
+
+			3 – Exceeds Standards
+
+			2 – Acceptable
+
+			1 – Needs Improvement
+
+
+
+Comment:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+d.	Variety of Instructional Techniques:
+
+			3 – Exceeds Standards
+
+			2 – Acceptable
+
+			1 – Needs Improvement
+
+
+
+Comment:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+e.	Sensitivity to Physical Classroom Environment Student Interest:
+
+			3 – Exceeds Standards
+
+			2 – Acceptable
+
+			1 – Needs Improvement
+
+
+
+Comment:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+f.	Achievement of Session’s Objectives:
+
+			3 – Exceeds Standards
+
+			2 – Acceptable
+
+			1 – Needs Improvement
+
+
+
+Comment:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+												III.	STUDENT-TEACHER RAPPORT:
+
+a.	Achievement of Sessions Objectives:
+
+			3 – Exceeds Standards
+
+			2 – Acceptable
+
+			1 – Needs Improvement
+
+
+
+Comment:
+
+	
+
+
+
+
+
+b.	Class Control:
+
+			3 – Exceeds Standards
+
+			2 – Acceptable
+
+			1 – Needs Improvement
+
+
+
+Comment:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+c.	Awareness of Individual Student Needs:
+
+			3 – Exceeds Standards
+
+			2 – Acceptable
+
+			1 – Needs Improvement
+
+
+
+Comment:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+IV.	EVALUATOR’S RECOMMENDATIONS/COMMENTS:
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+
+
+V.	FACULTY MEMBER’S COMMENTS (IF ANY):
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+
+
+
+
+Faculty Member’s Signature 							Date	
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Evaluator’s Signature								Date
+
+
+
+
+
+	One copy of this form will remain with the faculty member and one is filed in the Vice President for Academic Affairs Office.</s>"
+<s>[INST] Revised Faculty Evaluation Process and Standards (1st Draft).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Revised Faculty Evaluation Process and Standards (FACULTY FORUM DRAFT).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Revised Faculty Evaluation Process and Standards (Revised FACULTY FORUM DRAFT).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Revised Program Discontinuation Policy (3.27).txt [/INST] 2.	Program or Department Discontinuance Due to Educational Decisions
+
+Termination of an appointment with tenure, or of a tenure track faculty member before the end of the specified term, may occur as a result of a bona fide formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction due to educational considerations not related to a financially contingent situation.  
+
+	Criteria
+
+The decision to discontinue an academic program or department of instruction will be based on long-range, strategic judgements that the educational mission of the University as whole will be enhanced strengthened by the discontinuance of an academic program or department.  Program or department discontinuance does not preclude the reallocation of resources to other academic programs or departments determined to have higher priority based on long-term academic and educational reasons.  In making such judgements, the following criteria shall be utilized: Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality. See the Termination Due to Financially Contingent Situations and Resource Allocation Policy above for formal definitions of each category. A decision to discontinue an academic program or department of instruction shall not be based upon cyclical or temporary variations in enrollment or undue influence from external parties to the University.  
+
+For purposes of this policy, academic programs and departments are defined as an academic department or program offering majors and minors that existed prior to the decision to discontinue them. The term program means a group of courses leading to a major or minor, a sequence of courses with a common prefix, a service, or support area, or any curriculum area identified as such.
+
+	Making Academic Program or Department Discontinuation Decisions
+
+A proposal to discontinue formally a program or department of instruction may be initiated by the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee, the Committee on Academic Programs, the Provost, or the President.
+
+Academic Program Review Process
+
+Step 1: The initial step in the Academic Program Review process will be the development by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness of a set of common quantitative data for the academic department(s) and/or interdisciplinary program(s) showing long-term trends in course enrollments, student credits delivered, graduated majors, declared majors, direct instructional expense, and other performance metrics agreed upon by Academic Affairs, Academic Planning and Allocation Committee (APAC), and UGC. The data will be made available transparently to all faculty through appropriate means such as live data dashboards. 
+
+Step 2. Following the publication of the data, the applicable academic department(s) and/or interdisciplinary program(s) will be charged by Academic Affairs to complete a self-study, following criteria set by APAC. 
+
+Step 3. Following receipt of the self-studies, APAC will evaluate the academic department(s) and interdisciplinary program(s) in relation to Mission, Cost-Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality (see above) and issue a report to the President.
+
+Step 4. The President shall convene a Joint Committee comprised of eight faculty members, six of which are elected by the faculty (or appointed by the Executive Committee if an election is unsuccessful) from individuals serving on each of the following faculty committees: UGC, Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC), Committee on Academic Programs (CAP), and APAC; and two of which are appointed by the President from the tenure-line faculty.  In addition, the Joint Committee shall include the Provost and appropriate academic administrators responsible for data and curriculum as designated by the Provost.  From the faculty membership, the President shall appoint the convener of the Joint Committee.
+
+After considering the self-studies and APAC report, the Joint Committee shall develop recommendations to the President regarding the initial proposal to discontinue the department(s) or interdisciplinary program(s).  At the committee’s discretion, the report may include recommendations about (a) reconfiguring departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors by reassigning positions; (b) the enhancement of programs; and (c) changes in policies and procedures that would improve the functioning or efficiency of the academic program. 
+
+The President, following consultation with the Executive Committee of the Faculty, will determine the date by which the Joint Committee’s recommendations to the President must be provided.  Following its deliberations, the Joint Committee shall issue its formal recommendations in writing to the President.  
+
+Step 5. The President will review the Joint Committee report and issue a written proposal to the members of the faculty addressing whether a program or department of instruction should be discontinued.  The President’s written proposal will also be referred to CAP as to curricular impact, to APAC as to the implications for the academic plan, to the FPC as to personnel implications, and to the affected department(s) and interdisciplinary program(s) identified in the proposal.  
+
+Each committee and affected department(s) and interdisciplinary program(s) will have a 30-day period to develop their recommendations to the President.  The manner in which the committees and affected department(s) and interdisciplinary program(s) arrive at their recommendations is at their respective discretion.
+
+Step 6. The respective committees and affected department(s) and interdisciplinary program(s) may submit to the President written recommendations for changes to the proposal.  The President will consider the recommendations. If the President adopts the recommendations, the President will incorporate them into the final plan submitted to the Board of Trustees. If the President does not adopt the recommendations, the President will transmit to the Board of Trustees both the President’s final proposal and the alternative proposal(s) prepared by the faculty committees and affected department(s) and interdisciplinary program(s).  The Board of Trustees retains ultimate authority for approving any plan to discontinue an academic department or interdisciplinary program due to educational considerations and any corresponding position terminations.
+
+Step 7. The President shall render the final decision on any terminations due to the discontinuation of an academic department(s) or interdisciplinary program(s) due to educational considerations and shall notify the faculty member(s) involved in accordance with the Notification provisions below. 
+
+Step 8. After the completion and implementation of decisions for a discontinuation of an academic department(s) or interdisciplinary program(s) due to educational considerations, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.
+
+Reassignment and Retraining
+
+															Subject to a review of qualifications and retraining possibilities (see Section 3.10.3 – Retraining Leave), tenure-line faculty members in positions to be eliminated as a result of the discontinuation of an academic department(s) or interdisciplinary program(s) due to educational considerations will be considered for suitable vacancies at the University in administrative or teaching positions before the President issues notice of the intention to terminate an appointment. Tenured faculty, who will receive preference in such consideration over non-tenured faculty, may explore such possibilities as an alternative to receiving termination payments pursuant to Section 3.13.6.1.  
+
+															If the faculty member indicates a desire to explore an alternative assignment and retraining possibilities, the Provost will coordinate the review of the faculty member’s qualifications by the FPC, in consultation with APAC, in accordance with the procedures outlined in Section 3.13.6.1.  If the FPC recommends that a limited period of retraining is necessary for an alternative assignment and the faculty member indicates a desire to explore such a leave, the faculty member may request a retraining leave pursuant to Section 3.10.3 – Retraining Leave.
+
+When a position is not available within the University, with or without retraining, and the faculty member is not agreeable to any optional alternative courses of action (i.e., change in status to part-time), the faculty member’s appointment may be terminated.
+
+Notice
+
+Notification of termination will be sent from the President to the faculty member. The notice will specify the reasons for such termination, the effective date of termination, and right to an appeal.
+
+Full-time non-tenured faculty members will be given notice or severance salary in accordance with Section 3.13.3.1.  Tenured faculty will be provided with termination payments in accordance with Section 3.13.6.1.
+
+
+
+Appeal
+
+If the administration issues notice to a tenure line faculty member of an intention to terminate the appointment because of the formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction due to educational considerations, the faculty member will have the right to file a grievance in accordance with Section 3.14.3. 
+
+Termination Benefits for Tenure or Tenure-Track Faculty Whose Positions Are Eliminated 
+
+															Certain services and benefits are provided by the University to eligible persons as delineated below whose full-time tenured or tenure track employment is terminated because of the elimination of their positions as set forth in Section 3.13.6 above. In what follows, ""termination"" refers to the ending date of an appointment which ceases because the position has been eliminated.
+
+															Planning Assistance. One or more staff persons capable of providing career planning services will be available to work with terminated faculty, such services to include individual counseling, workshops, access to career literature, help with search skills, and contacts with alumni and other friends of the University.
+
+															Reassignment and Retraining. Subject to a review of qualifications and retraining possibilities (see Section 3.10.3 – Retraining Leave), faculty members in positions to be eliminated will be considered for suitable vacancies at the University in administrative or teaching positions before the University issues notice of its intention to terminate an appointment. Tenured faculty, who will receive preference in such consideration over non-tenured faculty, may explore such possibilities before electing early retirement or as an alternative to receiving termination payments (see below). The Provost will coordinate the identification of possible alternative assignments and the review of individual qualifications and any retraining possibilities, making known the applicable procedures.  
+
+															If the faculty member indicates a desire to explore an alternative assignment, the FPC, in consultation with APAC, will review the faculty member’s qualifications and offer a written recommendation to the Provost and President regarding the proposed assignment.  Following receipt and review of FPC’s recommendation, the Provost will independently examine the faculty member’s qualifications and provide a written recommendation to the President, who will make a final decision on the proposed assignment. When the Provost’s recommendation disagrees with APAC’s recommendation, the Provost’s letter to the President will include an explanation of the specific reasons for the differing recommendation.
+
+															If the FPC, after consultation with APAC, recommends that a limited period of retraining is necessary for an alternative assignment and the faculty member indicates a desire to explore such a leave, the faculty member may request a retraining leave pursuant to Section 3.10.3 – Retraining Leave. 
+
+															When a position is not available within the University, with or without retraining, and the faculty member is not agreeable to any optional alternative courses of action (i.e., change in status to part-time), the faculty member’s appointment may be terminated.  
+
+Medical Coverage. If current insurance plans permit, normal medical coverage will remain in force at University expense through December 31 of the next academic year, and can be continued at the individual's expense in accordance with the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act for the remainder of two years, after termination.
+
+															Termination Payments. The University provides tenured faculty with termination payments to help offset costs of retraining and relocation in positions outside the University as well as to recognize services rendered. Such payments are made in lieu of providing unemployment compensation payments for such faculty. The plan is based in general terms on the system of severance payments under the University's early retirement plan, but involves payment on a foreshortened schedule and includes calculations involving years of service and the salary the person would have received for full-time service in the year following termination.
+
+															The termination payments for an eligible tenured faculty member are determined as follows:
+
+															The calculation begins with the monthly rate of pay corresponding to 45% of the salary the individual would have received in the year following termination.
+
+															Because the terminated individual will not pay Social Security taxes on the faculty member’s termination benefit, the rate in 1 is reduced by the FICA (Social Security) individual tax rate at the time of termination.
+
+															The adjusted rate in 2 is hypothetically cumulated for 60 months (5 years), which total amount is then converted to an equivalent lump sum value by calculating its discounted present value (DPV) using the rate of interest on five-year government securities in effect at the time of termination.
+
+															The proportion of the lump sum value in 3 to which the individual is entitled is calculated as the proportion of 20 years the individual has served the University, this proportion not to exceed unity. This proportion is multiplied by the lump sum benefit of 3 to obtain the adjusted lump sum benefit.
+
+															The adjusted lump sum benefit in 4 will be paid to the individual at a monthly rate equal to the individual's full salary rate that would have obtained in the year following termination reduced by the current FICA individual tax rate used in 2 above.
+
+															The payments in 5 above will continue for as many months as the adjusted lump sum entitlement provides, discounted (adjusted upwards) for the lower value of future income payments using the rate in 3 above. The monthly payments will begin ordinarily with the academic year following the year of termination.
+
+															If employment is obtained outside the University, this must be immediately disclosed to the University and severance payments from the University will be reduced one dollar for each two dollars per month earned in that employment.
+
+															Tuition Benefits. The same tuition benefits (OWU tuition remission and GLCA tuition exchange) available to dependents sons and daughters of continuing faculty shall be available to those already in college or high school (grades 9 through 12) at the time the  faculty parent or legal guardian is terminated. The tuition benefit is taxable, but the terminated faculty member will not be taxed for the amount equal to any merit scholarships for which a tuition recipient receives.  For the tax year the terminated faculty member takes advantage of this benefit, they will receive a Form W-2 reporting the value of the benefit that is taxable to them.
+
+															Other Benefits. No  benefits will be paid by the University except those specifically provided for in this policy.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Revised Sabbatical Policy (11.19).txt [/INST] Sabbatical Leave
+
+Sabbatical leaves at Wheaton College are granted for the primary purpose of enhancing the value of the recipient’s further contribution to the College through scholarly, creative, or pedagogical work, solve an administrative problem(s) in consultation with and the support of the appropriate administrative office(s), or broaden the scope of knowledge in the faculty member’s discipline or field of research.
+
+Junior Sabbatical Leave
+
+Non-tenured tenure-track faculty are eligible to be considered for one-semester sabbaticals at full pay or an academic year’s leave at half salary. These sabbaticals are usually taken in their third or fourth year following a successful retention review. The pre-tenure sabbatical may not be taken by a faculty member with a terminal contract. Moreover, a non-tenured tenure-track faculty member granted three or more years credit toward the probationary period for tenure at the time of initial appointment to Wheaton is not eligible for the pre-tenure sabbatical leave as they are ineligible to apply for a pre-tenure sabbatical leave in the year they stand for tenure.
+
+The same guidelines as those for tenured faculty will apply. [May 13, 1963, p. 2715; November 18, 1963, p. 2728; December 2, 1988, p. 3762; March 5, 1999, pp. 4211-12; May 4, 2007, p. 4636]
+
+Post Tenure Sabbatical Leave
+
+Tenured full-time teaching faculty are eligible to be considered for sabbatical leave under one of two plans.
+
+After six semesters of  teaching a full-time instructional load or its equivalent, the faculty member will be eligible to apply for a one-semester leave of two full credit courses or its equivalent at three-fourths pay; or 
+
+After twelve semesters of a teaching a full-time instructional load or its equivalent, the faculty member  will be eligible to apply for a semester's leave of two full credit courses or its equivalent at full pay or an academic year's leave at half pay.
+
+. 
+
+An applicant for sabbatical leave must complete and submit the Sabbatical Leave Request Form by no later than the date specified by the Provost's Office in the academic year preceding the year of the sabbatical.  A faculty member may not normally apply to be on sabbatical in the academic year which would otherwise be the faculty member’s final year of full-time teaching at the College.
+
+Since the sabbatical leave program represents an investment by the College, the faculty member awarded leave must undertake substantial work which can be expected to result in an improvement in the quality of the faculty member’s future teaching and research or creative  contributions to the College or solve an administrative problem(s).  Accordingly, the sabbatical leave request form requests applicants to include a current curriculum vitae, a statement of the project the faculty member plans to carry out during the proposed sabbatical including specific deliverables, and, if applicable, a copy of the report of accomplishments from the faculty member’s last sabbatical leave. The faculty member’s Department Chair/Program Coordinator will receive a copy of the sabbatical leave request form and supply a brief statement of the impact the proposed leave will have on department and/or program staffing. 
+
+Overall, the granting of sabbatical leave is dependent upon the needs of the College, including both budgetary and institutional considerations. Course coverage and offerings during sabbatical leaves will be decided solely by the Office of the Provost, taking the department/program's staffing plan, as well as institutional priorities, into consideration. If approval for a sabbatical leave is not granted by the Provost due to the needs of the College, the sabbatical leave may be deferred. Moreover, faculty members may opt to delay consideration for a sabbatical to accommodate departmental continuity or course offerings.  The faculty member should do so in consultation with and the support of their Department Chair/Program Coordinator.  In either case, the deferred semester may be counted toward the faculty member’s next sabbatical leave. Ordinarily, faculty are permitted to defer and count up to two semester(s) toward the next sabbatical leave. 
+
+If the needs of the College do not preclude the granting of sabbatical leave, the Provost will evaluate the sabbatical leave request based on the following criteria:
+
+intellectual validity of the project;
+
+feasibility of research implementation; 
+
+clear plan for goals and outcomes; and
+
+submission of the report of the faculty member’s accomplishments from the last sabbatical leave. 
+
+If the Provost has concerns regarding the faculty member’s proposed project, the Provost shall discuss these concerns with the faculty member and offer guidance on how the proposal may be strengthened for resubmission.  If the application does not result in the awarding of a sabbatical leave, the faculty member is eligible to reapply the following cycle/year.  The Provost, in consultation with the faculty member and the faculty member’s Department and/or Program Coordinator, will determine the most appropriate course of action regarding whether or not the intervening semesters shall be banked toward the faculty member’s eligibility to apply for sabbatical leave in the future.
+
+Additional Guidelines
+
+Faculty members are expected to take the approved leave as scheduled unless extraordinary circumstances require a change. Any change to an approved leave schedule requires written approval of the Provost, who will consult with the faculty member’s Department Chair/Program Coordinator to determine the impact of a change.
+
+Upon return from leave, the faculty member’s teaching load during the academic year the leave is taken will be no less than three (3), except where adjustments must be made for Department Chairs/Program Coordinators or for other special duties.  Course adjustments should seek to minimize the impact on course options for students.
+
+While on sabbatical leave, a faculty member is entitled to participate in all College retirement, insurance, and other fringe benefit programs on the same terms as the faculty member participates when not on such leave. In the determination of the salary of a faculty member who returns after sabbatical leave, the time spent on leave will be considered as time spent in the service of the College. Similarly, the time spent on leave will be considered as time spent in the service of the College for purposes of promotion in rank and tenure applications.
+
+Except for fellowships, scholarships, grants-in-aid, and nominal salary received as a visiting professor at another college or university or artistic performance, a faculty member on sabbatical leave may not accept remunerative employment during such leave unless written arrangements have been made and approved in advance by the Provost. Acceptance of remunerative employment in violation of this policy may result in the faculty member being required to return their salary and benefits.
+
+A faculty member on sabbatical leave who wishes to extend the leave may apply for leave without pay and, if granted, the faculty member will be subject to all conditions governing such leave.
+
+A member of the faculty in accepting a grant of sabbatical leave is obligated not only to pursue the work in the sabbatical application for which the leave was granted, but also to return to full-time teaching at the end of the leave. It is presumed, generally, that the faculty member will teach for at least one academic year following a leave. In the event that the faculty member does not return, then the faculty member shall be obligated to return to the College the salary and contributions by the College to the faculty member’s insurance and retirement received during the leave.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Revised Sabbatical Policy.txt [/INST] Sabbatical Leave
+
+Sabbatical leaves at Wheaton College are granted for the primary purpose of enhancing the value of the recipient’s further service to the College through study, research, creative works, or publication undertaken to improve pedagogical techniques, solve administrative problems, or broaden the scope of knowledge in the faculty member’s discipline or field of research.
+
+Junior Sabbatical Leave
+
+Non-tenured tenure-track faculty are eligible to be considered for one-semester sabbaticals at full pay or an academic year’s leave at half salary. These sabbaticals are usually taken in their third or fourth year following a successful retention review. The pre-tenure sabbatical may not be taken by a faculty member with a terminal contract. Moreover, a non-tenured tenure-track faculty member granted three or more years credit toward the probationary period for tenure at the time of initial appointment to Wheaton is not eligible for the pre-tenure sabbatical leave as they are ineligible to apply for a pre-tenure sabbatical leave in the year they stand for tenure.
+
+The same guidelines as those for tenured faculty will apply. [May 13, 1963, p. 2715; November 18, 1963, p. 2728; December 2, 1988, p. 3762; March 5, 1999, pp. 4211-12; May 4, 2007, p. 4636]
+
+Post Tenure Sabbatical Leave
+
+Tenured full-time teaching faculty are eligible to be considered for sabbatical leave under one of two plans.
+
+After six semesters of full-time credit course teaching or its equivalent, the faculty member will be eligible for a one-semester leave of two full credit courses or its equivalent at three-fourths pay; or 
+
+After twelve semesters of full-time credit course teaching or its equivalent, the faculty member will be eligible for a semester's leave of two full credit courses or its equivalent at full pay or an academic year's leave at half pay.
+
+Current College Text
+
+The recommendation of the faculty member's Department Chair/Program Coordinator is required in all cases. An applicant for sabbatical leave should inform the administration in writing of their plans before a date specified by the Provost's Office in the academic year proceeding the year of the sabbatical, and should file a report of their accomplishments afterwards. Since the sabbatical leave program represents an investment by the College, the faculty member must undertake substantial scholarly, creative, or pedagogical work which can be expected to result in an improvement in the quality of their future service to the College. Further, a faculty member may not normally apply to be on sabbatical in the academic year which would otherwise be the faculty member's final year of full-time teaching at the College. 
+
+Alternative Text
+
+An applicant for sabbatical leave must complete and submit the Sabbatical Leave Request Form by no later than the date specified by the Provost's Office in the academic year preceding the year of the sabbatical.  A faculty member may not normally apply to be on sabbatical in the academic year which would otherwise be the faculty member’s final year of full-time teaching at the College.
+
+Since the sabbatical leave program represents an investment by the College, the faculty member awarded leave must undertake substantial scholarly, creative, or pedagogical work which can be expected to result in an improvement in the quality of the faculty member’s future teaching and research contributions to the College.  Accordingly, the sabbatical leave request form requests applicants to include a current curriculum vitae, a statement of the project the faculty member plans to carry out during the proposed sabbatical including specific deliverables, and, if applicable, a copy of the report of accomplishments from the faculty member’s last sabbatical leave. The faculty member’s Department Chair/Program Coordinator will receive a copy of the sabbatical leave request form. The recommendation of Department Chair/Program Coordinator for the sabbatical leave is required.
+
+Overall, the granting of sabbatical leave is dependent upon the needs of the College, including both budgetary and administrative considerations. The Provost will evaluate sabbatical leave requests based on the following criteria:
+
+intellectual validity of the project;
+
+feasibility of research implementation; 
+
+clear plan for goals and outcomes; and
+
+submission of the report of the faculty member’s accomplishments from the last sabbatical leave. 
+
+Faculty members opting to delay consideration for a sabbatical should do so in consultation with their Department Chair/Program Coordinator. Course coverage and offerings during sabbatical leaves will be decided solely by the Office of the Provost, taking the department/program's staffing plan, as well as institutional priorities, into consideration. If the Provost has concerns regarding the faculty member’s proposed project, the Provost shall meet with the faculty member to discuss these concerns and offer guidance on how the proposal may be strengthened.
+
+Faculty members are expected to take the approved leave as scheduled unless extraordinary circumstances require a change. Any change to an approved leave schedule requires written approval of the Provost, who will consult with the faculty member’s Department Chair/Program Coordinator to determine the impact of a change.
+
+Upon return from leave, the faculty member’s teaching load during the academic year the leave is taken will be no less than three (3), except where adjustments must be made for Department Chairs/Program Coordinators or for other special duties.  Course adjustments should seek to minimize the impact on course options for students. 
+
+Additional Guidelines
+
+While on sabbatical leave, a faculty member is entitled to participate in all College retirement, insurance, and other fringe benefit programs on the same terms as the faculty member participates when not on such leave. In the determination of the salary of a faculty member who returns after sabbatical leave, the time spent on leave will be considered as time spent in the service of the College. Similarly, the time spent on leave will be considered as time spent in the service of the College for purposes of promotion in rank and tenure applications.
+
+Except for fellowships, scholarships, grants-in-aid, and nominal salary received as a visiting professor at another college or university or artistic performance, a faculty member on sabbatical leave may not accept remunerative employment during such leave unless specific arrangements have been made and approved in advance by the Provost.
+
+A faculty member on sabbatical leave who wishes to extend the leave may apply for leave without pay and, if granted, the faculty member will be subject to all conditions governing such leave.
+
+A member of the faculty in accepting a grant of sabbatical leave is obligated not only to pursue the scholarly, creative, or pedagogical work for which the leave was granted, but also to return to full-time teaching at the end of the leave. It is presumed, generally, that the faculty member will teach for at least one academic year following a leave. In the event that the faculty member does not return, then the faculty member shall be obligated to return to the College the salary and contributions by the College to the faculty member’s insurance and retirement received during the leave.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Revised Scheduled Class Meetings and Faculty Absences Policy (2.19).txt [/INST] Ohio Wesleyan University is committed to providing students with an in-person residential experience and believes that meeting in person provides the richest opportunity for student involvement, interaction, and growth.  As such, in-person teaching is the expected norm, with both students and the instructor present on campus. Exceptions to this norm should generally be based on curricular/pedagogical benefits to the students, departmental/programmatic needs, or unique learning opportunities. In addition, faculty may occasionally require flexibility to participate in professional activities or to meet unplanned events such as inclement weather, a significant number of student illnesses, faculty illness, and faculty family needs. Finally, remote teaching may be a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act [ADA] where a disability prevents the instructor from successfully performing teaching in-person.  
+
+To balance these competing interests, the policies below provide clarity regarding how much instruction may occur remotely, be cancelled, covered with alternative assignments, or taught by colleagues. Violations of these policies may result in disciplinary action.
+
+In-Person Expectation
+
+Except for unforeseen events (see Remote Teaching below), all classes should be taught in-person at the time and location specified. All students and faculty are expected to be present in classes on campus. 
+
+As a residential university, the baseline expectation is that classes will be conducted in-person, with both students and the instructor present on campus, in the same place at the same time.  Any significant changes to class meeting location, time, or frequency must be authorized by Academic Affairs and reported to the Registrar’s Office to update records. 
+
+Academic Affairs may make exceptions to expand learning opportunities when judged in the interest of the University (e.g., GLCA shared languages classes) or to respond to local or national conditions making it unsafe to meet in-person.  See also the Remote Teaching section below. 
+
+Absences from Class
+
+Faculty may occasionally need to be absent from class for professional activities such as attendance at conferences, illness, or because of unforeseen circumstances such as a family emergency or inclement weather. When absence from in-person class instruction is necessary, faculty must arrange either for a colleague to cover the missed class(es) or arrange for alternative assignments that permit student learning to continue. 
+
+If the number of classes missed exceeds one week of classes, the course instructor is expected to notify the Department Chair to ensure that an appropriate course substitution or coverage plan is put in place. Any absence from in-person class meetings on the part of the instructor of record that exceeds two weeks of classes in a row cumulative  requires notification of the Department Chair and Academic Affairs as there may be Family and Medical Leave Act implications.  See the Leave section for additional information.
+
+
+
+Remote Teaching  
+
+Course instructors may temporarily move to remote teaching to participate in professional activities or to meet unplanned or crisis events such as inclement weather, a significant number of student illnesses, faculty illness, and faculty family needs, as well as planned events such as participation in a professional activity.  For purposes of this policy, remote teaching is defined as a temporary shift of face-to-face instructional delivery to an alternate delivery mode due to participating in a professional activity, unplanned event, or crisis circumstance. It involves the use of fully remote teaching solutions for instruction or education that would otherwise be delivered face-to-face and that will return to that format once the professional activity, unexpected event, or crisis circumstance has abated.
+
+Instructors utilizing temporary remote teaching modalities due to a planned professional activity, unplanned event, or crisis circumstance must ensure that all students in the class have the technological and other resources necessary to engage effectively in their planned remote work.  Consultation with the Department Chair and Academic Affairs is required for any course in which remote teaching is used as the main mode of student interaction for more than one week of class sessions, cumulative across a semester. 
+
+In recognition of academic freedom, instructors have the latitude to incorporate the use of technology in their course design to help students achieve course learning outcomes or present uniquely valuable learning opportunities.  The course design, however, must maintain its face-to-face component as over utilization of remote learning technologies may result in the course being classified as a distance education or online course by the Department of Education or Higher Learning Commission. Thus, if the course design intends to utilize remote technologies as the main mode of student interaction for more than one week of class sessions, cumulative across a semester, the instructor must consult with and receive the approval of the Department Chair and Academic Affairs.
+
+Finally, instructors with documented medical conditions that limit their participation in face-to-face classroom instruction may be eligible for a remote teaching accommodation at the conclusion of a formal Human Resources workplace accommodation process to determine what would constitute a reasonable accommodation.  Instructors with a documented medical condition that precludes in-person teaching are encouraged to contact Human Resources to request an accommodation(s) pursuant to the University’s ADA/Accommodations policy.
+
+Days Preceding Breaks
+
+Unless an unplanned event or crisis circumstance (e.g., inclement weather, a significant number of student illnesses, faculty illness, and faculty family needs) or planned professional activity preclude otherwise, instructors are expected to hold in-person classes on the days preceding a break such as Mid-Semester Break, Thanksgiving Break, and Spring Break. Cancelling such classes has the potential to encourage students to miss other classes.  
+
+Final Exams or Summative Assessments
+
+Unless an unplanned event or crisis circumstance (e.g., inclement weather, a significant number of student illnesses, faculty illness, and faculty family needs) preclude otherwise, course instructors administering final exams are expected to be present and available to answer questions related to final course projects..  Faculty exams and summative assessments must be scheduled in accordance with the Final Examination Policy published in the Catalog.  Exceptions to this policy must be approved by the faculty member’s Department Chair.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Revised Scheduled Class Meetings and Faculty Absences Policy.txt [/INST] Ohio Wesleyan University is committed to providing students with an in-person residential experience and believes that meeting in person provides the richest opportunity for student involvement, interaction, and growth.  As such, in-person teaching is the expected norm, with both students and the instructor present on campus. Exceptions to this norm should generally be based on curricular/pedagogical benefits to the students, departmental/programmatic needs, or unique learning opportunities. In addition, faculty may occasionally require flexibility to participate in professional activities or to meet unplanned events such as inclement weather, a significant number of student illnesses, faculty illness, and faculty family needs. Finally, remote teaching may be a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act [ADA] where a disability prevents the instructor from successfully performing teaching in-person.  
+
+To balance these competing interests, the policies below provide clarity regarding how much instruction may occur remotely, be cancelled, covered with alternative assignments, or taught by colleagues. Violations of these policies may result in disciplinary action.
+
+In-Person Expectation
+
+Except for unforeseen events (see Remote Teaching below), all classes should be taught in-person at the time and location specified. All students and faculty are expected to be present in classes on campus. 
+
+As a residential university, the baseline expectation is that classes will be conducted in-person, with both students and the instructor present on campus, in the same place at the same time.  Any significant changes to class meeting location, time, or frequency must be authorized by Academic Affairs and reported to the Registrar’s Office to update records. 
+
+Academic Affairs may make exceptions to expand learning opportunities when judged in the interest of the University (e.g., GLCA shared languages classes) or to respond to local or national conditions making it unsafe to meet in-person.  See also the Remote Teaching section below. 
+
+Absences from Class
+
+Faculty may occasionally need to be absent from class for professional activities such as attendance at conferences, illness, or because of unforeseen circumstances such as a family emergency or inclement weather. When absence from in-person class instruction is necessary, faculty must arrange either for a colleague to cover the missed class(es) or arrange for alternative assignments that permit student learning to continue. 
+
+If the number of classes missed exceeds one week of classes, the course instructor is expected to notify the Department Chair to ensure that an appropriate course substitution or coverage plan is put in place. Any absence from in-person class meetings on the part of the instructor of record that exceeds two weeks of classes in a row cumulative  requires notification of the Department Chair and Academic Affairs as there may be Family and Medical Leave Act implications.  See the Leave section for additional information.
+
+
+
+Remote Teaching  
+
+Course instructors may temporarily move to remote teaching to participate in professional activities or to meet unplanned or crisis events such as inclement weather, a significant number of student illnesses, faculty illness, and faculty family needs, as well as planned events such as participation in a professional activity.  For purposes of this policy, remote teaching is defined as a temporary shift of face-to-face instructional delivery to an alternate delivery mode due to participating in a professional activity, unplanned event, or crisis circumstance. It involves the use of fully remote teaching solutions for instruction or education that would otherwise be delivered face-to-face and that will return to that format once the professional activity, unexpected event, or crisis circumstance has abated.
+
+Instructors utilizing temporary remote teaching modalities due to a planned professional activity, unplanned event, or crisis circumstance must ensure that all students in the class have the technological and other resources necessary to engage effectively in their planned remote work.  Consultation with the Department Chair and Academic Affairs is required for any course in which remote teaching is used as the main mode of student interaction for more than one week of class sessions, cumulative across a semester. 
+
+In recognition of academic freedom, instructors have the latitude to incorporate the use of technology in their course design to help students achieve course learning outcomes or present uniquely valuable learning opportunities.  The course design, however, must maintain its face-to-face component as over utilization of remote learning technologies may result in the course being classified as a distance education or online course by the Department of Education or Higher Learning Commission. Thus, if the course design intends to utilize remote technologies as the main mode of student interaction for more than one week of class sessions, cumulative across a semester, the instructor must consult with and receive the approval of the Department Chair and Academic Affairs.
+
+Finally, instructors with documented medical conditions that limit their participation in face-to-face classroom instruction may be eligible for a remote teaching accommodation at the conclusion of a formal Human Resources workplace accommodation process to determine what would constitute a reasonable accommodation.  Instructors with a documented medical condition that precludes in-person teaching are encouraged to contact Human Resources to request an accommodation(s) pursuant to the University’s ADA/Accommodations policy.
+
+Days Preceding Breaks
+
+Unless an unplanned event or crisis circumstance (e.g., inclement weather, a significant number of student illnesses, faculty illness, and faculty family needs) or planned professional activity preclude otherwise, instructors are expected to hold in-person classes on the days preceding a break such as Mid-Semester Break, Thanksgiving Break, and Spring Break. Cancelling such classes has the potential to encourage students to miss other classes.  
+
+Final Exams or Summative Assessments
+
+Unless an unplanned event or crisis circumstance (e.g., inclement weather, a significant number of student illnesses, faculty illness, and faculty family needs) preclude otherwise, course instructors administering final exams are expected to be present and available to answer questions related to final course projects..  Faculty exams and summative assessments must be scheduled in accordance with the Final Examination Policy published in the Catalog.  Exceptions to this policy must be approved by the faculty member’s Department Chair.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] REVISED Sexual Harassment Prevention.txt [/INST] 2.1.16    Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy
+
+SEXUAL HARASSMENT PREVENTION POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+October 9, 2018
+
+Policy Number:
+
+II-2.1.16
+
+Supersedes:
+
+ 
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President for Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+All members of the Canisius College community.
+
+History:
+
+ 
+
+
+Introduction
+
+Canisius College (Canisius) is committed to maintaining a workplace free from sexual harassment.  All employees are required to work in a manner that prevents sexual harassment in the workplace. This Policy is one component of Canisius’s commitment to a discrimination-free work environment together with Canisius’s Anti-Discrimination and Harassment Policy and Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy.
+
+Sexual harassment is a form of workplace discrimination and is against the law.[1]  All persons covered by this Policy have a legal right to a workplace free from sexual harassment and are urged to report sexual harassment by filing a complaint internally with Canisius.  Complaints can also be filed with a government agency or in court under federal, state or local antidiscrimination laws.    
+
+Policy: 
+
+This Policy applies to the following persons regardless of immigration status:  all employees, applicants for employment, interns (paid or unpaid), and contractors, subcontractors, vendors, consultants and other persons providing services in the workplace pursuant to a contract with Canisius or any of their employees who are providing services in the workplace.[2]  (All of these persons are referred to in the remainder of this Policy singularly as “Covered Person” and collectively as “Covered Persons.”)
+
+Sexual harassment is prohibited and will not be tolerated.  Any Covered Person who engages in sexual harassment will be subject to remedial and/or disciplinary action (e.g., counseling, suspension or termination).  Any Covered Person who believes he or she has been a target of sexual harassment should report it using the procedures explained below in the section titled “Reporting Sexual Harassment and Retaliation.” 
+
+Retaliation is prohibited.  Canisius will not tolerate any retaliatory adverse action against any Covered Person who, in good faith, reports sexual harassment or who provides information, testifies or otherwise assists in any investigation of or proceeding involving sexual harassment.  Any Covered Person who engages in such retaliation will be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination.  Any Covered Person who believes he or she has been a target of retaliation should report it using the procedures explained below in the section titled “Reporting Sexual Harassment and Retaliation.”   
+
+Sexual harassment and retaliation are unlawful and a violation of this Policy and may subject Canisius to liability for harm to targets of such conduct.  Persons who engage in sexual harassment and retaliation may also be subject to individual liability.  Covered Persons of every level who engage in sexual harassment and/or retaliation, including managers and supervisors who engage in such conduct or who knowingly allow such conduct to continue, will be penalized for such misconduct.   
+
+All Covered Persons are encouraged to report any sexual harassment, retaliation or behaviors that violate this Policy.  Canisius will provide a complaint form for reporting such conduct and filing complaints. 
+
+Managers and supervisors are required to report any complaint of sexual harassment or retaliation that they receive or any sexual harassment that they observe or become aware of to the Title IX Coordinator in the Human Resources Department.
+
+Canisius will conduct a prompt and thorough investigation that ensures due process for all parties whenever management receives a complaint about sexual harassment or retaliation or otherwise knows of possible sexual harassment or retaliation occurring.  Canisius will keep the investigation confidential to the extent possible.  Effective corrective action will be taken whenever sexual harassment or retaliation is found to have occurred. All employees, including managers and supervisors, are required to cooperate with any internal investigation.
+
+This Policy applies to all Covered Persons and all must follow and uphold it.  This Policy must be provided to all employees and will be provided to employees upon hiring.
+
+What Is “Sexual Harassment”?
+
+Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination and is unlawful under federal, state, and (where applicable) local law. Sexual harassment includes harassment on the basis of sex, sexual orientation, self-identified or perceived sex, gender expression, gender identity and the status of being transgender.  This Policy prohibits sexual harassment even where it may not rise to the level of violating applicable law.
+
+Sexual harassment includes unwelcome conduct which is either of a sexual nature, or which is directed at an individual because of that individual’s sex when:
+
+Such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment, even if the reporting individual is not the intended target of the sexual harassment;
+
+Such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of employment; or
+
+Submission to or rejection of such conduct is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting an individual’s employment.
+
+A sexually harassing hostile work environment includes, but is not limited to, words, signs, jokes, pranks, intimidation or physical violence which are of a sexual nature, or which are directed at an individual because of that individual’s sex. Sexual harassment also consists of any unwanted verbal or physical advances, sexually explicit derogatory statements or sexually discriminatory remarks made by someone which are offensive or objectionable to the recipient, which cause the recipient discomfort or humiliation, which interfere with the recipient’s job performance. 
+
+ Sexual harassment also occurs when a person in authority tries to trade job benefits for sexual favors. This can include hiring, promotion, continued employment or any other terms, conditions or privileges of employment. This is also called “quid pro quo” harassment.
+
+Any Covered Person who feels harassed should make a report so that any violation of this Policy can be corrected promptly. Any harassing conduct, even a single incident, can be addressed under this Policy.
+
+Examples of sexual harassment
+
+The following describes some of the types of acts that may be unlawful sexual harassment and that are strictly prohibited:
+
+Physical acts of a sexual nature, such as:
+
+Touching, pinching, patting, kissing, hugging, grabbing, brushing against another person’s body or poking another person’s body;
+
+Rape, sexual battery, molestation or attempts to commit these assaults.
+
+Unwanted sexual advances or propositions, such as:
+
+Requests for sexual favors accompanied by implied or overt threats concerning the target’s job performance evaluation, a promotion or other job benefits or detriments;
+
+Subtle or obvious pressure for unwelcome sexual activities.
+
+Sexually oriented gestures, noises, remarks or jokes or comments about a person’s sexuality or sexual experience, which create a hostile work environment.
+
+Sex stereotyping occurs when conduct or personality traits are considered inappropriate simply because they may not conform to other people’s ideas or perceptions about how individuals of a particular sex should act or look.
+
+Sexual or discriminatory displays or publications anywhere in the workplace, such as:
+
+Displaying pictures, posters, calendars, graffiti, objects, promotional material, reading materials or other materials that are sexually demeaning or pornographic. This includes such sexual displays on workplace computers or cell phones and sharing such displays while in the workplace.
+
+Hostile actions taken against an individual because of that individual’s sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and the status of being transgender, such as:
+
+Interfering with, destroying or damaging a person’s workstation, tools or equipment, or otherwise interfering with the individual’s ability to perform the job;
+
+Sabotaging an individual’s work;
+
+Bullying, yelling, name-calling.
+
+Who can be a target of sexual harassment?
+
+Sexual harassment can occur between any individuals, regardless of their sex or gender. New York Law protects employees, paid or unpaid interns, and non-employees, including independent contractors, and those employed by companies contracting to provide services in the workplace. Harassers can be a superior, a subordinate, a coworker or anyone in the workplace including an independent contractor, contract worker, vendor, client, customer or visitor.
+
+Where can sexual harassment occur?
+
+Unlawful sexual harassment is not limited to the physical workplace itself. It can occur while employees are traveling for business or at employer sponsored events or parties. Calls, texts, emails, and social media usage by employees can constitute unlawful workplace harassment, even if they occur away from the workplace premises, on personal devices or during non-work hours.
+
+Retaliation
+
+Unlawful retaliation can be any action that could discourage a person from coming forward to make or support a sexual harassment claim.  Adverse action need not be job-related or occur in the workplace to constitute unlawful retaliation (e.g., threats of physical violence outside of work hours).  This Policy prohibits retaliation even where it may not rise to the level of violating applicable law.
+
+Such retaliation is unlawful under federal, state, and (where applicable) local law. The New York State Human Rights Law protects any individual who has engaged in “protected activity.” Protected activity occurs when a person has:
+
+Made a complaint of sexual harassment, either internally or with any anti-discrimination agency;
+
+Testified or assisted in a proceeding involving sexual harassment under the Human Rights Law or other anti-discrimination law;
+
+Opposed sexual harassment by making a verbal or informal complaint to management, or by simply informing a supervisor or manager of harassment;
+
+Reported that another employee has been sexually harassed; or
+
+Encouraged a fellow employee to report harassment.
+
+Even if the alleged harassment does not turn out to rise to the level of a violation of law, the individual is protected from retaliation if the person had a good faith belief that the practices were unlawful. However, the retaliation provision is not intended to protect persons making intentionally false charges of harassment.
+
+Reporting Sexual Harassment and Retaliation
+
+Preventing sexual harassment and retaliation is everyone’s responsibility. Canisius cannot prevent or remedy sexual harassment and retaliation unless it knows about them. Any Covered Person who has been subjected to behavior that may constitute sexual harassment or retaliation should report such behavior to his or her supervisor or manager or to the Title IX Coordinator in the Human Resources Department. Anyone who witnesses or becomes aware of potential instances of sexual harassment or retaliation should report such behavior to his or her supervisor or manager or to the Interim Title IX Coordinator in the Human Resources Department.
+
+Reports of sexual harassment and/or retaliation may be made verbally or in writing. A form for submission of a written complaint is attached to this Policy, and all Covered Persons are encouraged to use this complaint form (“Complaint Form”).  The complaint form is also available in Volume II of the campus wide Policy Manual, the Human Resources Portal or the Human Resources Department.  Covered Persons who are reporting sexual harassment or retaliation on behalf of other persons should use the complaint form and note that it is on another person’s behalf.
+
+Covered Persons who believe they have been a target of sexual harassment or retaliation may also seek assistance in other available forums, as explained below in the section on Legal Protections.
+
+Supervisory Responsibilities
+
+All supervisors and managers who receive a complaint or information about suspected sexual harassment or retaliation, observe what may be sexually harassing behavior or retaliation or for any reason suspect that sexual harassment or retaliation is occurring, are required to report such suspected sexual harassment or retaliation to the Interim Title IX Coordinator in the Human Resources Department.
+
+In addition to being subject to discipline if they engaged in sexually harassing conduct or retaliation themselves, supervisors and managers will be subject to discipline for failing to report suspected sexual harassment or otherwise knowingly allowing sexual harassment to continue.
+
+Supervisors and managers will also be subject to discipline for engaging in any retaliation or otherwise knowingly allowing retaliation to continue.
+
+Complaint and Investigation of Sexual Harassment and Retaliation
+
+All complaints or information about sexual harassment or retaliation will be investigated, whether that information was reported in verbal or written form. Investigations will be conducted in a timely manner and will be confidential to the extent possible.
+
+An investigation of any complaint, information or knowledge of suspected sexual harassment or retaliation will be prompt and thorough, commenced immediately and completed as soon as possible. 
+
+	All allegations of sexual harassment occurring within the college’s education programs and activities as defined by the college’s Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct (Title IX) Policy will be handled exclusively pursuant to the investigation and grievance procedures outlined in that policy.  When the alleged sexual harassment conduct does not meet the college’s Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct (Title IX) Policy definition of sexual harassment, then the college’s investigation and resolution efforts will be conducted in accordance with the college’s Anti-Discrimination and Harassment Policy.  The determination of which policy will govern is in the sole discretion of the Title IX officer.  
+
+	The college’s investigation, regardless of which policy governs, will be kept confidential to the extent possible. Moreover, all persons involved, including complainants, witnesses and alleged harassers will be accorded due process, as outlined below, to protect their rights to a fair and impartial investigation.
+
+Any employee or other Covered Person may be required to cooperate as needed in an investigation of suspected sexual harassment or retaliation. Canisius will not tolerate retaliation against Covered Persons who file complaints, support another’s complaint or participate in an investigation regarding a violation of this Policy.
+
+While the process may vary from case-to-case, investigations should be done in accordance with the following steps:
+
+Upon receipt of complaint, the Interim Title IX Coordinator will conduct an immediate review of the allegations and take any interim actions, (e.g., instructing the respondent to refrain from communications with the complainant), as appropriate. If the complaint is verbal, encourage the individual to complete the Complaint Form in writing.  If he or she refuses, prepare a Complaint Form based on the verbal report.
+
+Take steps to obtain and preserve emails, phone records and other documents relevant to the investigation.
+
+Request and review all relevant documents, including all electronic communications.
+
+Interview all parties involved, including any relevant witnesses;
+
+Create a written documentation of the investigation (such as a letter, memo or email), which contains the following: 
+
+A list of all documents reviewed, along with a detailed summary of relevant documents;
+
+A list of names of those interviewed, along with a detailed summary of their statements;
+
+A timeline of events;
+
+A summary of prior relevant incidents, reported or unreported; and
+
+The basis for the decision and final resolution of the complaint, together with any corrective action(s).
+
+Keep the written documentation and associated documents in a secure and confidential location.
+
+Promptly notify the individual who reported and the individual(s) about whom the complaint was made of the final determination and implement any corrective actions identified in the written document.
+
+Inform the individual who reported of the right to file a complaint or charge externally as outlined below in the next section.
+
+Legal Protections and External Remedies
+
+Sexual harassment and retaliation are not only prohibited by this Policy but are also prohibited by state, federal, and, where applicable, local law.
+
+Aside from the internal process at Canisius, Covered Persons may also pursue legal remedies with the following governmental entities.  While a private attorney is not required to file a complaint with a governmental agency, you may seek the legal advice of an attorney.
+
+In addition to those outlined below, Covered Persons in certain industries may have additional legal protections.
+
+New York State Human Rights Law (HRL)
+
+The New York State Human Rights Law (HRL), codified at N.Y. Executive Law, art. 15, § 290 et seq., applies to all employers in New York State with regard to sexual harassment, and protects employees, paid or unpaid interns and non-employees, regardless of immigration status. A complaint alleging violation of the Human Rights Law may be filed either with the Division of Human Rights (DHR) or in New York State Supreme Court.
+
+Complaints may be filed with DHR any time within one year of the harassment. If an individual did not file at DHR, they can sue directly in state court under the HRL, within three years of the alleged sexual harassment. An individual may not file with DHR if they have already filed a HRL complaint in state court.
+
+Complaining internally to Canisius does not extend the time to file with DHR or in court. The one year or three years is counted from date of the most recent incident of harassment.
+
+You do not need an attorney to file a complaint with DHR, and there is no cost to file with DHR.
+
+DHR will investigate your complaint and determine whether there is probable cause to believe that sexual harassment has occurred. Probable cause cases are forwarded to a public hearing before an administrative law judge. If sexual harassment is found after a hearing, DHR has the power to award relief, which varies but may include requiring an employer to take action to stop the harassment, or redress the damage caused, including paying of monetary damages, attorney’s fees and civil fines.
+
+DHR’s main office contact information is: NYS Division of Human Rights, One Fordham Plaza, Fourth Floor, Bronx, New York 10458.  You may call (718) 741-8400 or visit, www.dhr.ny.gov.
+
+Contact DHR at (888) 392-3644 or visit dhr.ny.gov/complaint for more information about filing a complaint. The website has a complaint form that can be downloaded, filled out, notarized and mailed to DHR. The website also contains contact information for DHR’s regional offices across New York State.
+
+ Civil Rights Act of 1964
+
+The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) enforces federal anti-discrimination laws, including Title VII of the 1964 federal Civil Rights Act (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.). An individual can file a complaint with the EEOC anytime within 300 days from the harassment. There is no cost to file a complaint with the EEOC. The EEOC will investigate the complaint, and determine whether there is reasonable cause to believe that discrimination has occurred, at which point the EEOC will issue a Right to Sue letter permitting the individual to file a complaint in federal court.
+
+The EEOC does not hold hearings or award relief, but may take other action including pursuing cases in federal court on behalf of complaining parties. Federal courts may award remedies if discrimination is found to have occurred.  In general, private employers must have at least 15 employees to come within the jurisdiction of the EEOC.
+
+An employee alleging discriminated against at work can file a “Charge of Discrimination.” The EEOC has district, area, and field offices where complaints can be filed. Contact the EEOC by calling 1-800-669-4000 (1-800-669-6820 (TTY: 1-800-669-6820), visiting their website at www.eeoc.gov or via email at info@eeoc.gov.
+
+If an individual filed an administrative complaint with DHR, DHR will file the complaint with the EEOC to preserve the right to proceed in federal court.
+
+Local Protections
+
+Many localities enforce laws protecting individuals from sexual harassment and discrimination. An individual should contact the county, city or town in which they live to find out if such a law exists. For example, employees who work in New York City may file complaints of sexual harassment with the New York City Commission on Human Rights. Contact their main office at Law Enforcement Bureau of the NYC Commission on Human Rights, 40 Rector Street, 10th Floor, New York, New York; call 311 or (212) 306-7450; or visit www.nyc.gov/html/cchr/html/home/home.shtml. 
+
+Contact the Local Police Department
+
+If the harassment involves unwanted physical touching, coerced physical confinement or coerced sex acts, the conduct may constitute a crime. Contact the local police department.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+CANISIUS COLLEGE
+
+ COMPLAINT FORM
+SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND RETALIATION 
+
+                           
+
+New York State Labor Law requires all employers to adopt a sexual harassment prevention policy that includes a complaint form to report alleged incidents of sexual harassment and retaliation.
+
+If you believe that you have been subjected to sexual harassment or subjected to retaliation for reporting sexual harassment or assisting in an investigation of sexual harassment, you are encouraged to complete this form and submit it to the College’s Title IX Coordinator.
+
+The Title IX Coordinator is Kathleen Brucato, located in FH 006, 716-888-3781, farleyk@canisius.edu. You will not be retaliated against for filing a complaint.
+
+If you are more comfortable reporting verbally or in another manner, Canisius will complete this form and provide you with a copy and follow its sexual harassment prevention policy by investigating the claims are outlined at the end of this form.
+
+ 
+
+For additional resources, visit:  
+
+ny.gov/programs/combatting-sexual-harassment-workplace 
+
+ 
+
+YOUR INFORMATION
+
+Name: __________________________________
+
+Work Address:  ___________________________       Work Phone: ____________________
+
+                            ___________________________
+
+Job Title:  _______________________________        Email:__________________________  
+
+Best way to contact you:  _____Email     _____Phone _____In person
+
+ 
+
+SUPERVISORY INFORMATION
+
+Immediate Supervisor’s Name:  _______________________________________________
+
+Title:  ____________________________________
+
+Work Address:  ____________________________     Work phone: ___________________
+
+  
+
+COMPLAINT INFORMATION
+
+1.      You complaint is about:  ____ sexual harassment      ____ retaliation
+
+2.      Your complaint is made about:
+
+            Name: ____________________________        Title:__________________________
+
+            Work Address:______________________        Work Phone: ___________________
+
+                                  ______________________
+
+ 
+
+         Relationship to you:  ___ Supervisor   ___ Subordinate   ___ Co-Worker   ___ Other
+
+3.      Please describe what happened and how it is affecting you and your work.  (Please use additional sheets of paper if necessary and attach any relevant documents or evidence.) 
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+4.       Date(s) conduct occurred: ________________________________________________
+
+          
+
+           Is the conduct continuing?     _____ Yes    ____ No
+
+ 
+
+5.       Please list the name and contact information of any witnesses or individuals that may have information related to your complaint.
+
+ 
+
+           The last question is optional, but may help the investigation.
+
+ 
+
+6.       Have you previously complained or provided information (verbal or written) about related incidents?  If yes, when and to whom did you complain or provide information?  
+
+ 
+
+ 
+
+If you have retained legal counsel and would like us to work with them, please provide their contact information.
+
+   
+
+Signature: _________________________________  Date:  ________________________
+
+ 
+
+Investigation Procedures
+
+ 
+
+If Canisius receives a complaint about alleged sexual harassment or retaliation it will follow its sexual harassment prevention policy.
+
+An investigation involves:
+
+Speaking with the person making the complaint
+
+Speaking with the alleged harasser
+
+Interviewing witnesses
+
+Collecting and reviewing any related documents
+
+While the process may vary from case to case, all allegations will be investigated promptly and resolved as quickly as possible. The investigation will be kept confidential to the extent possible.
+
+The findings of the investigation and basis for any decision along with any corrective actions taken will be documented and the person making the complaint and the individual(s) against whom the complaint was made will be notified.  This may be done via email.
+
+This form may also be viewed and completed in PDF format, listed below: 
+
+Canisius Sexual Harassment Complaint Form October 2018 final.pdf</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Revised_Faculty_Survey_on_ART_Policies_and_Procedures.txt [/INST] Faculty Survey on ART Policies and Procedures
+
+
+
+
+
+Start of Block: Default Question Block
+
+
+
+1 You are being invited to confidentially share your perspectives about Cal Lutheran’s Appointment, Rank & Tenure (ART) process. 
+
+
+We are a faculty task force that has been assembled to review our current ART policies and procedures. In collaboration with external consultants, we will be evaluating our current practices. As a part of this process, we are soliciting the feedback of our colleagues to better understand the full range of experiences and opinions about our current ART policies and practices. The goal is to present a proposal to FAC for Handbook changes by the end of February 2022. 
+
+
+Your participation is entirely voluntary and all your personal information will be kept confidential. The results of this survey will not be used for research purposes. Demographic questions are only to help us report on the nature of the full set of participants; responses will be reported in aggregate form only. Some questions have been adapted from The Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education (COACHE), an annual tenure-track faculty job satisfaction survey coordinated and administered by Harvard University. 
+
+
+We greatly appreciate your time and your insights.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+2 
+I. Demographic Background:  
+ These first items gather basic demographic information about you.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+3 How many years have you been employed at Cal Lutheran?
+
+less than one year  (1) 
+
+1-5 years  (2) 
+
+6-10 years  (5) 
+
+11-15 years  (6) 
+
+16-20 years  (7) 
+
+21-25 years  (8) 
+
+26 years or more  (12) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+4 Have you held an academic appointment at another institution before being employed at Cal Lutheran?
+
+Yes  (1) 
+
+No  (2) 
+
+
+
+Skip To: 5 If Have you held an academic appointment at another institution before being employed at Cal Lutheran? = Yes
+
+
+
+
+
+5 For how many years did you have an academic appointment elsewhere?
+
+less than one year  (1) 
+
+1-2 years  (2) 
+
+3-5 years  (5) 
+
+6-8 years  (6) 
+
+9-12 years  (7) 
+
+13-15 years  (8) 
+
+16-18 years  (9) 
+
+19-21 years  (10) 
+
+22-24 years  (11) 
+
+25 years or more  (12) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+6 Please identify the rank of your current position:
+
+Professor  (1) 
+
+Associate Professor  (2) 
+
+Assistant Professor  (3) 
+
+Senior Lecturer  (9) 
+
+Instructor  (4) 
+
+Lecturer  (5) 
+
+Senior Adjunct  (10) 
+
+Adjunct  (11) 
+
+Other  (7) 
+
+Decline to answer  (8) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+7 Do you typically have 8 or more credits of release time for administrative duties?
+
+Yes  (1) 
+
+No  (2) 
+
+Unsure  (3) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+8 Please identify your current tenure status:
+
+Tenured  (1) 
+
+Tenure Track  (2) 
+
+Non-Tenure Track  (3) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+9 Please indicate the primary academic unit you affiliate with at California Lutheran University.
+
+College of Arts and Sciences  (1) 
+
+School of Management  (2) 
+
+Graduate School of Education  (3) 
+
+Graduate School of Psychology  (4) 
+
+School for Professional and Continuing Studies  (5) 
+
+Pacific Lutheran Theological Seminary  (6) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+10 Have you ever served on the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure Committee?
+
+Yes  (1) 
+
+No  (2) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+11 What is the highest degree you have earned? 
+
+Bachelor's  (5) 
+
+Master's  (2) 
+
+Doctorate (including J.D.)  (1) 
+
+Decline to answer  (4) 
+
+
+
+
+
+Page Break
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+12 How do you identify in terms of race/ethnicity?
+
+American/Alaska Native  (1) 
+
+Asian  (2) 
+
+Black  (3) 
+
+Hispanic/Latino  (4) 
+
+Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander  (5) 
+
+White  (6) 
+
+Multi-racial/Multi-Ethnic  (9) 
+
+Other racial/ethnic identity  (7) ________________________________________________
+
+Decline to state  (8) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+13 How do you describe yourself in terms of gender?
+
+Male  (1) 
+
+Female  (2) 
+
+Transgender  (3) 
+
+Genderqueer/Gender Non­Conforming  (5) 
+
+Different Identity  (6) 
+
+Prefer not to say  (7) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+14 Please identify your age category:
+
+22-24  (10) 
+
+25 - 34  (2) 
+
+35 - 44  (3) 
+
+45 - 54  (4) 
+
+55 - 64  (5) 
+
+65 - 74  (6) 
+
+75 - 84  (7) 
+
+Decline to answer  (9) 
+
+
+
+
+
+Page Break
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+15 
+II. Tenure:  
+This set of items addresses various aspects surrounding tenure at Cal Lutheran.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+16 Please rate the level of clarity you have regarding the following aspects of tenure at Cal Lutheran.
+
+
+
+Not applicable (1)
+
+Very clear (2)
+
+Fairly clear (3)
+
+Neither clear nor unclear (4)
+
+Fairly unclear (5)
+
+Very unclear (6)
+
+Decline to answer (7)
+
+I find the tenure process to be... (1) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+I find the tenure criteria (what things are evaluated) to be... (2) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+I find the tenure standards (the performance threshold) to be... (3) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+I find the full  body of evidence (the contents of the dossier and the confidential file) that will be considered in tenure decisions to be... (4) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+17 Is what's expected in order to earn tenure clear to you regarding your performance as:
+
+
+
+Not applicable (1)
+
+Very clear (2)
+
+Fairly clear (3)
+
+Neither clear nor unclear (4)
+
+Fairly unclear (5)
+
+Very unclear (6)
+
+Decline to answer (7)
+
+a scholar (e.g., research and creative work) (1) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+a teacher (2) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+an advisor to students (3) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+a colleague in your department or program (4) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+a campus citizen (e.g., service, committees). (5) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+a member of the broader community (e.g. service, outreach) (6) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+18 Is what's expected in order to earn tenure reasonable to you regarding your performance as:
+
+
+
+Not applicable (1)
+
+Very reasonable (2)
+
+Somewhat reasonable (3)
+
+Neither reasonable nor unreasonable (4)
+
+Somewhat unreasonable (5)
+
+Very unreasonable (6)
+
+Decline to answer (7)
+
+a scholar (e.g., research and creative work) (1) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+a teacher (2) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+an advisor to students (3) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+a colleague in your department or program (4) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+a campus citizen (e.g., service, committees). (5) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+a member of the broader community (e.g. service, outreach) (6) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+19 How much mentoring (formal or informal) did you receive regarding how to approach the tenure process?
+
+None at all  (1) 
+
+A little  (2) 
+
+A moderate amount  (3) 
+
+A lot  (4) 
+
+A great deal  (5) 
+
+Not applicable  (6) 
+
+
+
+
+
+Page Break
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+20 
+III. Promotion:  
+This next set of items asks about the promotion process at Cal Lutheran. 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+21 Please rate the level of clarity you have regarding the following aspects of promotion.
+
+
+
+Not applicable (1)
+
+Very clear (2)
+
+Fairly clear (3)
+
+Neither clear nor unclear (4)
+
+Fairly unclear (5)
+
+Very unclear (6)
+
+Decline to answer (7)
+
+the promotion from assistant professor to associate professor is... (1) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+the promotion from lecturer to senior lecturer is... (7) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+the promotion from associate professor to full professor is... (2) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+the criteria (what things are evaluated) for promotion in rank are... (3) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+the promotion standards (the performance thresholds) for promotion in rank are... (4) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+the full  body of evidence (the contents of the dossier and the confidential file) considered for promotion in rank is... (5) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+the timeframe within which assistant or associate professors should apply for promotion in rank is... (6) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+22 How much mentoring (formal or informal) did you receive regarding how to approach the promotion process?
+
+None at all  (1) 
+
+A little  (2) 
+
+A moderate amount  (3) 
+
+A lot  (4) 
+
+A great deal  (5) 
+
+Not applicable  (6) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+23 
+Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements regarding tenure and promotion at Cal Lutheran:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+24 From what I can gather, tenure and promotion decisions at Cal Lutheran are based primarily on performance rather than on politics, relationships or demographics.
+
+Strongly agree  (1) 
+
+Somewhat agree  (2) 
+
+Neither agree nor disagree  (3) 
+
+Somewhat disagree  (4) 
+
+Strongly disagree  (5) 
+
+Decline to answer  (6) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+25 From what I can gather, tenure and promotion criteria and standards are consistently applied to all candidates at Cal Lutheran.  
+
+Strongly agree  (1) 
+
+Somewhat agree  (2) 
+
+Neither agree nor disagree  (3) 
+
+Somewhat disagree  (4) 
+
+Strongly disagree  (5) 
+
+Decline to answer  (6) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+26 I have received mixed messages about the requirements for tenure and promotion from senior colleagues.
+
+Strongly agree  (1) 
+
+Somewhat agree  (2) 
+
+Neither agree nor disagree  (3) 
+
+Somewhat disagree  (4) 
+
+Strongly disagree  (5) 
+
+Decline to answer  (6) 
+
+
+
+
+
+Page Break
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Page Break
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+27 
+III. Perspectives on specific ART practices and policies at Cal Lutheran.  
+These questions ask you to consider potential changes to our current system.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+28 The current Faculty Handbook states that teaching effectiveness is ""weighted most heavily.""  Should university-wide weight ranges be assigned to each evaluation category to clarify the promotion and tenure criteria and guidelines for both candidates and evaluators?
+
+Yes  (1) 
+
+No  (2) 
+
+Unsure  (3) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+29 Because the nature of teaching effectiveness, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service differs in some respects among academic disciplines, should discipline-specific standards for tenure and promotion be developed by departments or program areas?
+
+Yes  (1) 
+
+No  (2) 
+
+Unsure  (3) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+30 To what extent do you agree that contributions	to diversity, equity, and inclusion should	be added to the criteria for evaluation in tenure and promotion decisions? Such	 contributions	can	be	part	of	teaching,	advising,	research, and/or	service.
+
+Strongly agree  (1) 
+
+Somewhat agree  (2) 
+
+Neither agree nor disagree  (3) 
+
+Somewhat disagree  (4) 
+
+Strongly disagree  (5) 
+
+Decline to answer  (6) 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+31 For the purposes of promotion and tenure, I think advising should be evaluated under...
+
+Advising (i.e., remain as a stand-alone criterion)  (1) 
+
+Teaching  (2) 
+
+Service  (3) 
+
+Other  (4) ________________________________________________
+
+
+
+
+
+Page Break
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+32 
+IV. Open-Ended Questions  
+The following questions ask you to share more generally about your perspectives and experiences with the ART process at Cal Lutheran.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+33 In your opinion, on what are tenure decisions primarily based at Cal Lutheran?
+
+________________________________________________________________
+
+________________________________________________________________
+
+________________________________________________________________
+
+________________________________________________________________
+
+________________________________________________________________
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+34 What is working well with our current tenure and promotion practices at Cal Lutheran?
+
+________________________________________________________________
+
+________________________________________________________________
+
+________________________________________________________________
+
+________________________________________________________________
+
+________________________________________________________________
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+35 What are specific elements that could be improved with our current tenure and promotion practices at Cal Lutheran?
+
+________________________________________________________________
+
+________________________________________________________________
+
+________________________________________________________________
+
+________________________________________________________________
+
+________________________________________________________________
+
+
+
+End of Block: Default Question Block
+
+
+
+
+
+Page of 
+
+
+
+Page 1 of 20</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Salary Policies.txt [/INST] Salary Policies
+
+
+
+Dennison 
+
+
+
+
+
+Wabash - Merit
+
+
+
+Northeastern University 
+
+
+
+https://faculty.northeastern.edu/handbook/
+
+
+
+https://faculty.northeastern.edu/handbook/appointments-promotion-and-tenure/compensation/</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Sample Text for CLU Handbook.txt [/INST] Sample Text for CLU Handbook
+
+
+
+
+
+Service to the Community Text: 
+
+
+
+https://www.gvsu.edu/provost/faculty-responsibilities-in-the-area-of-service-113.htm
+
+
+
+Administrative Service
+
+
+
+https://www.boisestate.edu/policy/academic-affairs-faculty-administration/policy-title-faculty-promotion-guidelines/
+
+
+
+Appointments of academic administrators with tenured faculty appointments are governed by sections I.A and II.D.1 above. For academic administrators hired with a faculty appointment without tenure, a minimum of three years of service at Loyola Marymount University and at least three courses taught in the affiliate Department/Program are required before eligibility for tenure and promotion. 
+
+Applications for promotion in rank and/or advancement to tenure from academic officers shall follow the procedures for tenure and promotion for tenure-line faculty detailed in the Faculty Handbook and Handbook Addendum A (the Rank & Tenure Resource Manual). Academic administrators applying for tenure and/or promotion shall be evaluated according to departmental standards for quantity and quality of scholarship and/or creative works and for quality of teaching. At the time of appointment to the administrative post or at the time an administrator is advanced to the tenure track, the academic administrator/faculty member, Department Chair, Dean, and Provost shall enter into a Memorandum of Understanding outlining the service and administrative expectations for the administrator/faculty member. For pre-tenure administrators/faculty, the MOU shall also detail the timeline for tenure and promotion, including the minimum number of courses required and the scheduling of pre-tenure reviews. Changes to the MOU may only be made with the agreement of the academic administrator/faculty member, Department Chair, Dean, and Provost. 
+
+If denied tenure, the candidate may not re-apply for tenure and loses the tenure- line faculty appointment, though she/he may continue to serve in her/his administrative position. If a tenured administrator’s application for advancement in rank to full professor is denied, he/she may not reapply in the subsequent academic year. 
+
+
+
+Alleged Misconduct
+
+Should allegations of serious misconduct against a faculty member arise during the tenure review process or after review, but before the date tenure is granted, the Dean has the discretion to either: 
+
+(1) Give the faculty member a full, written description of the alleged facts and 
+
+circumstances and invite his or her response. The faculty member’s response will be included, with the allegations, in the dossier.
+or (2) Suspend the tenure evaluation process and refer the misconduct allegations to the appropriate internal bodies for resolution. Upon resolution, the tenure process will resume. 
+
+Allegations of serious misconduct include, but are not limited to, unethical conduct, violations of University policies concerning discrimination against a member of a protected class, grave personal misconduct that bears on one’s fitness as a faculty member, criminal acts and plagiarism. 
+
+Timing Issues
+
+The Rank and Tenure Committee, Provost, and President will endeavor to complete their work consistent with the schedule outlined in the calendar. These dates should not be interpreted as guaranteed by the candidates. Therefore, a missed deadline by the Rank and Tenure Committee, Provost, or President is not an event subject to Grievance (see section 2.16 Grievance). The President will notify candidates in writing of any significant delay in the decision process. 
+
+Limited to Dossier
+
+The process for promotion and appointment depends on a careful evaluation by a peer committee of all evidence deemed appropriate for consideration at the time the evaluation report is written. Subsequent recommendations by the department chair, dean or Provost should be based only on this body of evidence. 
+
+In order to be considered, additional evidence, that becomes available after the evaluation report is submitted, must be reviewed by the evaluation committee to determine if the evaluation report should be amended. The revision of the report must be done expeditiously so that the Promotions and Tenure Committee can act in a timely manner. 
+
+Expectations of Reviewers  (Chapman)
+
+a. At all stages of the review process, evaluation of faculty members shall be based on (1) the established unit criteria for tenure and/or promotion; (2) the annual report or electronic portfolio; and, (3) the faculty member's contractual responsibilities, which should be clearly defined by the faculty member in the review file materials. 
+
+b. With the exception of the Provost, reviewers shall consider only the material contained in the faculty member's portfolio. If a reviewer believes the material contained in the portfolio is insufficient for a thorough review, the reviewer may note this in his or her evaluation letter. However, a reviewer who believes a portfolio to be inadequate may not expand the scope of his or her review beyond the material in the portfolio to remedy this perceived inadequacy. The Provost, in making his or her decision, may consider pertinent employment information not contained within the critical year, tenure, or promotion portfolio. 
+
+
+
+Redlands
+
+The members of the Faculty Review Committee individually read the dossier file of every faculty member undergoing review. After the Review Committee members have read a dossier, they may meet together with the appropriate Dean or the Provost to discuss the case. The members of the Review Committee and the administrator(s) limit their discussion strictly to the materials in the review dossier (§3.9.4), which are considered in light of the applicable criteria (§3.9.3) and standards (§§3.9.5, 3.9.7, 3.9.8, 3.9.9). 
+
+Information outside of the dossier that Committee members or an administrator might possess that is not reflected in the dossier is not admitted for consideration at any stage of the review process. As indicated above (§3.10.3), the Faculty Review Committee may augment the dossier as required by soliciting additional information from the candidate or from persons either on or off campus. 
+
+If the Review Committee determines that additional information is required regarding a specific issue, it also may invite the relevant department chair, a departmental or School designate, the Director of the Library, the Athletic Director, the relevant Dean, or the Provost to meet with the Committee. The Review Committee may not turn to one of its deliberating members for such information. If the Review Committee augments the review dossier through such a conversation, the Dean must notify the faculty member and summarize in writing any information entered into the dossier file to which the candidate might wish to respond. Such notification comprises the act of augmentation (maintaining confidentiality as in all aspects of the review process) and any new information to which the candidate might wish to respond. This process and the time-line for such a response are the same as stated in §3.10.5. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Besides letters from external reviewers, can there be material included in the dossier that is not made available to the candidate for review when he or she signs the signature statement? 
+
+Only the material identified in the Administrative Guidelines on page 8, III.C.2.k. (external letters of assessment), is listed as confidential and excluded from the candidate’s review or inspection. Before the dossier goes to the committee, the candidate signs a statement that he or she has reviewed all materials in the dossier, with the exception of that section. If material is added to the dossier afterwards, excluding the committee and administrative letters, the candidate should be so informed and be able to review it. (Page 8, III.C.2.l., .m.; page 11, III.F.; page 51, Appendix F.) 
+
+If candidates disagree with statements by peer or internal reviewers, may they ask that they be removed or write a rebuttal? 
+
+If statements are factually inaccurate, candidates should discuss their concerns with the department head who should do what is possible to correct factual errors. However, if the disagreement is with the evaluation itself, there should be no change, and no rebuttal. Candidates sign they have reviewed the dossier, not that they agree with any assessments made in it. If they feel that something about their intentions or methodology needs to be clarified, they may address that in their narrative statement. (Page 7, III.C.2.e, .f) 
+
+Can information be added to the dossier after the department committee has reviewed it, and if so, must the committee meet again to review the dossier and write a new letter? 
+
+It is not appropriate to add information to the dossier after it has been reviewed if that information was available at the time the dossier was assembled and reviewed, unless a significant error had been made. However, until February 15, if there are new achievements that might have an impact on the record–a judgment will need to be made by the appropriate administrator–then that information must be sent back to all who have already acted on the dossier. If the new information has no impact on the recommendation, then that is all that need be indicated. (Pages 11, III.F.) 
+
+Can a dossier be withdrawn after it has been sent forward for review? 
+
+Once a dossier has been completed and the candidate has signed that he or she has reviewed it, and the peer review committee begins its review, the formal process has begun. However, if it is a promotion review only, and if the peer review committee does not recommend promotion and the department head agrees, the head should discuss with the candidate the advisability of withdrawing the dossier from further consultation. (Pages 19, V.D.) 
+
+
+
+Division Criteria
+
+LMU
+
+College/School and Departmental Rank & Tenure (R&T) Standards 
+
+Every academic department is responsible for developing standards for the purpose of making recommendations on faculty advancement to tenure and/or promotion in rank. The following statement on Department Standards incorporates and embraces the spirit of the descriptions and expectations that define the Assistant, Associate, and Full Professor at LMU and as stated in the LMU Faculty Handbook. The term “department standards” applies to the program standards of autonomous programs and the school standards of the School of Education. 
+
+A. ESTABLISHMENT OF STANDARDS 
+
+1. Department Standards should take into consideration Loyola Marymount University’s Mission, the College or School’s Mission, the Department Departmental/Program’s Mission, principles of academic freedom, and, if appropriate, accepted practices in professional discipline-specific associations, as well as LMU’s commitments to supporting teaching and scholarship/creative work that crosses disciplinary boundaries. 
+
+2. Department Standards must incorporate rank and tenure standards, descriptions of expectations for teaching and advising, scholarship or creative works and service. Regarding scholarly and/or creative works, candidates must be evaluated on the basis of their entire body of work, with the expectation that evidence is demonstrated of ongoing productivity. Department Standards may define or stipulate what constitutes evidence of ongoing productivity. 
+
+3. Department Standards for advancement to tenure and/or promotion are submitted to the appropriate College or School Dean, who is responsible for coordinating this process. 
+
+56 
+
+4. Autonomous programs in a college or school may develop their own standards with permission of the respective Dean. 
+
+5. The School of Education (SOE) will develop School Standards rather than Department Standards. 
+
+6. The College or School Dean is responsible for ensuring appropriate consistency in protection of academic freedom, rigor, equity, and balance of Department Standards across the College or School. Therefore, the Dean will review, suggest revisions, and finally approve the Department Standards. Once approved, the Dean forwards the Department Standards to the Provost. 
+
+7. The Provost is responsible for ensuring appropriate consistency in protection of academic freedom, rigor, equity, and balance across Colleges and Schools. Therefore, the Provost reviews and, if necessary, returns Department Standards to the appropriate Dean with questions and/or suggestions for revisions. The Provost shall have final say over whether Department Standards conform to the rank and tenure standards, descriptions of expectations for teaching and advising, scholarship or creative works and service. The Provost will approve the final version of a Department’s Standards and then submit them to the President for authorization. 
+
+8. The President will authorize the final version of the Department or Program Standards and will return them to the Provost for distribution to the respective Dean and Department Chair. A copy of every set of Department and Program Standards will be maintained by the individual College or School. 
+
+PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
+
+For some candidates, public engagement may be a major facet of one or all three major domains (i.e., research, teaching, and service). Public engagement involves faculty members drawing on their expertise to address or respond to societal problems, concerns, issues, or interests to contribute to the public good. Notably, a continuum exists such that public engagement is more integral to the work of some faculty members than of others. Public engagement often occurs in collaboration with public or private communities or organizations at the local, state, national, or international level for the mutually beneficial exchange of knowledge and resources in a context of partnership and reciprocity. To the extent that they encapsulate the key concepts outlined here, a variety of other terms, such as civic scholarship, community partnerships, innovation and entrepreneurship engagement, outreach, public-facing scholarship, public impact research, public service, social innovation, and technology transfer, may be considered public engagement in the context of research, teaching, and/or service. 
+
+SEE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
+
+
+
+
+
+Mission
+
+
+
+https://www.whitworth.edu/cms/media/whitworth/documents/administration/academic-affairs/faculty-handbook/section%207.pdf
+
+
+
+Mentoring
+
+See also witworth
+
+
+
+DEPARTMENT CHAIR CANDIDATES
+
+
+
+Evaluation of Tenure and/or Promotion Forms: These forms are completed by: (1) the Department TAP committee; (2) the Department Chair; (3) the School TAP committee; and (4) the School Dean. These forms are filled and included in the dossier as successive evaluations take place. (If the candidate is a department chair, the department chair recommendation form will be completed by an Associate Dean or other senior faculty member in the school chosen by the dean.)
+
+DEPARTMENT CHAIR 
+
+Annual Evaluations
+
+The annual faculty evaluations are intentionally not part of the promotion portfolio. However, Department Chairs may use information from candidates’ annual evaluations to support their recommendation, e.g., in discussions of longitudinal development or particular milestones of achievement that would help put the chairs’ recommendation in proper context. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Collegiality
+
+Can collegiality be a factor in tenure reviews? 
+
+If collegiality is to be considered as a factor, it should be according to its impact on the candidate’s contributions to one or more of the three cells evaluated in the dossier. For example, a candidate’s lack of collegiality, defined as the ability to collaborate and cooperate constructively, can be addressed in the teaching cell when it impinges on his or her ability to work with colleagues in advising students or in preparing them for prerequisites for more advanced courses, or in preparing them for group activities required of the academic discipline; or in the research cell when it impinges on the candidate’s ability to work collaboratively with colleagues in developing research or creative activities, or in creating grant proposals or organizing conferences; or in service when it prevents departmental committees or programs from functioning as they should. 
+
+At the same time, we need to heed the warning from the 1999 AAUP report, that “invoking collegiality as a separate element can insure homogeneity and threaten academic freedom. Moreover, it can be confused with the expectation that a faculty member exhibit enthusiasm, dedication, a constructive attitude, and a willingness to defer to the judgments of superiors.” (Chronicle for Higher Education, September 22, 1999) 
+
+
+
+PSU
+
+
+
+
+
+ACCELERATED REVIEWS
+
+
+
+Accelerated Reviews  - Chapman
+
+A faculty member is not typically considered for tenure or promotion if he or she fails to provide notice of intent by the published deadline; however, he or she may be considered if he or she can provide documentation of the extraordinary circumstances requiring immediate tenure or promotion consideration. The faculty member shall submit this documentation to the Chair of the Faculty Personnel Council (FPC) and to the Provost, who shall decide (1) if immediate review is warranted, and, (2) if warranted, what documentation shall be required. If an accelerated review is approved, the faculty member shall submit the requested documentation to the appropriate Unit Faculty Review Committee (FRC or FPRC, depending on rank) for evaluation. In cases where the appropriate Unit Faculty Review Committee is unable to review the file in a timely matter, the review shall be conducted by the chair of the Unit Faculty Review Committee, the Dean, the Chair of the FPC, and the Provost. 
+
+SCU - 3.4.3.2 Early Application for Tenure 
+
+Faculty members ordinarily are not encouraged to apply for tenure before the penultimate year of the probationary period. Early tenure requires evidence that the candidate has met the normal standards for tenure as specified in 3.4.2. A faculty member who wishes to apply before the penultimate year should consult with senior members of his or her department to determine if an early application is advisable. 
+
+If an early application for tenure is denied, the faculty member may not reapply until the penultimate year of the probationary period.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] SECONDARY ASSIGNMENTS POLICY.txt [/INST] SECONDARY ASSIGNMENTS POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+
+
+Policy Number:
+
+III – 3.6.7
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President, Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+All Canisius College employees.
+
+History:
+
+
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines regarding the acceptance of a Secondary Assignment within the college. 
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Secondary Assignmentsare additional assignments within the college where the duties are clearly outside of the regular responsibilities of the employee’s primary job with the college.
+
+POLICY
+
+It is the policy of Canisius College to permit employees to accept a Secondary Assignment within the college under certain approved circumstances and in accordance with the guidelines set forth in this policy. Secondary Assignments are generally temporary and are not benefit-eligible, except where required by law.  
+
+Note: This policy does not govern secondary employment outside of Canisius College.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+I.	General Requirements for Secondary Assignments
+
+The responsibilities associated with Secondary Assignment are clearly outside of the employee’s primary job responsibilities. 
+
+The intended Secondary Assignment does not diminish the employee’s effectiveness in the employee’s primary job with the college. 
+
+The college’s best interest is served by allowing the Secondary Assignment. 
+
+The employee is qualified to perform the responsibilities of the Secondary Assignment. 
+
+II.	Procedures Applicable to All Secondary Assignments
+
+Employees who seek a Secondary Assignment within Canisius College, including part-time teaching engagements, must obtain prior written approval from the employee’s current direct supervisor and area vice president. In determining Secondary Assignment eligibility, the supervisor and area vice president considers whether the assignment meets the general requirements described in this policy. 
+
+All Secondary Assignment pay is based on the applicable pay structure for the work to be performed and must be reported and paid in accordance with current payroll and FLSA guidelines:
+
+A non-exempt employee must be compensated on an hourly basis for any Secondary Assignment and is entitled to overtime pay where applicable.
+
+A non-exempt employee’s total hours among assignments will be accumulated to determine weekly overtime. 
+
+Supervisors are responsible for monitoring and ensuring compliance with this policy. 
+
+It is the responsibility of both the primary and secondary supervisors to coordinate with one another regarding applicable leave administration and compensation, including eligibility for overtime pay for non-exempt employees, where due.
+
+Continuation of the Secondary Assignment will be reviewed at the time of the employee’s annual evaluation.  If either the employee’s current direct supervisor and area vice president determines that the employee’s Secondary Assignment within the college interferes with the performance or ability of the employee to meet his or her primary job requirements, the Secondary Assignment will be terminated.
+
+III.	Procedures Relating to Staff Accepting Adjunct Teaching Assignments
+
+The following procedures apply to staff employees seeking to accept an instructional assignment that are not part of their normal job responsibilities. 
+
+A. 	Staff Accepting Adjunct Teaching Assignments 
+
+Any staff member interested in adjunct teaching must possess the proper academic credentials or other demonstrated equivalent experience that provides evidence to support effective teaching and student achievement, as well as meet all institutional, accreditation, and regulatory requirements applicable to course instructors. 
+
+The teaching assignment must be approved by the staff member’s supervisor. If approved, the details of the teaching assignment and the compensation will be determined by the appropriate academic department chair, the academic dean, and the vice president for academic affairs. Staff approved to teach courses must continue to fulfill their primary employment responsibilities and otherwise meet the requirement set forth in Sections B and C below.
+
+B. 	Balancing Primary and Secondary Adjunct Teaching Assignments 
+
+An eligible staff employee may seek a Secondary Assignment to teach a course as an adjunct instructor under one of the following conditions:
+
+The staff member teaches the course during non-work hours (i.e., evenings or weekends);
+
+The staff member, supervisor and area vice president agree on a flexible work schedule by which the staff member performs part of his or her primary job responsibilities outside normal work hours; or
+
+The staff member teaches without charge to the college if the teaching is done during regular working hours and the employee’s supervisor and area vice president approves the teaching assignment.
+
+Staff who teach as adjunct faculty in accordance with paragraph (1) or (2) above shall be compensated according to the regular compensation schedule for adjuncts. Adjunct compensation is not provided for staff whose normal job responsibilities include teaching as part of their primary assignment and on which their contract and base salary are based. 
+
+C.	Course Limitations
+
+A staff member is not permitted to accept a Secondary Assignment to teach more than one course per semester.
+
+REFERENCING THE POLICY
+
+Hours of Work Policy
+Outside Activities Policy
+Overtime Policy 
+Payment of Services Policy</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Section 7 Disciplinary Action Short of Dismissal.txt [/INST] Section 7	Disciplinary Action Short of Dismissal
+
+The College encourages a supportive problem-solving approach to workplace problems.  The process in this section will normally be implemented when a faculty member exhibits professional incompetence, neglect of obligations and responsibilities as set forth in the Faculty Bylaws, or gross personal misconduct that do not give rise to a major sanction (i.e., suspension or dismissal) and the conduct in question is not regulated under any other specific College policy (e.g., the Sexual and Gender-based Misconduct Policy for Faculty or the Unlawful Discrimination and Harassment Policy).  
+
+The imposition of disciplinary action short of suspension or dismissal for adequate cause is intended to provide faculty with notice of deficiencies and an opportunity to improve.  Some conduct, however, may be of such serious nature that suspension or dismissal for adequate cause pursuant to Article IV, Section 8 may be appropriate and the College reserves the right to proceed with dismissal for adequate cause proceedings, without written reprimand or minor sanctions, even if the conduct at question constitutes a first offense.
+
+	The Provost’s Consultation with the Faculty Member 
+
+If the Provost has information that a faculty member is demonstrating professional incompetence, neglect of obligations and responsibilities as set forth in the Faculty Bylaws, or gross personal misconduct and the Provost believes that the situation will not be improved without administrative intervention, then the Provost will meet with the faculty member to discuss the concerns, to consider the faculty member’s response, and if possible to arrive at an informal resolution that is acceptable to the faculty member, to other involved parties (if any), and to the College.  
+
+The College expects that in the majority of cases problems will be resolved through such consultation and that further administrative action will be unnecessary. The written resolution shall be entered into the faculty member’s personnel file.
+
+	Written Reprimand
+
+If the matter cannot be resolved through consultation, the Provost will issue a written reprimand to the faculty member. The Provost’s letter will specify the basis for the reprimand, identify appropriate remedial action(s), and invite the faculty member to respond in writing. Based upon that response, the Provost may modify the letter, withdraw it, or let it stand. The written warning and, if submitted, the faculty member's written response, shall be entered into the faculty member’s permanent personnel file.
+
+A faculty member who believes that a written reprimand has been issued unfairly may petition the Appeals and Hearing Committee for redress (""Review and Appeals Procedures for Certain Faculty Grievances"" in Article IV, Section 9). 
+
+	Minor Sanctions
+
+If the Provost believes that the matter cannot be resolved through consultation and that it is serious enough to warrant disciplinary action beyond a written reprimand, the Provost will impose a specific minor administrative sanction. Such sanction may include but is not necessarily limited to mandatory counseling or training, removal from an appointed position or assignment, reassignment of duties, or denial of a specific faculty privilege. The Provost’s written notice of sanction to the faculty member will include a summary of the case, including the evidence on which the sanction is based and the outcome the Provost hopes to achieve, as well as provide the faculty member with an opportunity to persuade the Provost that the proposed sanction not be implemented.  A copy of the Provost’s letter and the response (if any) by the faculty member will be placed in the faculty member’s permanent personnel file.
+
+A faculty member who believes that a minor sanction has been unjustly imposed may petition the Appeals and Hearing Committee for redress (""Review and Appeals Procedures for Certain Faculty Grievances"" in Article IV, Section 9). 
+
+If the Provost believes that the conduct of a faculty member is sufficiently grave to justify a major administrative sanction (i.e., suspension or dismissal), then dismissal for adequate cause proceedings as described in Article IV, Section 8.2 will be initiated.  The initiation of a proceeding to impose suspension or dismissal need not be preceded by steps described above.</s>"
+<s>[INST] Sex Offenses.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy - Version 1.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] SS Changes to Annual Security and Fire Safety Report (Clery Compliance)Draft 4.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] SS Comments & Suggested Revisions to DRAFT Grievance and Dismissal (5.11).txt [/INST] 1
+
+Dismissal and Complaint/Grievance Policy Revisions
+
+Version 3 (2/24 Update)
+
+
+
+Executive Summary: Proposal to revise the Grievance and Dismissal processes in the Faculty Policies Handbook.  This proposal offers five shifts from current policy: 1) disentangle the dismissal and grievance processes; 2) clarify which elected faculty bodies hear and/or adjudicate dismissal and grievance proceedings; 3) incorporate AAUP guidelines and procedural protections in dismissal proceedings; 4) simplify the Complaint/Grievance processes such that the adjudicating committee can gather data and statements without the structure, demands and timeline of an evidentiary hearing, and 5) the creation of a new standing Complaints and Grievance Committee that will hear faculty complaints and grievances (the bar for grievable items has been lowered substantially).  Of these proposed changes, #1 is a matter of good governance policy, #2, #4, and #5 are merely streamlining and clarifying policies and structures that already exist, and #3 is incorporating the policy recommendation regarding academic freedom and tenure that have been considered the standard in higher education since 1968.    
+
+
+
+Context: The Faculty Affairs Committee would be slightly expanded (probably to 6 members) and would be the adjudicating body in the event of faculty dismissals.  The FAC would offer its professional recommendations on dismissal proceedings without its opinion being binding upon the President or Board of Regents.  This would not be a substantial departure from current practices: such faculty hearing committees already exist. In dismissal proceedings, the Faculty Policies Handbook (pg. 79) currently charges ART/FAC as an adjudicating committee: 
+
+
+
+Prior to the implementation of the dismissal, the data supporting the adequate cause for such action will be presented in writing to the ART Committee by the President or the President’s designee. If the ART Committee has engaged in post-tenure review of the faculty member and in monitoring a development plan, the Faculty Affairs Committee will serve as the initial review committee. The committee will obtain a written or oral statement from the faculty member (depending on which is preferred by the faculty member) with regard to the charges, and any other data the committee deems pertinent. The committee as a whole will consider the evidence and render an opinion. The opinion will be given to the faculty member and to the President without the opinion being binding upon the President.
+
+
+
+In addition to the ambiguity of the “development plan” language, there is also the notion that the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure committee is likely to be a party/witness to dismissal cases. Having it also function in an adjudicative capacity, in addition to the presence of the Provost on the ART committee, is procedurally problematic.  
+
+
+
+In the case of Grievance proceedings, the Faculty Policies Handbook (pg. 47) currently charges the Grievance Committee as a hearing committee: 
+
+
+
+The parties shall submit their evidence and witness lists to the Grievance Committee no later than seven calendar days prior to the hearing date. The Grievance Committee will cooperate with the grievant in securing witnesses and making available documentary and other evidence to the extent possible. The Grievance Committee shall promptly provide each party’s submitted evidence and witness lists to the other party. The committee may also request witnesses and documents that it believes would assist members in their deliberation. The Grievance Committee retains the right to exclude evidence if it determines it is irrelevant or prejudicial . . . The Grievance Committee will present its decision in writing within 15 business days of the hearing to the parties, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the President of the University . . . The President shall review the record and respond within 30 business days as to the final disposition of the grievance.
+
+
+
+The grievance proceedings, as currently written, define grievable actions too narrowly and are not sufficiently specific in their charges to the grievance committee and assume a “hearing structure” that is unnecessarily complex for the task.  Expanding the committee charge to hear what were formerly deemed “complaints,” and simplifying the fact-finding process, rightly situates an elected faculty body in a position of responsibility regarding faculty discipline whilst making clearer the relationship between the recommendations of the committee and the decision-making process and power of the university provost and president.
+
+
+
+
+
+Policy Proposals Below
+
+Dismissal is a severance action by which the University, for adequate cause, ends its employment relationship with members of the ranked faculty. Adequate cause for dismissal shall be based upon justifiable reasons (see 1.a below).  The burden of proof that adequate cause exists shall rest with the University.
+
+Dismissal Procedures (with minor modifications from AAUP Statement on Ac. Freedom and Tenure)
+
+a. Adequate cause for a dismissal will be related, directly and substantially, to the fitness of faculty members in their professional capacities as teachers or researchers. Dismissal will not be used to restrain faculty members in their exercise of academic freedom or other rights of American citizens.9
+
+Examples of conduct that may raise questions regarding a faculty member’s fitness as a teacher or researcher include, but not necessarily limited to: 
+
+demonstrated professional incompetence or dishonesty in teaching or research;
+
+continued neglect of faculty responsibilities as set forth in this handbook despite oral and/or written warnings; 
+
+serious personal misconduct which substantially impairs the individual’s fulfillment of institutional responsibilities;
+
+deliberate and serious violation of the rights and freedom of fellow faculty members, administrators, or students; 
+
+conviction of any felony; 
+
+conviction of a crime directly related to the faculty member’s fitness to practice their profession; 
+
+inability to perform the essential functions of the position despite reasonable accommodation (if requested pursuant to the University’s ADA Policy);*
+
+theft or willful destruction of property;
+
+serious failure to follow the canons and professional ethics of one’s discipline and those set down in the “Professional Ethics and Relations” section of this handbook; 
+
+falsification of credentials and experience; 
+
+failure to meet the performance standards set forth in the “Faculty Responsibilities” section of this handbook after oral and/or written warnings; 
+
+sexual harassment or unlawful discrimination of a student, University employee, or member of the University community (e.g., volunteer, vendor, etc.).** 
+
+
+
+* Dismissals because of a mental or physical disability for which no reasonable accommodation can be made are resolved pursuant to the Mental or Physical Disability Policy.
+
+** Allegations of unlawful discrimination, harassment, and sexual and gender-based misconduct against a faculty member will be investigated and resolved pursuant to the Policy on Sexual Harassment Prohibited by Title IX, HR Policy 006 - Harassment, Discrimination, Biased Conduct and Retaliation Prohibition or the Freedom from Harassment Policy, as may be applicable.
+
+b. Steps Prior to Dismissal: Dismissal of a faculty member with continuous tenure, or with a probationary or other nontenured appointment before the end of the specified term, will be preceded by (1) discussions, including a documented history thereof, between the faculty member and appropriate administrative officers looking toward a mutual settlement (2) informal inquiry by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, which may, if it fails to effect an adjustment, determine whether in its opinion dismissal proceedings should be undertaken, without its opinion being binding upon the president; (3) a statement of charges, framed with reasonable particularity by the Provost or the Provost’s delegate.
+
+(1) The Dean’s Consultation with the Faculty Member 
+
+If the faculty member’s Dean has evidence that the faculty member has demonstrated or is demonstrating conduct that may constitute adequate cause for dismissal as specified above, then the Dean will meet with the faculty member to discuss the concerns and to consider the faculty member’s response.  If requested by the faculty member, the Dean will provide the faculty member with a written statement of concerns. 
+
+The Dean may request further investigation into the matter by other appropriate University personnel (i.e., human resources, Title IX Coordinator, etc.) before or after meeting with the faculty member. However, before moving beyond this stage in these procedures, the Dean will afford the faculty member a reasonable opportunity to respond to any information that the Dean believes would constitute adequate cause for dismissal and, if possible, arrive at a mutually agreeable settlement. 
+
+(2) Informal Consultation with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee 
+
+If the matter cannot be resolved through consultation with the faculty member and if the Dean believes that adequate cause for dismissal exists, the Dean forwards a recommendation for dismissal or severe sanction to the Provost. The Provost may meet with the faculty member, at the Provost’s discretion.  At any time, if the Provost and the faculty member reach a mutually agreeable settlement, the matter will be concluded. 
+
+If the Provost believes that the faculty member has demonstrated or is demonstrating conduct that may constitute adequate cause for dismissal and a mutual settlement is not possible, the Provost will consult with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee to informally and confidentially consider the Dean’s recommendation for dismissal or severe sanction.  The faculty member will be notified of this action by the Provost. The role of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee is to consider the Dean’s recommendation and consult with the Provost regarding the allegations.  The committee does not serve a fact-finding role.
+
+No later than five academic days after consulting with the Provost, the Faculty Senate Executive Committee may recommend a settlement acceptable to both the faculty member and the Provost, administrative disciplinary actions short of dismissal, that no administrative action be taken, that further investigation be undertaken, or that dismissal proceedings be initiated. The Faculty Senate Executive Committee’s recommendation is not binding on the Provost.
+
+After considering the recommendations of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, the Provost notifies in writing the faculty member:
+
+that no action will be taken and the matter is concluded;
+
+that further investigation into the matter by other appropriate University personnel (i.e., human resources, Title IX Coordinator, etc.) is warranted;
+
+that the Provost intends to impose sanctions short of dismissal (see Alternatives to Dismissal section); or 
+
+that the Provost intends to issue a statement of charges that provides grounds for dismissal under the procedures specified below. 
+
+(3)	Statement of Charges
+
+If the Provost intends to seek the faculty member’s dismissal, the Provost will provide the faculty member with a written statement of charges, framed with reasonable particularity, indicating the charges that provide grounds for the proposed dismissal action. At the same time, the Provost will inform the faculty member that a formal review hearing before the Faculty Affairs Committee will be initiated as specified below. 
+
+
+
+c. Referral to Faculty Affairs Committee: A dismissal, as defined in Regulation 1a, will be preceded by a statement of charges, and the individual concerned will have the right to be heard initially by the Faculty Affairs Committee.10 Members of the committee deeming themselves disqualified for bias or interest will remove themselves from the case, either at the request of the chair of the committee or on their own initiative. When assembling the Dismissal Panel from the membership of the Faculty Affairs Committee, each party to the dismissal will have a maximum of one challenge without stated cause.11  After recusals and removals, the remaining members who will be adjudicating the case will hereafter be referred to as the hearing committee or Dismissal Panel.  If there are not enough remaining members to form a panel the chair of the Faculty Affairs Committee will contact the Committee on Committees to request additional members, ideally selected from faculty in elected positions.
+
+(1) Suspension: Pending a final decision by the hearing committee, the faculty member will be suspended, or assigned to other duties in lieu of suspension, by the President (or the President’s designee) only if immediate harm to the faculty member or others is threatened by continuance or the continued functioning of the faculty member in the position would substantially impair or disrupt the regular functions of the University. Except for emergency, life threatening situations, before suspending a faculty member, pending an ultimate determination of the faculty member’s status through the institution’s hearing procedures, the administration President (or the President’s designee) will consult with the Provost and Faculty Affairs Committee concerning the propriety, the length, and the other conditions of the suspension. A suspension that is intended to be final is a dismissal and will be treated as such. Salary will continue during the period of the suspension.
+
+(2) The hearing committee may, with the consent of the parties concerned, hold joint prehearing meetings with the parties in order to (i) simplify the issues, (ii) effect stipulations of facts, (iii) provide for the exchange of documentary or other information, and (iv) achieve such other appropriate prehearing objectives as will make the hearing fair, effective, and expeditious, including but not limited to setting additional time for the gathering of documentary or other evidence.
+
+(3) Service of notice of hearing with specific charges in writing will be made at least twenty days prior to the hearing. The faculty member may waive a hearing or may respond to the charges in writing at any time before the hearing. If the faculty member waives a hearing, but denies the charges or asserts that the charges do not support a finding of adequate cause, the hearing committee will evaluate all available evidence and rest its recommendation upon the evidence in the record. Prior to issuing a recommendation, the committee may obtain testimony from witnesses and documentary or other evidence.
+
+If the faculty member fails to attend the review hearing without reasonable cause and does not deny the charges or assert that the charges do not support a finding of adequate cause, then the hearing will not take place, the chair of the hearing committee will refer the matter to the President for final disposition, and the faculty member will have waived all grievance rights pertaining to the dismissal action.
+
+(4) The hearing committee, in consultation with the President and the faculty member, will exercise its judgment as to whether the hearing should be public or private.
+
+Alternative Text for Consideration
+
+The proceedings will be closed and confidential, subject only to the need of the faculty member or the administration to comply with the procedures specified herein or to present evidence concerning the case in other judicial or administrative proceedings. Except for such simple announcements as may be required, covering the time of the hearing and similar matters, public statements and publicity about the case by either the faculty member or administrative officers will be avoided so far as possible.
+
+(5) During the proceedings the faculty member will be permitted to have an academic adviser and counsel of the faculty member’s choice.  Neither the advisor nor legal counsel may actively participate in any aspect of the dismissal process (i.e., address the committee, question witnesses, raise objections, etc.), including but not limited to the hearing.  The President (or President’s designee) will appoint a non-attorney administrator(s) to present the University’s case for dismissal. 
+
+(6) At the request of either party or the hearing committee, a representative of a responsible educational association will be permitted to attend the proceedings as an observer.  
+
+(7) A verbatim record of the hearing or hearings will be taken, and a copy will be made available to the faculty member without cost, at the faculty member’s request. The [Office of Human Resources] shall be the repository of the record.  The record shall be considered confidential and only the parties to the case may access it.
+
+(8) The burden of proof that adequate cause exists rests with the institution and will be satisfied only by clear and convincing the preponderance of the evidence in the record considered as a whole.
+
+
+
+(9) The hearing committee will grant reasonable adjournments to enable either party to investigate evidence as to which a valid claim of surprise is made.
+
+(10) The faculty member will be afforded an opportunity to obtain necessary witnesses and documentary or other evidence. The administration Provost (or Provost’s designee) and other administrators as may be applicable will cooperate with the hearing committee in securing witnesses and in making available documentary and other evidence.
+
+(11) The faculty member and the administration administrator(s) appointed by the President to present the case for dismissal will have the right to confront and cross-examine all witnesses. Where the witnesses cannot or will not appear, but the committee determines that the interests of justice require admission of their statements, the committee will identify the witnesses, disclose their statements, and, if possible, provide for interrogatories.
+
+(12) In the hearing of charges of incompetence, the testimony will include that of qualified faculty members from this or other institutions of higher education.
+
+(13) The hearing committee will not be bound by strict rules of legal evidence and may admit any evidence which is of probative value in determining the issues involved. Every possible effort will be made to obtain the most reliable evidence available.
+
+(14) The findings of fact and the decision will be based solely on the hearing record.
+
+(15) Except for such simple announcements as may be required, covering the time of the hearing and similar matters, public statements and publicity about the case by either the faculty member or administrative officers will be avoided so far as possible until the proceedings have been completed, including consideration by the governing board of the University. The President, Provost, and the faculty member will be notified of the decision in writing and will be given a copy of the record of the hearing.
+
+(16) If the hearing committee concludes that adequate cause for dismissal has not been established by the evidence in the record, it will so report to the president. If the president rejects the report, the president will state the reasons for doing so, in writing, to the hearing committee and to the faculty member and provide an opportunity for the filing of a grievance response before transmitting the case to the governing board. If the hearing committee concludes that adequate cause for a dismissal has been established, but that an academic penalty less than dismissal would be more appropriate, it will so recommend, with supporting reasons.
+
+Alternative Text for Consideration
+
+Within [five (5) academic days of conclusion of the hearing, the Chair of the hearing committee will present to the President written findings of fact and recommendations as to the review of the faculty member's dismissal; copies must at the same time be sent to the faculty member and the Provost.
+
+The committee report must contain written findings of fact and a recommendation whether the dismissal for cause action was warranted in light of the documented evidence
+
+The committee’s written findings of fact and recommendation shall be based on a simple majority vote
+
+Any dissenting opinions will be included in the written findings of fact and recommendation
+
+President’s Independent Review and Decision
+
+Within five (5) academic days after receipt of the hearing committee’s findings and recommendations, the President, in light of the documented evidence and hearing record, will issue an independent written decision on the matter, with copies to the committee, the faculty member, and the Provost.
+
+If the President sustains the hearing committee recommendation that adequate cause to dismiss the faculty member does not exist, the matter will be concluded,
+
+If the President determines that additional consideration by the committee is necessary, the President will remand the case back to the committee with specific objections.
+
+If the President concludes that the administration has established adequate cause for a dismissal, but that a sanction(s) less than dismissal would be more appropriate, the sanction(s) and effective date of sanction(s) will be stated in the President’s letter with supporting reasons.
+
+If the President concludes that the administration has established adequate cause for a dismissal and agrees that dismissal is appropriate, the effective date of the dismissal will be stated in the President’s letter with supporting reasons.  The President’s decision will be final, pending the faculty member’s filing of a grievance in accordance with the Complaint and Grievance Procedures section of this handbook.
+
+Grievance Rights
+
+The President’s decision may be the basis of a formal grievance.  Such grievance shall be limited to questions of inadequate consideration and/or whether the procedures set forth in this Dismissal for Adequate Cause Policy have been followed in the faculty member’s case.  The grievance must be filed in writing within ten academic days of receiving written notification from the President of the final decision.  The grievance committee will not substitute its judgment on the merits of the case, but rather determine whether the decision was the result of adequate consideration.
+
+Action by the Governing Board
+
+If dismissal or other severe sanction is recommended, the president will, on request of the faculty member, transmit to the governing board the record of the case. The governing board’s review will be based on the record of the committee hearing, and it will provide opportunity for argument, oral or written or both, by the principals at the hearing or by their represen­tatives. The decision of the hearing committee will either be sustained or the proceedings returned to the committee with specific objections. The committee will then reconsider, taking into account the stated objec­tions and receiving new evidence, if necessary. The governing board will make a final decision only after study of the committee’s reconsideration.
+
+Procedures for Imposition of Sanctions other than Dismissal
+
+a. If the administration believes that the conduct of a faculty member, although not constituting adequate cause for dismissal, is sufficiently grave to justify imposition of a severe sanction, such as suspension from service for a stated period, the administration may institute a proceeding to impose such a severe sanction; the procedures outlined in “Dismissal Proceedings” herein will govern such a proceeding.
+
+b. If the faculty member’s Dean or the Provost administration believes that the conduct of a faculty member justifies imposition of a minor sanction, such as a reprimand, it will notify the faculty member of the basis of the proposed sanction and provide the faculty member with an opportunity to persuade the administration that the proposed sanction should not be imposed. See the Alternatives to Dismissal clause for additional information.  
+
+A faculty member who believes that a major sanction has been incorrectly imposed under this paragraph, or that a minor sanction has been unjustly imposed, may, pursuant to the Complaint and Grievance Procedures section of this handbook Regulation 11, petition the faculty grievance committee for such action as may be appropriate.
+
+Terminal Salary or Notice
+
+If the appointment of a probationary faculty member or faculty member serving on a rolling contract is terminated, the faculty member will receive salary or notice in accordance with the following schedule: at least three months, if the final decision is reached by March 1 (or three months prior to the expiration) of the first year of probationary full-time service; at least six months, if the decision is reached by December 15 of the second year (or after nine months but prior to eighteen months) of probationary full-time service; at least one year, if the decision is reached after eighteen months of probationary full-time service or if the faculty member has tenure.12  
+
+See the Non-Reappointment of Probationary Faculty Members and Faculty on Rolling Contracts Policy, 
+
+With the exception of terminations due to mental or physical disability, this provision for terminal notice or salary need will not apply if the faculty member was terminated for adequate cause in accordance with the Dismissal Procedures above. in the event that there has been a finding that the conduct which justified dismissal involved moral turpitude. On the recommendation of the faculty hearing committee, or the president, the governing board, in determining what, if any, payments will be made beyond the effective date of dismissal, may take into account the length and quality of service of the faculty member.
+
+Academic Freedom and Protection against Discrimination
+
+a. All members of the faculty, whether tenured or not, are entitled to academic freedom as set forth in the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, formulated by the Association of American Colleges and Universities and the American Association of University Professors.
+
+b. All members of the faculty, whether tenured or not, are entitled to protection against illegal or unconstitutional discrimination by the University institution, or discrimination on a basis not demonstrably related to the faculty member’s professional performance.  See the Policy on Sexual Harassment Prohibited by Title IX, HR Policy 006 - Harassment, Discrimination, Biased Conduct and Retaliation Prohibition or the Freedom from Harassment Policy for additional information. including but not limited to race, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation.
+
+Complaints of Violation of Academic Freedom or of Discrimination in Nonreappointment
+
+If a faculty member on probationary or other non­tenured appointment alleges that a decision against reappointment was based significantly on considerations that violate (a) academic freedom or (b) govern­ing policies on making appointments without prejudice with respect to race, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation, the allegation will be given preliminary consideration by the Faculty Affairs Committee, which will seek to settle the matter by informal methods. The allegation will be accompanied by a statement that the faculty member agrees to the presentation, for the consideration of the faculty committee, of such reasons and evidence as the institution may allege in support of its decision. If the difficulty is unresolved at this stage and if the committee so recommends, the matter will be heard in the manner set forth in “Dismissal Proceedings” above, except that the faculty member making the complaint is responsible for stating the grounds upon which the allegations are based and the burden of proof will rest upon the faculty member. If the faculty member succeeds in establishing a prima facie case, it is incumbent upon those who made the decision against reappointment to come forward with evidence in support of their decision. Statistical evidence of improper discrimination may be used in establishing a prima facie case.
+
+An allegation that that a decision against reappointment was based on unlawful discrimination will be referred to the Assistant Director of Human Resources or Title IX Coordinator to be investigated according to the provisions of Policy on Sexual Harassment Prohibited by Title IX, HR Policy 006 - Harassment, Discrimination, Biased Conduct and Retaliation Prohibition or the Freedom from Harassment Policy, as may be applicable.  Allegations of unlawful discrimination will be considered and resolved before the case is presented to the Faculty Affairs Committee. Any resolution reached via the applicable policy above on the basis of an investigation into charges of unlawful discrimination related to a proposed non-reappointment will be provided to the Faculty Affairs Committee if the case is presented to it. 
+
+Administrative Personnel
+
+The foregoing regulations apply to administrative personnel who hold academic rank, but only in their capacity as faculty members. Administrators who allege that a consideration that violates academic freedom or governing policies against improper discrimination, as stated in Regulation 6, significantly contributed to a decision to terminate their appoint­ment to an administrative post or not to reappoint them are entitled to the procedures set forth in Regulation 6.
+
+Political Activities of Faculty Members
+
+Faculty members, as citizens, are free to engage in political activities. Where necessary, leaves of absence may be given approved by the Provost (or designee) for the duration of an election cam­paign or a term of office, on timely application, and for a reasonable period of time. The terms of such leave of absence will be set forth in writing, and the leave will not affect unfavorably the tenure status of a faculty member, except that time spent on such leave will not count as probationary service unless otherwise agreed to.13
+
+Part-Time Faculty Appointments 
+
+a. After having been reappointed beyond an initial term, a part-time faculty member who is subsequently notified of nonreappointment will be advised upon request of the reasons that contributed to the decision. Upon the faculty member’s further request, the reasons will be confirmed in writing. The faculty member will be afforded opportunity for review of the deci­sion by the Faculty Affairs Committee].
+
+b. For part-time faculty members who have served for three or more terms within a span of three years, the following additional protections of academic due process apply:
+
+(1) Written notice of reappointment or non­reappointment will be issued no later than one month before the end of the existing appointment. If the notice of reappointment is to be conditioned, for example, on suffi­ciency of student enrollment or on financial considerations, the specific conditions will be stated with the issuance of the notice.
+
+(2) When the part-time faculty member is denied reappointment to an available assignment (one with substantially identical responsibilities assigned to another part-time faculty member with less service), if the nonreappointed faculty member alleges that the decision was based on inadequate consideration, the allegation will be subject to review by the Faculty Affairs Committee. If this body, while not providing judgment on the merits of the decision, finds that the consideration has been inadequate in any substantial respects, it will remand the matter for fur­ther consideration accordingly.15
+
+c. Prior to consideration of reappointment beyond a seventh year, part-time faculty members who have taught at least twelve courses or six terms within those seven years shall be provided a comprehensive review with the potential result of (1) appointment with part-time tenure [where such exists], (2) appointment with part-time con­tinuing service, or (3) nonreappointment. Those appointed with tenure shall be afforded the same procedural safeguards as full-time tenured faculty. Those offered additional appointment without tenure shall have continuing appoint­ments and shall not be replaced by part-time appointees with less service who are assigned substantially identical responsibilities without having been afforded the procedural safeguards associated with dismissal.
+
+Other Academic Staff 
+
+a. In no case will a member of the academic staff who is not otherwise protected by the preceding regulations that relate to dismissal proceedings be dismissed without having been provided with a statement of reasons and an opportunity to be heard before a duly constituted committee.20 (A dismissal is a termination before the end of the period of appointment.)
+
+b. With respect to the nonreappointment of a member of such academic staff who establishes a prima facie case to the satisfaction of a duly constituted committee that considerations that violate academic freedom, or of governing poli­cies against improper discrimination as stated in “Complaints of Violation of Academic Freedom or of Discrimination in Nonreappointment,” significantly contributed to the nonreappointment, the academic staff member will be given a statement of reasons by those responsible for the nonreappointment and an opportunity to be heard by the committee.
+
+Grievance Procedures
+
+
+a. Before pursuing a formal grievance procedure, if the grievant feels comfortable in doing so, they should appeal to the person or official body responsible for the actions to which the grievant has objection or to the immediate supervisor, if any, of that person or body to determine if the complaint or problem may be resolved without resorting to formal action. This would normally be the department chair, program director or the dean, and such a meeting, including suggested remedies and points of discussion, should be documented by both parties. If the complainant is not comfortable addressing it with an immediate supervisor, they may address the issue with the next highest administrator or supervisor.  Formal grievance procedures may be initiated when a complainant has been unsuccessful in resolving the matter informally. 
+
+
+
+b. If any faculty member alleges cause for grievance in any matter not covered by the procedures described in the foregoing regulations, the faculty member may petition the elected Faculty Grievance Committee for redress. Such grievable issues include, but are not limited to: 
+
+workload, 
+
+teaching assignments, 
+
+annual evaluation, 
+
+disputes among faculty members, 
+
+infringement of academic freedom, 
+
+disciplinary actions, 
+
+retaliation,
+
+ improper scheduling, 
+
+denial of sabbatical, 
+
+denial of reappointment, 
+
+denial of promotion, or 
+
+prejudicial denial of salary increases. 
+
+
+
+c. The faculty grievant will prepare a petition that sets forth in detail the nature of the grievance and shall state against whom the grievance is directed. It shall contain any data which the grievant deems pertinent to the case.  The grievance consists of a written appeal, and any supporting documentation, which is transmitted by the faculty member to the Grievance Committee and to the University Provost, or where the grievance is against the action of the University Provost or President, to the President.  The grievance petition should include the following:
+
+A clear statement of facts upon which the grievance is based, including an explanation of how the faculty member alleges he or she has been adversely affected and the specific relief requested
+
+An identification of the person(s) or the college or University policy or procedure considered responsible for the alleged adverse condition, action, or inaction upon which the grievance is based and an explanation of why the person(s) is considered responsible or why the college or University policy or procedure is considered improper
+
+d. Upon receiving a grievance petition, any member of the Grievance Committee should recuse themselves from the case if they have or could be perceived to have a bias or a conflict of interest.
+
+e. The Grievance Committee (absent any recused members) will decide whether the grievance merits further investigation. The submission of a petition will not automatically result in an investigation or detailed consideration of the grievance. If the Grievance Committee determines that a further investigation is not warranted, it shall report that finding to the grievant within thirty days of receipt of the grievance. If the Grievance Committee determines that further action is warranted, it will be provided with all relevant information and will seek, in consultation with the Provost, or where the grievance is against the action of the University Provost the President, to bring about a settlement of the issue. The Provost or President shall indicate in writing their proposed terms of settlement.
+
+f. If such a settlement is not possible or is inappropriate, the Grievance Committee Panel can request further information on the matters relevant to the grievance petition. Upon receipt of the statement of charges, the person(s) against whom, or representing the unit against which, the grievance is lodged shall, if they wish to reply, have twenty (20) business days to present a response to the charges to the chair of the Grievance Committee.  The response must be in writing, and should include any relevant information, argumentation, or evidence that bears upon the matters relevant to the grievance. 
+
+g. Within five (5) business days after receipt of the response to the statement of charges from the party(ies) against whom the grievance has been lodged, the chair of the Grievance Committee shall have prepared and distributed to the grievant and to each member of the committee a complete copy of the response.  The Grievance Committee shall, within twenty (20) days of receipt of the response, deliver its final recommendation and/or position to the faculty member and Provost, or if the Provost if party to the Grievance, to the University President.  
+
+Appeal to the President    Ordinarily the decision of the Provost shall be final and conclusive. However, an affected party may present a request, in writing, to the President within ten (10) business days after receipt of the Provost’s decision, asking to review the record of the process.  Within twenty (20) business days after receipt of a request from an affected party, the President will either affirm the decision of the Provost or make additional or different determinations. The decision of the President is final.
+
+Membership of the Grievance Committee: The Grievance Committee should be a standing committee, elected by the faculty from within its ranks, with the charge of representing and governing the business of the faculty. If, after recusals and removals there are not enough remaining members to assemble at least a 3-member panel, the Grievance Committee chair should contact the Committee on Committees chair to request the temporary appointment of additional members for the purpose of constituting a sufficient committee.  No officer of the administration will serve on the committee (including Deans, Associate Deans, and Assistant Deans). 
+
+Conflict of Interest and Recusal. Conflicts of Interest include situations in which an individual’s financial, professional, or other personal considerations may directly or indirectly affect, or have the appearance of affecting, an individual’s professional judgment in exercising any University duty or responsibility. In both grievance and dismissal proceedings members should recuse themselves from a grievance or dismissal proceeding if they deem themselves unable to exercise professional judgment. 
+
+Confidentiality: It is expected that confidentiality will be maintained in the conduct of the all committee deliberations. The mere suspicion of wrongdoing, even if totally unjustified, is potentially damaging. Information concerning any grievance and/or dismissal proceedings must be held in strictest confidence and should be available only to those with a right or a need to know.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] SS Comments & Suggested Revisions to DRAFT Grievance and Dismissal (5.12).txt [/INST] 1
+
+Dismissal and Complaint/Grievance Policy Revisions
+
+Version 3 (2/24 Update)
+
+
+
+Executive Summary: Proposal to revise the Grievance and Dismissal processes in the Faculty Policies Handbook.  This proposal offers five shifts from current policy: 1) disentangle the dismissal and grievance processes; 2) clarify which elected faculty bodies hear and/or adjudicate dismissal and grievance proceedings; 3) incorporate AAUP guidelines and procedural protections in dismissal proceedings; 4) simplify the Complaint/Grievance processes such that the adjudicating committee can gather data and statements without the structure, demands and timeline of an evidentiary hearing, and 5) the creation of a new standing Complaints and Grievance Committee that will hear faculty complaints and grievances (the bar for grievable items has been lowered substantially).  Of these proposed changes, #1 is a matter of good governance policy, #2, #4, and #5 are merely streamlining and clarifying policies and structures that already exist, and #3 is incorporating the policy recommendation regarding academic freedom and tenure that have been considered the standard in higher education since 1968.    
+
+
+
+Context: The Faculty Affairs Committee would be slightly expanded (probably to 6 members) and would be the adjudicating body in the event of faculty dismissals.  The FAC would offer its professional recommendations on dismissal proceedings without its opinion being binding upon the President or Board of Regents.  This would not be a substantial departure from current practices: such faculty hearing committees already exist. In dismissal proceedings, the Faculty Policies Handbook (pg. 79) currently charges ART/FAC as an adjudicating committee: 
+
+
+
+Prior to the implementation of the dismissal, the data supporting the adequate cause for such action will be presented in writing to the ART Committee by the President or the President’s designee. If the ART Committee has engaged in post-tenure review of the faculty member and in monitoring a development plan, the Faculty Affairs Committee will serve as the initial review committee. The committee will obtain a written or oral statement from the faculty member (depending on which is preferred by the faculty member) with regard to the charges, and any other data the committee deems pertinent. The committee as a whole will consider the evidence and render an opinion. The opinion will be given to the faculty member and to the President without the opinion being binding upon the President.
+
+
+
+In addition to the ambiguity of the “development plan” language, there is also the notion that the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure committee is likely to be a party/witness to dismissal cases. Having it also function in an adjudicative capacity, in addition to the presence of the Provost on the ART committee, is procedurally problematic.  
+
+
+
+In the case of Grievance proceedings, the Faculty Policies Handbook (pg. 47) currently charges the Grievance Committee as a hearing committee: 
+
+
+
+The parties shall submit their evidence and witness lists to the Grievance Committee no later than seven calendar days prior to the hearing date. The Grievance Committee will cooperate with the grievant in securing witnesses and making available documentary and other evidence to the extent possible. The Grievance Committee shall promptly provide each party’s submitted evidence and witness lists to the other party. The committee may also request witnesses and documents that it believes would assist members in their deliberation. The Grievance Committee retains the right to exclude evidence if it determines it is irrelevant or prejudicial . . . The Grievance Committee will present its decision in writing within 15 business days of the hearing to the parties, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the President of the University . . . The President shall review the record and respond within 30 business days as to the final disposition of the grievance.
+
+
+
+The grievance proceedings, as currently written, define grievable actions too narrowly and are not sufficiently specific in their charges to the grievance committee and assume a “hearing structure” that is unnecessarily complex for the task.  Expanding the committee charge to hear what were formerly deemed “complaints,” and simplifying the fact-finding process, rightly situates an elected faculty body in a position of responsibility regarding faculty discipline whilst making clearer the relationship between the recommendations of the committee and the decision-making process and power of the university provost and president.
+
+
+
+
+
+Policy Proposals Below
+
+Dismissal is a severance action by which the University, for adequate cause, ends its employment relationship with members of the ranked faculty. Adequate cause for dismissal shall be based upon justifiable reasons (see 1.a below).  The burden of proof that adequate cause exists shall rest with the University.
+
+Dismissal Procedures (with minor modifications from AAUP Statement on Ac. Freedom and Tenure)
+
+a. Adequate cause for a dismissal will be related, directly and substantially, to the fitness of faculty members in their professional capacities as teachers or researchers. Dismissal will not be used to restrain faculty members in their exercise of academic freedom or other rights of American citizens.9
+
+Examples of conduct that may raise questions regarding a faculty member’s fitness as a teacher or researcher include, but not necessarily limited to: 
+
+demonstrated professional incompetence or dishonesty in teaching or research;
+
+continued neglect of faculty responsibilities as set forth in this handbook despite oral and/or written warnings; 
+
+serious personal misconduct which substantially impairs the individual’s fulfillment of institutional responsibilities;
+
+deliberate and serious violation of the rights and freedom of fellow faculty members, administrators, or students; 
+
+conviction of any felony; 
+
+conviction of a crime directly related to the faculty member’s fitness to practice their profession; 
+
+inability to perform the essential functions of the position despite reasonable accommodation (if requested pursuant to the University’s ADA Policy);*
+
+theft or willful destruction of property;
+
+serious failure to follow the canons and professional ethics of one’s discipline and those set down in the “Professional Ethics and Relations” section of this handbook; 
+
+falsification of credentials and experience; 
+
+failure to meet the performance standards set forth in the “Faculty Responsibilities” section of this handbook after oral and/or written warnings; 
+
+sexual harassment or unlawful discrimination of a student, University employee, or member of the University community (e.g., volunteer, vendor, etc.).** 
+
+
+
+* Dismissals because of a mental or physical disability for which no reasonable accommodation can be made are resolved pursuant to the Mental or Physical Disability Policy.
+
+** Allegations of unlawful discrimination, harassment, and sexual and gender-based misconduct against a faculty member will be investigated and resolved pursuant to the Policy on Sexual Harassment Prohibited by Title IX, HR Policy 006 - Harassment, Discrimination, Biased Conduct and Retaliation Prohibition or the Freedom from Harassment Policy, as may be applicable.
+
+b. Steps Prior to Dismissal: Dismissal of a faculty member with continuous tenure, or with a probationary or other nontenured appointment before the end of the specified term, will be preceded by (1) discussions, including a documented history thereof, between the faculty member and appropriate administrative officers looking toward a mutual settlement (2) informal inquiry by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, which may, if it fails to effect an adjustment, determine whether in its opinion dismissal proceedings should be undertaken, without its opinion being binding upon the president; (3) a statement of charges, framed with reasonable particularity by the Provost or the Provost’s delegate.
+
+(1) The Dean’s Consultation with the Faculty Member 
+
+If the faculty member’s Dean has evidence that the faculty member has demonstrated or is demonstrating conduct that may constitute adequate cause for dismissal as specified above, then the Dean will meet with the faculty member to discuss the concerns and to consider the faculty member’s response.  If requested by the faculty member, the Dean will provide the faculty member with a written statement of concerns. 
+
+The Dean may request further investigation into the matter by other appropriate University personnel (i.e., human resources, Title IX Coordinator, etc.) before or after meeting with the faculty member. However, before moving beyond this stage in these procedures, the Dean will afford the faculty member a reasonable opportunity to respond to any information that the Dean believes would constitute adequate cause for dismissal and, if possible, arrive at a mutually agreeable settlement. 
+
+(2) Informal Consultation with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee 
+
+If the matter cannot be resolved through consultation with the faculty member and if the Dean believes that adequate cause for dismissal exists, the Dean forwards a recommendation for dismissal or severe sanction to the Provost. The Provost may meet with the faculty member, at the Provost’s discretion.  At any time, if the Provost and the faculty member reach a mutually agreeable settlement, the matter will be concluded. 
+
+If the Provost believes that the faculty member has demonstrated or is demonstrating conduct that may constitute adequate cause for dismissal and a mutual settlement is not possible, the Provost will consult with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee to informally and confidentially consider the Dean’s recommendation for dismissal or severe sanction.  The faculty member will be notified of this action by the Provost. The role of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee is to consider the Dean’s recommendation and consult with the Provost regarding the allegations.  The committee does not serve a fact-finding role.
+
+No later than five academic days after consulting with the Provost, the Faculty Senate Executive Committee may recommend a settlement acceptable to both the faculty member and the Provost, administrative disciplinary actions short of dismissal, that no administrative action be taken, that further investigation be undertaken, or that dismissal proceedings be initiated. The Faculty Senate Executive Committee’s recommendation is not binding on the Provost.
+
+After considering the recommendations of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, the Provost notifies in writing the faculty member:
+
+that no action will be taken and the matter is concluded;
+
+that further investigation into the matter by other appropriate University personnel (i.e., human resources, Title IX Coordinator, etc.) is warranted;
+
+that the Provost intends to impose sanctions short of dismissal (see Alternatives to Dismissal section); or 
+
+that the Provost intends to issue a statement of charges that provides grounds for dismissal under the procedures specified below. 
+
+(3)	Statement of Charges
+
+If the Provost intends to seek the faculty member’s dismissal, the Provost will provide the faculty member with a written statement of charges, framed with reasonable particularity, indicating the charges that provide grounds for the proposed dismissal action. At the same time, the Provost will inform the faculty member that a formal review hearing before the Faculty Affairs Committee will be initiated as specified below. 
+
+
+
+c. Referral to Faculty Affairs Committee: A dismissal, as defined in Regulation 1a, will be preceded by a statement of charges, and the individual concerned will have the right to be heard initially by the Faculty Affairs Committee.10 Members of the committee deeming themselves disqualified for bias or interest will remove themselves from the case, either at the request of the chair of the committee or on their own initiative. When assembling the Dismissal Panel from the membership of the Faculty Affairs Committee, each party to the dismissal will have a maximum of one challenge without stated cause.11  After recusals and removals, the remaining members who will be adjudicating the case will hereafter be referred to as the hearing committee or Dismissal Panel.  If there are not enough remaining members to form a panel the chair of the Faculty Affairs Committee will contact the Committee on Committees to request additional members, ideally selected from faculty in elected positions.
+
+(1) Suspension: Pending a final decision by the hearing committee, the faculty member will be suspended, or assigned to other duties in lieu of suspension, by the President (or the President’s designee) only if immediate harm to the faculty member or others is threatened by continuance or the continued functioning of the faculty member in the position would substantially impair or disrupt the regular functions of the University. Except for emergency, life threatening situations, before suspending a faculty member, pending an ultimate determination of the faculty member’s status through the institution’s hearing procedures, the administration President (or the President’s designee) will consult with the Provost and Faculty Affairs Committee concerning the propriety, the length, and the other conditions of the suspension. A suspension that is intended to be final is a dismissal and will be treated as such. Salary will continue during the period of the suspension.
+
+(2) The hearing committee may, with the consent of the parties concerned, hold joint prehearing meetings with the parties in order to (i) simplify the issues, (ii) effect stipulations of facts, (iii) provide for the exchange of documentary or other information, and (iv) achieve such other appropriate prehearing objectives as will make the hearing fair, effective, and expeditious, including but not limited to setting additional time for the gathering of documentary or other evidence.
+
+(3) Service of notice of hearing with specific charges in writing will be made at least twenty days prior to the hearing. The faculty member may waive a hearing or may respond to the charges in writing at any time before the hearing. If the faculty member waives a hearing, but denies the charges or asserts that the charges do not support a finding of adequate cause, the hearing committee will evaluate all available evidence and rest its recommendation upon the evidence in the record. Prior to issuing a recommendation, the committee may obtain testimony from witnesses and documentary or other evidence.
+
+If the faculty member fails to attend the review hearing without reasonable cause and does not deny the charges or assert that the charges do not support a finding of adequate cause, then the hearing will not take place, the chair of the hearing committee will refer the matter to the President for final disposition, and the faculty member will have waived all grievance rights pertaining to the dismissal action.
+
+(4) The hearing committee, in consultation with the President and the faculty member, will exercise its judgment as to whether the hearing should be public or private.
+
+Alternative Text for Consideration
+
+The proceedings will be closed and confidential, subject only to the need of the faculty member or the administration to comply with the procedures specified herein or to present evidence concerning the case in other judicial or administrative proceedings. Except for such simple announcements as may be required, covering the time of the hearing and similar matters, public statements and publicity about the case by either the faculty member or administrative officers will be avoided so far as possible.
+
+(5) During the proceedings the faculty member will be permitted to have an academic adviser and counsel of the faculty member’s choice.  Neither the advisor nor legal counsel may actively participate in any aspect of the dismissal process (i.e., address the committee, question witnesses, raise objections, etc.), including but not limited to the hearing.  The President (or President’s designee) will appoint a non-attorney administrator(s) to present the University’s case for dismissal. 
+
+(6) At the request of either party or the hearing committee, a representative of a responsible educational association will be permitted to attend the proceedings as an observer.  
+
+(7) A verbatim record of the hearing or hearings will be taken, and a copy will be made available to the faculty member without cost, at the faculty member’s request. The [Office of Human Resources] shall be the repository of the record.  The record shall be considered confidential and only the parties to the case may access it.
+
+(8) The burden of proof that adequate cause exists rests with the institution and will be satisfied only by clear and convincing the preponderance of the evidence in the record considered as a whole.
+
+
+
+(9) The hearing committee will grant reasonable adjournments to enable either party to investigate evidence as to which a valid claim of surprise is made.
+
+(10) The faculty member will be afforded an opportunity to obtain necessary witnesses and documentary or other evidence. The administration Provost (or Provost’s designee) and other administrators as may be applicable will cooperate with the hearing committee in securing witnesses and in making available documentary and other evidence.
+
+(11) The faculty member and the administration administrator(s) appointed by the President to present the case for dismissal will have the right to confront and cross-examine all witnesses. Where the witnesses cannot or will not appear, but the committee determines that the interests of justice require admission of their statements, the committee will identify the witnesses, disclose their statements, and, if possible, provide for interrogatories.
+
+(12) In the hearing of charges of incompetence, the testimony will include that of qualified faculty members from this or other institutions of higher education.
+
+(13) The hearing committee will not be bound by strict rules of legal evidence and may admit any evidence which is of probative value in determining the issues involved. Every possible effort will be made to obtain the most reliable evidence available.
+
+(14) The findings of fact and the decision will be based solely on the hearing record.
+
+(15) Except for such simple announcements as may be required, covering the time of the hearing and similar matters, public statements and publicity about the case by either the faculty member or administrative officers will be avoided so far as possible until the proceedings have been completed, including consideration by the governing board of the University. The President, Provost, and the faculty member will be notified of the decision in writing and will be given a copy of the record of the hearing.
+
+(16) If the hearing committee concludes that adequate cause for dismissal has not been established by the evidence in the record, it will so report to the president. If the president rejects the report, the president will state the reasons for doing so, in writing, to the hearing committee and to the faculty member and provide an opportunity for the filing of a grievance response before transmitting the case to the governing board. If the hearing committee concludes that adequate cause for a dismissal has been established, but that an academic penalty less than dismissal would be more appropriate, it will so recommend, with supporting reasons.
+
+Alternative Text for Consideration
+
+Within [five (5) academic days of conclusion of the hearing, the Chair of the hearing committee will present to the President written findings of fact and recommendations as to the review of the faculty member's dismissal; copies must at the same time be sent to the faculty member and the Provost.
+
+The committee report must contain written findings of fact and a recommendation whether the dismissal for cause action was warranted in light of the documented evidence
+
+The committee’s written findings of fact and recommendation shall be based on a simple majority vote
+
+Any dissenting opinions will be included in the written findings of fact and recommendation
+
+President’s Independent Review and Decision
+
+Within five (5) academic days after receipt of the hearing committee’s findings and recommendations, the President, in light of the documented evidence and hearing record, will issue an independent written decision on the matter, with copies to the committee, the faculty member, and the Provost.
+
+If the President sustains the hearing committee recommendation that adequate cause to dismiss the faculty member does not exist, the matter will be concluded,
+
+If the President determines that additional consideration by the committee is necessary, the President will remand the case back to the committee with specific objections.
+
+If the President concludes that the administration has established adequate cause for a dismissal, but that a sanction(s) less than dismissal would be more appropriate, the sanction(s) and effective date of sanction(s) will be stated in the President’s letter with supporting reasons.
+
+If the President concludes that the administration has established adequate cause for a dismissal and agrees that dismissal is appropriate, the effective date of the dismissal will be stated in the President’s letter with supporting reasons.  The President’s decision will be final, pending the faculty member’s filing of a grievance in accordance with the Complaint and Grievance Procedures section of this handbook.
+
+Grievance Rights
+
+The President’s decision may be the basis of a formal grievance.  Such grievance shall be limited to questions of inadequate consideration and/or whether the procedures set forth in this Dismissal for Adequate Cause Policy have been followed in the faculty member’s case.  The grievance must be filed in writing within ten academic days of receiving written notification from the President of the final decision.  The grievance committee will not substitute its judgment on the merits of the case, but rather determine whether the decision was the result of adequate consideration.
+
+Action by the Governing Board
+
+If dismissal or other severe sanction is recommended, the president will, on request of the faculty member, transmit to the governing board the record of the case. The governing board’s review will be based on the record of the committee hearing, and it will provide opportunity for argument, oral or written or both, by the principals at the hearing or by their represen­tatives. The decision of the hearing committee will either be sustained or the proceedings returned to the committee with specific objections. The committee will then reconsider, taking into account the stated objec­tions and receiving new evidence, if necessary. The governing board will make a final decision only after study of the committee’s reconsideration.
+
+Procedures for Imposition of Sanctions other than Dismissal
+
+a. If the administration believes that the conduct of a faculty member, although not constituting adequate cause for dismissal, is sufficiently grave to justify imposition of a severe sanction, such as suspension from service for a stated period, the administration may institute a proceeding to impose such a severe sanction; the procedures outlined in “Dismissal Proceedings” herein will govern such a proceeding.
+
+b. If the faculty member’s Dean or the Provost administration believes that the conduct of a faculty member justifies imposition of a minor sanction, such as a reprimand, it will notify the faculty member of the basis of the proposed sanction and provide the faculty member with an opportunity to persuade the administration that the proposed sanction should not be imposed. See the Alternatives to Dismissal clause for additional information.  
+
+A faculty member who believes that a major sanction has been incorrectly imposed under this paragraph, or that a minor sanction has been unjustly imposed, may, pursuant to the Complaint and Grievance Procedures section of this handbook Regulation 11, petition the faculty grievance committee for such action as may be appropriate.
+
+Terminal Salary or Notice
+
+If the appointment of a probationary faculty member or faculty member serving on a rolling contract is terminated, the faculty member will receive salary or notice in accordance with the following schedule: at least three months, if the final decision is reached by March 1 (or three months prior to the expiration) of the first year of probationary full-time service; at least six months, if the decision is reached by December 15 of the second year (or after nine months but prior to eighteen months) of probationary full-time service; at least one year, if the decision is reached after eighteen months of probationary full-time service or if the faculty member has tenure.12  
+
+See the Non-Reappointment of Probationary Faculty Members and Faculty on Rolling Contracts Policy, 
+
+With the exception of terminations due to mental or physical disability, this provision for terminal notice or salary need will not apply if the faculty member was terminated for adequate cause in accordance with the Dismissal Procedures above. in the event that there has been a finding that the conduct which justified dismissal involved moral turpitude. On the recommendation of the faculty hearing committee, or the president, the governing board, in determining what, if any, payments will be made beyond the effective date of dismissal, may take into account the length and quality of service of the faculty member.
+
+Academic Freedom and Protection against Discrimination
+
+a. All members of the faculty, whether tenured or not, are entitled to academic freedom as set forth in the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, formulated by the Association of American Colleges and Universities and the American Association of University Professors.
+
+b. All members of the faculty, whether tenured or not, are entitled to protection against illegal or unconstitutional discrimination by the University institution, or discrimination on a basis not demonstrably related to the faculty member’s professional performance.  See the Policy on Sexual Harassment Prohibited by Title IX, HR Policy 006 - Harassment, Discrimination, Biased Conduct and Retaliation Prohibition or the Freedom from Harassment Policy for additional information. including but not limited to race, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation.
+
+Complaints of Violation of Academic Freedom or of Discrimination in Nonreappointment
+
+If a faculty member on probationary or other non­tenured appointment alleges that a decision against reappointment was based significantly on considerations that violate (a) academic freedom or (b) govern­ing policies on making appointments without prejudice with respect to race, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation, the allegation will be given preliminary consideration by the Faculty Affairs Committee, which will seek to settle the matter by informal methods. The allegation will be accompanied by a statement that the faculty member agrees to the presentation, for the consideration of the faculty committee, of such reasons and evidence as the institution may allege in support of its decision. If the difficulty is unresolved at this stage and if the committee so recommends, the matter will be heard in the manner set forth in “Dismissal Proceedings” above, except that the faculty member making the complaint is responsible for stating the grounds upon which the allegations are based and the burden of proof will rest upon the faculty member. If the faculty member succeeds in establishing a prima facie case, it is incumbent upon those who made the decision against reappointment to come forward with evidence in support of their decision. Statistical evidence of improper discrimination may be used in establishing a prima facie case.
+
+An allegation that that a decision against reappointment was based on unlawful discrimination will be referred to the Assistant Director of Human Resources or Title IX Coordinator to be investigated according to the provisions of Policy on Sexual Harassment Prohibited by Title IX, HR Policy 006 - Harassment, Discrimination, Biased Conduct and Retaliation Prohibition or the Freedom from Harassment Policy, as may be applicable.  Allegations of unlawful discrimination will be considered and resolved before the case is presented to the Faculty Affairs Committee. Any resolution reached via the applicable policy above on the basis of an investigation into charges of unlawful discrimination related to a proposed non-reappointment will be provided to the Faculty Affairs Committee if the case is presented to it. 
+
+Administrative Personnel
+
+The foregoing regulations apply to administrative personnel who hold academic rank, but only in their capacity as faculty members. Administrators who allege that a consideration that violates academic freedom or governing policies against improper discrimination, as stated in Regulation 6, significantly contributed to a decision to terminate their appoint­ment to an administrative post or not to reappoint them are entitled to the procedures set forth in Regulation 6.
+
+Political Activities of Faculty Members
+
+Faculty members, as citizens, are free to engage in political activities. Where necessary, leaves of absence may be given approved by the Provost (or designee) for the duration of an election cam­paign or a term of office, on timely application, and for a reasonable period of time. The terms of such leave of absence will be set forth in writing, and the leave will not affect unfavorably the tenure status of a faculty member, except that time spent on such leave will not count as probationary service unless otherwise agreed to.13
+
+Part-Time Faculty Appointments 
+
+a. After having been reappointed beyond an initial term, a part-time faculty member who is subsequently notified of nonreappointment will be advised upon request of the reasons that contributed to the decision. Upon the faculty member’s further request, the reasons will be confirmed in writing. The faculty member will be afforded opportunity for review of the deci­sion by the Faculty Affairs Committee].
+
+b. For part-time faculty members who have served for three or more terms within a span of three years, the following additional protections of academic due process apply:
+
+(1) Written notice of reappointment or non­reappointment will be issued no later than one month before the end of the existing appointment. If the notice of reappointment is to be conditioned, for example, on suffi­ciency of student enrollment or on financial considerations, the specific conditions will be stated with the issuance of the notice.
+
+(2) When the part-time faculty member is denied reappointment to an available assignment (one with substantially identical responsibilities assigned to another part-time faculty member with less service), if the nonreappointed faculty member alleges that the decision was based on inadequate consideration, the allegation will be subject to review by the Faculty Affairs Committee. If this body, while not providing judgment on the merits of the decision, finds that the consideration has been inadequate in any substantial respects, it will remand the matter for fur­ther consideration accordingly.15
+
+c. Prior to consideration of reappointment beyond a seventh year, part-time faculty members who have taught at least twelve courses or six terms within those seven years shall be provided a comprehensive review with the potential result of (1) appointment with part-time tenure [where such exists], (2) appointment with part-time con­tinuing service, or (3) nonreappointment. Those appointed with tenure shall be afforded the same procedural safeguards as full-time tenured faculty. Those offered additional appointment without tenure shall have continuing appoint­ments and shall not be replaced by part-time appointees with less service who are assigned substantially identical responsibilities without having been afforded the procedural safeguards associated with dismissal.
+
+Other Academic Staff 
+
+a. In no case will a member of the academic staff who is not otherwise protected by the preceding regulations that relate to dismissal proceedings be dismissed without having been provided with a statement of reasons and an opportunity to be heard before a duly constituted committee.20 (A dismissal is a termination before the end of the period of appointment.)
+
+b. With respect to the nonreappointment of a member of such academic staff who establishes a prima facie case to the satisfaction of a duly constituted committee that considerations that violate academic freedom, or of governing poli­cies against improper discrimination as stated in “Complaints of Violation of Academic Freedom or of Discrimination in Nonreappointment,” significantly contributed to the nonreappointment, the academic staff member will be given a statement of reasons by those responsible for the nonreappointment and an opportunity to be heard by the committee.
+
+Grievance Procedures
+
+
+a. Before pursuing a formal grievance procedure, if the grievant feels comfortable in doing so, they should appeal to the person or official body responsible for the actions to which the grievant has objection or to the immediate supervisor, if any, of that person or body to determine if the complaint or problem may be resolved without resorting to formal action. This would normally be the department chair, program director or the dean, and such a meeting, including suggested remedies and points of discussion, should be documented by both parties. If the complainant is not comfortable addressing it with an immediate supervisor, they may address the issue with the next highest administrator or supervisor.  Formal grievance procedures may be initiated when a complainant has been unsuccessful in resolving the matter informally. 
+
+
+
+b. If any faculty member alleges cause for grievance in any matter not covered by the procedures described in the foregoing regulations, the faculty member may petition the elected Faculty Grievance Committee for redress. Such grievable issues include, but are not limited to: 
+
+workload, 
+
+teaching assignments, 
+
+annual evaluation, 
+
+disputes among faculty members, 
+
+infringement of academic freedom, 
+
+disciplinary actions, 
+
+retaliation,
+
+ improper scheduling, 
+
+denial of sabbatical, 
+
+denial of reappointment, 
+
+denial of promotion, or 
+
+prejudicial denial of salary increases. 
+
+
+
+c. The faculty grievant will prepare a petition that sets forth in detail the nature of the grievance and shall state against whom the grievance is directed. It shall contain any data which the grievant deems pertinent to the case.  The grievance consists of a written appeal, and any supporting documentation, which is transmitted by the faculty member to the Grievance Committee and to the University Provost, or where the grievance is against the action of the University Provost or President, to the President.  The grievance petition should include the following:
+
+A clear statement of facts upon which the grievance is based, including an explanation of how the faculty member alleges he or she has been adversely affected and the specific relief requested
+
+An identification of the person(s) or the college or University policy or procedure considered responsible for the alleged adverse condition, action, or inaction upon which the grievance is based and an explanation of why the person(s) is considered responsible or why the college or University policy or procedure is considered improper
+
+d. Upon receiving a grievance petition, any member of the Grievance Committee should recuse themselves from the case if they have or could be perceived to have a bias or a conflict of interest.
+
+e. The Grievance Committee (absent any recused members) will decide whether the grievance merits further investigation. The submission of a petition will not automatically result in an investigation or detailed consideration of the grievance. If the Grievance Committee determines that a further investigation is not warranted, it shall report that finding to the grievant within thirty days of receipt of the grievance. If the Grievance Committee determines that further action is warranted, it will be provided with all relevant information and will seek, in consultation with the Provost, or where the grievance is against the action of the University Provost the President, to bring about a settlement of the issue. The Provost or President shall indicate in writing their proposed terms of settlement.
+
+f. If such a settlement is not possible or is inappropriate, the Grievance Committee Panel can request further information on the matters relevant to the grievance petition. Upon receipt of the statement of charges, the person(s) against whom, or representing the unit against which, the grievance is lodged shall, if they wish to reply, have twenty (20) business days to present a response to the charges to the chair of the Grievance Committee.  The response must be in writing, and should include any relevant information, argumentation, or evidence that bears upon the matters relevant to the grievance. 
+
+g. Within five (5) business days after receipt of the response to the statement of charges from the party(ies) against whom the grievance has been lodged, the chair of the Grievance Committee shall have prepared and distributed to the grievant and to each member of the committee a complete copy of the response.  The Grievance Committee shall, within twenty (20) days of receipt of the response, deliver its final recommendation and/or position to the faculty member and Provost, or if the Provost if party to the Grievance, to the University President.  
+
+Appeal to the President    Ordinarily the decision of the Provost shall be final and conclusive. However, an affected party may present a request, in writing, to the President within ten (10) business days after receipt of the Provost’s decision, asking to review the record of the process.  Within twenty (20) business days after receipt of a request from an affected party, the President will either affirm the decision of the Provost or make additional or different determinations. The decision of the President is final.
+
+Membership of the Grievance Committee: The Grievance Committee should be a standing committee, elected by the faculty from within its ranks, with the charge of representing and governing the business of the faculty. If, after recusals and removals there are not enough remaining members to assemble at least a 3-member panel, the Grievance Committee chair should contact the Committee on Committees chair to request the temporary appointment of additional members for the purpose of constituting a sufficient committee.  No officer of the administration will serve on the committee (including Deans, Associate Deans, and Assistant Deans). 
+
+Conflict of Interest and Recusal. Conflicts of Interest include situations in which an individual’s financial, professional, or other personal considerations may directly or indirectly affect, or have the appearance of affecting, an individual’s professional judgment in exercising any University duty or responsibility. In both grievance and dismissal proceedings members should recuse themselves from a grievance or dismissal proceeding if they deem themselves unable to exercise professional judgment. 
+
+Confidentiality: It is expected that confidentiality will be maintained in the conduct of the all committee deliberations. The mere suspicion of wrongdoing, even if totally unjustified, is potentially damaging. Information concerning any grievance and/or dismissal proceedings must be held in strictest confidence and should be available only to those with a right or a need to know.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] SS Comments & Suggested Revisions toDRAFT Handbook Updates - Grievance and Dismissal-2.txt [/INST] 1
+
+Dismissal and Complaint/Grievance Policy Revisions
+
+Version 3 (2/24 Update)
+
+
+
+Executive Summary: Proposal to revise the Grievance and Dismissal processes in the Faculty Policies Handbook.  This proposal offers five shifts from current policy: 1) disentangle the dismissal and grievance processes; 2) clarify which elected faculty bodies hear and/or adjudicate dismissal and grievance proceedings; 3) incorporate AAUP guidelines and procedural protections in dismissal proceedings; 4) simplify the Complaint/Grievance processes such that the adjudicating committee can gather data and statements without the structure, demands and timeline of an evidentiary hearing, and 5) the creation of a new standing Complaints and Grievance Committee that will hear faculty complaints and grievances (the bar for grievable items has been lowered substantially).  Of these proposed changes, #1 is a matter of good governance policy, #2, #4, and #5 are merely streamlining and clarifying policies and structures that already exist, and #3 is incorporating the policy recommendation regarding academic freedom and tenure that have been considered the standard in higher education since 1968.    
+
+
+
+Context: The Faculty Affairs Committee would be slightly expanded (probably to 6 members) and would be the adjudicating body in the event of faculty dismissals.  The FAC would offer its professional recommendations on dismissal proceedings without its opinion being binding upon the President or Board of Regents.  This would not be a substantial departure from current practices: such faculty hearing committees already exist. In dismissal proceedings, the Faculty Policies Handbook (pg. 79) currently charges ART/FAC as an adjudicating committee: 
+
+
+
+Prior to the implementation of the dismissal, the data supporting the adequate cause for such action will be presented in writing to the ART Committee by the President or the President’s designee. If the ART Committee has engaged in post-tenure review of the faculty member and in monitoring a development plan, the Faculty Affairs Committee will serve as the initial review committee. The committee will obtain a written or oral statement from the faculty member (depending on which is preferred by the faculty member) with regard to the charges, and any other data the committee deems pertinent. The committee as a whole will consider the evidence and render an opinion. The opinion will be given to the faculty member and to the President without the opinion being binding upon the President.
+
+
+
+In addition to the ambiguity of the “development plan” language, there is also the notion that the Appointment, Rank, and Tenure committee is likely to be a party/witness to dismissal cases. Having it also function in an adjudicative capacity, in addition to the presence of the Provost on the ART committee, is procedurally problematic.  
+
+
+
+In the case of Grievance proceedings, the Faculty Policies Handbook (pg. 47) currently charges the Grievance Committee as a hearing committee: 
+
+
+
+The parties shall submit their evidence and witness lists to the Grievance Committee no later than seven calendar days prior to the hearing date. The Grievance Committee will cooperate with the grievant in securing witnesses and making available documentary and other evidence to the extent possible. The Grievance Committee shall promptly provide each party’s submitted evidence and witness lists to the other party. The committee may also request witnesses and documents that it believes would assist members in their deliberation. The Grievance Committee retains the right to exclude evidence if it determines it is irrelevant or prejudicial . . . The Grievance Committee will present its decision in writing within 15 business days of the hearing to the parties, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the President of the University . . . The President shall review the record and respond within 30 business days as to the final disposition of the grievance.
+
+
+
+The grievance proceedings, as currently written, define grievable actions too narrowly and are not sufficiently specific in their charges to the grievance committee and assume a “hearing structure” that is unnecessarily complex for the task.  Expanding the committee charge to hear what were formerly deemed “complaints,” and simplifying the fact-finding process, rightly situates an elected faculty body in a position of responsibility regarding faculty discipline whilst making clearer the relationship between the recommendations of the committee and the decision-making process and power of the university provost and president.
+
+
+
+
+
+Policy Proposals Below
+
+Dismissal is a severance action by which the University, for adequate cause, ends its employment relationship with members of the ranked faculty. Adequate cause for dismissal shall be based upon justifiable reasons (see 1.a below).  The burden of proof that adequate cause exists shall rest with the University.
+
+Dismissal Procedures (with minor modifications from AAUP Statement on Ac. Freedom and Tenure)
+
+a. Adequate cause for a dismissal will be related, directly and substantially, to the fitness of faculty members in their professional capacities as teachers or researchers. Dismissal will not be used to restrain faculty members in their exercise of academic freedom or other rights of American citizens.9
+
+Examples of conduct that may raise questions regarding a faculty member’s fitness as a teacher or researcher include, but not necessarily limited to: 
+
+demonstrated professional incompetence or dishonesty in teaching or research;
+
+continued neglect of faculty responsibilities as set forth in this handbook despite oral and/or written warnings; 
+
+serious personal misconduct which substantially impairs the individual’s fulfillment of institutional responsibilities;
+
+deliberate and serious violation of the rights and freedom of fellow faculty members, administrators, or students; 
+
+conviction of any felony; 
+
+conviction of a crime directly related to the faculty member’s fitness to practice their profession; 
+
+inability to perform the essential functions of the position despite reasonable accommodation (if requested pursuant to the University’s ADA Policy);*
+
+theft or willful destruction of property;
+
+serious failure to follow the canons and professional ethics of one’s discipline and those set down in the “Professional Ethics and Relations” section of this handbook; 
+
+falsification of credentials and experience; 
+
+failure to meet the performance standards set forth in the “Faculty Responsibilities” section of this handbook after oral and/or written warnings; 
+
+sexual harassment or unlawful discrimination of a student, University employee, or member of the University community (e.g., volunteer, vendor, etc.).** 
+
+
+
+* Dismissals because of a mental or physical disability for which no reasonable accommodation can be made are resolved pursuant to the Mental or Physical Disability Policy.
+
+** Allegations of unlawful discrimination, harassment, and sexual and gender-based misconduct against a faculty member will be investigated and resolved pursuant to the Policy on Sexual Harassment Prohibited by Title IX, HR Policy 006 - Harassment, Discrimination, Biased Conduct and Retaliation Prohibition or the Freedom from Harassment Policy, as may be applicable.
+
+b. Steps Prior to Dismissal: Dismissal of a faculty member with continuous tenure, or with a probationary or other nontenured appointment before the end of the specified term, will be preceded by (1) discussions, including a documented history thereof, between the faculty member and appropriate administrative officers looking toward a mutual settlement (2) informal inquiry by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, which may, if it fails to effect an adjustment, determine whether in its opinion dismissal proceedings should be undertaken, without its opinion being binding upon the president; (3) a statement of charges, framed with reasonable particularity by the Provost or the Provost’s delegate.
+
+(1) The Dean’s Consultation with the Faculty Member 
+
+If the faculty member’s Dean has evidence that the faculty member has demonstrated or is demonstrating conduct that may constitute adequate cause for dismissal as specified above, then the Dean will meet with the faculty member to discuss the concerns and to consider the faculty member’s response.  If requested by the faculty member, the Dean will provide the faculty member with a written statement of concerns. 
+
+The Dean may request further investigation into the matter by other appropriate University personnel (i.e., human resources, Title IX Coordinator, etc.) before or after meeting with the faculty member. However, before moving beyond this stage in these procedures, the Dean will afford the faculty member a reasonable opportunity to respond to any information that the Dean believes would constitute adequate cause for dismissal and, if possible, arrive at a mutually agreeable settlement. 
+
+(2) Informal Consultation with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee 
+
+If the matter cannot be resolved through consultation with the faculty member and if the Dean believes that adequate cause for dismissal exists, the Dean forwards a recommendation for dismissal or severe sanction to the Provost. The Provost may meet with the faculty member, at the Provost’s discretion.  At any time, if the Provost and the faculty member reach a mutually agreeable settlement, the matter will be concluded. 
+
+If the Provost believes that the faculty member has demonstrated or is demonstrating conduct that may constitute adequate cause for dismissal and a mutual settlement is not possible, the Provost will consult with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee to informally and confidentially consider the Dean’s recommendation for dismissal or severe sanction.  The faculty member will be notified of this action by the Provost. The role of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee is to consider the Dean’s recommendation and consult with the Provost regarding the allegations.  The committee does not serve a fact-finding role.
+
+No later than five academic days after consulting with the Provost, the Faculty Senate Executive Committee may recommend a settlement acceptable to both the faculty member and the Provost, administrative disciplinary actions short of dismissal, that no administrative action be taken, that further investigation be undertaken, or that dismissal proceedings be initiated. The Faculty Senate Executive Committee’s recommendation is not binding on the Provost.
+
+After considering the recommendations of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, the Provost notifies in writing the faculty member:
+
+that no action will be taken and the matter is concluded;
+
+that further investigation into the matter by other appropriate University personnel (i.e., human resources, Title IX Coordinator, etc.) is warranted;
+
+that the Provost intends to impose sanctions short of dismissal (see Alternatives to Dismissal section); or 
+
+that the Provost intends to issue a statement of charges that provides grounds for dismissal under the procedures specified below. 
+
+(3)	Statement of Charges
+
+If the Provost intends to seek the faculty member’s dismissal, the Provost will provide the faculty member with a written statement of charges, framed with reasonable particularity, indicating the charges that provide grounds for the proposed dismissal action. At the same time, the Provost will inform the faculty member that a formal review hearing before the Faculty Affairs Committee will be initiated as specified below. 
+
+
+
+c. Referral to Faculty Affairs Committee: A dismissal, as defined in Regulation 1a, will be preceded by a statement of charges, and the individual concerned will have the right to be heard initially by the Faculty Affairs Committee.10 Members of the committee deeming themselves disqualified for bias or interest will remove themselves from the case, either at the request of the chair of the committee or on their own initiative. When assembling the Dismissal Panel from the membership of the Faculty Affairs Committee, each party to the dismissal will have a maximum of one challenge without stated cause.11  After recusals and removals, the remaining members who will be adjudicating the case will hereafter be referred to as the hearing committee or Dismissal Panel.  If there are not enough remaining members to form a panel the chair of the Faculty Affairs Committee will contact the Committee on Committees to request additional members, ideally selected from faculty in elected positions.
+
+(1) Suspension: Pending a final decision by the hearing committee, the faculty member will be suspended, or assigned to other duties in lieu of suspension, by the President (or the President’s designee) only if immediate harm to the faculty member or others is threatened by continuance or the continued functioning of the faculty member in the position would substantially impair or disrupt the regular functions of the University. Except for emergency, life threatening situations, before suspending a faculty member, pending an ultimate determination of the faculty member’s status through the institution’s hearing procedures, the administration President (or the President’s designee) will consult with the Provost and Faculty Affairs Committee concerning the propriety, the length, and the other conditions of the suspension. A suspension that is intended to be final is a dismissal and will be treated as such. Salary will continue during the period of the suspension.
+
+(2) The hearing committee may, with the consent of the parties concerned, hold joint prehearing meetings with the parties in order to (i) simplify the issues, (ii) effect stipulations of facts, (iii) provide for the exchange of documentary or other information, and (iv) achieve such other appropriate prehearing objectives as will make the hearing fair, effective, and expeditious, including but not limited to setting additional time for the gathering of documentary or other evidence.
+
+(3) Service of notice of hearing with specific charges in writing will be made at least twenty days prior to the hearing. The faculty member may waive a hearing or may respond to the charges in writing at any time before the hearing. If the faculty member waives a hearing, but denies the charges or asserts that the charges do not support a finding of adequate cause, the hearing committee will evaluate all available evidence and rest its recommendation upon the evidence in the record. Prior to issuing a recommendation, the committee may obtain testimony from witnesses and documentary or other evidence.
+
+If the faculty member fails to attend the review hearing without reasonable cause and does not deny the charges or assert that the charges do not support a finding of adequate cause, then the hearing will not take place, the chair of the hearing committee will refer the matter to the President for final disposition, and the faculty member will have waived all grievance rights pertaining to the dismissal action.
+
+(4) The hearing committee, in consultation with the President and the faculty member, will exercise its judgment as to whether the hearing should be public or private.
+
+Alternative Text for Consideration
+
+The proceedings will be closed and confidential, subject only to the need of the faculty member or the administration to comply with the procedures specified herein or to present evidence concerning the case in other judicial or administrative proceedings. Except for such simple announcements as may be required, covering the time of the hearing and similar matters, public statements and publicity about the case by either the faculty member or administrative officers will be avoided so far as possible until the proceedings have been completed.
+
+(5) During the proceedings the faculty member will be permitted to have an academic adviser and counsel of the faculty member’s choice.  Neither the advisor nor legal counsel may actively participate in any aspect of the dismissal process (i.e., address the committee, question witnesses, raise objections, etc.), including but not limited to the hearing.  The President (or President’s designee) will appoint a non-attorney administrator(s) to present the University’s case for dismissal. 
+
+(6) At the request of either party or the hearing committee, a representative of a responsible educational association will be permitted to attend the proceedings as an observer.  
+
+(7) A verbatim record of the hearing or hearings will be taken, and a copy will be made available to the faculty member without cost, at the faculty member’s request. The [Office of Human Resources] shall be the repository of the record.  The record shall be considered confidential and only the parties to the case may access it.
+
+(8) The burden of proof that adequate cause exists rests with the institution and will be satisfied only by clear and convincing the preponderance of the evidence in the record considered as a whole.
+
+
+
+(9) The hearing committee will grant reasonable adjournments to enable either party to investigate evidence as to which a valid claim of surprise is made.
+
+(10) The faculty member will be afforded an opportunity to obtain necessary witnesses and documentary or other evidence. The administration Provost (or Provost’s designee) and other administrators as may be applicable will cooperate with the hearing committee in securing witnesses and in making available documentary and other evidence.
+
+(11) The faculty member and the administration administrator(s) appointed by the President to present the case for dismissal will have the right to confront and cross-examine all witnesses. Where the witnesses cannot or will not appear, but the committee determines that the interests of justice require admission of their statements, the committee will identify the witnesses, disclose their statements, and, if possible, provide for interrogatories.
+
+(12) In the hearing of charges of incompetence, the testimony will include that of qualified faculty members from this or other institutions of higher education.
+
+(13) The hearing committee will not be bound by strict rules of legal evidence and may admit any evidence which is of probative value in determining the issues involved. Every possible effort will be made to obtain the most reliable evidence available.
+
+(14) The findings of fact and the decision will be based solely on the hearing record.
+
+(15) Except for such simple announcements as may be required, covering the time of the hearing and similar matters, public statements and publicity about the case by either the faculty member or administrative officers will be avoided so far as possible until the proceedings have been completed, including consideration by the governing board of the University. The President, Provost, and the faculty member will be notified of the decision in writing and will be given a copy of the record of the hearing.
+
+(16) If the hearing committee concludes that adequate cause for dismissal has not been established by the evidence in the record, it will so report to the president. If the president rejects the report, the president will state the reasons for doing so, in writing, to the hearing committee and to the faculty member and provide an opportunity for the filing of a grievance response before transmitting the case to the governing board. If the hearing committee concludes that adequate cause for a dismissal has been established, but that an academic penalty less than dismissal would be more appropriate, it will so recommend, with supporting reasons.
+
+Alternative Text for Consideration
+
+Within [five (5) academic days of conclusion of the hearing, the Chair of the hearing committee will present to the President written findings of fact and recommendations as to the review of the faculty member's dismissal; copies must at the same time be sent to the faculty member and the Provost.
+
+The committee report must contain written findings of fact and a recommendation whether the dismissal for cause action was warranted in light of the documented evidence
+
+The committee’s written findings of fact and recommendation shall be based on a simple majority vote
+
+Any dissenting opinions will be included in the written findings of fact and recommendation
+
+President’s Independent Review and Decision
+
+Within five (5) academic days after receipt of the hearing committee’s findings and recommendations, the President, in light of the documented evidence and hearing record, will issue an independent written decision on the matter, with copies to the committee, the faculty member, and the Provost.
+
+If the President sustains the hearing committee recommendation that adequate cause to dismiss the faculty member does not exist, the matter will be concluded,
+
+If the President determines that additional consideration by the committee is necessary, the President will remand the case back to the committee with specific objections.
+
+If the President concludes that the administration has established adequate cause for a dismissal, but that a sanction(s) less than dismissal would be more appropriate, the sanction(s) and effective date of sanction(s) will be stated in the President’s letter with supporting reasons.
+
+If the President concludes that the administration has established adequate cause for a dismissal and agrees that dismissal is appropriate, the effective date of the dismissal will be stated in the President’s letter with supporting reasons.  The President’s decision will be final, pending the faculty member’s filing of a grievance in accordance with the Complaint and Grievance Procedures section of this handbook.
+
+Grievance Rights
+
+The President’s decision may be the basis of a formal grievance.  Such grievance shall be limited to questions of inadequate consideration and/or whether the procedures set forth in this Dismissal for Adequate Cause Policy have been followed in the faculty member’s case.  The grievance must be filed in writing within ten academic days of receiving written notification from the President of the final decision.  The grievance committee will not substitute its judgment on the merits of the case, but rather determine whether the decision was the result of adequate consideration.
+
+Action by the Governing Board
+
+If dismissal or other severe sanction is recommended, the president will, on request of the faculty member, transmit to the governing board the record of the case. The governing board’s review will be based on the record of the committee hearing, and it will provide opportunity for argument, oral or written or both, by the principals at the hearing or by their represen­tatives. The decision of the hearing committee will either be sustained or the proceedings returned to the committee with specific objections. The committee will then reconsider, taking into account the stated objec­tions and receiving new evidence, if necessary. The governing board will make a final decision only after study of the committee’s reconsideration.
+
+Procedures for Imposition of Sanctions other than Dismissal
+
+a. If the administration believes that the conduct of a faculty member, although not constituting adequate cause for dismissal, is sufficiently grave to justify imposition of a severe sanction, such as suspension from service for a stated period, the administration may institute a proceeding to impose such a severe sanction; the procedures outlined in “Dismissal Proceedings” herein will govern such a proceeding.
+
+b. If the faculty member’s Dean or the Provost administration believes that the conduct of a faculty member justifies imposition of a minor sanction, such as a reprimand, it will notify the faculty member of the basis of the proposed sanction and provide the faculty member with an opportunity to persuade the administration that the proposed sanction should not be imposed. See the Alternatives to Dismissal clause for additional information.  
+
+A faculty member who believes that a major sanction has been incorrectly imposed under this paragraph, or that a minor sanction has been unjustly imposed, may, pursuant to the Complaint and Grievance Procedures section of this handbook Regulation 11, petition the faculty grievance committee for such action as may be appropriate.
+
+Terminal Salary or Notice
+
+If the appointment is terminated, the faculty member will receive salary or notice in accordance with the following schedule: at least three months, if the final decision is reached by March 1 (or three months prior to the expiration) of the first year of probationary service; at least six months, if the decision is reached by December 15 of the second year (or after nine months but prior to eighteen months) of probationary service; at least one year, if the decision is reached after eighteen months of probationary service or if the faculty member has tenure.12
+
+With the exception of terminations due to mental or physical disability, this provision for terminal notice or salary need not apply if the faculty member was terminated for adequate cause in accordance with the Dismissal Procedures above. in the event that there has been a finding that the conduct which justified dismissal involved moral turpitude. On the recommendation of the faculty hearing committee, or the president, the governing board, in determining what, if any, payments will be made beyond the effective date of dismissal, may take into account the length and quality of service of the faculty member.
+
+Academic Freedom and Protection against Discrimination
+
+a. All members of the faculty, whether tenured or not, are entitled to academic freedom as set forth in the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, formulated by the Association of American Colleges and Universities and the American Association of University Professors.
+
+b. All members of the faculty, whether tenured or not, are entitled to protection against illegal or unconstitutional discrimination by the institution, or discrimination on a basis not demonstrably related to the faculty member’s professional performance, including but not limited to race, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation.
+
+Complaints of Violation of Academic Freedom or of Discrimination in Nonreappointment
+
+If a faculty member on probationary or other non­tenured appointment alleges that a decision against reappointment was based significantly on considerations that violate (a) academic freedom or (b) govern­ing policies on making appointments without prejudice with respect to race, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation, the allegation will be given preliminary consideration by the Faculty Affairs Committee, which will seek to settle the matter by informal methods. The allegation will be accompanied by a statement that the faculty member agrees to the presentation, for the consideration of the faculty committee, of such reasons and evidence as the institution may allege in support of its decision. If the difficulty is unresolved at this stage and if the committee so recommends, the matter will be heard in the manner set forth in “Dismissal Proceedings” above, except that the faculty member making the complaint is responsible for stating the grounds upon which the allegations are based and the burden of proof will rest upon the faculty member. If the faculty member succeeds in establishing a prima facie case, it is incumbent upon those who made the decision against reappointment to come forward with evidence in support of their decision. Statistical evidence of improper discrimination may be used in establishing a prima facie case.
+
+An allegation that that a decision against reappointment was based on unlawful discrimination will be referred to the Assistant Director of Human Resources or Title IX Coordinator to be investigated according to the provisions of Policy on Sexual Harassment Prohibited by Title IX, HR Policy 006 - Harassment, Discrimination, Biased Conduct and Retaliation Prohibition or the Freedom from Harassment Policy, as may be applicable.  Allegations of unlawful discrimination will be considered and resolved before the case is presented to the Faculty Affairs Committee. Any resolution reached via the applicable policy above on the basis of an investigation into charges of unlawful discrimination related to a proposed non-reappointment will be provided to the Faculty Affairs Committee if the case is presented to it. 
+
+Administrative Personnel
+
+The foregoing regulations apply to administrative personnel who hold academic rank, but only in their capacity as faculty members. Administrators who allege that a consideration that violates academic freedom or governing policies against improper discrimination, as stated in Regulation 6, significantly contributed to a decision to terminate their appoint­ment to an administrative post or not to reappoint them are entitled to the procedures set forth in Regulation 6.
+
+Political Activities of Faculty Members
+
+Faculty members, as citizens, are free to engage in political activities. Where necessary, leaves of absence may be given approved by the Provost (or designee) for the duration of an election cam­paign or a term of office, on timely application, and for a reasonable period of time. The terms of such leave of absence will be set forth in writing, and the leave will not affect unfavorably the tenure status of a faculty member, except that time spent on such leave will not count as probationary service unless otherwise agreed to.13
+
+Part-Time Faculty Appointments 
+
+a. After having been reappointed beyond an initial term, a part-time faculty member who is subsequently notified of nonreappointment will be advised upon request of the reasons that contributed to the decision. Upon the faculty member’s further request, the reasons will be confirmed in writing. The faculty member will be afforded opportunity for review of the deci­sion by the Faculty Affairs Committee].
+
+b. For part-time faculty members who have served for three or more terms within a span of three years, the following additional protections of academic due process apply:
+
+(1) Written notice of reappointment or non­reappointment will be issued no later than one month before the end of the existing appointment. If the notice of reappointment is to be conditioned, for example, on suffi­ciency of student enrollment or on financial considerations, the specific conditions will be stated with the issuance of the notice.
+
+(2) When the part-time faculty member is denied reappointment to an available assignment (one with substantially identical responsibilities assigned to another part-time faculty member with less service), if the nonreappointed faculty member alleges that the decision was based on inadequate consideration, the allegation will be subject to review by the Faculty Affairs Committee. If this body, while not providing judgment on the merits of the decision, finds that the consideration has been inadequate in any substantial respects, it will remand the matter for fur­ther consideration accordingly.15
+
+c. Prior to consideration of reappointment beyond a seventh year, part-time faculty members who have taught at least twelve courses or six terms within those seven years shall be provided a comprehensive review with the potential result of (1) appointment with part-time tenure [where such exists], (2) appointment with part-time con­tinuing service, or (3) nonreappointment. Those appointed with tenure shall be afforded the same procedural safeguards as full-time tenured faculty. Those offered additional appointment without tenure shall have continuing appoint­ments and shall not be replaced by part-time appointees with less service who are assigned substantially identical responsibilities without having been afforded the procedural safeguards associated with dismissal.
+
+Other Academic Staff 
+
+a. In no case will a member of the academic staff who is not otherwise protected by the preceding regulations that relate to dismissal proceedings be dismissed without having been provided with a statement of reasons and an opportunity to be heard before a duly constituted committee.20 (A dismissal is a termination before the end of the period of appointment.)
+
+b. With respect to the nonreappointment of a member of such academic staff who establishes a prima facie case to the satisfaction of a duly constituted committee that considerations that violate academic freedom, or of governing poli­cies against improper discrimination as stated in “Complaints of Violation of Academic Freedom or of Discrimination in Nonreappointment,” significantly contributed to the nonreappointment, the academic staff member will be given a statement of reasons by those responsible for the nonreappointment and an opportunity to be heard by the committee.
+
+Grievance Procedures
+
+
+a. Before pursuing a formal grievance procedure, if the grievant feels comfortable in doing so, they should appeal to the person or official body responsible for the actions to which the grievant has objection or to the immediate supervisor, if any, of that person or body to determine if the complaint or problem may be resolved without resorting to formal action. This would normally be the department chair, program director or the dean, and such a meeting, including suggested remedies and points of discussion, should be documented by both parties. If the complainant is not comfortable addressing it with an immediate supervisor, they may address the issue with the next highest administrator or supervisor.  Formal grievance procedures may be initiated when a complainant has been unsuccessful in resolving the matter informally. 
+
+
+
+b. If any faculty member alleges cause for grievance in any matter not covered by the procedures described in the foregoing regulations, the faculty member may petition the elected Faculty Grievance Committee for redress. Such grievable issues include, but are not limited to: 
+
+workload, 
+
+teaching assignments, 
+
+annual evaluation, 
+
+disputes among faculty members, 
+
+infringement of academic freedom, 
+
+disciplinary actions, 
+
+retaliation,
+
+ improper scheduling, 
+
+denial of sabbatical, 
+
+denial of reappointment, 
+
+denial of promotion, or 
+
+prejudicial denial of salary increases. 
+
+
+
+c. The faculty grievant will prepare a petition that sets forth in detail the nature of the grievance and shall state against whom the grievance is directed. It shall contain any data which the grievant deems pertinent to the case.  The grievance consists of a written appeal, and any supporting documentation, which is transmitted by the faculty member to the Grievance Committee and to the University Provost, or where the grievance is against the action of the University Provost or President, to the President.  The grievance petition should include the following:
+
+A clear statement of facts upon which the grievance is based, including an explanation of how the faculty member alleges he or she has been adversely affected and the specific relief requested
+
+An identification of the person(s) or the college or University policy or procedure considered responsible for the alleged adverse condition, action, or inaction upon which the grievance is based and an explanation of why the person(s) is considered responsible or why the college or University policy or procedure is considered improper
+
+d. Upon receiving a grievance petition, any member of the Grievance Committee should recuse themselves from the case if they have or could be perceived to have a bias or a conflict of interest.
+
+e. The Grievance Committee (absent any recused members) will decide whether the grievance merits further investigation. The submission of a petition will not automatically result in an investigation or detailed consideration of the grievance. If the Grievance Committee determines that a further investigation is not warranted, it shall report that finding to the grievant within thirty days of receipt of the grievance. If the Grievance Committee determines that further action is warranted, it will be provided with all relevant information and will seek, in consultation with the Provost, or where the grievance is against the action of the University Provost the President, to bring about a settlement of the issue. The Provost or President shall indicate in writing their proposed terms of settlement.
+
+f. If such a settlement is not possible or is inappropriate, the Grievance Committee Panel can request further information on the matters relevant to the grievance petition. Upon receipt of the statement of charges, the person(s) against whom, or representing the unit against which, the grievance is lodged shall, if they wish to reply, have twenty (20) business days to present a response to the charges to the chair of the Grievance Committee.  The response must be in writing, and should include any relevant information, argumentation, or evidence that bears upon the matters relevant to the grievance. 
+
+g. Within five (5) business days after receipt of the response to the statement of charges from the party(ies) against whom the grievance has been lodged, the chair of the Grievance Committee shall have prepared and distributed to the grievant and to each member of the committee a complete copy of the response.  The Grievance Committee shall, within twenty (20) days of receipt of the response, deliver its final recommendation and/or position to the faculty member and Provost, or if the Provost if party to the Grievance, to the University President.  
+
+Appeal to the President    Ordinarily the decision of the Provost shall be final and conclusive. However, an affected party may present a request, in writing, to the President within ten (10) business days after receipt of the Provost’s decision, asking to review the record of the process.  Within twenty (20) business days after receipt of a request from an affected party, the President will either affirm the decision of the Provost or make additional or different determinations. The decision of the President is final.
+
+Membership of the Grievance Committee: The Grievance Committee should be a standing committee, elected by the faculty from within its ranks, with the charge of representing and governing the business of the faculty. If, after recusals and removals there are not enough remaining members to assemble at least a 3-member panel, the Grievance Committee chair should contact the Committee on Committees chair to request the temporary appointment of additional members for the purpose of constituting a sufficient committee.  No officer of the administration will serve on the committee (including Deans, Associate Deans, and Assistant Deans). 
+
+Conflict of Interest and Recusal. Conflicts of Interest include situations in which an individual’s financial, professional, or other personal considerations may directly or indirectly affect, or have the appearance of affecting, an individual’s professional judgment in exercising any University duty or responsibility. In both grievance and dismissal proceedings members should recuse themselves from a grievance or dismissal proceeding if they deem themselves unable to exercise professional judgment. 
+
+Confidentiality: It is expected that confidentiality will be maintained in the conduct of the all committee deliberations. The mere suspicion of wrongdoing, even if totally unjustified, is potentially damaging. Information concerning any grievance and/or dismissal proceedings must be held in strictest confidence and should be available only to those with a right or a need to know.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] SS COMMENTS TO INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY POLICY AND PROCEDURES revised.txt [/INST] INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY POLICY AND PROCEDURES 
+
+
+
+Per Faculty Motion; adopted by the Board of Trustees on XX, 2022
+
+(Adapted from the 2017 Lafayette College Faculty Handbook)
+
+
+
+Bethany College is committed to fostering an environment that promotes and protects the creation and dissemination of knowledge, inventions, and artistic works by faculty, staff, and students.  The fullest realization of this goal is achieved only when the College ensures academic freedom for all of its community members, protects its identity, and functional interest, and recognizes the ownership, whether shared or individual, of intellectual properties and patents.  This policy aims to safeguard and protect those rights.
+
+
+
+A robust Intellectual Property (IP) Policy is necessary for fostering scholarship in the community and for promoting the best interests of the College.  The College’s IP policy should encourage innovation and the creation and dissemination of IP for the public good, rather than implement procedures motivated by a desire to develop sources of revenue.  A strong IP policy balances the IP rights and obligations of the faculty, staff and students with the institutional rights and obligations of the College.  The policy stated herein is structured to include a clear and fair system for the distribution of any benefits accrued, if and where appropriate, by IP created by members of the Bethany community. 
+
+
+
+Definitions of terms used are given at the end of this policy statement (Section X.X)
+
+
+
+X.1 Scope
+
+
+
+The guiding principle of the IP policy is that the products of teaching and scholarship, except patents, are the property of the community member.  The College, however, has the sole ownership interest in copyrightable material if it involves an identity interest (Section X.1.1) or is classified as an Institutional Work (Section X.1.3). If a community member employs an extraordinary use of College resources in developing copyrightable material, then the IP rights will be determined by the deliberate determination procedure (Section X.1.2).  Community members who develop patentable discoveries using College resources have a duty to disclose and assign patent rights to the College.  In those cases where patentable inventions are created by a community member with only incidental use of College-supplied computers, email and phones, however, the patent rights are retained by the creator.  In addition, the College will retain an ownership interest in intellectual properties resulting in a patent that is the result of a work for hire as defined by United States copyright law (Section 7.7) , as well as intellectual property that may be classified as an Institutional Work (Section X.7.7) or falls under any of the miscellaneous categories listed in Section X.1.4.
+
+
+
+X.1.1 Identity Interest.  The College has an identity interest in copyrightable materials that are integral to, and reflect more directly on, the identity of the College rather than the identity of the creator.  The College has an identity interest in items distributed beyond the College, such as but not limited to: the college catalogue, alumni bulletins, institutional web pages, admissions brochures and campaign materials.  Copyrightable materials in which the College has an identity interest will be owned by the College. 
+
+X.1.2. Extraordinary Use of College Resources. The College has an ownership interest in copyrightable and patentable materials generated with extraordinary use of College resources, which refers to support by the College that is not normally available to a community member in their standard role (see section X.7.5)
+
+With respect to the foregoing works, the College may decide to assign its copyright to the author or authors of the work on a case-by-case basis.  
+
+X.1.3: Institutional Work: The College has an ownership interest in intellectual property that may be classified as an Institutional Work, which includes works that are supported by a specific allocation of Bethany College funds and created at the direction of Bethany College for a specific Bethany College purpose.  Institutional Works also include works whose authorship cannot be attributed to one or a discrete number of authors but rather result from simultaneous or sequential contributions over time by multiple faculty and students.  For example, software tools developed and improved over time by multiple faculty and students where authorship is not appropriately attributed to a single or defined group of authors would constitute an institutional work.  The mere fact that multiple individuals have contributed to the creation of a work shall not cause the work to constitute an institutional work.
+
+X.1.4: Other: In addition to the above, ownership in intellectual property will normally rest with the College, rather than with the creator, under the following circumstances:
+
+If the work includes the name, seal, logo, insignia, trademark or watermark of Bethany College as an endorsement, enhancement, or sanction for a product or service.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+X.2 Implications for Faculty, Staff and Students. The extent to which the College’s IP policy affects the different constituencies on campus is given below. 
+
+ 
+
+X.2.1  Faculty.   Faculty members who create products of teaching and scholarship (“academic works”) own their IP except for patentable inventions, in which case the ownership rights rest with the College.  Pedagogical, literary, artistic and creative works are owned by the faculty member, consistent with American Association of University Professors guidelines about copyrights and the prevailing view in academia.  In keeping with that tradition, the College waives its ownership rights in academic copyrightable works, except under circumstances in which an academic copyrightable works was specifically assigned and funded by the College (as provided in Section X.1.3 above) or developed with extraordinary use of Bethany College resources (as provided in Section X.1.2 above). Note, however, that faculty ownership of such academic works may be affected by the terms of agreements with third-party sponsors or by agreements between faculty and the College with respect to special projects such as the creation of online courses or other digital education offerings. 
+
+
+
+Accordingly, recorded lectures, lecture notes and other course notes such as problem sets and syllabi are normally the faculty member’s IP.  Works related to scholarship, such as journal articles, books, textbooks, videos, photos, and artistic works in any medium, are similarly also the faculty member’s IP.  With respect to faculty materials produced for online instructions, copyright ownership is treated no differently than faculty materials produced for the classroom.  If the materials are not Institutional Works or developed via the extraordinary use of College resources, the faculty member owns the copyright for those materials created for online use. 
+
+The use of resources normally available to the faculty member does not abrogate that right.  For faculty, the support normally provided in the form of salary, lab or studio space, funding for sabbatical leaves, and internal grants available on a competitive basis through the Faculty Development Committee are considered normal support (see X.7.5 for further definition of normal support). 
+
+ 
+
+The IP generated in outside employment (such as consulting) or without College resources is not covered by this policy.  Faculty members are bound by the terms of employment set forth in Faculty Policy Manual XXX. 
+
+
+
+X.2.2: Licensing:  Where faculty academic works covered in Section X.2.1 are incorporated into educational resources designed for ongoing departmental classroom use in a particular academic unit, the College shall have a perpetual, nonexclusive, royalty-free license to use such academic works for such purposes.
+
+
+
+ 
+
+X.2.2  Staff.  In most cases the copyrightable materials created by a staff member is relate to the identity interests of the College, and therefore is owned by the College.  In some cases, however, a staff member may undertake a project that is considered scholarly work, in which the College has no identity interest.  In such cases, ownership goes to the creator, even though the default is to give it to the College.  Staff members who develop patentable discoveries using College resources have a duty to assign patent rights to the College. 
+
+ 
+
+X.2.3  Students.  For students, the College does not have an identity interest in their IP except when they are employees of the College or are under the supervision of a faculty member.  If a student project is developed in the context of normal coursework, then the rights to copyrightable materials is retained by the student.  If students are under the supervision of a faculty member and are working on IP of the faculty member, then the faculty member and student are strongly encouraged to draw up a written agreement in consultation with the Intellectual Property Policy Committee, specifying the terms of how the IP generated by their collaboration will be handled before the project begins.  If patentable inventions involve significant faculty mentorship and/or Bethany resources, then the student has a duty to assign patent rights to the College.  In all other circumstances where students are employed by the College, the IP policy for staff applies (Section X.2.2) 
+
+ 
+
+X.2.4 Group Projects.  In the case when there are two or more community members collaborating in the creation of patentable inventions, all parties should sign a disclosure form in consultation with the Intellectual Property Policy Committee.  This disclosure form should indicate a fair distribution of fractional shares among the collaborators. 
+
+ 
+
+X.3 Process for Deliberate Determination of IP Rights 
+
+ 
+
+X.3.1 Deliberate determination is not required.  For all scholarly work (except for patents) in which the College has no ownership interest (i.e., no identity interest, there is no extraordinary use of College resources, etc.) there is no need to report the creation of IP by a community member to the Intellectual Property Policy Committee.  Outside consulting and work done by community members without College resources is not subject to the reporting requirements.  
+
+
+
+In those cases where the College has a routine and clear case of an identity interest or the product is clearly a work for hire, the College owns the copyrightable material and there is no need to report it to the Intellectual Property Policy Committee.  
+
+
+
+X.3.2 Deliberate Determination Required. In the case of patents or when copyrightable materials have received extraordinary support from the College, the creator must declare the IP to the Intellectual Property Policy Committee via the disclosure form as soon as the situation becomes clear.  The Intellectual Property Policy Committee will make recommendations regarding the most suitable distribution of IP rights between the creator and College as well as distribution of partial shares between community members.  Normally, within sixty (60) days of receiving complete formal disclosures of IP requiring deliberate determination, the Intellectual Property Policy Committee will make a recommendation to the Provost.  After receiving the report from the Intellectual Property Policy Committee, the Provost will make a determination of IP rights in writing, normally within thirty (30) days. The distribution of IP rights should be specified in writing and signed by the creator and College’s representative. 
+
+ 
+
+If the College does not commercialize the IP within five years of making a determination, or does not pay the community member net revenue as described in X.4.1, then the creator shall assume an exclusive license to commercialize the patent, including the ability to license to others permission to utilize the patent.  In such cases, the net revenue is still divided between the creator and the College, as laid out in section X.4. 
+
+ 
+
+X.3.2.1 Disclosure Form.  The form for disclosure of IP requiring deliberate determination of IP rights will be available in the XXXX Manual and website. 
+
+ 
+
+X.3.2.2.2 The Intellectual Property Policy Committee will be composed of the chair of the Faculty Development Committee, a representative appointed by the Provost, and a third representative from the College faculty or staff chosen by the Provost and the Chair of Faculty Development Committee.  In considering cases involving patents or other matters that fall outside the expertise of the three committee members, the Intellectual Property Policy Committee will ask qualified faculty members as well as external professional counsel to advise on an ad hoc basis as needed.  The Intellectual Property Policy Committee will also serve as a resource for any questions about IP policy and procedures for the community, and initial inquiries about the need for deliberate determination can be made on an informal basis. 
+
+ 
+
+X.3.3 Third Party Agreements.  All IP defined by Scope in X.1 produced by work sponsored by public or private organizations is governed by this policy, unless otherwise specified in a written contract or in federal or state laws and regulations. Contracts with third parties can contain provisions governing IP rights that supersede the College policy.  The Provost must approve the IP provisions in such contracts, and normally such contracts must also be reviewed by the General Counsel. 
+
+ 
+
+X.3.4  Appeal of the Provost’s Determination of IP Rights.  In the event where the creator disagrees with the Provost’s determination of IP rights, the creator may appeal the decision to the President within thirty days.  Upon receiving the appeal, the President will render a decision regarding the appeal within thirty days.  
+
+ 
+
+X.4  Revenue.  If revenue is generated by IP held by the College, the College and creator will split the revenue in the following manner.  The first $10,0000 of net revenue will go to the creator.  The creator will receive sixty percent, and the College forty percent, of further revenue.  The College agrees to pay annually to the creator(s), or to the creator’s heirs, successors, or assigns, 60% of the net revenue per invention, with an additional 10% of net revenue per invention allocated to the creator’s department or program.  Net revenue is defined as gross income less the costs of submitting and protecting and preserving patent and related property rights, and such other costs, taxes, or reimbursements as may be necessary or required by law.  When there are two or more creators, each creator shall share equally in the creator’s share of revenue, unless all creators previously have agreed in writing to a different distribution of such share. This distribution will continue regardless of the creator’s status at the College. 
+
+ 
+
+If it so wishes, the College can agree to provide the creator with an exclusive, or non-exclusive license to commercialize the patent, including licensing it to others.  In such cases, the net revenue is still divided between the creator and the College as laid out in section X.4.  Such agreements will be provided in writing to the creator. 
+
+ 
+
+X.4.1 Payment of Revenue.  Annually, net revenue for a creator is collected and held by the College from July 1st to June 30th, and is paid to the creator the following August 30th or the nearest business day after August 30th.   
+
+ 
+
+Each annual payment will be accompanied by a document accounting for source of revenue and all costs from July 1st to June30th.  The College cannot recoup costs from previous revenue payments made to the creator(s). 
+
+ 
+
+X.5 Transfer of IP Rights.  There are circumstances in which either the creator or College may want to transfer IP ownership to the other.  For IP developed without the extraordinary use of College resources and held by a community member, the community member may ask the College to consider accepting assignment of ownership, but the College has no obligation to do so.  Even if the College has clear ownership of IP, the transfer of IP ownership to the community member may be appropriate, especially if it facilitates the distribution of the IP to the greater community.   
+
+ 
+
+X.6 Consultants.  When the College has an identity or functional interest in copyrightable materials created by hired consultants, the College will stipulate by contract that ownership stays with the College.  Hired consultants are not considered community members and as such are not covered by this policy. 
+
+ 
+
+X.7 Definitions 
+
+ 
+
+X.7.1 Intellectual Property (IP).  Intellectual property is a creative work or invention in which the law allows ownership rights for the creator.  The two main types of IP in the academic environment are copyrights and patents.  Copyrights are an exclusive legal right available to creators to print, publish, perform, film, or record literary, artistic, or musical material.  Patent protection is granted by the government to the creator for inventions that are useful, non-obvious and novel products or processes. 
+
+ 
+
+X.7.2 Community Members.  Faculty, staff, and students. 
+
+ 
+
+X.7.3 Creator.  One community member, or two or more collaborators, who develop the IP. 
+
+ 
+
+X.7.3.1 Collaborators.  Two or more community members who share in the creation of IP.  In the case of more than one creator, fractional shares will be agreed upon beforehand to the extent possible.  If parties outside the community are involved in the creation of IP that requires deliberate determination, then distribution of IP rights between all parties should be described prior to or as part of the disclosure process. 
+
+ 
+
+X.7.4  Scholarly Work.  Scholarly work refers to original work including publications, exhibitions, and/or performances.  The guidelines for recognized forms of scholarly work in each discipline are located XXXXXX and are described in XXXXX of the Faculty XXXX. 
+
+ 
+
+X.7.5 Normal Support for a Community Member.  For all community members, College-supplied computing, email and phone resources are considered normal support.  For faculty, normal support also includes salary, laboratory or studio space, funding for sabbatical leaves, start-up grants, competitive grants distributed through the Faculty Development Committee, as well as other widely advertised grant opportunities from the College and other funds available through competitive processes.  For staff, salary and laboratory or studio space are considered normal support.  For students, normal support entails the use of College-owned resources either freely available to students (for example, computer labs and workstations on campus) or available on loan (computers, cameras, video recording devices, etc.) or through courses (art supplies, for example). 
+
+ 
+
+X.7.6 Extraordinary Support for a Community Member.  A community member who receives support beyond the normal support afforded to the community member is receiving extraordinary support. 
+
+ 
+
+X.7.7 Work for Hire.  Under the 1976 Copyright Law, “a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment” is considered “work for hire,” in which case the copyright becomes the property of the employer.  Within the context of academia, however, most institutions do not consider scholarly work (except for patents) done by faculty and students to be the property of the institution, except in cases where the institution has an identity interest, and/or has given extraordinary resources for the creation of the work. 
+
+
+
+X.7.8 .Institutional Work: include works that are supported by a specific allocation of College funds or that are created at the direction of College for a specific Bethnay College purpose.  Institutional Works also include works whose authorship cannot be attributed to one or a discrete number of authors but rather result from simultaneous or sequential contributions over time by multiple faculty and students.
+
+ 
+
+X.7.9 Federal Grants and Bayh-Dole Act of 1980.  The Bayh-Dole act permits a college or university to elect to pursue ownership of IP developed with the support of federal research grants in preference to the government.  In particular, Bethany College can determine IP rights and responsibilities, with the framework of federal guidelines.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] SS Invoices University of Providence Fac Handbook 8.4.18.txt [/INST] Stevens Strategy
+
+
+
+INVOICE
+
+
+
+
+
+Inv. #
+
+Inv. #
+
+Date
+
+Date
+
+Bill to
+
+Bill to
+
+
+
+Anthony Aretz, Ph.D.
+
+President
+University of Providence
+1301 20th Street South
+Great Falls, Montana 59405
+
+
+
+Anthony Aretz, Ph.D.
+
+President
+University of Providence
+1301 20th Street South
+Great Falls, Montana 59405
+
+
+
+2
+
+2
+
+8/4/18				
+
+8/4/18				
+
+
+
+
+
+All invoices are due upon receipt. A late charge of 1.5% will be added to any unpaid balance for each 30 days the payment is overdue. Balances reflect payments received up to and including invoice date.
+
+
+
+Please make payment by check to:
+
+	Stevens Strategy, LLC
+
+PO Box 72
+
+Grantham, NH 03753 
+
+
+
+Please make wire payments to:
+
+	Stevens Strategy, LLC
+
+	Bank:  Lake Sunapee Bank
+
+9 Main Street
+
+Newport, New Hampshire
+
+Acct#: 8236782210
+
+ABA#:011201759
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+All invoices are due upon receipt. A late charge of 1.5% will be added to any unpaid balance for each 30 days the payment is overdue. Balances reflect payments received up to and including invoice date.
+
+
+
+Please make payment by check to:
+
+	Stevens Strategy, LLC
+
+PO Box 72
+
+Grantham, NH 03753 
+
+
+
+Please make wire payments to:
+
+	Stevens Strategy, LLC
+
+	Bank:  Lake Sunapee Bank
+
+9 Main Street
+
+Newport, New Hampshire
+
+Acct#: 8236782210
+
+ABA#:011201759
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+TOTAL DUE        	               $2,900.00
+
+TOTAL DUE        	               $2,900.00
+
+			
+
+			Consulting Fees and Expenses:
+
+			
+
+Final Payment due upon completion of the project
+
+in accord with Contract of May 11, 2017               		               	 $2,900.00
+
+			
+
+			Total Consulting Fees and Expenses	$2,900.00
+
+			
+
+			
+
+			
+
+			
+
+			
+
+			Consulting Fees and Expenses:
+
+			
+
+Final Payment due upon completion of the project
+
+in accord with Contract of May 11, 2017               		               	 $2,900.00
+
+			
+
+			Total Consulting Fees and Expenses	$2,900.00
+
+			
+
+			
+
+			
+
+			
+
+Second Payment
+
+Second Payment
+
+Faculty Handbook for the School of Health Professions       		           		                                      
+
+Faculty Handbook for the School of Health Professions</s>"
+"<s>[INST] SS Project Feedback Response IWPM BJU  2014.txt [/INST] 4
+
+
+
+
+
+Stevens Strategy
+
+Strategic Management Consulting
+
+Project Management Feedback Form
+
+
+
+Thank you very much for working with Stevens Strategy on this project.  We are always striving to improve our effectiveness in serving our clients.  Our goal is to exceed your expectations.  We would therefore very much appreciate your feedback regarding your experience during our work with you.  Please respond to the brief questions below and consider providing additional detailed comments and suggestions on the back of this page. 
+
+
+
+Institution/Project Data
+
+Institution:
+
+Bob Jones University
+
+
+
+Your Name/Title: Phil Gerard, Director for Accreditation
+
+Type of Project (Strategic planning, IT, search, etc.)
+
+
+
+Institutional Policy
+
+Stevens Strategy Consultants you worked with (list):
+
+Stephen Lazarus
+
+Project Start Date:
+
+May 2013
+
+Project End Date:
+
+December 2013
+
+
+
+What was your level of satisfaction with Stevens Strategy for each of the following service components (1=not at all, 10=completely)?
+
+
+
+
+
+Service Component
+
+Rating (1-10)
+
+Overall project success
+
+10
+
+Overall project management
+
+10
+
+Communication
+
+10
+
+Documentation and other resources provided
+
+10
+
+Written reports
+
+10
+
+Oral presentations
+
+10
+
+Meeting management / facilitation
+
+10
+
+Adherence to deadlines / timeliness
+
+10
+
+Billing and administrative services
+
+10
+
+Value of services compared to price for services 
+
+10
+
+Other:
+
+
+
+Other:
+
+
+
+Other:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+What were your expectations for the project?  How well did Stevens Strategy do in meeting them?
+
+BJU wanted to review our institutional policies for  completeness, accuracy and currency.  We particularly wanted help with ensuring that we meet federal and state mandates and SACSCOC requirements.  Stevens did a great job.  We found Stephen Lazarus a great resource for whatever questions we asked.  He was particularly helpful in our review and update of our by-laws and board manual.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+What was the most successful part of this engagement?
+
+
+
+Doing all of the above on a very short timeline—May to November, 2013.  Also the by-laws and board manual.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Based on your work with the Stevens Strategy team, what would you say are the firm’s greatest strengths?  
+
+
+
+Responsiveness and flexibility.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Based on your work with the Stevens Strategy team, what would you say are the firm’s greatest weaknesses?  
+
+
+
+Found no weaknesses to speak of.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Would you hire Stevens Strategy again?  Why and in what area, or why not?
+
+
+
+I did recommend them for helping with the presidential search.  As vendors go, and I have had a lot of experience with IT vendors, Stevens Strategy is impressive.  They already know us well as an institution and have shown themselves to be very knowledgeable in any area of higher ed where they do consulting.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+We welcome all comments and suggestions to improve our approach and your experience.  We will make sincere efforts to take these to heart and incorporate them into our services.  If we need to improve in certain areas, we need to know.  If you were delighted with our services, please tell us!
+
+
+
+Comments:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+May we use your comments regarding out services on our Web site and/or publications?  
+
+
+
+Yes_X__ No___  
+
+
+
+					02/28/2014
+
+________________________	________________
+
+Signature				Date
+
+
+
+Thanks a lot!
+
+
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: StevensStrategy.com</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Start Up Funds.txt [/INST] https://www.kenyon.edu/offices-and-services/office-of-the-provost/new-faculty/startup-funds/
+
+
+
+https://www.colby.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Use-of-Start-Up-Funds-Policy-3.2022.pdf
+
+
+
+Colby College is committed to the success of its junior faculty. Start-up funding is provided as a catalyst for a faculty member’s career at Colby, assisting with career development, enabling scholarship and teaching innovations, and insuring that faculty receive support at crucial early stages of their careers. 
+
+Start-up funds may be used for professional expenses incurred during the first several years of a faculty member’s appointment at Colby. All continuing faculty (tenure track and non- tenure track continuing faculty) may receive start-up funding. 
+
+https://www.colby.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Chair-Handbook-2022.pdf
+
+Start-up and Matching Funds. The College makes available funds for start-up and for matching on grants for instructional and research purposes: 
+
+a. Start-Up Funds. The College endeavors to provide appropriate resources for all faculty so that they can carry out their individual scholarship effectively. As early as the interview stage, chairs should discuss with potential new faculty their research agendas and start-up needs. These discussions should involve the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs so that the magnitude of research needs will be clearly understood by all parties, along with College budget constraints. 
+
+b. Matching Funds. Faculty members whose research and teaching needs permit applications to external funding sources for equipment grants may apply to the College for matching funds of up to
+50% of the value of the equipment to be purchased. This application need be no more than a copy of the proposal submitted to the external agency, but approval for matching funds must be obtained in advance from the Provost, prior to the submission of the proposal to the external funding source. 
+
+Lewis and Clark
+
+https://college.lclark.edu/live/files/30863-start-upfundsoct2020pdf
+
+
+
+https://www.drake.edu/media/departmentsoffices/academicchairs/documents/FY22%20HR%20Faculty%20Recruitment%20Manual%20Working%20Document.pdf
+
+
+
+
+
+Gustavus
+
+Start-up Fund Use Policy – 4:15
+
+The Office of the Provost is pleased to support our newly-hired, tenure-track faculty with start-up funds. Start-up Funds are intended to provide the support needed to allow a new tenure-track faculty member to initiate a strong scholarly program at Gustavus. The expectation is that these funds would support the foundational scholarly/creative work of the faculty member during their first year/s at Gustavus. After this period, it is anticipated that the scholarly/creative work of the faculty member would be supported through other internal or external funding opportunities. All start-up funds should be expended by the end of the second fiscal year of a faculty member’s appointment (May 31 of a given year), unless explicit permission is granted in advance by Dean Sarah Bridges (sbridges@gustavus.edu or 507-933-6514). Discussions about the length of time/availability of start-up funds will generally occur during negotiation, but may occur in real time if circumstances change. 
+
+For each college fiscal year, start-up funds are allocated according to the negotiation between the Dean and faculty member. Unused start-up funds do not roll over from one fiscal year into the next fiscal year. Start-up funds for a given fiscal year must be spent and items received by May 31. Start-up fund availability will not go beyond the end of the fiscal year associated with a faculty member’s tenure candidacy. 
+
+The expenses must be directly related to scholarly/creative work and reasonable. All items purchased are property of the Colleges. 
+
+Questions about start-up funds should be directed to Dean Sarah Bridges (sbridges@gustavus.edu or 507-933-6514).
+
+Acceptable uses for Start-up Funds could include: 
+
+Travel expenses (i.e., transportation, hotels, food), to conduct scholarly work (e.g., research library or collection, field sites)
+
+Laboratory/studio equipment, materials, supplies and organisms
+
+Specialized computer hardware and software
+
+Books and video materials
+
+Fees for laboratory analysis or instrument user fees for equipment not owned by Gustavus
+
+Professional certification or licensing
+
+Journal publication costs (i.e., page and image charges, copyright permission, publication subvention costs)
+
+Gustavus summer student research assistant wages, plus related benefits (e.g., FICA, worker’s compensation), ordinarily in the summer after the first full year of tenure-track employment at Gustavus
+
+Gustavus student research assistant wages (academic year)
+
+Professional society memberships or attending academic conferences
+
+Start-up Funds cannot be used for the following (unless prior approval is granted from the Dean):
+
+Compensation or commissioning of goods/services for Gustavus faculty or professional staff
+
+Teaching supplies (which should be paid out of department budgets)
+
+Start-up funds and employee separation:
+
+Start-up funds are designated to assist a new faculty member to build their research, scholarship, and creativity program at Gustavus Adolphus College. As a result, upon notice of an employee's resignation or separation from the College, funds designated for start-up expenses will no longer be expendable, unless specific approval has been granted by the appropriate funding authority (i.e., the appropriate Dean or Provost). Upon the departure of a faculty member, durable assets or items of value purchased with start-up funds remain with the College.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Wake Forest
+
+
+
+PROCEDURES FOR APPROVING FACULTY START-UP FUNDS TO NEW HIRES
+
+If faculty start-up funds will be offered to a newly hired faculty member, the hiring unit must prepare a budget that lists the costs from all sources to be included in the start-up package, with quotes included for items over $25,000. We recognize that chairs are uniquely qualified to provide the disciplinary and professional expertise to assess reasonable needs in their areas. As such, the technical details of the start-up offer pertaining to scholarly research will be the responsibility of the Chair of the hiring Department.
+
+The hiring unit department chair will consult with the Office of the Dean of the College and the Provost and obtain approval of the start-up package before an offer letter is issued.
+
+Facilities-related costs for new faculty need to be discussed by the hiring unit in advance with the Office of the Dean of the College and approved by the Office of the Provost prior to inclusion in the offer letter. Departments who know they are likely to have facilities needs should include this information in the position request. A quote for any proposed work must be presented by the requesting department to the Dean and Provost. Such renovation planning may need to occur outside the annual capital request process to ensure the construction team has sufficient lead time.
+
+
+
+
+
+Tennessee
+
+
+
+https://research.utk.edu/oried/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/06/Start-Up-Funds-Request-and-Approval-Process.pdf
+
+
+
+At the request of the Provost, colleges will prepare a list in the spring of faculty search requests for the following academic year. This list will include the estimated startup costs based on recent experience with an explanation from the unit leader for the startup request as to the likely uses of the startup package and/or benchmarking data. The Provost, Vice Chancellor for Research and Vice Chancellor of Finance & Administration will meet to discuss the requests and decide if the university can afford the startup for all requested searches. This discussion will be informed by the historical startup and funding data for each department. If the startup needs for all the positions cannot be funded, they will decide how much startup funding can be approved for each college for the following year. It will be the decision of the college dean how best to use those funds in filling positions or to delay searching any particular position. Startup funds for faculty position searches approved during the academic year to be conducted in that same academic year will be approved on a case-by-case basis. 
+
+When negotiating with candidates for faculty positions, department heads should request a plan for the use of the start-up funds being requested by the candidate. The department head must then assess whether the funds being requested and the plan for use of those funds are reasonable and appropriate for the position being filled. A request for start-up funding support after a candidate has accepted a position is not appropriate. 
+
+
+
+Purdue: 
+
+https://www.purdue.edu/provost/faculty/initiatives/start-up.html
+
+By September 1 each year, the Provost will solicit requests for start-up funds from the Deans of the ten academic colleges, Honors College, Libraries and Bands.  The proposals should be submitted by October 1 and should identify each new anticipated hire for the following academic year including position description, department, faculty rank and estimated start-up costs.  Start-up costs for equipment should be listed separately from all other start-up costs, which can be combined and reported as one amount for each faculty position.  Other start-up costs can include items such as faculty summer support, graduate student or post-doc salaries, fringe benefits, travel, and supply and expense allocations.  Expenses for remodeling, relocation/moving, or facility construction should be excluded from these start-up requests.  The proposed sources of start-up funding should be reported showing the amount requested from the Provost and the amount to be provided from the college/school/unit and other sources.
+
+At the same time that each unit submits the October 1 start-up needs for anticipated new hires, the units should also submit a summary of all anticipated hires that will receive Provost start-up funding from one of the Provost hiring initiatives (ex., Strategic Opportunity Hire Program). 
+
+The college/school/unit will submit a follow-up analysis to the Provost by June 30 each year that reports the actual hires for the next year and their actual start-up amounts.  
+
+At the same time that each college/school/unit submits the June 30th actual hire analysis, a separate summary of all faculty hires for the next year that will receive Provost start-up funding through one of the Provost hiring initiatives will be required  .  Where Provost hiring initiatives allow it, units may request supplemental funds from the Faculty Start-up Fund.
+
+
+
+Review and Allocation Process
+
+The college/school/unit will be notified of preliminary commitment decisions from the Faculty Start-up Fund by November 1 each year so that this information is available early in the recruitment process.  Units will be advised of final allocation amounts by July 31 following a review of actual hire information.  The transfer of funding will occur after the final allocations are determined. See Exhibit 1 for the Proposal and Allocation Schedule.
+
+A number of factors will be considered in the review and allocation process:  equipment requirements and non-equipment needs; number of positions; request per CUL; allocation per CUL; allocation as a percentage of request; contribution by the unit; and comparison to prior year allocation. The compilation of this information will be used by the Provost as the basis of the preliminary allocations decision. Actual hires and actual start-up packages will be factored into the final allocation amounts. Note that the start-up funds available to the Provost are fixed, so allocations to individual colleges can vary from year to year. The overall number of hires and start-up needs of the colleges may impact an individual college’s allocation.
+
+
+
+
+
+https://www.csuohio.edu/research/faculty-start-fund-policy
+
+
+
+https://www.slu.edu/arts-and-sciences/pdfs/startup-policy-2015.pdf
+
+
+
+https://www.as.miami.edu/_assets/pdf/faculty-staff/faculty-and-personnel-affairs/faculty-start-up.pdf
+
+
+
+https://researchhow2.uc.edu/docs/default-source/default-document-library/faculty-startup-funds-guidelines6d1941545777401589b638e656f73e4c.pdf?sfvrsn=26e010d_2
+
+
+https://www.oxy.edu › Start_Up_Funds_Policy</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Student Identity Verification.txt [/INST] STUDENT VERIFICATION IN DISTANCE LEARNING
+
+Effective Date:
+
+
+
+Policy Number:
+
+
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Vice President for Academic Affairs
+
+Applicability:
+
+All Canisius College distance learning faculty and students.
+
+History:
+
+ 
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to ensure that Canisius College operates in compliance with the provisions of the United States Federal Higher Education Opportunity Act (HEOA) concerning the verification of student identity in distance education.
+
+POLICY
+
+In compliance with the provisions of the United States Federal Higher Education Opportunity Act (HEOA), Public Law 110-315 concerning the verification of student identity in distance learning, all credit-bearing courses and programs offered through distance learning methods must verify that the student who registers for a distance education course or program is the same student who participates in and completes the course or program and receives academic credit. One or more of the following methods must be used:
+
+A secure login and passcode (see Access Control and Password policies);
+
+Proctored examinations; and/or
+
+New or emerging technologies and practices that are effective in verifying student identification.
+
+All methods of verifying student identity in distance learning must protect the privacy of student information. If any fees associated with the verification of student identity will be charged to students, they must be notified of these charges in writing at the time of registration or enrollment.
+
+Personally identifiable information collected by the College may be used, at the discretion of the College, as the basis for identity verification.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+General Responsibilities
+
+All users of the College’s learning management systems are responsible for maintaining the security of usernames, passwords and any other access credentials assigned. Access credentials may not be shared or given to anyone other than the user to whom they were assigned to for any reason. Users are responsible for any and all uses of their account. Users are responsible for changing passwords periodically to maintain security. Users are held responsible for knowledge of the information contained within the College’s Acceptable Use of College Computer and Network Systems Policy and other applicable information system policies. Failure to read College policies will not exempt users from responsibility.
+
+Responsibilities
+
+Faculty Responsibilities
+
+Faculty teaching courses through distance education methods hold primary responsibility for ensuring that their individual courses comply with the provisions of this policy. Because technology and personal accountability may not verify identity absolutely or ensure academic integrity completely, faculty are encouraged, when feasible and pedagogically sound, to design courses that employ assignments and evaluations unique to the course and that support academic integrity.
+
+Student Responsibilities
+
+Students are responsible for providing complete and true information about themselves in any identity verification process, in accordance with the Community Standards.
+
+Dean Responsibilities
+
+Deans are responsible for ensuring that faculty are aware of this policy and comply with its provisions. Deans are also responsible for ensuring that academic awards and degree programs within their units comply with the provisions of this policy.
+
+Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs Responsibilities
+
+The Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs is responsible for ensuring College-wide compliance with the provisions of this policy and that Deans are informed of any changes in a timely fashion.
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Acceptable Use of College Computer and Network Systems Policy
+Access Control Policy
+Password Policy</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Substantive Changes in Draft 6.txt [/INST] Substantive Changes in Draft 6
+
+Below is a summary of key substantive changes introduced to the 6th draft of the Faculty Handbook.
+
+
+
+Chapter Two – Faculty Governance
+
+2.1	Faculty Bylaws
+
+Article III - Meetings
+
+In response to comments received and the results of the ECF survey on this topic, the FHRT has modified this clause to reflect that attendance at meetings is encouraged as opposed to “expected”.
+
+Article IV – Nominations and Election Procedures
+
+A new Section 4 was added per the request of the Executive Committee of the Faculty that addresses the election of faculty members to University-wide (as opposed to faculty standing) committees, task forces, work groups, etc. The newly added text requires that faculty to be elected to any University-wide committee, task force, etc. charged with addressing matters that “fall within an area of primary faculty responsibility as defined in the Article VIII, Section 2 of the Code of Regulations.”
+
+In the prior draft, the President was permitted to appoint faculty to University-wide committees outside the faculty standing committee structure.  Of note, the President has raised concerns and is opposed to this new section.
+
+
+
+Chapter Three - Full-time Faculty Personnel Policies
+
+3.2.4: Librarians
+
+A new definition of Librarians provided by TAC was added to the draft.  Per the new text, University librarians are defined as staff members doing work that requires professional education in the theoretical and scientific aspects of librarianship, archives, or information studies. A definition for “other professional librarian staff” was also provided (staff performing professional level tasks who, though not librarians, have equivalent education and training in related fields and are assigned formal teaching responsibilities).  
+
+Per the newly added text, both categories are afforded voting privileges at Faculty meetings and are eligible for election to Faculty standing committees. In addition, these individuals may use the appropriate appeal process in the Faculty Handbook for cases involving alleged violations of their academic freedom.  For activities outside of teaching responsibilities, University librarians and other professional librarian staff, as members of the University’s professional staff, are guided by employment policies applicable to staff as set forth in the Employee Manual.
+
+
+
+3.2.6.1: Professor Emeriti
+
+A revised listing of faculty emeriti recognitions and privileges was added.
+
+3.6.1.1: Standard Full-time Teaching Load
+
+Alternative Standard Full-time Teaching Load Policy
+
+The model text was edited to make a distinction between workload and teaching load.  Per the revised text, the standard workload for Tenure Line faculty includes a standard teaching load, as well as advising, scholarship or creative work, and service responsibilities.  The standard workload for full-time Visiting faculty includes a standard teaching load, as well as any other responsibilities (i.e., scholarly or creative work and/or service) as delineated in the individual appointment contract.  The standard teaching load for both Tenure Line and full-time Visiting faculty is six full unit courses or its equivalent during the normal academic year of two semesters.  
+
+Additional text was also added indicating that teaching load distribution for individual faculty members within a department is the responsibility of the Department Chair.  
+
+To help ensure that teaching responsibilities are distributed equitably across all departments, the FHRT added text indicating that Department Chairs will provide semester teaching load distributions to Academic Affairs. If Academic Affairs has equity concerns regarding the distribution of teaching loads within the department, it will work in consultation with the applicable Department Chair and faculty member to resolve the concern.  
+
+Increase in the Standard Teaching Load/Overloads
+
+This section was revised to reflect that a faculty member’s acceptance of an overload teaching assignment is strictly voluntary and subject to Academic Affairs approval. At the faculty member’s option, and subject to the approval of Academic Affairs, a faculty member accepting an overload assignment in the fall semester may request an underload in the immediately following spring semester in lieu of compensation for the overload in the fall semester. Requests to take a course reduction in lieu of overload payment may not be rolled over from one academic year to the next.
+
+
+
+
+
+3.6.1.5: Scheduled Class Meeting and Faculty Absences 
+
+Several revisions to this section were made to address in-person teaching expectations.  One key change was to add text that in-person teaching is an essential function for each faculty position and an expected norm.  
+
+Modified text addressing the remote teaching section was also added in response to calls that the text in prior drafts was an intrusion on academic freedom.  The new text allows for temporary use of remote teaching technologies in certain circumstances (illness, participation at a professional conference, etc.); however, consultation with the Department Chair and Academic Affairs is required for any course in which remote teaching is used as the main mode of student interaction for more than one week of class sessions, cumulative across a semester.  Similarly, if a course design intends to utilize remote technologies as the main mode of student interaction for more than one week of class sessions, cumulative across a semester, the instructor must consult with and receive the approval of the Department Chair and Academic Affairs.
+
+3.9.1 – Evaluation Criteria
+
+Per FPC and faculty feedback, the alternative model text provided in prior drafts addressing a non-weighted evaluation criteria approach was removed and sent to FPC for further study next academic year.  The University’s current weight percentages remain in place.
+
+3.9.2.6: External Review
+
+Based on FPC and faculty feedback, the FHRT removed the alternative policy that was included in prior drafts requiring external reviews for all tenure and promotion to full Professor evaluations.  The alternative model text, as well as research on the topic, has been transmitted to the FPC for further study over the next academic year. 
+
+												3.9.4.2: Eligibility for Tenure – The Probationary Period
+
+												In the prior draft, two policies were reprinted under this heading: (1) the University’s current policy, reprinted from Chapter III.F of the current handbook; and (2) an alternative policy which the Review Team believed more clearly defines the probationary period and affirmatively states that the University does not recognize de facto tenure (i.e., tenure must be affirmatively awarded by the Board).  Since no comments were received opposing the alternative policy, the FHRT opted to strike the University’s current text in favor of the alternative model.
+
+												3.10.1: Sabbatical Leave
+
+												The FHRT, in response to colleague and FPC comments, has made several adjustments to the alternative sabbatical leave policy:
+
+												To facilitate course scheduling and planning and verification of eligibility, the revised text requires eligible faculty to declare to Academic Affairs on or before October 1st the semester they will take the leave.  This step will allow Academic Affairs to confirm that a sabbatical leave report was filed with the FPC at the conclusion of the faculty member’s last sabbatical leave.  The FHRT is concerned that the current University policy presently does not include a mechanism to verify that the report, which is required by current policy, was filed with FPC. The step, in the view of FHRT, will help ensure sabbatical accountability. 
+
+												The FHRT also introduced revisions to the timeline and content surrounding the submission of a brief written description or abstract of the sabbatical plan.  In this draft, the plan/abstract must be submitted three months before the leave; however, text was added allowing for modifications to the plan prior to the leave itself.  The FHRT continues to believe that requesting the submission of a brief written description or abstract will help ensure that the faculty member’s leave is as productive as possible by requiring some planning in advance of the leave.
+
+												3.12.1.3: Salary Ranges for Initial Appointment
+
+												In an effort to address these faculty concerns regarding equity issues without moving away from the ability to hire faculty at market rate salaries by discipline, the FHRT added text indicating that the Academic Affairs, in consultation with the FPC, will review periodically review internal salary patterns by discipline, rank, and gender. 
+
+3.13.1: Retirement
+
+A listing of retirement benefits provided by Academic Affairs was included in the draft.
+
+3.13.4: Policies and Procedures Governing Dismissal for Cause
+
+A new definition of “incompetence” was introduced.  In addition, the team removed the term “moral turpitude” as it believed the definition of “gross personal misconduct” sufficiently captured such behavior.
+
+												3.13.5: Policies and Procedures Governing the Imposition of Sanctions Other than Dismissal for Cause
+
+A clause was added to the Informal Meeting with Provost step requiring that prior to the initial meeting to discuss the complaint, the Provost, unless legal or confidentiality concerns preclude otherwise, must notify the faculty member in writing of the nature of the complaint.
+
+3.13.6: Termination
+
+2.b(1): Termination due to Financially Contingent Situations and Resource Allocation
+
+Several changes were introduced to this section.
+
+The first change was the addition of a new step to include faculty participation in the declaration of a financially contingent situation. Per this section, the Board is still solely authorized to determine that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent.  However, there is now allowance for the UGC to be invited to be present when the Board of Trustees considers matters related to financial contingency. Moreover, the UGC may, at the discretion of the Chair of the Board of Trustees, be invited to address the Board on behalf of the faculty as part of the Board's deliberations.  The new clause also stipulates that the President shall present relevant financial data to the UGC that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent, and that reasonable means for coping with the situation have been exhausted without resorting to the elimination of faculty positions.
+
+The second major change was the addition of detailed procedures codifying the procedures that were followed by the University during the most recent program review that resulted in faculty terminations.
+
+The third change was the addition of a clause that delineates the normal sequence of faculty layoffs due to a financially contingent situation.  Per the clause, the University will first consider faculty attrition, followed by termination of part-time and visiting faculty positions, and then tenure-track and tenured faculty.  Unless a serious distortion of department or program would otherwise result, tenured faculty are retained in favor of tenure-track faculty.
+
+2.b(2): Program or Department Discontinuance Due to Educational Considerations 
+
+The FHRT introduced several revisions to the policy, including references to the Academic Review Process procedures in 2.b(1) above, as well as the addition of text addressing AAUP recommended protections with respect to the possibility of reassignment and retraining prior to the termination a tenured faculty appointment.  Moreover, all references to program reductions were removed.
+
+3.14.1: Appeals Procedures in Nonrenewal for Performance Reasons
+
+Based on faculty feedback, the FHRT removed the alternative appeals policy that appeared in prior drafts of the handbook.   Per faculty suggestions during open meetings, the definitions of “prejudicial error” and “inadequate consideration” from the alternative model were incorporated into the University’s current policy. 
+
+
+
+Chapter Five - Allocation and Review of Faculty Positions
+
+5.2.1: Initial Authorization of Positions
+
+Per APAC member feedback, APC/APAC does not currently make recommendations for visiting (term) positions. As such, adjustments were made to the policy reflecting that this policy only applies to the approval of tenure-line positions.
+
+5.2.2: Re-Authorization of Vacant Positions
+
+The process for re-authorizing vacant positions was modified by the FHRT in consultation with APAC to streamline the process.  Per the modified text, within two weeks of receiving a Vacancy Memorandum, APAC, utilizing the same criteria used for regular position allocations, will make an initial written recommendation to the Provost and President regarding whether the vacant position should be immediately reauthorized or evaluated by the Committee pursuant to the standard allocation process. The Committee reserves the right to recommend position allocation in diverse ways that meet the needs and strategic importance of the position to the department and University.
+
+
+
+Appendix C – Policy Statement on Appointment of Librarians
+
+The FHRT revised Appendix C based on information provided in TAC’s memo to the team.  Specifically, TAC recommended that qualifying library staff retain voting rights and the ability to participate in relevant faculty committee work and receive relevant faculty communications.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Suggested Revisions to ARTICLE VIII.txt [/INST] ARTICLE VIII 
+THE FACULTY 
+
+Section 1. The Faculty of Ohio Wesleyan University shall consist of the Professors, the Associate Professors, the Assistant Professors, the Instructors, the President, the Provost, the Vice Presidents of the University, and others officially admitted by the Faculty. 
+
+Section 2. It shall be the primary function of the Faculty to instruct the students in the arts and sciences, and in all branches of liberal and professional instruction, according to the highest academic standards. Under the leadership of the President and subject to review procedures provided elsewhere in the Code, the Faculty shall have primary responsibility for the following additional functions: 
+
+Academic standards and policy for the admission, retention, and graduation of students. 
+
+Curricula necessary to achieve the educational aims of the University and periodic review of those curricula. 
+
+General policy and regulations for the conduct of intercollegiate athletics and other formalized intercollegiate activities. 
+
+Faculty employment, appointments, non-reappointments, promotions, tenure, evaluation criteria for merit increases, dismissals, professional development leaves of absences, and grants-in-aid for scholarly research. 
+
+Section 3. The Faculty may determine its own By-Laws within the framework of the policies established by the Board of Trustees and consistent with the Charter of the University and this Code of Regulations. 
+
+Section 4. OFFICERS OF THE FACULTY 
+
+The Faculty shall elect a Secretary at the April meeting of the Faculty to serve for a term of two years commencing on the June first following such election. Such Secretary and the President of the University and the Provost shall be the officers of the Faculty. 
+
+The Provost shall receive communications directed to the Faculty and shall issue communications from the Faculty and shall, with the aid of the Secretary of the Faculty, prepare the agenda for all Faculty meetings. 
+
+The Secretary of the Faculty shall prepare and keep full and complete minutes of all Faculty meetings. 
+
+Section 5. The Faculty shall be organized into such academic departments and divisions as are necessary for proper administration of personnel policies and the property planning, direction, and teaching of courses. Chairpersons of such departments or divisions shall be responsible to the President or the Provost as the President may determine, and shall be appointed by the President after consultation with the members of the academic department or division immediately concerned. 
+
+Section 6. STANDING COMMITTEES OF THE FACULTY
+Standing committees of the Faculty shall be designated, elected and directed by the Faculty, shall have as ex officio members the President of the University and the Provost, and each shall elect its Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson from the elected members. The term of service of faculty members of such committees, their eligibility to serve on more than one committee and to be re-elected, and the method of filling vacancies shall be determined by the Faculty. Such committees shall be concerned primarily with academic philosophy and policy, not with administration. The standing committees of the Faculty shall include the Committee on University Governance, which shall consist of four members elected from the Faculty. It shall be the responsibility of the Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson of this Committee to attend meetings of the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees, and of the whole Committee to attend meetings of the Board of Trustees, subject to the provisions of Article VI, Section 2.f. and Article III, Section 3 hereof. This Committee also shall cooperate with the administrative officers of the University in fiscal planning and budgeting of the University.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Survey Questions Ideas.txt [/INST] Suggested Survey Questions
+
+
+
+Section III – Open-Ended Questions
+
+The Task Force may want to consider adding the following question to the Open-Ended Questions section of the survey.
+
+
+
+In your opinion, what one to three specific things could help improve the current promotion and tenure process?
+
+
+
+With respect to the faculty evaluation system in place at the University, please respond below if you have any additional feedback to share with the Task Force:
+
+
+
+New DEI Section
+
+The Task Force may want to consider adding a new section to address DEI issues.  If so, we have provided a few questions for the Task Force’s consideration and comment:
+
+
+
+From what I can gather, tenure and promotion criteria and standards are consistently applied:
+
+Strongly agree
+
+Somewhat agree
+
+Neither agree nor disagree
+
+Somewhat disagree
+
+Strongly disagree
+
+Decline to answer
+
+
+
+From what I can gather, tenure and promotion decisions here are fair for all faculty regardless of diversity:
+
+Strongly agree
+
+Somewhat agree
+
+Neither agree nor disagree
+
+Somewhat disagree
+
+Strongly disagree
+
+Decline to answer
+
+Scholarly productivity and professional service that incorporates Diversity, Equity, and Inclusivity principles should receive credit equivalent to all other areas of scholarly productivity and professional service in the promotion and tenure process:
+
+Strongly agree
+
+Somewhat agree
+
+Neither agree nor disagree
+
+Somewhat disagree
+
+Strongly disagree
+
+Decline to answer
+
+
+
+Service that incorporates Diversity, Equity, and Inclusivity principles should be acknowledged and receive credit in the promotion and tenure processes:
+
+Strongly agree
+
+Somewhat agree
+
+Neither agree nor disagree
+
+Somewhat disagree
+
+Strongly disagree
+
+Decline to answer
+
+
+
+Miscellaneous Questions
+
+The Task Force may want to consider adding a new “miscellaneous” section to include the following questions:
+
+
+
+The current Faculty Handbook states that teaching effectiveness is… “weighted most heavily.”  Should University-wide weight ranges be assigned to each evaluation category to clarify the promotion and tenure criteria and guidelines for both candidates and evaluators?
+
+Yes
+
+No
+
+Unsure
+
+Because the nature of teaching effectiveness, scholarly productivity/professional service/creative works, and service differs in some respects among academic disciplines, should discipline-specific standards for tenure and promotion be developed by departments or program areas?
+
+Yes
+
+No 
+
+Unsure
+
+For the purposes of promotion and tenure, I think advising should be evaluated under: 
+
+Advising (i.e., remain as a stand-alone criterion)
+
+Teaching
+
+Service
+
+Other</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Table of Contents (Draft 1).txt [/INST] Faculty Bylaws (or Statutes) 
+
+Proposed Table of Contents
+
+Article I - The College Faculty
+
+Membership of Faculty
+
+Section 1: Members of the Faculty
+
+Section 2: Functions (Faculty Responsibilities)
+
+The Faculty Assembly
+
+Section 1: Voting Members
+
+Section 2: Officers 
+
+Section 3. Attendance
+
+Section 4 Faculty Meetings
+
+Procedures at Meetings
+
+Time and Place
+
+Special Meetings
+
+Notification of Proposed Legislation
+
+Necessary Number of Votes
+
+New Business
+
+Agenda
+
+Secretary to the Faculty
+
+Student Access to Minutes
+
+Section 5: Faculty Standing Committees
+
+Article II - Faculty Status and Appointments
+
+Section 1: Faculty Titles 
+
+Section 2: Faculty Ranks
+
+Section 3: Faculty Recruitment and Initial Appointment
+
+Section 4: Faculty Appointment Contracts
+
+Section 5: Department Chairs
+
+Article III - Full-time Faculty Personnel Policies
+
+Section 1: Faculty Rights and Standards of Professional Conduct
+
+Academic Freedom and Responsibility
+
+Statement on Professional Ethics
+
+Statement on Plagiarism
+
+Outside and Summer Employment
+
+Faculty Grievances
+
+Section 2: Faculty Responsibilities
+
+Teaching Activities
+
+Scholarly and Creative Work Activities
+
+Service Activities
+
+Section 3: Evaluation of Faculty Performance
+
+Annual Evaluations
+
+Section 4: Promotion in Rank
+
+Section 5: Tenure
+
+Section 6: Faculty Development
+
+Sabbatical Leave
+
+Section 7: Faculty Compensation, Benefits, and Leaves
+
+Section 8: Faculty Separation 
+
+Resignation
+
+Non-Reappointment
+
+Dismissal for Cause
+
+Faculty Layoffs (Financial Exigency & Program Discontinuation)
+
+Article IV - Part-time Faculty Personnel Policies
+
+Section 1: Part-time Faculty Titles and Appointments
+
+Voting Rights
+
+Duration of Appointments
+
+Section 2: Part-time Faculty Rights and Standards of Professional Conduct
+
+Section 3: Part-time Faculty Responsibilities
+
+Section 4: Part-time Faculty Evaluation
+
+Section 5: Benefits and Compensation
+
+Section 6: Part-time Faculty Separation 
+
+Resignation
+
+Notice of Termination
+
+Dismissal for Cause</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Table of Contents -  Draft 1.txt [/INST] Table of Contents
+
+1	Chapter One: Code of Regulations of the Trustees of the Ohio Wesleyan University 	1
+
+2	Chapter Two: Faculty Governance	2
+
+2.1	Faculty Bylaws	2
+
+2.2	Descriptions of Faculty Committees	7
+
+2.3	Academic Departments and Department Chairs	19
+
+2.3.1	Academic Departments	19
+
+2.3.2	Department Chairs	19
+
+3	Chapter Three: Full-time Faculty Personnel Policies	20
+
+3.1	Preamble and General Policy	20
+
+3.2	Faculty Classifications	20
+
+3.2.1	Full-Time Teaching Faculty	28
+
+3.2.2	Part-Time Faculty	29
+
+3.2.3	Administrators with Faculty Status	30
+
+3.2.4	Librarians	31
+
+3.2.5	Faculty-in-Residence	32
+
+3.2.6	Honorific Faculty	33
+
+3.3	Faculty Contracts	35
+
+3.3.1	Types of Faculty Contracts	35
+
+3.3.2	Annual Contract Period	36
+
+3.3.3	Contract Terms	36
+
+3.3.4	Area of Appointment	36
+
+3.3.5	Joint Appointments	37
+
+3.4	Faculty Recruitment, Initial Appointment, and Placement in Rank	38
+
+3.4.1	Position Authorization	38
+
+3.4.2	Search Procedures	38
+
+3.4.3	Rank and Salary of Initial Appointment	40
+
+3.4.4	Prior Service Credit	40
+
+3.4.5	Faculty Qualifications 	40
+
+3.4.6	Appointment of Foreign Nationals	43
+
+3.5	Faculty Rights and Standards of Professional Conduct	44
+
+3.5.1	Academic Freedom	44
+
+3.5.2	Professional Ethics	44
+
+3.5.3	Statement on Plagiarism	45
+
+3.5.4	Observance of University Mission and Policies	46
+
+3.5.5	Confidentiality	46
+
+3.5.6	Conflict of Interest – Faculty Specific Activities	46
+
+3.5.7	Outside Activities	47
+
+3.5.8	Faculty-Student Relationships	48
+
+3.5.9	Sexual and Other Unlawful Discrimination or Harassment	52
+
+3.6	Contractual Obligations and Duties of a Faculty Member	53
+
+3.6.1	Teaching	53
+
+3.6.2	Scholarly or Creative Work Contributions	61
+
+3.6.3	Service to the University and Community	61
+
+3.7	Faculty Personnel Records	63
+
+3.8	Faculty Evaluation	66
+
+3.8.1	Evaluation Criteria for Personnel Decisions	66
+
+3.8.2	Evaluation of Full-time Faculty Members	74
+
+3.8.3	Evaluation for Reappointment	81
+
+3.8.4	Evaluation for Tenure	87
+
+3.8.5	Evaluation for Promotion	93
+
+3.8.6	Evaluation for Merit Salary Increments	96
+
+3.8.7	Confidentiality of Faculty Personnel Committee Minutes	100
+
+3.9	Faculty Professional Development	101
+
+3.9.1	Regular Paid (Sabbatical) Leave 	101
+
+3.9.2	Special Released Time for Scholarly Production	103
+
+3.9.3	Retraining Leaves	105
+
+3.9.4	Professional Development Leave Without Pay	105
+
+3.9.5	Individual Professional Development Accounts	107
+
+3.10	Faculty Awards	109
+
+3.10.1	The Welch Meritorious Teaching Award	109
+
+3.10.2	The Sherwood Dodge Shankland Award for Encouragement of Teachers	110
+
+3.10.3	The Welch Award for Scholarly or Artistic Achievement	110
+
+3.11	Faculty Compensation, Benefits, and Non-Professional Development Leaves	112
+
+3.11.1	Faculty Compensation	112
+
+3.11.2	Benefits	113
+
+3.11.3	Faculty Leaves	124
+
+3.12	Separation from Service	129
+
+3.12.1	Resignation	129
+
+3.12.2	Retirement	129
+
+3.12.3	Nonrenewal of Appointment	129
+
+3.12.4	Policies and Procedures Governing Dismissal for Cause	130
+
+3.12.5	Policies and Procedures Governing Imposition of Sanctions Other than Dismissal for Cause	136
+
+3.12.6	Termination	138
+
+3.13	Faculty Appeals and Grievances	146
+
+3.13.1	Appeals Procedure in Nonrenewal for Performance Reasons	146
+
+3.13.2	Appeals on Grounds of Academic Freedom in Cases of Termination of a Tenure Track Position or Conversion of a Tenure Track Position to Non-Tenure Track Term 	152
+
+3.13.3	Other Faculty Grievances	153
+
+4	Chapter Four: Part-time Faculty Personnel Policies	156
+
+4.1	Academic Titles for Part-Time Faculty	156
+
+4.2	Recruitment and Initial Appointment of Part-Time Faculty	156
+
+4.2.1	Establishment of Need for Part-Time Faculty	156
+
+4.2.2	Recruitment of Part-time Faculty	156
+
+4.2.3	Part-time Faculty Rights and Privileges	156
+
+4.2.4	Part-time Faculty Contractual Duties and Responsibilities	157
+
+4.3	Terms of Part-Time Faculty Appointments	157
+
+4.3.1	Part-time Instructors	157
+
+4.3.2	Lecturers	159
+
+4.3.3	Senior Lecturers	162
+
+4.3.4	Appeal Procedures for Part-Time Faculty	164
+
+4.3.5	Approval of Appointments and Promotions	164
+
+4.3.6	Course Assignments Contingent upon Need	164
+
+5	Chapter Five: Allocation and Review of Faculty Positions	165
+
+5.1	Preamble and General Policy	165
+
+5.2	Authorization of Full-time Teaching Faculty Positions	165
+
+5.2.1	Initial Authorization of Positions	165
+
+5.2.2	Re-authorization of Vacant Positions	166
+
+5.2.3	Guidelines for Allocation and Review of Full-time Teaching Faculty Positions	166
+
+5.3	Review of Tenure Track Positions	167
+
+5.3.1	Scheduled Review	167
+
+5.3.2	Discretionary Review	168
+
+5.3.3	Appeals Related to Regular and Discretionary Reviews	169
+
+5.4	Faculty Selected for Administrative Positions	169
+
+5.5	External Candidate Appointed as Provost and Granted Tenure with That Appointment	170
+
+6	Chapter VI – Amendments to the Faculty Handbook and Sanction of the Board of Trustees	171
+
+6.1	Amendments to the Faculty Handbook	171
+
+6.2	Sanction of Board of Trustees	171
+
+Appendices	172
+
+Appendix A: Faculty Personnel Forms	172
+
+Appendix B: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Policy	172
+
+Appendix C. Policy Statement on Appointment of Librarians	172</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Table of Contents - Review Team Meeting.txt [/INST] Table of Contents
+
+1	Chapter One: Code of Regulations of the Trustees of the Ohio Wesleyan University	1
+
+2	Chapter Two: Faculty Governance	2
+
+2.1	Faculty Bylaws	2
+
+2.2	Descriptions of Faculty Committees	6
+
+2.3	Academic Departments and Department Chairs	18
+
+2.3.1	Academic Department	18
+
+2.3.2	Department Chairs	18
+
+2.4	Amendments to the Faculty Handbook	19
+
+3	Chapter Three: Faculty Personnel Policies	19
+
+3.1	Preamble and General Policy	19
+
+3.1.1	Faculty Committee Advice	20
+
+3.1.2	Sanction of Board of Trustees	20
+
+3.2	Kinds of Faculty Positions	20
+
+3.2.1	Tenure Track Faculty	21
+
+3.2.2	Term Faculty	21
+
+3.2.3	Adjunct Professors	22
+
+3.2.4	Administrative Faculty	23
+
+3.2.5	Professional Librarians	23
+
+3.2.6	Honorific Faculty	23
+
+3.3	Kinds of Appointments	24
+
+3.3.1	Full-time Appointments	25
+
+3.3.2	Part-time Appointments	26
+
+3.4	Faculty Contracts	32
+
+3.4.1	Annual Contract Period	32
+
+3.4.2	Contract Terms	32
+
+3.4.3	Area of Appointment	32
+
+3.4.4	Joint Appointments	33
+
+3.5	Faculty Recruitment, Initial Appointment, and Placement in Rank	34
+
+3.5.1	Rank and Salary of Initial Appointment	34
+
+3.5.2	Faculty Credentials	34
+
+3.5.3	Appointment of Foreign Nationals	34
+
+3.5.4	External Candidate Appointed as Provost and Granted Tenure with That Appointment	34
+
+3.6	Faculty Rights and Standards of Professional Conduct	35
+
+3.6.1	Academic Freedom	35
+
+3.6.2	Professional Ethics	36
+
+3.6.3	Statement on Plagiarism	37
+
+3.6.4	Observance of University Policies	37
+
+3.6.5	Conflict of Interest – Faculty Specific Activities	38
+
+3.6.6	Outside Activities	39
+
+3.6.7	Faculty-Student Relationships	41
+
+3.6.8	Prohibition of Harassment and Unlawful Discrimination	41
+
+3.6.9	Violations of Faculty Rights, Academic Freedom and Professional Ethics	42
+
+3.7	Contractual Obligations of a Faculty Member	42
+
+3.7.1	Teaching	42
+
+3.7.2	Scholarly or Creative Work Contributions	48
+
+3.7.3	Service to the University and Community	48
+
+3.7.4	Contributions to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion	48
+
+3.8	Faculty Personnel Records	49
+
+3.9	Faculty Evaluation	50
+
+3.9.1	Evaluation Criteria for Personnel Decisions	50
+
+3.9.2	Evaluation Components and Review Materials	55
+
+3.9.3	Annual Evaluation for Reappointment	59
+
+3.9.4	Evaluation for Tenure	64
+
+3.9.5	Evaluation for Promotion	69
+
+3.9.6	Evaluation for Merit Increments	70
+
+3.9.7	Faculty Personnel Committee Minutes	70
+
+3.10	Faculty Professional Development	71
+
+3.10.1	Pre-Tenure Regular Paid (Sabbatical) Leave for Full-Time Faculty	71
+
+3.10.2	Regular Paid Leaves (Sabbatical) for Tenured Full-Time Faculty	73
+
+3.10.3	Special Released Time for Scholarly Production	74
+
+3.10.4	Retraining Leaves	75
+
+3.10.5	Professional Development Leave Without Pay	75
+
+3.10.6	Assistance With Travel and Other Professional Expenses	76
+
+3.11	Faculty Awards for Teaching and Scholarly or Artistic Achievement	77
+
+3.11.1	The Welch Meritorious Teaching Award	77
+
+3.11.2	The Sherwood Dodge Shankland Award for Encouragement of Teachers	78
+
+3.11.3	The Welch Award for Scholarly or Artistic Achievement	78
+
+3.12	Faculty Compensation, Benefits, and Non-Professional Development Leaves	79
+
+3.12.1	Salary	79
+
+3.12.2	Benefits	80
+
+3.12.3	Faculty Leaves	87
+
+3.13	Separation from Service	88
+
+3.13.1	Retirement and Voluntary Separation	88
+
+3.13.2	Nonrenewal of Appointment	88
+
+3.13.3	Policies and Procedures Governing Dismissal For Cause	88
+
+3.13.4	Policies and Procedures Governing Imposition of Sanctions Other than Dismissal for Cause*	92
+
+3.13.5	Termination	92
+
+3.14	Faculty Grievances	98
+
+4	Chapter Four: Part-time Faculty Personnel Policies	101
+
+4.1	Preamble and General Policy	101
+
+4.2	Academic Titles for Part-Time Faculty	101
+
+4.3	Recruitment and Initial Appointment of Part-Time Faculty	101
+
+4.3.1	Establishment of Need for Part-Time Faculty	101
+
+4.4	Terms of Part-Time Appointments	101
+
+4.5	Rights and Privileges of Part-Time Faculty	107
+
+5	Chapter Five: Allocation and Review of Faculty Positions	107
+
+5.1	Preamble and General Policy	107
+
+5.2	Initial Authorization of Positions	108
+
+5.2.1	Guidelines for Allocation and Review of Faculty Positions	108
+
+5.3	Re-authorization of Vacant Positions	108
+
+5.4	Review of Tenure Track Positions	108
+
+5.5	Faculty Selected for Administrative Positions	110
+
+Appendices	113
+
+Appendix A: Faculty Personnel Forms	113
+
+Appendix B: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Policy	113
+
+Appendix C. Policy Statement on Appointment of Librarians	113</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Teaching Load Assignments.txt [/INST] Teaching Load Assignments/Approvals
+
+Wooster 
+
+After consultation with the department chairperson and the Teaching Staff and Tenure Committee, the Provost has the responsibility to oversee the teaching load of each department. In doing so the Provost shall take into consideration such factors as (1) the curricular goals for the department, (2) the types and requirements of the courses to be taught for the coming academic year, (3) the number of I.S. students, (4) the number of sections of First-Year Seminar, (5) the number of students taught the year before, (6) extra-departmental responsibilities, and (7) the number of leaves granted to members of the department. 
+
+Subject to review by the Provost, the department chairperson shall then have the responsibility to set the load for each individual member of their department in terms of college, departmental, and individual needs. The normal range of course units taught per faculty member in any academic year shall be from five to six. Any combination of registrations equaling ten of Independent Study and 400 tutorial shall equal one course unit. The departmental program shall be evaluated by the chairperson and the Provost each year in preparation for setting the load for the coming year. The intention shall be to apportion equitably among the departments and Faculty the teaching load of the College in a manner consistent with the special situation of each department and consistent with the needs of the College. 
+
+Antioch
+
+Faculty workload is defined as teaching load plus other duties such as advising, committee work, and other duties as described below…
+
+The vice president for academic affairs is responsible for monitoring teaching load and for ensuring that teaching overload and teaching underload are avoided as much as possible. When either situation is unavoidable, the vice president for academic affairs and the faculty will consult the Academic Policies and Guidelines Handbook for equitable, agreeable solutions 
+
+Note: The Academic Policies and Guidelines Handbook is not publicly available.
+
+Alleghany College
+
+Not addressed in Faculty Handbook.
+
+Oberlin
+
+Not addressed in Faculty Guide.
+
+Kenyon
+
+Not addressed in Faculty Handbook.
+
+Kalamazoo
+
+Not addressed in Faculty Handbook.
+
+Hope College
+
+B. NORMAL COMPONENTS OF A FACULTY MEMBER'S PROFESSIONAL OBLIGATIONS
+
+Teaching Assignments: Requisite faculty contact hours (FCN), normally 12 per semester, or student contact hours (SCN) as determined by the department and as approved by the academic dean and the Provost.
+
+Albion
+
+Not addressed in Faculty Handbook.
+
+Wabash
+
+Not addressed in Faculty Handbook.
+
+Earlham
+
+Not addressed in Faculty Handbook.
+
+Depauw
+
+Not specifically addressed in Faculty Handbook.
+
+The normal teaching duties of a full time member of the DePauw faculty within the College of Liberal Arts shall be equivalent to twelve contact hours per week each semester (18 hours for applied faculty within the School of Music) and the whole range of attendant duties involved in teaching (preparation, evaluation, and reflection) necessary to support these hours. Within the College of Liberal Arts, individual departments, interdisciplinary programs and schools are responsible for determining, with the approval of the Vice President for Academic Affairs (for the College of Liberal Arts) and the approval of the Dean of the School of Music (for the School of Music), what counts as a normal teaching load under this general guideline.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Teaching Load Examples.txt [/INST] Teaching Load Examples
+
+
+
+Trinity</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Teaching Policies For Academic Best Practices Manual.txt [/INST] Teaching Policies For Academic Best Practices Manual
+
+Academic Advising
+
+Members of the full-time faculty are expected to support students through informed and effective academic advising. Beginning with their second year of an appointment, faculty members are expected to advise their assigned students and to assume an equitable number of student advisees as assigned by the Department Chair. Moreover, faculty members should be informed academic advisors, with current knowledge about and attentiveness to the following: 
+
+General education, major, and minor requirements.
+
+General academic policies, including processes for filing paperwork related to a student’s academic record.
+
+Available campus resources for students (e.g., disabilities, career planning and other academic and personal assistance). 
+
+In addition, faculty members are expected to monitor their advisees’ academic progress, working with an advisee not showing adequate academic progress to determine the cause and to seek campus resources to cope with academic or personal challenges, if necessary. 
+
+Availability to Students and Colleagues 
+
+Because Ohio Wesleyan University is a teaching institution, the University expects a full-time faculty member’s commitment to teaching to translate into an established campus presence. Regular office hours constitute one means to demonstrate accessibility to students. A pattern of student complaints regarding faculty accessibility or class attendance may be a sufficient cause for a negative personnel decision.
+
+As professional educators and scholars and in keeping with the mission and aims of the University, members of the full-time faculty are further expected to allocate their time to assist their colleagues in the shared work of the University and attend faculty meetings and University and department events.
+
+Course Syllabi
+
+In accordance with Criterion 2B in the Higher Learning Commission Criteria for Accreditation, students must be provided clear and complete course information for each course taken at the University, a requirement that is supported through the distribution of a syllabus.  In addition, the Higher Learning Commission has a role in reviewing University compliance with the U.S. Department of Education’s requirements related to the credit hour definition.  Evidence of compliance in this regard is provided, in part, through the Commission’s review of sample course syllabi.  Based on the above, it is the expectation of the University that each faculty member at a minimum distribute or electronically post on the Learning Management System (preferable) a course syllabus for each course taught within the first week of the course.  Such syllabi must include the following information (though not necessarily in this order): 
+
+Course name
+
+Course credit hours
+
+Course location and meeting times
+
+The instructor’s name, title, contact information (i.e., email address and office number), office location and hours
+
+The course description as published in the Catalog and the expected course objectives and/or student learning goals
+
+Required materials to complete the course (e.g., texts, lab equipment, etc.)
+
+The requirements to complete the course:
+
+Required assessments (i.e., assignments, exams, presentations, performances, etc.)
+
+Grading scale and assignment weights
+
+Any additional course and academic program policies, as appropriate (e.g., travel, field experiences, engagement, make-up work, extra credit, etc.)
+
+Policies:
+
+Attendance policy for the course 
+
+Reference to the University Academic Honesty Policy
+
+A statement indicating that accommodations will be made for students with documented disabilities and contact information for the Accessibility Services Office
+
+Reference to the University’s Title IX and Sexual Harassment Policy 
+
+In addition to the above, a statement reserving the course instructor’s right to change the syllabus as needed, provided clear communication with the students about the changes is assured, is also recommended.
+
+Copies of each syllabus, for archival and accreditation compliance purposes, must be submitted to the institutional syllabus upload page on or before the date published by Academic Affairs.
+
+Textbooks
+
+Per the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008, the University is required to electronically post textbook and other course materials in the schedule of classes prior to the start of registration each semester. Faculty must provide this information directly to the bookstore via an order form or may enter this information through INSERT LINK on or before the date published by Academic Affairs. 
+
+Students with Disabilities
+
+The University is committed to complying with federal and state requirements regarding the provision of a reasonable accommodation(s) for students with disabilities.
+
+As such, course instructors have the responsibility to: 
+
+		Assist in maintaining the confidentiality of a student with a disability.
+
+		Encourage students with disabilities to seek out the Accessibility Services Office for official accommodations to ensure their success.
+
+		Contact the Accessibility Services Office with questions or concerns about reasonable accommodations or a student with a disability. 
+
+		With the assistance of the Accessibility Services Office, provide a requested reasonable accommodation(s) as indicated on an “Accommodation Letter” presented by a student enrolled in the faculty member’s course or lab.
+
+Use of Approved Learning Management System
+
+Faculty teaching online and hybrid learning classes are required to use the University’s approved learning management system.  Faculty teaching courses solely meeting on campus are strongly encouraged to use the University’s learning management system for the posting of the course syllabus, course modules, grades, and feedback on assignments.
+
+Knowledge of Academic Policies, Procedures, and Curricula 
+
+Faculty members are expected to familiarize themselves with and abide by the academic policies and procedures published in the current Catalog and, as applicable, Academic Affairs.  Members of the faculty are also responsible for understanding the degree requirements (both general education and major and minor requirements) and other curricular regulations of their academic program(s) with which they are directly involved.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Teaching Responsibilities Text Removed from Article IV.txt [/INST] Teaching Responsibilities Text Removed from Article IV
+
+
+
+Teaching Load
+
+The normal course load at Wheaton for full-time tenure-line faculty is five courses or the equivalent per academic year.  each course meeting for three hours per week.  
+
+For Professors of the Practice, the normal course load is six courses or the equivalent per academic year.
+
+The Provost, after receiving and considering the recommendation of the appropriate Department Chair or Program Coordinator and in consultation with the Committee on Educational Policy and the Provost’s Advisory Committee, determines teaching equivalencies for workload assignments according to the following considerations:
+
+The number of student contact hours and extent of faculty preparation required
+
+The number of student course credits generated
+
+Curricular requirements in effect, such as internships, practicums, and field experiences
+
+Standards promulgated by accrediting agencies, professional organizations, or disciplinary bodies
+
+Responsibility for organized instructional activities.
+
+Overloads
+
+Faculty who teach more than [six] courses in an academic year shall seek the prior approval of their Department Chair or Program Coordinator and Provost for teaching an overload.  
+
+For faculty with joint appointments, prior approval shall be sought from the Department Chair or Program Coordinator of the faculty member’s department/program of primary academic appointment and the Provost.  Those faculty members who support programs, majors, minors, etc. but who do not  have a formal joint appointment must obtain prior approval from the Provost, who will consult with the Department Chair/Program Coordinator from the faculty member’s primary academic department/program, as well as the Department Chair/Program Coordinator of the program the faculty member support.  In all instances, the Provost shall make the final decision.
+
+Approved overloads are compensated in accordance with guidelines established by the Provost’s Office.
+
+Underloads
+
+If an underload occurs, whether due to a course cancellation or other cause, the faculty member may be assigned alternative teaching responsibilities, possibly in a subsequent semester, or may be granted release time for other duties at the discretion of the Provost.
+
+Teaching Releases
+
+Release from teaching to perform administrative or other specified duties must be approved by the Provost following consultation with the faculty member receiving the release and the appropriate Department Chair(s)/Program Coordinator(s). 
+
+Scheduled Class Meetings
+
+Faculty are expected to meet their classes punctually as scheduled.  Changes to the College schedule of course meeting times must be approved, in advance, by the Department Chair or Program Coordinator and Provost.  When such changes are sought for a course that is not cross-listed but that counts toward and/or supports a major other than one housed within the department or program under which the course is listed, the faculty member  is encouraged to consult with, and required to notify, the Department Chair or Program Coordinator of the affected major and the Registar.  Changes to the College schedule of meeting times for cross-listed courses must be approved, in advance, by the Chair(s) and/or Coordinator(s) of each department and/or program under which the course is listed.
+
+If a faculty member is unable to attend a class meeting, they are responsible for notifying their Department Chair or Program Coordinator and appropriate administrative assistant , as well as amake appropriate alternative arrangements (e.g., class cancellation, rescheduling the class meeting, finding a substitute instructor, or replacement of the class session by a substitute activity).  If the Department Chair or Program Coordinator is not available, the faculty member should notify the Provost’s Office.
+
+Anticipated extended medical leave absences must be reported to the faculty member’s Department Chair/Program Coordinator, Provost’s Office, and Human Resources in accordance with established Human Resource policy.
+
+Availability to Students and Colleagues 
+
+As professional educators and scholars, members of the full-time teaching faculty are expected to allocate their time to fulfill their individual appointment responsibilities, assist their colleagues in the shared work of the department/program and College, and attend faculty meetings and College events.  Accordingly, full-time faculty are normally expected to be available for meetings, office hours, and teaching at least three days a week during the academic year, as well as make themselves available an additional day each week for meetings, department functions, and other applicable service responsibilities. 
+
+In addition to being reasonably available for in-person, synchronous meetings with students and colleagues, faculty members are expected to be reasonably available for asynchronous and/or remote communication with students and colleagues.  During times of intensive student-faculty work (including student advising and registration in the College), it may be necessary for faculty members to schedule additional office hours.  Similarly, it may be necessary for faculty members to make themselves reasonably available to faculty colleagues and administrators to conduct department/programmatic or College work that occurs on an unscheduled basis.  As such, faculty members are expected to ensure that they are available often enough to meet assigned responsibilities.  
+
+Course Syllabi
+
+Faculty are required for each course taught, each term the course is taught, to provide students a complete and current syllabus, as well as upload the course syllabus to the instructor’s course site on the learning management system. Syllabi are collected each semester and archived by the Library.   Syllabi must contain the following minimum content: 
+
+Course name
+
+Course credit hours
+
+Course location and meeting times
+
+The instructor’s name, title, and contact information, office location and hours
+
+Course objectives and student learning outcomes
+
+A course outline
+
+Grading and attendance policies
+
+Required texts
+
+Any additional course and academic program policies, as appropriate (e.g. travel, field experiences, engagement, make-up work, extra credit, etc.)
+
+A Title IX statement.
+
+Accessibility/Disability Services Statement: Wheaton is committed to ensuring equitable access to programs and services and to prohibit discrimination in the recruitment, admission, and education of students with disabilities. Individuals with disabilities requiring accommodations or information on accessibility should contact the Director for Accessibility Services at the Filene Center for Academic Advising and Career Services: accessibility@wheatoncollege.edu or (508) 286-8215: You can find more info here: https://wheatoncollege.edu/academics/filene-center-for-academic-advising-and-career-services/accessibility-services/
+
+Counseling Center: The confidential and FREE mental health resource on campus for all students offers in person and telehealth mental healthcare. To learn about services, visit the Counseling Center’s website, or give the office a call at 508-286-3905. Additionally, the Mental Health Support Line is available anytime the CC is not, by calling the front desk 508-286-3905 and following voicemail prompts to be connected to a clinician (24/7, available in languages other than English, and accessible from anywhere you are in the world).
+
+The Committee on Educational Policy will periodically review the above listing and update as necessary.
+
+Students with Disabilities
+
+Section 504 of the Federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973 requires that institutions make “reasonable accommodations” for students with disabilities, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 provides even more extensive protections for citizens with disabilities.  The College is committed to complying with federal and state requirements regarding the provision of reasonable accommodations for students with disabilities and will make reasonable accommodations to the needs of eligible students. 
+
+Faculty members have the responsibility to: 
+
+Assist in maintaining the confidentiality of the student with a disability.
+
+Consider including a statement in the syllabus indicating the faculty member’s willingness to provide reasonable accommodations to a student with a disability and serve as an invitation to seek out Accessibility Services for official accommodations. 
+
+Encourage students with disabilities to seek out Accessibility Services for official accommodations to ensure their success.
+
+Contact the Office of Accessibility Services with questions or concerns about accommodations or a student with a disability. 
+
+Provide a requested accommodation(s) as indicated on an “Accommodation Letter” presented by an enrolled student.  The faculty member should endeavor to accommodate the student with the assistance of Academic Support Services.
+
+Knowledge of Academic Policies, Regulations, and Curricula 
+
+Faculty members are expected to familiarize themselves with and abide by the academic policies and regulations published in the current College Catalog, as well as any applicable departmental or program policies.  
+
+Members of the faculty are also responsible for understanding the degree requirements (both general education and major requirements) and other curricular regulations of their academic program(s) with which they are directly involved.  To properly advise students, faculty members should be familiar with academic requirements, policies, and regulations applicable to those students they advise. 
+
+Student Course Feedback Forms Course Evaluations by Students EvaluationsFeedback
+
+Members of the faculty shall distribute s Student course evaluation feedback forms are electronically distributed to students in all classes during the final two weeks of the fall and spring semesters.   Evaluation Student course feedback procedures and forms shall conform to the terms of this legislation policy, as proposed by the Committee on Educational Policy, approved by the faculty, and set forth [INSERT LINK TO WHERE THE POLICIES WILL BE PUBLISHED]below.  Instructors are encouraged to provide students class time to complete the forms.
+
+The student course feedback results, in combination with other evidence of teaching performance (e.g., peer evaluations, Year End Self Evaluation Reports, dossier self-assessment, syllabi, and other course resources), are considered as a point of reference to assist the evaluations of a faculty member’s overall teaching performance.  Student course feedback is never to be used in isolation as a means of recommending reappointment, promotion, or tenure.  Rather, evaluators will take due consideration in interpreting trends across multiple courses/terms when referencing student feedback during the teaching performance evaluation process.
+
+Design of Evaluation Course Feedback Forms 
+
+Design of Evaluation Course Feedback Forms shall begin with the following statement:
+
+This evaluation course feedback form gives you an opportunity to communicate to your instructor your views of the strengths and weaknesses of this course. It is a tool that can help your instructor to understand student opinion and to improve this class and her or histhe instructor’s teaching in general. The appropriate faculty committees will also review this evaluation feedback as part of faculty re-appointment, merit, tenure, and promotion processes. You are urged to take this evaluation opportunity to provide feedback seriously and to answer questions completely and thoroughly. The anonymity of this process will be assured; your instructor will not see your responses until after final grades have been submitted to the Registrar. 
+
+Evaluation Course feedback forms shall include the following questions: 
+
+Instructor’s Name: 
+
+Course Title and Number: ____________________________________ 
+
+Semester/Year: ______________________________________________
+
+You are a freshman ______ sophomore ______ junior ______ senior ____ 
+
+You are taking this course (check all that apply): 
+
+for major	for minor 	as Gen Ed. Requirement 	as Elective 
+
+What grade do you expect in this course? ____ 
+
+Approximate number of class meetings that you missed: ____ 
+
+Average number of hours per week you spend on this course outside class: ___ 
+
+Amount of time you spend on this course compared to other courses this semester:
+
+much less 		less 	about the same 		more 		much more 
+
+Departments and academic programs shall elicit information relevant to their own discipline. In addition, the following information shall be elicited with questions designed by departments or academic program: 
+
+Organization and clarity of the instructor’s presentation. 
+
+Fairness of instructor’s evaluation of student’s work. 
+
+Instructor’s encouragement of, and receptivity to, student participation in class. 
+
+Whether the instructor treats students with respect, courtesy, civility, inclusivity, or professional attitude. 
+
+Instructor’s availability and helpfulness to students outside class. 
+
+Whether the course, as a whole, made sense. 
+
+Whether the course was intellectually stimulating. 
+
+The strongest/weakest aspects of the course. 
+
+Departments and academic programs may use either numerical-scale questions, open-ended questions, or both.  When a numerical scale is used, the highest number shall correspond to the highest rating, and the numbers shall increase from left to right.  Departments and academic programs are strongly encouraged to use a 5-point scale if they choose to employ numerical-scale questions.  Departments and academic programs are also encouraged to invite narrative comments from students. 
+
+All departments and academic programs shall include at a minimum the following two questions on their course evaluation feedback forms.  These two questions shall be answered on the five-points rating scale illustrated below: 
+
+Overall, how do you rate the instructor of this course? 
+
+ 
+
+1 		2 	3 	4 	5 
+
+Poor 				Excellent
+
+Comments: 
+
+Overall, how do you rate this course? 
+
+ 
+
+1		2	3	4	5 
+
+Poor 				Excellent 
+
+Comments: 
+
+Independent Studies, Honors Theses, and Small Classes 
+
+Instructors are encouraged to request evaluations feedback of their own design from students taking independent study courses with them, as well as from students writing honors theses under their supervision. 
+
+Instructors may ask students in very small classes to write a group evaluation.  In such classes, departments or programs may allow the group evaluation to supplement, or to substitute for, the regular course evaluation feedback forms. 
+
+Design, Distribution, and Collection of Evaluation Feedback Forms 
+
+Department Chairs and Program Coordinators are responsible for the design and collection of evaluation feedback forms. 
+
+Students shall fill out evaluation feedback forms only when the instructor is not present in the room. The instructor shall not read completed evaluations forms until after final grades have been submitted to the Registrar.  All evaluations shall be stored in the files of the Department Chair or Program Coordinators.  [November 1, 1991, pp. 3858-60; May 7, 1999, pp. 4217-18]</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Template.txt [/INST] [The Effects of Finishing an Honors Thesis
+
+During the Senior Year at Whitman College]
+
+(title)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+by
+
+
+
+Student A. Whitman
+
+(name as it is to appear on commencement program)
+
+
+
+
+
+A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements 
+
+for graduation with Honors in [major here].
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Whitman College
+
+2019
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Certificate of Approval
+
+
+
+
+
+This is to certify that the accompanying thesis by [your name as it is to appear on commencement program] has been accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation with Honors in [major].
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+________________________
+
+[Type name of thesis advisor]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Whitman College
+
+May 08, 2019 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Table of Contents
+
+(TOC Instructions: This table can be updated under References > Table of Contents (far left) > Update Table) on a Mac this may be under “Document Elements,” click “update” in the Table of Contents section. If you want to add a section select the title of the section (“Appendix B”) where it is in this doc and make it “Heading 1” under Home > Styles (you can make the font and size anything you want but it will change initially) section titles or anything you want underneath a section should be “Heading 2”.)
+
+	Acknowledgements	iv
+
+	Abstract	vi
+
+	[List of Illustrations/Tables/Figures/Graphs/Images]	vii
+
+	[Introduction]	1
+
+	[Chapter 1]	2
+
+	[Section 1.1]	2
+
+	[Section 1.2]	2
+
+	[Section 1.3]	2
+
+	[Chapter 2]	3
+
+	[Section 2.1]	3
+
+	[Section 2.2]	3
+
+	[Section 2.3]	3
+
+	[Chapter 3]	4
+
+	[Section 3.1]	4
+
+	[Section 3.2]	4
+
+	[Section 3.3]	4
+
+	[Chapter 4]	5
+
+	[Section 4.1]	5
+
+	[Section 4.2]	5
+
+	[Section 4.3]	5
+
+	[Chapter 5]	6
+
+	[Section 5.1]	6
+
+	[Section 5.2]	6
+
+	[Section 5.3]	6
+
+	[Chapter 6]	7
+
+	[Section 6.1]	7
+
+	[Section 6.2]	7
+
+	[Section 6.3]	7
+
+	[Conclusion]	8
+
+	Appendix A	9
+
+	Appendix B	10
+
+	Appendix C	11
+
+	Bibliography	12
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Acknowledgements
+
+
+
+
+
+Abstract
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+[List of Illustrations/Tables/Figures/Graphs/Images]
+
+(List instructions: This table can be done by hand, but you can also insert one automatically in Word. On any figure within your thesis, insert a caption in References>Captions>Insert Caption. Once everything has a caption, in that same box select Insert Table of Figures and it will be automatically created). 
+
+
+
+	Figure 1: [Figure name]	[#]
+
+	Figure 2: [Figure name]	[#]
+
+	Figure 3: [Figure name]	[#]
+
+	Figure 4: [Figure name]	[#]
+
+	Figure 5: [Figure name]	[#]
+
+	Figure 6: [Figure name]	[#]
+
+	Figure 7: [Figure name]	[#]
+
+	Figure 8: [Figure name]	[#]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+[Introduction]
+
+
+
+[Text for introduction goes here]
+
+
+
+
+
+[Chapter 1]
+
+
+
+[Text for Chapter 1 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 1.1]
+
+[Text for 1.1 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 1.2]
+
+[Text for 1.2 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 1.3]
+
+[Text for 1.3 goes here]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+[Chapter 2]
+
+
+
+[Text for Chapter 2 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 2.1]
+
+[Text for 2.1 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 2.2]
+
+[Text for 2.2 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 2.3]
+
+[Text for 2.3 goes here]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+[Chapter 3]
+
+
+
+[Text for Chapter 3 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 3.1]
+
+[Text for 3.1 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 3.2]
+
+[Text for 3.2 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 3.3]
+
+[Text for 3.3 goes here]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+[Chapter 4]
+
+
+
+[Text for Chapter 4 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 4.1]
+
+[Text for 4.1 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 4.2]
+
+[Text for 4.2 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 4.3]
+
+[Text for 4.3 goes here]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+[Chapter 5]
+
+
+
+[Text for Chapter 5 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 5.1]
+
+[Text for 5.1 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 5.2]
+
+[Text for 5.2 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 5.3]
+
+[Text for 5.3 goes here]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+[Chapter 6]
+
+
+
+[Text for Chapter 6 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 6.1]
+
+[Text for 6.1 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 6.2]
+
+[Text for 6.2 goes here]
+
+
+
+[Section 6.3]
+
+[Text for 6.3 goes here]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+[Conclusion]
+
+
+
+[Text for conclusion goes here]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Appendix A
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Appendix B
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Appendix C
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Bibliography
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+vi
+
+11</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Tenure Clock.txt [/INST] SCU
+
+Extensions of the probationary period for tenure fall into two categories, routine and discretionary, described below. For both routine and discretionary extensions of the probationary period, the faculty member must submit a Tenure Clock Extension Form to the Provost as soon as possible after the qualifying event or circumstance, but in no case later than September 15 of the penultimate year of the probationary period. If the Provost has not been notified in this manner, the probationary period remains unchanged. 
+
+Categories for extensions are as follows: 
+
+1. Routine Extensions 
+
+A one-year extension of the probationary period will be granted routinely for the following reasons: 
+
+the birth or adoption of a child; or 
+
+the death of the faculty member’s spouse, registered domestic partner, or child. 
+
+Discretionary Extensions 
+
+A one-year extension of the probationary period may be granted on a discretionary basis if requested by a faculty member for circumstances that significantly impede progress toward tenure, such as: 
+
+a serious health condition of the faculty member; or 
+
+a serious health condition of the faculty member’s child, spouse, registered domestic partner, or parent, for whom the faculty member is required to provide significant caregiving; or 
+
+other extraordinary circumstances beyond the control of the faculty member. 
+
+Extensions of the probationary period for any reason will normally be limited to a total of two years. 
+
+A faculty member who is granted an extension of the probationary period will be permitted to apply for tenure before the end of the extended probationary period, as allowed in 3.4.3.2. 
+
+Tenure candidates who have been granted an extension of the probationary period will be reviewed under the same academic standards as a candidate who has not had an extension. 
+
+
+
+
+
+St. Mary’s
+
+Tenure-track faculty members have the option of interrupting the probationary period – “stopping the tenure-track clock” – up to a total of two one-year periods for conditions covered by the Family Medical Leave Act or the California Family Rights Act or the Pregnancy Disability Leave, whether or not leave is actually taken. 
+
+Stopping the clock under this provision will not be considered a matter for special negotiation, but will be initiated via written notification by the faculty member to the Provost, with copies to the member’s Department Chair and Dean. The option of stopping the tenure clock will be independent of a request for Protected Leave (see 2.13.2.1 Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993/California Family Rights Act) or any other leave. The tenure clock will normally be stopped any time during the academic calendar before the submission deadline for the Form A upon request in writing by the faculty member, and will be restarted automatically with the next year’s deadline for the Form A. Tenure decisions will not be affected by the interruption of the probationary period (i.e., there will be no changed/higher expectations). The Provost will respond to the faculty member, with copies to the faculty member’s department chair and dean, indicating how the tenure schedule has been adjusted.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Termination Due to Financially Contingent Situations and Resource Allocation.txt [/INST] Termination Due to Financially Contingent Situations and Resource Allocation
+
+Termination of a tenured faculty member or, prior to the end of the term of appointment, of a tenure-track faculty member may occur because of the declaration of a financially contingent situation as described below. 
+
+	
+
+	Criteria
+
+The criteria to be employed in financially contingent situations in allocating resources to University programs and services fall under three headings: Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality. These will at times compete and at other times converge. If and when Ohio Wesleyan University meets contingencies that require institutional contraction and reorganization, these sets of criteria will be used in complementary fashion as guidelines. The order of their enumeration should not be taken to indicate their order of priority. Neither should it be presumed that all three will be weighed equally in making particular decisions. Particular circumstances may encourage the assignment of greater weight to one or another in particular cases, even though in financially contingent situations it is to be expected that fiscal pressure may emphasize reference to the criterion of cost effectiveness. What is important is that the campus community, in considering contingency reductions, identify and grapple directly with what are likely to be very difficult choices from among options that all carry significant costs and/or benefits in terms of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality. The objective must be to arrive at wise judgments.
+
+	MISSION
+
+Because Ohio Wesleyan University is a specific private university with a specific heritage, a major consideration associated with any reduction or change in size will be to preserve its essential character by maintaining those programs and activities judged to be more central to that character. To do so will require reference to several questions. How closely does the program or service in question fit the stated mission of Ohio Wesleyan University? How importantly does it contribute toward a non-curricular campus ambience vital to Ohio Wesleyan's liberal arts heritage? Is it essential in serving other programs?
+
+	COST EFFECTIVENESS & MARKETABILITY
+
+Attentiveness to the cost effectiveness and marketability of programs and services is a key characteristic of a well-run institution. Cost-effectiveness must be one guideline in determining staffing levels and whether or not to maintain programs or services. The University must therefore be sensitive to the constituencies it serves and to their preferences. While Ohio Wesleyan cannot mindlessly add or subtract staff or programs or services to track short-term fluctuations in cost effectiveness, neither can it ignore longer term or more profound shifts as it decides which subject areas, programs, or services to maintain and at what staffing levels. The following non-prescriptive questions related to cost effectiveness and marketability must be asked: What is the relationship between direct expenses and revenues in a given area? What is the actual and relative cost of a graduation unit (or, in the case of non-academic areas, other service unit)? What is the trend line for both, and for enrollments and student/staff ratio? Is the program or service a ""native recruiter?"" Is it duplicative?  What is the present and future demand for the program among existing and potential student populations as measured by internal data sets (e.g., enrollments, numbers of majors, programs served, etc.), labor market projections, external stakeholder feedback, and national and state policy/economic projections and placement data?
+
+	QUALITY
+
+Since the primary purpose of Ohio Wesleyan University is to provide excellent instruction in the liberal arts and selected career options, and comparable quality in non-academic services, it must consider program or service quality in making program, service, and faculty staffing decisions. In dealing with any financially contingent situation, it will seek to retain its best personnel, programs, and services, as one top priority. It will strive to adjust programs and services and retain or retrain individuals so as to maintain the best possible teaching and learning environment. Major issues associated with this guideline are complex and difficult. Among them are the following: Is the program or service and its staff faculty generally perceived by Faculty (staff, where non-academic services may be involved), students, and alumni to be of high quality? Do students, in or associated with it, perform throughout the University at average or higher levels? Is the staff faculty versatile as well as strong?
+
+	The guidelines of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality are contradictory. Any one of them used exclusively could lead to very serious imbalances in the focus and operation of the University. Recognition that each of these three needs to be considered and that each provides an outward boundary for the decision process will encourage an intelligent and equitable response to financially contingent situations as well as to ordinary conditions.
+
+	Making Contingency Decisions
+
+If financially contingent situations require reductions in personnel and/or academic departments or programs resulting in the termination of faculty appointments or services , the University will balance a need for timely action with the need for shared decision-making.  In both determining whether such a situation exists and in shaping difficult decisions that contingencies might require, the President will engage in extensive consultation with appropriate faculty committees, administrators, and where conditions allow, students, before making a recommendation to the Board of Trustees as follows:  
+
+Determination of Financial Contingency
+
+When a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent that might require reductions in academic departments or programs, the President will present to the Committee on University Governance evidence supporting the President’s assessment that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent and that reasonable means for coping with the situation have been exhausted without resorting to the elimination of faculty positions.  The Committee on University Governance will review the evidence within the time prescribed by the President and transmit to the President and Board of Trustees either: 
+
+An endorsement of the President’s assessment; or 
+
+Its own assessment, explicitly stating its point(s) of disagreement with the President. 
+
+The Board of Trustees will not make a determination on whether a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent until it has received the report from the Committee on University Governance or the deadline prescribed by the President has elapsed.  These determinations and resulting document(s) shall be considered private and confidential unless the Board of Trustees agrees to make all or portions of them public. 
+
+After completing the above steps, the Board of Trustees shall determine whether a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent and retains ultimate authority for declaring that a financially contingent situation exists or is imminent.
+
+
+
+Framing of Proposal to Address Financial Contingent Situation
+
+Responsibility for framing a proposal for program or services and/or personnel reductions to deal with a financially contingent situation will rest with the President.  The proposal, when it pertains to academic programs and/or personnel, will be referred to the Committee on Academic Programs as to curricular impact, to the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee as to the implications for the academic plan, to the Faculty Personnel Committee as to personnel implications, and to the affected programs. When the proposal pertains to non-academic programs, services, and/or personnel, it will be forwarded to the Governance Committee and the Senior Leadership Team Cabinet for consideration. These bodies will hold hearings as part of their deliberations. At the discretion of the President, an advisory student committee may also be created. These groups will severally consider the proposal(s) and in doing so may consult widely with faculty, students, and, where appropriate, with staff. They are to complete their deliberations within 30 calendar days of receipt of the President's proposal(s) and report their findings and recommendations to the President immediately upon finishing their deliberations. They may recommend acceptance, alteration, or otherwise, of the President's proposal(s). If and when they are unable to achieve concurrence with the President, and the President yet judges that reductions must be made, the President will report to the Board of Trustees the proposed course of action. If there is a difference of views between the President and the committees, the President will ensure that the committees' proposals are forwarded to the Trustees  with the President’s proposal(s). The Board of Trustees retains ultimate authority for approving proposals as to program and position reductions and terminations responding to a financially contingent situation.
+
+After the completion and implementation of decisions for institutional contraction to deal with a financially contingent situation, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.
+
+In the event that the Board of Trustees declares that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent, the President shall be responsible for framing a proposal for addressing the situation.  If the proposal might require reductions in academic departments or interdisciplinary programs and the termination of faculty positions, the President, prior to framing the proposal, shall engage in an extensive academic program review process.
+
+Academic Program Review Process
+
+Step 1: The initial step in the Academic Program Review process will be the development by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness of a Dashboard that provides extensive quantitative data relating to all academic programs at the University. The Dashboard will be made available transparently to all faculty. 
+
+Step 2. Following the publication of the Dashboard, each academic department will be charged by Academic Affairs to complete self-studies, following criteria set by the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee (APAC). 
+
+Step 3. Following receipt of the department self-studies, APAC will evaluate each department in relation to Mission, Cost-Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality (see above) and issue a report to the President.
+
+Step 4. The President shall convene a Joint Committee comprised of eight faculty members elected by the faculty (or appointed by the Executive Committee if an election is unsuccessful) from individuals serving on each of the following faculty committees: University Governance Committee (UGC), Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC), Committee on Academic Programs (CAP), and Academic Planning and Allocation Committee (APAC).  In addition, the Joint Committee shall include the Provost and appropriate academic administrators responsible for data and curriculum as designated by the Provost.  
+
+After considering the department self-studies and APAC report, the Joint Committee shall:
+
+Develop recommendations for the appropriate number and size of departments and interdisciplinary programs, as well as the appropriate number of majors and minors;
+
+Identify opportunities for program enhancement; and
+
+Suggest the optimal configuration of departments and interdisciplinary programs. 
+
+In addressing these areas, the committee’s recommendations may include (a) the discontinuation and/or reduction of departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors; (b) the elimination of faculty positions; (c) recommendations about reconfiguring departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors by reassigning positions; (d) enhancement of programs, and (e) changes in policies and procedures that would improve the functioning or efficiency of the academic program. 
+
+The President, in consultation with the Executive Committee of the Faculty, will determine the date by which the Joint Committee’s recommendations to the President must be provided.  Following its deliberations, the Joint Committee shall issue its formal recommendations in writing to the President.  
+
+Step 5. The President will review the Joint Committee report and issue a written proposal to the members of the faculty addressing the financially contingent situation.  The President’s written proposal will also be referred to CAP as to curricular impact, to APAC as to the implications for the academic plan, to the FPC as to personnel implications, and to the affected programs identified in the proposal, each of which will have the opportunity to hold hearings over a 30-day period. The manner in which the hearings are held are at the discretion of the respective committees.  
+
+Step 6. Following the hearings, the respective committees and programs may submit to the President written recommendations for changes to the proposal.  The President will consider the recommendations. If consensus can be reached regarding the final proposal, the President will forward to the Board of Trustees a final report reflecting that consensus. If consensus cannot be reached, the President will transmit to the Board of Trustees both the President’s final proposal and the alternative proposal(s) prepared by the faculty committees and program.  The Board of Trustees shall approve the final plan to address the financial contingent situation and retains ultimate authority for approving proposals as to department or interdisciplinary program and position reductions and terminations responding to a financially contingent situation.
+
+Step 7. If the Board approved plan includes the discontinuation and/or reduction of departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors, the Faculty Personnel Committee, in consultation with the Provost, shall recommend to the President which individual positions, and therefore appointments, should be terminated. In developing recommendations, the committee will be guided by following sequence:
+
+Consideration of attrition resulting from resignation, retirement, or other severance actions. 
+
+Termination of Part-time and Visiting faculty positions within the affected department(s) or interdisciplinary program(s). 
+
+Termination of tenure-track and/or tenured positions within the affected department(s) or interdisciplinary program(s).  In the case of a reduction of a department or interdisciplinary program, as opposed to a discontinuation, the appointment of a faculty member with tenure within the same department or program will not be terminated in favor of retaining a full-time tenure-track faculty member, except in circumstances where a serious distortion of the department or interdisciplinary program would otherwise result.  
+
+In making recommendations, the following criteria, in no particular order of priority, will be considered by the Faculty Personnel Committee: 
+
+Education and professional credentials; 
+
+The length of the faculty member’s service to the University;
+
+The quality of the faculty member’s service to the University;
+
+The abilities of the individual faculty member in relation to the needs of the University and the potentially affected department or interdisciplinary program.
+
+Step 8. The President shall render the final decision on terminations for reasons of financial contingency and notify the faculty member(s) involved in accordance with the Notification provisions below. 
+
+Step 9. After the completion and implementation of decisions for institutional contraction to deal with a financially contingent situation, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.
+
+Notification
+
+Notification of termination will be sent from the President to the faculty member. The notice will specify the reasons for such termination, the effective date of termination, the faculty member's right to retraining (if applicable), and right to an appeal.
+
+In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial exigency, full-time non-tenure faculty members will be given notice or severance salary in accordance with Section 3.13.3.1.  Tenured faculty will be provided with termination payments in accordance with Section 3.13.5.1.
+
+Appeals
+
+If the administration issues notice to a particular faculty member of an intention to terminate the appointment because of financial exigency, the faculty member will have the right to file a grievance in accordance with Section 3.14.3. The issues in this hearing may include the following:
+
+The existence and extent of the condition of financial exigency. The burden will rest on the administration to prove the existence and extent of the condition. The findings of a faculty committee in a previous proceeding involving the same issue may be introduced.
+
+The validity of the educational judgments and the criteria for identification for termination; but the recommendations of a faculty committee on these matters will be considered presumptively valid.
+
+Whether the criteria are being properly applied in the individual case.
+
+Reassignment and Retraining
+
+Subject to a review of qualifications (see Section 3.4.5 - Faculty Qualification) and retraining possibilities (see Section 3.10.3 – Retraining Leave), tenured and tenure track faculty members in positions to be eliminated will be considered for suitable vacancies at the University in administrative or teaching positions. See Section 3.13.5.1 below.
+
+Reinstatement Rights
+
+When a tenured faculty position is terminated for a financial contingent situation, the position will not be filled by a new appointee with the same areas of specialization as the terminated faculty member within a period of three years, unless the released faculty member has been offered reinstatement and at least thirty days in which to accept or decline it.
+
+
+
+	2.	Program or Department Discontinuance Due to Educational Decisions
+
+Termination of an appointment with tenure, or of a probationary faculty member before the end of the specified term, may occur as a result of the formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction due to educational considerations not related to a financially contingent situations.  
+
+	Criteria
+
+The decision to discontinue an academic program or department of instruction will be based on long-range judgements that the educational mission of the University as whole will be enhanced by the discontinuance of an academic program or department.  Such a decision will not be based upon cyclical or temporary variations in enrollment.
+
+For purposes of this policy, departments are defined as an academic department or unit of instruction offering majors and minors that existed prior to the decision to discontinue them. The term program means a group of courses leading to a major or minor, a sequence of courses with a common prefix, a service, or support area, or any curriculum area identified as such.
+
+	Making Academic Program or Department Discontinuation Decisions
+
+A proposal to discontinue an academic program or department is reviewed according to the following procedures: 
+
+A proposal may be initiated by the Committee on Academic Programs, the Provost, or the President. 
+
+Upon receipt of a proposal, the Provost shall call together a joint committee, comprising the Committee on Academic Programs and the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee (hereinafter referred to as the Joint Committee), which shall evaluate the proposal considering criteria used in the normal, periodic review of academic programs and departments.  As part of the evaluation, the Joint Committee will consult with the faculty of the impacted program or department. 
+
+At the discretion of the President, an advisory student committee may also be created.
+
+The recommendations of the Joint Committee concerning discontinuance of an academic program or department will be reported to the Faculty as a whole for review.
+
+The Faculty will then make a final recommendation on the matter to the Provost.  
+
+In the event the Provost disagrees with the Faculty’s recommendation, the Provost will meet with the Faculty to discuss the reasons for such disagreement, before making a final recommendation on the matter to the President.
+
+The Provost will then communicate a final recommendation and the reasons therefor in writing to the Faculty.
+
+Having considered the recommendations above and considered the vote of the Faculty, the Provost will make a final written recommendation to the President on the matter.  If the Provost disagrees with the Faculty recommendation, the Provost will forward the Faculty’s proposal to the President.
+
+The President will then transmit the above recommendation(s), along with the President’s independent recommendation, to the Board of Trustees for final action.
+
+If the Board of Trustees approves the discontinuation of the program or department, the President will charge the Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Personnel Committee, to recommend names of faculty members to be reduced.
+
+The President shall render the final decision on terminations for reasons of formal reduction or discontinuance of a degree or program area and shall notify the faculty member(s).
+
+Notice
+
+Notification of termination will be sent from the President to the faculty member. The notice will specify the reasons for such termination, the effective date of termination, the faculty member's right to retraining (if applicable), and right to an appeal.
+
+Commitment to Reinstate Terminated Ranked Faculty Members
+
+In all cases of termination of appointment of tenure or tenure-track faculty because of program or department discontinuation, the place of the faculty member concerned will not be filled by a replacement within a period of three years, unless the released faculty member has been offered reinstatement and at least thirty days in which to accept or decline it.
+
+Appeal
+
+A tenured or tenure-track track faculty member may appeal a proposed termination pursuant to the Faculty Grievance Policy.  Such an appeal will be limited to whether the Termination Policy and procedures were adhered and must be filed with Provost no later than fifteen working days from the receipt of notice of reassignment or termination.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Termination of Appointment Due to Program Discontinuation.txt [/INST] Termination of Appointment Due to Program Discontinuation
+
+Termination of an appointment with  tenure, or of a tenure track, Professor of the Practice, or Visiting Faculty  appointment before the end of the specified term may occur as a result of a bona fide formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction.
+
+The following standards and procedures will apply: 
+
+The decision to discontinue formally a program or department of instruction will be based essentially upon educational considerations, as determined primarily by the faculty as a whole after consideration by the Joint Committee.
+
+For this purpose, educational considerations do not include temporary variations in enrollment.  They must reflect long-range judgments that the educational mission of the College as a whole will be enhanced by the discontinuance. 
+
+The decision to discontinue an academic program or department of instruction will be based on educational considerations related to the mission of the College.  The decision must reflect long-range judgements that the educational mission of the College as whole will be enhanced by the discontinuance.  Such a decision will not be based upon cyclical or temporary variations in enrollment; however, it may legitimately include financial considerations. 
+
+Those involved in making a decision to discontinue an academic program or department will consider advice from the concerned program or department on the short- and long-term implications of any proposed course of action.  Since these are areas in which the faculty has a significant interest and responsibility, the faculty as a whole after consideration by the Joint Committee will participate in the decision.  However, final administrative authority concerning the levels of staffing of academic programs and departments rests with the President; final authority to approve or modify an academic program or department rests with the Board of Trustees. 
+
+The decision-making process set forth above will routinely follow the steps below: 
+
+Such an action may be proposed by a standing faculty committee, by the Provost, the President, or the Board of Trustees. 
+
+Upon receipt of a proposed action, the President shall call together a joint committee, comprising the Advisory Committee and the Educational Policy Committee (hereinafter referred to as the Joint Committee), which shall evaluate the proposal considering criteria used in the normal, periodic review of academic programs and departments.  As part of the evaluation, the Joint Committee will consult with the faculty of the impacted program or department. 
+
+The recommendations of the Joint Committee concerning discontinuance of an academic program or department will be reported to the Faculty for review.
+
+The Faculty shall make a final recommendation on the matter to the Provost.  
+
+In the event the Provost disagrees with that recommendation, the Provost shall meet with the Faculty to discuss the reasons for such disagreement, before making a final recommendation on the matter to the President. 
+
+The Provost will then communicate a final decision and the reasons therefore in writing to the Faculty.
+
+Having considered the recommendations above and considered the vote of the Faculty, the Provost will make a final written recommendation to the President on the matter.  If the Provost disagreed with the Faculty’s recommendation, the Provost will communicate the reasons therefore in the written recommendation to the President.
+
+The President will then refer the above recommendations, along with the President’s independent recommendation, to the Board of Trustees for final action.
+
+Additional Guidelines
+
+Transfer Eligibility: Before the administration issues notice to a full-time faculty member of its intention to terminate an appointment because of formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction, the Provost, in consultation with the potential receiving academic department/program ,will make every effort to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position within the College for which the faculty member is qualified. When, in the opinion of the Provost, placement within the College is not a viable alternative, the College will assist the faculty member in finding outside employment. The final decision on reassignment is within the discretion of the Provost.
+
+Retraining: If consultation with a receiving academic department/program can establish placement in another position would be facilitated by a reasonable period of training, financial and other support for such training will be offered at the request of the faculty member.  Assistance may include, but need not be limited to, granting a paid leave for retraining or participation in other faculty development programs.  If retraining is approved by the President, it will normally not exceed one (1) calendar year.  If, in the judgement of the Provost, no position is available within the College with or without retraining, the faculty member’s appointment then may be terminated, but only with provision for notice not less than as prescribed in Article II, Section 2.2.2 or severance salary in lieu of notice equitably adjusted to the faculty member’s length of past and potential service. 
+
+Subject to the foregoing, the Board of Trustees shall have final authority for termination of appointments by the College.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Terminations Due to Program Discontinuation Not Related to Financial Contingencies.txt [/INST] New Policy Addressing Terminations Due to Program Discontinuation Not Related to Financial Contingencies
+
+Chapter IV. E - Contingencies and Resource Allocation is limited to “financially contingent situations.”  Current University policy does not include a policy addressing dismissal of full-time faculty, including tenured faculty, due to program discontinuations unrelated to financial contingencies that are based on educational considerations.  I suspect that the handbook is silent in this regard because the 1940 AAUP Statement on Academic Freedom did not recognize terminations due to program discontinuation based on educational considerations when the handbook was originally drafted.  Regulation 4(d) of the AAUP’s Recommended Institutional Regulations, however, does and it was adopted many years after the 1940 AAUP academic freedom statement.  Given Regulation 4(d), such a policy is standard in higher education and, given my charge, I am planning on providing a model for the team’s review and comment.   
+
+Standard policy in this area, consistent with AAUP Regulation 4(d), requires that such program discontinuations be based on educational considerations as determined primarily by the faculty or a faculty committee.  Educational considerations do not include cyclical or temporary variations in enrollment.  Rather, they reflect long-term judgements that the mission of the University is enhanced by the discontinuation.  In terms of defining academic programs, the AAUP offers the following commentary:
+
+[Note: Academic programs cannot be defined ad hoc, at any size; programs must be recognized academic units that existed prior to the decision to discontinue them. The term “program” should designate a related cluster of credit-bearing courses that constitute a coherent body of study within a discipline or set of related disciplines. When feasible, the term should designate a department or similar administrative unit that offers majors and minors.]
+
+Prior to termination, efforts must be made to transfer or retrain a faculty member to another position.  If a transfer is not feasible, then appropriate length notice or severance salary is provided.  As recommended by the AAUP, allowance for an appeal to a faculty committee is also standard.  
+
+Below is an example of such a policy from Drew University, which is brief and to the point.  Similar succinct policies can be found in the Albion (2.15.4), Lewis and Clark (3.14.4), and Luther (410.1.2) handbooks. For more comprehensive policy examples, please see the Susquehanna (4.14.3) and Kenyon (2.3.15) faculty handbooks.  Other examples can be provided upon request as such a policy is standard across institutions given the AAUP regulation on this matter.
+
+Drew University Example
+
+Discontinuance of an Academic Program or Department Not Mandated by Financial Exigency
+
+Termination of an appointment with continuous tenure, or of a probationary or specified appointment before the end of the specified term, may occur as a result of a bona fide formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction. Relocation of faculty members according to normal planning procedures may occur as a result of a reduction in a program or department of instruction. In the case of termination resulting from the discontinuance of a program or department, the following standards and procedures will apply:
+
+The decision to discontinue formally a program or department of instruction will be based upon educational considerations as determined by the Faculty or appropriate committee thereof. If, through the processes of review and final decision, the administration and Board of Trustees differ with the faculty judgment, the reasons for the disagreement shall be stated and the Faculty shall have an opportunity for further consideration and further communication of its views.
+
+Before the President issues notice to a faculty member of the intention to terminate an appointment because of formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction, the University will make every effort to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position. If placement in another position would be facilitated by a reasonable period of training, financial and other support for such training will be proffered. If no such position is available, the faculty member’s appointment may then be terminated, with provision for severance salary equitably adjusted to the faculty member’s length of past and potential service.
+
+A faculty member may appeal a proposed relocation or termination resulting from a discontinuance and has a right to a full hearing before a faculty committee. The hearing need not conform in all respects with a Termination for Cause proceeding (see D.4. below), but the essentials of an on-the-record adjudicative hearing will be observed. The issues in such a hearing may include the University’s failure to satisfy any of the conditions specified in this section. In such a hearing a faculty determination that a program or department is to be discontinued will be considered presumptively valid, but the burden of proof on other issues will rest on the administration.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Text Not Included.txt [/INST] Text Not Included
+
+Faculty Affirmative Action Officer
+
+Eligibility and Selection:
+
+The Faculty Affirmative Action Officer (FAAO) shall be a tenured member of the faculty.
+
+The FAAO will be selected by the Provost and the Provost's Advisory Group on Academic Personnel and will report to the Provost. 
+
+The FAAO will serve for a three-year term. 
+
+Responsibilities of the Faculty Affirmative Action Officer:
+
+Resources: The FAAO shall stay abreast of literature on such issues as differential responses on student evaluations for faculty from federally defined Affirmative Action groups (e.g., Black, non- Hispanic; American Indian/Alaskan Native; Asian/Pacific Islander; Hispanic; women) as well as other faculty members who might be subject to discrimination, on the basis, for example, of sexuality, gender identity, or disability and of current legal information regarding Affirmative Action standards and practices. The FAAO will develop and maintain a file containing such information. [February 4, 2005, p. 4491]
+
+Hiring: The FAAO shall consult with each department concerning its search; provide departments with resources and strategies for recruiting candidates from federally defined Affirmative Action groups; and facilitate their search for candidates in such group.
+
+Reappointment: In cases of reappointment of faculty from federally defined Affirmative Action groups as well as other faculty members who might be subject to discrimination, on the basis, for example, of sexuality, gender identity, or disability, the FAAO shall normally consult with all candidates for reappointment and will provide interpretive context for the Provost and department chairs as necessary. [February 4, 2005, p. 4492]
+
+Reports: The FAAO shall submit an annual report to the faculty on her or his activities and the progress the faculty has achieved toward meeting the goals of the 1999 faculty resolution on the diversity of the faculty. [April 5, 2002, pp. 4352 – 4354]</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Text to be Published in the ART Guidelines Document.txt [/INST] Text to be Published in the ART Guidelines Document
+
+
+
+
+
+In regards to faculty research productivity or creative work, here is a sampling of DEI achievements we can value in promotion decisions:
+
+Research or creative activity in a faculty member’s area of expertise that involves inequalities or barriers for inclusion of underrepresented groups
+
+Intellectual themes or trajectories that examine patterns of representation, incorporation, or inclusion within a faculty member’s area of expertise
+
+Grant seeking or obtaining that provides funding for research that focuses on equity, inclusion, and diversity
+
+Scholarly productivity in particular texts, data sets, methodological practices, theories, or creative discourses that involve equity and inclusion within a faculty member’s area of expertise
+
+Research interests that contribute to diversity and equal opportunity, for example, research that addresses:
+
+Race, ethnicity, gender, multiculturalism, and inclusion on health disparities, educational access and achievement, political engagement, economic justice, social mobility, civil, and human rights
+
+Questions of interest to communities historically excluded by higher education
+
+Artistic expression and cultural production that reflect culturally diverse communities or voices not well represented in the arts and humanities.
+
+In regards to teaching, these are some activities we can value in promotion decisions:
+
+Curricular Diversity: Curriculum that prepares students to critically interrogate and engage with a global, multicultural, and rapidly changing world as scholars and citizens
+
+Access and Success: Pedagogy promoting equitable access to resources and opportunities that create conditions for success in the classroom and other learning environments
+
+Inclusive Climate: Pedagogy fostering learning environments in which students who are members of underrepresented populations are socially and culturally included
+
+Advising: Academic advising for students from underrepresented and underserved populations
+
+Professional Development: Participation in professional development activities that lead to greater understanding and work toward equity-minded teaching practices
+
+Additional Supports: Advising and mentoring roles, such as working with students on summer scholarship or long-term projects, helping with internship placements or national fellowship and scholarship applications, career advising, and on research and publication.
+
+In regards to service, here are some important forms of service we can value in promotion decisions:
+
+Contributions furthering diversity and equal opportunity within and beyond the college, through participation in such activities as recruitment, retention, and mentoring of colleagues and students.
+
+Service that contributes to inclusion, equity, or access; examples might include:
+
+Curricular Diversity: Service that works to ensure a curriculum that prepares students to critically interrogate and engage with a global, multicultural, and rapidly changing world as scholars and citizens
+
+Access and Success: Service that aims to promote equitable access to resources and opportunities that provide conditions for success for students, faculty, and staff
+
+Inclusive Climate: Service that fosters environments in which students, faculty, and staff who are members of underrepresented populations are socially and culturally included
+
+Contributions to student life; this might include such activities as:
+
+Working with student clubs and organizations
+
+Mentoring students, as distinct from advising or counseling them; may involve activities such as guiding underrepresented students and helping them adapt to college
+
+Participation in academic preparation, outreach, tutoring, pipeline, or other programs designed to remove barriers facing women, minorities, veterans, people with disabilities, and other individuals who are members of groups historically excluded from higher education
+
+Recognition that candidates may engage in more service activities because of their group membership
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Examples of University service activities include but are not limited to:
+
+attendance at Faculty Retreat* 
+
+attendance at Opening Convocation* 
+
+attendance at Commencement* 
+
+committee assignments* 
+
+attendance at monthly All-Faculty Meetings* 
+
+timely completion of ART Evaluations 
+
+serving on the Faculty Senate
+
+serving on search committees 
+
+serving on advisory boards (e.g., Alumni Board) 
+
+serving as a new faculty mentor 
+
+mentoring colleagues in research, service and/or teaching
+
+assessing a colleague as part of the peer review process
+
+leading workshops and presentations (e.g., CTL Lunch, Faculty Retreat Session) 
+
+chapel Speaker 
+
+speaker at Synod Assemblies 
+
+Safe Zone Ally (attended Safe Zone training) 
+
+attendance at Honors Convocation 
+
+attendance at Speaker Series 
+
+member of a task force 
+
+attendance at sporting events or cultural events 
+
+attendance at Orientation Events 
+
+attendance at Homecoming Events 
+
+attendance at community events on campus 
+
+attendance at University sponsored events (e.g. , Books and Brew, CEJ sponsored events) 
+
+serving as faculty advisor to student clubs and organizations
+
+writing accreditation reports
+
+development and submission of grant proposals on behalf of the University (not research)
+
+participation in student recruitment, fundraising, or marketing activities
+
+organizing University events such as student symposia, drama productions, concerts, showcases, competitions, conferences, guest speakers, etc.
+
+organizing events such as student symposia, drama productions, concerts, showcases, competitions, conferences, etc.
+
+organizing or leading campus workshops, seminars, or training activities
+
+engaging in leadership or active participation in development of research programs
+
+participating with service learning, travel study, etc.
+
+*The Faculty Handbook indicates that faculty are expected to participate in these activities.
+
+The following are examples of service to the Department/College/School: 
+
+assisting with program reviews 
+
+attending department meetings 
+
+mentoring new adjuncts 
+
+assisting with curriculum changes 
+
+participating in any of the following:
+
+Student & Faculty Mentor Program: Pairing prospective students and faculty relative to academic or extra-curricular areas of interest and/or field of expertise 
+
+Admitted Student Day (Traditional Undergraduates): Facilitating sample lectures, exhibiting majors/departments, engaging with students and families. 
+
+Information Sessions (Professionals and Graduate): Faculty representation at information sessions for prospective students to highlight programs 
+
+All-Access program: Serving as faculty panelist / participant for targeted yield program exclusively for admitted students 
+
+Honors Day: Interviews for Presidential Scholarship & Honors program candidates
+
+Campus Visit Program: Providing access to lectures and meeting on an individual basis for visiting prospective students
+
+Global Scholars Program: Interviews for high performing international students for Global Scholarship program
+
+Yield Campaign support: Participating in various communication campaigns including letter writing, phone calls, e-mail strategies
+
+Engagement and development with community partners in outreach & recruitment 
+
+
+
+Examples of professional service activities include but are not limited to: 
+
+serving as a reviewer for a professional journal 
+
+holding office in a professional association
+
+coordinating sessions at a professional conference 
+
+membership and participation in professional organizations
+
+submission of a grant on behalf of the University (i.e., outside of the faculty member’s required load distribution)
+
+serving as an administrator or principal investigator of a University grant (i.e., outside of the faculty member’s required load distribution)
+
+service on a professional conference committee
+
+active participation in professional and learned societies
+
+serving as an appointed or elected officer of an academic or professional association
+
+serving as an organizer or leader of workshops, panels, or meetings in areas of professional competence
+
+contributing time and expertise to further the work of a professional society or organization
+
+promoting the image, prestige, and perceived value of a discipline or profession
+
+participating in accreditation and assessment activities
+
+providing professional or expert advice on subjects in one's discipline to governmental bodies and media organizations
+
+writing newspaper articles, opinion columns, as well as other pieces not subject to peer review
+
+editing a professional journal and/or serving on the editorial board of a professional journal
+
+refereeing manuscripts, conference submissions, or grant proposals submitted to journals, professional meetings, and internal and external funding organizations
+
+contributing professional expertise to community activities through lecturing and consulting
+
+engaging in other forms of consulting in the service of one’s discipline or professional community. 
+
+
+
+
+
+Examples of community service include, but are not limited to:
+
+presenting lectures in the faculty member’s area of expertise to community groups 
+
+using one’s expertise to hold leadership positions or provide service in community, religious, or political organization activities
+
+participatinge in discipline-related non-profit organizations designed tothat serve the general public 
+
+servinge community groups in a professional capacity 
+
+engaging in a community outreach or community engagement effort related to the faculty member’s discipline
+
+participating in public service or community development activities
+
+consulting activities with private and public organizations
+
+volunteering services as a subject-matter consultant on community projects 
+
+contributing time and expertise to a community organization
+
+using one’s expertise to offer insight or provide analysis of issues via public, non-academic media
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Annual Report
+
+
+
+Goal Setting Guidelines
+
+The faculty member, in formulating proposed goals for the following academic year, is encouraged to consider the following guidelines: 
+
+Goals should reflect the University, College/School/Seminary, and department missions; 
+
+Goals should contribute to the faculty member’s development as an effective faculty member and be designed to meet or exceed current academic rank expectations; 
+
+Goals should be attainable within the capabilities and resources of the individual and the University; 
+
+Goals should specify actions to be taken or tasks to be accomplished.  At the time of evaluation, it should be clear whether a particular goal has been achieved or is progressing towards being achieved; and 
+
+Goals should be described in such a way that their completion may be objectively evaluated.
+
+
+
+
+
+Optional Letters
+
+Candidates undergoing promotion and tenure reviews are afforded the option of including in their dossiers letters from identifying colleagues or peers (whether internal to the University or external to it) who can make a material contribution to the evaluation of the candidate’s scholarly/creative productivity and/or service activities.  Candidates are responsible for soliciting the letters and including them in the dossier.  It is expected that University colleagues outside of the candidate’s department will contribute a letter of evaluation if asked by the candidate; however, they are not obligated to do so.  
+
+Candidates should avoid including letters from selecting individuals who may appear to be biased, such as a Ph.D. advisor or recent co-author, except in those cases where the nature of the discipline is so specialized that they are the these reviewers are the only qualified persons available.  Moreover, a promotion and tenure dossier file is strengthened by the inclusion of letters from colleagues or peers able to speak directly to one or more of the review standards criteria than by the inclusion of numerous letters that are less directly relevant. 
+
+If deemed necessary by the ART subcommittee, internal and external colleagues or peers who have submitted a letter on a candidate’s behalf may be contacted to provide additional information. 
+
+
+
+SERVICE – ADVISING/MENTORING???
+
+
+Multiple forms of evidence are useful in a comprehensive assessment of mentoring effectiveness and include, but are not limited to: 
+
+Research productions including publications, conference participations, research presentations; 
+
+Progress towards degrees measured by grades/research credit, degree milestones (exams: qualifying, comprehensive), proposal, department presentations, final defense; 
+
+Fellowships, scholarships and other external funding obtained in support of professional and academic student development and/or training; 
+
+Completion of thesis or dissertation; 
+
+External review of thesis or dissertation; 
+
+Other evidence of structured individual or group mentoring activities such as focused literature reviews, journal clubs, grant writing and professional skills development. 
+
+Multiple forms of evidence are useful in a comprehensive assessment of advising effectiveness and include, but are not limited to: 
+
+Documentation of the number of students advised, type of advising, and time spent in University or College level advising sessions. 
+
+Documentation reflecting the level of informal advising occurring in an ad hoc fashion because a faculty member chooses to spend significant time accessible to students (e.g. the number of new majors advised or the number of students advised not on a faculty member’s assigned advisee list). 
+
+Documentation of the number of graduate committees chaired, and membership on graduate committees within and outside the Department. 
+
+When applicable, documentation of student advising in cross–disciplinary programs with which the faculty member is affiliated.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] The Evidence of Teaching Effectiveness Initiative has been created to explore and examine best research.txt [/INST] The Evidence of Teaching Effectiveness Initiative has been created to explore and examine best research-based practices for the evaluation of teaching (formative and summative). The goals of this long term project are to re-design “course evaluations” and design other measurements of teaching effectiveness. See the webpage for official communications, updates, task force representatives, and quick notes on key concepts.
+
+CETL Quick Notes
+
+Centralized System
+
+Contextual Narratives
+
+Course Evaluations Revisited
+
+Evaluating Teaching Effectiveness
+
+Evidence of Teaching Effectiveness
+
+Formative Feedback
+
+Online Systems
+
+Question Types
+
+Guides and Articles
+
+Article reading list for Evidence of Teaching Effectiveness OU initiative includes dozens of articles on the research landscape around student feedback surveys (course evaluations) and other methods of evaluating teaching effectiveness. 
+
+Unbiased, reliable, and valid student evaluations can still be unfair, from Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. Justin Esarey and Natalie Valdes, 2020.
+
+Students Helping Students Provide Valuable Feedback on Course Evaluations (UC Merced). This website provides a brief guide for students on providing feedback in end-of-course surveys, and include helpful videos such as this 3-minute video.
+
+Research on Student Ratings Continues to Evolve. We Should, Too (Rice University CTE, 2018)
+
+Podcast Episodes
+
+Biases in Student Evaluations of Teaching (25 minutes, from Tea for Teaching)
+
+Gender Bias and Course Evaluations (40 minutes, from Tea for Teaching)
+
+Inclusified Teaching Evaluation (40 minutes, from Teaching in Higher Ed)
+
+Peer Review of Teaching (40 minutes, from Teaching in Higher Ed)
+
+About Those Student Evals... (20 minutes, from Let’s Talk Teaching)
+
+Tools and Activities
+
+Gendered Language in Teacher Reviews. Analyzes student responses from RateMyProfessor, broken down by gender and subject.
+
+Books At CETL
+
+Check out these and other books in our collection in 200D Elliott Hall. Browse the full CETL library.
+
+Arreola, R. (2007). Developing a Comprehensive Faculty Evaluation System, 3rd Edition. San Francisco, CA: Anker Publishing
+
+Berk, R. (2006). Thirteen Strategies to Measure College Teaching. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing
+
+Berk, R. (2013). Top 10 Flashpoints in Student Ratings and the Evaluation of Teaching. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing
+
+Blumberg, P. (2014). Assessing and Improving Your Teaching: Strategies and Rubrics for Faculty Growth and Student Learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
+
+Braskamp, L. & Ory, J. (1994). Assessing Faculty Work. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
+
+Brookfield, S. (1995). Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
+
+Buller, J. (2012). Best Practices in Faculty Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
+
+Centra, J. (1993). Reflective Faculty Evaluation: Enhancing Teaching and Determining Faculty Effectiveness. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
+
+Glanz, J. & Sullivan, S. (2000). Supervision in Practice: 3 Steps to Improve Teaching and Learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press
+
+Hativa, N. (2013). Student Ratings of Instruction: A Practical Approach to Designing, Operating, and Reporting. Seattle, WA: Orion Publishing
+
+Havita, N. (2013). Student Ratings of Instruction: Recognizing Effective Teaching. Orion Publishing
+
+Kember, D. & Ginns, P. (2012). Evaluating Teaching and Learning: A Practical Handbook for Colleges, Universities, and the Scholarship of Teaching. New York, NY: Routledge
+
+Seldin, P. (2006). Evaluating Faculty Performance: A Practical Guide to Assessing, Teaching, Research, and Service. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
+
+van Note Chism, N. (2007). Peer Review of Teaching: A Sourcebook (2nd ed). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
+
+New Directions for Teaching and Learning: Online Student Ratings of Instruction, No. 96, Winter 2003. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass</s>"
+"<s>[INST] The Libby Reed Endowed Professorship.txt [/INST] The Libby Reed Endowed Professorship
+
+	a.	Background
+
+The Libuse L. Reed Endowed Professorship was established to honor Libby Reed's demanding teaching style which influenced the careers and lives of her students, all of whom she now calls ""friend.""  Few professors' influence crossed as many disciplines as did that of Libby Reed; for that reason all professors, no matter their area of concentration, shall be eligible for consideration.
+
+The chair is to be awarded for a period of not more than two years and shall be accompanied by a stipend. All recipients will be eligible for the award again after five years. It need not be awarded each year if no one is adjudged worthy of the honor.  The announcement of the recipient of the Libuse L. Reed Endowed Chair shall be announced at commencement and again during Alumni Weekend festivities and every year thereafter during Libby Reed's lifetime.
+
+	b.	Criteria for Selection
+
+The recipient shall:
+
+Show academic discipline
+
+help students acquire the habits that build a foundation for intellectual outreach and the integration of all areas of knowledge to enrich their lives
+
+be accessible to provide empathy and encouragement to students 
+
+not only in the classroom, but as advisor and through extracurricular activities.
+
+	c.	Method of Selection
+
+A committee of ten people to include six students and four faculty members from Faculty Personnel Committee shall determine the actual recipient from a pool of nominations from students and faculty.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] The Process at Vaughn College.txt [/INST] 2
+
+	The Process at Vaughn College
+
+	
+
+As outlined below, we propose a three-phase process to complete the objectives of this project.
+
+
+
+	Phase One			Introduction, Identify Needs, and Document Collection
+
+	Phase Two			Development of the Faculty Handbook, Updated Bylaws, 						on Policies, Clery Act and Title IX Policies & Audit 						Memorandum
+
+	Phase Three			Final Approval
+
+	
+
+	Phase One – Introduction, Identify Needs, and Document Collection
+
+	
+
+	We begin our engagement with an initial phone conference to identify the Review Team that will be charged with vetting the drafts of the Faculty Handbook.  In addition, appropriate teams of administrators that will be responsible for reviewing the College Bylaws, the Policy on Policies, and the Clery Act and Title IX policies will be identified during the conference call.  The review teams identified during the conference call will be tasked to vet document drafts submitted by Stevens Strategy during Phase Two.  Their comments and guidance will be critical to the process and help ensure that proposed model policies and suggested policy changes introduced by Stevens Strategy are tailored to meet the mission, culture and needs of Vaughn College.  Ultimately, the policies developed by Stevens Strategy in collaboration with these stakeholders will be recommended to the appropriate College governance bodies as applicable (i.e., the Faculty Senate), the president, and then the Board of Trustees for formal adoption.
+
+	
+
+	Once the review teams are identified, Stevens Strategy consultants will visit campus to meet with the respective teams.  During these meetings, Stevens Strategy consultants will present power point presentations that explain the services we will be providing and outline in detail the various project phases and goals.  In addition, the presentation to the Faculty Handbook Review Team will focus on providing an overview of the Stevens Strategy Faculty Handbook outline, which is set forth below:
+
+	
+
+	Outline of Faculty Handbook
+
+	Introduction
+
+	Faculty Status and Rank 
+
+	Faculty Contracts
+
+	Search and Appointment of Faculty
+
+	Faculty Personnel Records
+
+	Faculty Rights and Responsibilities
+
+	Faculty Evaluations
+
+	Faculty Advancement in Rank
+
+	Faculty Tenure 
+
+	Faculty Development 
+
+	Faculty Compensation 
+
+	Faculty Separation
+
+	Revision of the Faculty Handbook 
+
+	
+
+	Following the power point presentations, we will transition into Q&A, as well as strategy sessions with the respective teams to identify and discuss the College’s areas of needs.  These sessions will help further frame the content of the initial document drafts delivered by Stevens Strategy during Phase Two.  
+
+	
+
+	We will also work with the review teams to identify relevant policy documents necessary for Stevens Strategy consultants to begin Phase Two of the process.  The final objective of Phase One will be to work with the President or other appropriate administrator(s) to develop a detailed project schedule, which will guide all deliverables throughout each phase of the project.  
+
+	
+
+	Phase Two – Document Preparation & Review
+
+	
+
+	Segment One - Development and Review of the Faculty Handbook, Updated Bylaws, Policy on Policies, & Clery Act and Title IX Policies
+
+	
+
+	At the beginning of Phase Two, Stevens Strategy consultants will conduct a review of all existing College policy documen
+
+	ts delivered during Phase One and begin developing the initial drafts of the Faculty Handbook, the updated Bylaws, the Policy on Policies, and the Clery Act and Title IX policies.  Our drafting of these documents will include proposed changes to current College policy and the introduction of new model policies that address non-profit higher education industry best practices, relevant Department of Education requirements, and regional accreditation agency standards.  All policy changes proposed by Stevens Strategy, as well as any new model policies, will be introduced by utilizing the Microsoft “Track Changes” software.  The use of this software allows for complete transparency, permitting reviewers to easily identify when Stevens Strategy is proposing a change to current text or introducing new policy.  A “Comment Note” that summarizes why we are suggesting the proposed change or new policy will also be included in the initial drafts.  Finally, Stevens Strategy will footnote all text reprinted from the College’s current policy documents so that reviewers will know where the policy originated.
+
+	
+
+	Stevens Strategy will deliver the initial drafts of the policy documents in accordance with the project calendar developed during Phase One.  Typically, the delivery occurs approximately two months after the beginning of Phase Two.  The review teams will be requested to review the drafts and prepare comments in advance of the comprehensive review meetings that will be conducted on campus a few weeks following the delivery of the first draft.  
+
+	
+
+	The review meetings, which are facilitated and led by Stevens Strategy consultants, are designed to review each document thoroughly and allow team members to engage in open discussions regarding each suggested policy change proffered by Stevens Strategy.  In particular, the discussions will be focused on refining, modifying, and tailoring the model policy suggestions provided by Stevens Strategy to ensure they meet the College’s needs and culture.  In advance of these meetings, Stevens Strategy consultants will be available to answer the respective teams’ questions or concerns.
+
+	
+
+	Following the facilitation meetings, Stevens Strategy consultants, armed with feedback and comments from the review teams will develop 2nd drafts of the documents.  Upon completion, Stevens Strategy will deliver the 2nd drafts to the team chairs, which in turn will distribute the draft to team members.  The review teams will then review the drafts independently and provide additional comments and any requested changes to Stevens Strategy.  Again, Stevens Strategy representatives will be available to answer any questions or concerns during this review period.  Upon receipt of the teams’ comments and requested changes to the 2nd draft, Stevens Strategy consultants will implement all changes and deliver a third draft in accordance with the project calendar.  The review teams will then be asked to address any final open issues identified in the 3rd drafts so that a fourth draft may be submitted by Stevens Strategy to appropriate College governance bodies in accordance with current institution governance practices (i.e., Faculty Senate, etc.).  
+
+	
+
+	Once the appropriate governance bodies approve the applicable policies, local legal counsel will need to review those policies of legal import since Stevens Strategy is not a law firm, is not a substitute for an attorney or law firm, and its professional personnel cannot provide legal advice.
+
+
+
+	Phase Three - Final Approval Process
+
+	
+
+	Phase Three begins with Stevens Strategy’s delivery of the final draft of the Faculty Handbook, the updated Bylaws, the Policy on Policies, and the Clery Act and Title IX policies.  This final draft, which incorporates the review teams, legal counsel (as applicable), and appropriate governance bodies’ final comments, is delivered to the president for review and comment.  Following the President’s review, Stevens Strategy will make any requested changes and then deliver the presidential approved Faculty Handbook and other policies for Board of Trustee approval.
+
+	
+
+	When Stevens Strategy provides the College with a final, clean version of the policy documents approved by the Board of Trustees, the project is completed.
+
+
+
+P.O. Box 72      12 Island View      Grantham, NH 03753
+
+phone: 603.863.4704      fax: 603.863.0531      web: stevensstrategy.com</s>"
+<s>[INST] TM Employee Policies (1st Draft).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] TM Employee Policies (3rd Draft)(6.2018).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] TM FPM (1st Draft)(3.2018).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] TM FPM (1st Pre-Draft)(2.12.2018).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] TM FPM (2nd Draft)(6.2018).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] TM FPM (3rd Draft)(3.2019) .txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] TMC Proposal - Option 2 (11.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] UGF V.1 (1st Client Draft)(2.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] UGF V.1 (2nd Draft)(11.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] UGF V.4 (1st Client Draft)(2.2017).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] UGF V.4 (2nd Draft)(5.2017) AVPP Reviewed.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] University of Great Falls IWPM Pro.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] UP V.4 (Updated 2nd Draft)(12.2017) .txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Updated Calendar .txt [/INST] Description
+
+Proposed Date
+
+
+
+Completion Date
+
+Phase I 
+
+
+
+
+
+University completes electronic delivery of all applicable internal faculty evaluation policy documents
+
+August 25
+
+
+
+Stevens Strategy consultants analyze the University’s Current Faculty Evaluation Materials 
+
+August 27
+
+
+
+Virtual meeting with the ART Task Force 
+
+Week of August 29
+(Exact Date TBD)
+
+
+
+Delivery of best practice faculty evaluation resources 
+
+September 3
+
+
+
+ART Task Force delivers draft Faculty Survey to consultants
+
+September 8
+
+
+
+Review draft faculty survey authored by ART Task Force and provide feedback to the ART Task Force
+
+September 10
+
+
+
+ART Task Force delivers to consultants a listing of peer and aspirational institutions 
+
+September 10
+
+
+
+Consultants deliver peer and aspirational institution models (for those that are publicly available or provided by the peer institution at the request of ART Task Force)
+
+September 22
+
+
+
+Consultants conduct one-on-one faculty and faculty focus group interviews 
+
+Week of September 26 (Exact Dates TBD)
+
+
+
+Task Force Zoom Meeting #1 – to (a) discuss feedback from survey and interviews; (b) share information with the ART Task Force from comparison institutions; (c) discuss recommendations for changes; and (d) create a list of questions and issues to be resolved during a series of Faculty forums that follow in Phase Two
+
+October 4, 5, or 6
+(Exact Date TBD)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Task Force Zoom Meeting #2 – (a) discuss feedback from survey and interviews; (b) share information with the ART Task Force from comparison institutions; (c) discuss recommendations for changes; and (d) create a list of questions and issues to be resolved during a series of Faculty forums that follow in Phase Two
+
+October 13, 14, or 15
+(Exact Date TBD)
+
+
+
+Phase II 
+
+		Proposed Date
+
+Completion Date
+
+Faculty Forum Meeting #1 - discuss the Task Force recommendations and any open issues identified during Step 7 of Phase One.   Consultant(s) will attend both forums via Zoom to incorporate Faculty feedback into the initial draft of the revised faculty evaluation policies
+
+Week of October 24
+
+(Exact Date TBD)
+
+
+
+Faculty Forum Meeting #2 - discuss the Task Force recommendations and any open issues identified during Step 7 of Phase One.  Consultant(s) will attend both forums via Zoom to incorporate Faculty feedback into the initial draft of the revised faculty evaluation policies
+
+Week of October 31 
+(Exact Date TBD)
+
+
+
+Consultants deliver Draft #1 of proposed faculty evaluation policy changes
+
+November 19
+
+
+
+ART Task Force reviews Draft #1 & prepares for the consultant-run facilitation meeting
+
+November 19 - 28
+
+
+
+Consultants visit campus to facilitate ART Task Force’s review of Draft #1
+
+Week of November 28 (Exact Date TBD)
+
+
+
+		Consultants implement ART Task Force’s requested revisions and deliver Draft #2
+
+December 10
+
+
+
+		ART Task Force delivers Draft #2 requested revisions and comments to the consultants
+
+December 17
+
+
+
+		Consultants implement ART Task Force’s requested revisions and deliver Draft #3
+
+December 23
+
+
+
+		ART Task Force delivers Draft #3 to President & Legal Counsel
+
+January 13
+
+
+
+		President & Legal Counsel deliver comments to consultant.
+
+January 20
+
+
+
+		The Task Force and consultant(s) will meet via Zoom to evaluate the President and legal counsel’s comments.
+
+January 24th or 25th
+
+
+
+		Consultant delivers revised Draft #3 to Task Force, with copies to FSEC, FAC, and Deans
+
+January 27
+
+
+
+		FSEC, FAC, and Deans review Draft #3 independently
+
+January 28th-February 7th
+
+
+
+		FSEC, FAC, Deans, and President deliver Draft #3 comments to ART Task Force
+
+February 7th
+
+
+
+		The Task Force and consultant(s) will meet via Zoom to evaluate the FSEC, FAC, Deans, and President’s comments and arrive at a consensus regarding any additional policy revisions
+
+On or before February 11th 
+(Exact Date TBD)
+
+
+
+		Consultants deliver Draft #4
+
+February 18
+
+
+
+		Consultants provide draft forms and updated ART guidelines document.
+
+February 27th
+
+
+
+		Phase III
+
+
+
+
+
+		The final recommended evaluation policy revisions and guidelines approved by the Task Force will be presented at a series of Faculty forums facilitated by the Faculty Senate.  Consultant(s) will attend both forums virtually (or review Minutes of the meetings if preferable) to incorporate Faculty feedback into the final draft of the faculty evaluation policies and guidelines.
+
+February 27 – March 4
+
+
+
+		If any revisions to the policy and guideline recommendations are required based on input received at the Faculty Forums, consultants will work with the Task Force to modify them accordingly before submission for final Faculty approval
+
+March 7 - 18
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Page 2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] UPDATED FUNDRAISING AND GIFT ACCEPTANCE POLICY.txt [/INST] FUNDRAISING AND GIFT ACCEPTANCE POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+May 8, 2017
+
+Policy Number:
+
+II -2.7.2
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable. 
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+College President 
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Vice President for Institutional Advancement
+
+Applicability:
+
+All members of the Canisius College community.
+
+History:
+
+ 
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to define the types of gifts accepted by the college and to provide a set of policy guidelines and procedures by which such gifts are solicited, accepted, and acknowledged by Canisius College.  In addition, this policy sets forth guidelines and procedures regarding endowed funds and naming opportunities.
+
+POLICY
+
+							Institutional Advancement has been delegated by the Canisius College Board of Trustees to advance the mission and goals of Canisius College through outreach initiatives and fundraising efforts designed to engage the college’s external constituencies, including alumni, donors, friends, and members of the community.  Before formally accepting a gift, Institutional Advancement determines that gifts to the college are evidence of philanthropic intent and that the donor’s philanthropy is in accord with the stated mission and goals of the college.  All charitable and philanthropic funds will be obtained with dignified, ethical, business and fundraising practices.
+
+							When soliciting or accepting private contributions for the benefit of the college, all private gifts (monetary, in-kind, or promises to give) must abide by IRS guidelines for tax deductibility (IRS Reg. 170) and follow the policy guidelines and procedures set forth in this policy.
+
+							Although Institutional Advancement is the principal fundraising arm of the college, fundraising activities on the part of individuals, college departments, or other college groups or organizations are welcomed.  However, to avoid conflicting communication, no person, department, or organization of the college is authorized to solicit an individual, organization, corporation, or foundation for an outright donation or gift in the name of Canisius College without prior clearance from Institutional Advancement.  This includes but is not limited to the solicitation of sponsorships, gifts of equipment, or direct contributions of money, plus anything else that qualifies as a donation. Institutional Advancement will ensure that, in the solicitation for support from such sources, college priorities are observed and plans for such programs, projects, or activities have been reviewed and approved in advance of solicitation by academic, financial, and other appropriate administrative officers.  When in doubt, college personnel, departments, students, clubs/organizations, and representatives of the college must consult with Institutional Advancement.  
+
+							Additionally, requests for fundraising services (i.e. faculty or programs seeking funding for projects, initiatives, etc.) shall be promoted up the direct chain of command, with the ultimate approval authority resting with the division vice president. The vice president, or designee, will forward fundraising requests to Institutional Advancement. 
+
+When soliciting charitable contributions, no college personnel, department, or representative of the college or a college group or organization is authorized to commit Canisius College to an agreement which is in conflict with established college policies and procedures, or that compromises, in any manner, the position of any office or department in the performance of its assigned responsibilities.  As a general rule, a solicitation for a major gift is made for a specific project and may either be restricted or unrestricted.  Prior to acceptance, a bequest or restricted gift must be assessed to assure that it does not place unreasonable constraints or requirements on the college.  While the college will accept gifts which are restricted so as to affirmatively assist particular individual or group efforts, it is the policy of the college to seek to encourage the donor, when appropriate, to allow language in any gift documents permitting use of the funds for general purposes.  
+
+							Gifts will not be accepted by the college if they are offered on the condition or with the understanding that the award will be made to a student of the donor’s choice.  The college will pay no fees to any person in consideration of directing a gift or completing a gift instrument to the college and its fundraising campaigns.  
+
+							Gifts are not generally subject to an exchange of consideration or other contractual duties between the college and the donor, except for gifts of real property and certain deferred gifts as set out in this policy; although objectives may be stated and funds may be restricted to a specific charitable purpose acceptable to the college.  Fundraising activities, including special events, may have a non-gift element; the value of the non-gift element will be determined and subtracted from the total amount to determine the contribution portion. 
+
+							In addition, no person, department, or organization of the college is authorized to remit an official gift receipt.  Only Institutional Advancement is permitted to issue such receipts.  A gift receipt recognizes the dollar value of the contribution less any goods and services received.  Individuals may send thank you letters, but the letter may not indicate or imply that it is substantiation from the college for the purposes of tax deductibility.
+
+							DEFINITIONS
+
+Annual Fund—any organized effort by the college to secure gifts on an annual basis, either by mail or through direct solicitation, or both.  Gifts, unless otherwise designated, benefit the unrestricted operating funds of the college.
+
+Capital Campaign or Major Gifts—A campaign to raise substantial funds for a nonprofit organization to finance major building projects or major program initiatives, supplement endowment funds, and/or meet other needs that require significant investment.
+
+College Personnel—Canisius College trustees, executive officers, administrators, faculty, staff, student employees, contractors, and others who act on behalf of the college.
+
+Deferred or Planned Gift—The creation of a vested future interest in property for the benefit of a charitable organization.  Current value is ascertainable using actuarial tables.
+
+Donor/Benefactor—An individual, corporation, foundation, or organization that has made a gift to the college.
+
+Endowment—Funds that are kept intact and permanently invested, a portion of the earnings from which are applied to purposes designated at the outset by the donor.
+
+Gift—a voluntary and irrevocable transfer of money, services, or property from an external Donor for either unrestricted or restricted use in support of the college’s goals.  No commitment of resources or services is required other than the stated donor restrictions.
+
+Gift in Kind — a Gift of goods and/or services which may be used in the operation of the organization, or may be converted to cash assets with the authorization of the donor, at the discretion of the college.
+
+Quasi-Endowment—funds that a board of trustees decides to retain and invest for a long but unspecified period with the caveat that the board may expend the principal of such funds at any time.  There are two types of quasi-endowments: restricted and unrestricted.  With restricted quasi-endowments, the board earmarks the funds for an intended purpose.  With unrestricted quasi-endowments, the board has the authority to decide at any time to expend the total dollar amount and to designate how the earnings are to be spent.
+
+Restricted Gift—gifts given or paid wherein the donor or granting and contracting organization has specified that the gift to be used to support specific programs or projects.
+
+Unrestricted Gift—nature of a gift that it is donated to be used where it is most needed by the charitable organization as determined by the organization leadership.
+
+							PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+Management and Reporting of Gifts
+
+Canisius College reserves the right to treat each gift on an individual basis, and thereby reserves the right to accept, reject, or modify any agreement and/or gift.  In general, the college will not accept gifts that (a) would result in the college violating its corporate charter, (b) would result in college losing its status as a § 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization, (c) are too difficult or too expensive to administer in relation to their value, (d) would result in any unacceptable consequences for the college, or (e) are for purposes outside the college’s mission.  Moreover, the college’s management and reporting of gifts will be guided by the standards of accounting and reporting established by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the Council for Advancement and Support of Education (CASE), and the National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO).
+
+The college accepts gifts in a number of forms as outlined below.  Outright gifts of cash and marketable securities are preferable to less liquid assets.  Other assets may be accepted with appropriate consideration.  For some donors, substantial gifts are best made by bequest, through a life-income arrangement, retained life estate, or other planned gift.
+
+Gift Acceptance Guidelines
+
+A solicitation for a gift may stress the advantages of an unrestricted gift in the form of cash or liquid securities.  Other forms of giving, such as planned or deferred gifts, are acceptable and may offer qualified donors an attractive alternative.  Such gifts may enable donors to significantly increase the level of their gifts while taking advantage of some meaningful commemorative or named gift opportunities.  
+
+Tax and Legal Advisors:
+
+Donors: The college will advise all donors to seek their own tax and legal counsel and does not render tax, legal, or financial advice.
+
+College: The college will seek the advice of a tax and/or legal counsel in matters relating to acceptance of gifts when appropriate.  Review by counsel is recommended for gifts of securities that are subject to restrictions or buy-sell agreements; documents naming the college as trustee or requiring the college to act in any fiduciary capacity; Gifts requiring the college to assume financial or other obligations; Transactions with potential conflicts of interest; and gifts of property which may be subject to environmental or other regulatory restrictions.
+
+Gift Valuation: Gifts are valued in accordance with the college’s Gift Accounting Policy on the date the donor relinquishes control of the assets in favor of the college. 
+
+Crowdfunding: College faculty, staff, and students who wish to use crowdfunding as a means of supporting college-related projects should use a college-approved crowdfunding site.  This will ensure that the project is branded with the college’s name and collateral, that gifts to the projects are tax deductible, and that the college is equipped to recognize and steward those donors.  This will also ensure that no tax liability accrues to an individual as a result of receiving the funds personally through an external crowdfunding site.  The funds will go directly into a college gift fund designated for the project’s use and gifts will be properly receipted to the donors.  If an external crowdfunding site is used, the name and branding of the college may not be used in relation to the project, as this would constitute the unauthorized acceptance of gifts on behalf of the college.
+
+Gift Types 
+
+Methods of giving generally accepted by the college are:
+
+1.	Outright Gifts
+
+Gifts of Cash/Checks/Credit Cards: Cash gifts include currency, personal checks, cashier’s check, money orders and credit card payments (including payments made online) for outright gifts for which the donor receives an income tax deduction as prescribed by law. 
+
+Cash gifts are receipted, reported, and recognized in accordance with the college’s Gift Accounting Policy.  A donor has the option to restrict some or all of the cash gift to a specific program or department.
+
+The donor is credited with the full amount of the cash gift.  In cases where the donor receives something of value in return for the donation, the donor will be made aware of the cost of the benefit received.  In these cases, the gift processor deducts the cost of the benefit received against the donation. Additionally, in some cases a currency exchange requirement may be necessary and will be reflected on the gift receipt with both currency values illustrated.
+
+All checks must be made payable to the college and not to an employee, agent, or volunteer for the credit of the college.  Checks are deposited in the ordinary course of business and no employee or agent of the college is permitted to delay deposit of such.
+
+Donors may make gifts to the college through donor-advised funds or charitable checking accounts.  On such an occurrence, Canisius will credit the donor-advised fund or charitable organization for the gift. If the gift is payment against a pledge, the pledge must be reduced by the corresponding gift amount. Receipts are not generated for gifts from donor-advised funds or charitable checking accounts, however, acknowledgment letters are completed as requested by the organizations or charities administering the accounts. Memo credit will be provided to the donor facilitating the gift request.
+
+Donors whose gifts are matched by a company receive memo credit for the matching amount in accordance with the college’s Gift Accounting Policy.  
+
+Gifts of Appreciated Publicly Traded Securities: These include all gifts of stocks, bonds, and other negotiable securities, which are (or will be) readily marketable.  Marketable publicly traded securities are receipted, reported, and recognized in accordance with the college’s Gift Accounting Policy.
+
+It is college policy to immediately liquidate any gifts of publicly-traded securities unless retention of the specific security is consistent with the college’s investment practices.  If a donor is an officer or director of the issuing corporation, the College will inquire as to whether any Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Rule 144 restrictions apply that limit the college’s ability to sell the donated securities.
+
+The college will not receive or process proposed transfers of stock that have no current market value (i.e., “worthless stock”) at the time a transfer to the college is proposed. 
+
+Securities controlled under SEC Rule 144 are held until the restriction on the sale expires and then they are immediately sold in the matter indicated above.
+
+Gifts of Closely Held Stock: This is a gift of stock of a private or family held corporation.  The donor may avoid capital gains on appreciation of the closely held stock while attaining a tax deduction based on the stock’s fair market value.  Such gifts are receipted, reported, and recognized in accordance with the college’s Gift Accounting Policy.
+
+Gifts of Real Estate: Gifts of real estate pose special legal and financial considerations and, therefore, may be accepted only with the approval of the vice president for institutional advancement and the president of the college, in consultation with the vice president for business and finance.  Whenever feasible, a prospective donor will be encouraged to sell the real estate in contemplation for donation to the college.  Gifts of real estate are receipted, reported, and recognized in accordance with the college’s Gift Accounting Policy.
+
+Prior to approval, the following items must be completed to the satisfaction of the vice president for business and finance and the vice president for institutional advancement:  
+
+		Phase I Environmental Audit;
+
+		Certified appraisal to establish the value of the property within sixty (60) days of the date of gift;
+
+		Legal description of the property;
+
+		Photographs of the property and / or a site visit;
+
+		Title insurance binder for the property within thirty (30) days of the date of the gift naming the college as the insured, at standard rates, subject to a legal opinion as to exceptions from coverage. 
+
+The above should be provided at the donor’s expense.  The donor is ultimately responsible for substantiating the value of any charitable deduction.  The college reserves the right to cover certain expenses if the value of the gift is a substantial amount.
+
+Bargain Sales – A donor may elect to sell a piece of real estate to the college at a price less than fair market value.  The IRS considers the difference between the fair market value and the selling price to be a gift and therefore produces an income tax deduction for the donor.  The college benefits by acquiring property or by selling the property to a third party at market value.  Bargain sales are receipted, reported, and recognized in accordance with the college’s Gift Accounting Policy.
+
+Gifts of Tangible Personal Property and Gifts-In-Kind: The college will accept gifts of tangible personal property from individuals and in-kind gifts from organizations and corporations in accordance with the procedures established below.  In general, all gifts of tangible personal property must further the college’s mission or be readily marketable.  The final determination of need rests with the vice president for institutional advancement in consultation with the appropriate department and the college president. 
+
+Outright gifts of tangible personal property, for which individual donors qualify for a charitable gift deduction under current IRS regulations, are receipted, reported, and recognized in accordance with the college’s Gift Accounting Policy.  Unless otherwise authorized by the board of trustees, the college will seek to liquidate such assets in order to secure the cash needed to fund its programmatic and/or facility priorities.  Once a gift is accepted, the item becomes college property.  If at any time the college wants to sell or otherwise dispose of the gift, the disposition must follow college policy.
+
+Generally, the college’s acceptance of non-cash gifts will not involve significant additional expense for their receipt, present or future use, insurance, maintenance, or administration.  In addition, the college will not incur burdensome financial or other obligations, directly or indirectly, unless approved by the board.
+
+The college will not accept gifts of tangible personal property, such as books, paintings, etc., if such gifts are to be made on the condition, understanding or expectation that the gifts items will be loaned to the donor or to persons designated by the donor for life or for an extended period of time as determined by the donor.
+
+Canisius College will accept works of art and provide donors with charitable deduction receipts for these gifts in kind, on the following conditions:
+
+Upon transfer to Canisius, the works of art become the property of the college and the decision to display, manage, or even sell is within the discretion of the college;
+
+Artwork is put on display as much and as widely as possible, but it is not possible to guarantee a permanent location for a particular piece or even a commitment to display all items in a collection at all times;
+
+							In accordance with IRS guidelines, an artist who donates his or her own work of art may receive a charitable contribution only for the cost of the materials used to create the artwork but not for the resale value of the piece;
+
+							In the case of a donor who is not the artist, an appraisal by a professional third party must be provided by the donor at the donor’s expense;
+
+							Gift of Service: As a general guideline, gifts of service are not a tax deductible donation and should not be recorded for accounting purposes, but the volunteer may receive recognition credit for the service. In order for an organization to claim a charitable contribution, the individual must receive income and in return give money or tangible goods back to the charitable organization. Employees or independent contractors of the college may not forfeit pay for services and then make a donation of the same amount. A Form W-2 or 1099-Misc needs to be issued for time worked at the college. Per IRS Publication 526, you cannot claim a deduction for the value of your time or services.
+
+Cashless Stock Options Exercise Programs: This gift is an exercise of stock options tied to a donation of the stock to the college.  Individuals can realize a tax write-off while the college benefits from the difference between the sale price and the exercise cost. Such gifts are receipted, reported, and recognized in accordance with the college’s Gift Accounting Policy.
+
+Corporate Matching Gifts: These gifts will be encouraged and credited in accordance with the college Gift Accounting Policy.  The college does not accept pledges of matching gifts from donors nor can the pledge be increased to include a potential matching gift.  Only the corporation itself can pledge a matching gift.
+
+Professional Services and Volunteer Travel Expenses: The goal of any campaign is to realize real and applicable financial resources.  Therefore, while the college is grateful for the involvement of volunteer leadership, these are gifts that will not be credited to the campaign or recorded in annual donor categories.  An individual functioning as a trustee, alumni board member, volunteer, or committee member is not eligible to donate volunteer time dedicated to the college-related activities as a gift of professional services.  If the individual is retained, either by contract or similarly in writing, to perform a professional service, that individual may be able to donate the payment for professional services back to the college.  An individual functioning as a trustee, alumni board member, volunteer, or other similar committee member is eligible to deduct related travel expenses as defined by IRS guidelines.  However, the college does not record that travel as a gift, include it in campaign or other giving program totals, or credit the individual in donor categories.
+
+							2.	Pledges
+
+							Pledges allow a commitment to be paid at a future date or over a period of time based on an agreed-upon payment schedule.  Pledging a gift over a three-to-five-year period may allow a donor to make a more substantial gift while affording him/her the opportunity to adjust the timing and amount of each payment to achieve the most beneficial tax treatment.  Most annual gifts are not pledged beyond the fiscal year in which they are requested. Annual fund pledges are subject to review on a six month rolling cycle. Capital and endowment pledges are reviewed with the Office of Business and Finance in cooperation with Instutional Advancement gift officers on a yearly basis for determination of donor intent to pay.
+
+							3.	Deferred or Planned Gifts
+
+			Deferred or planned gifts are different from outright gifts as the college does not realize an asset until some point in the future.  It is for this reason – the uncertainty of timing of realization – that the college records deferred gifts separately from outright gifts.  As a general guideline, any unrestricted bequest less than $10,000 is designated to annual fund – unrestricted, and any bequest $10,000 or greater is designated to endowment. – unrestricted. When a bequest of less than $10,000 is received and general scholarship is indicated, the gift will be designated to annual fund – tuition assistance for students. Any bequest $10,000 or greater will be designated to endowment – commemorative scholarship fund. The general rule applies, unless consultation with the family is appropriate.
+
+			In accordance with the college’s Gift Accounting Policy, the college reports the planned gift’s face value and present value. Present value of deferred gifts may be counted for campaign purposes. Total value may be counted if donor is over 70 ½ years of age.  
+
+			Planned gifts may be made through the following:
+
+			Bequest by Will or Living Trust – A donor may name the college as beneficiary in his/her will or trust directing that the college receive an outright distribution or annual payments from the donor’s estate.  
+
+			Gifts of Retirement Plan Assets – A donor may contribute retirement plan assets to the college by means of testamentary bequests and transfers to charitable remainder trusts.
+
+			Charitable Trusts (irrevocable) – Trusts are legal documents and are not the property of the college.
+
+							Charitable Remainder Unitrust – This trust pays a set percentage of the trust’s principal, as calculated annually, to the income beneficiary for life or a set term of years (i.e., the amount of the annual payments fluctuate).  Additional gifts may be made to the trust at any time.  When the income beneficiary dies or the term of years expires, the principal goes to the college and perhaps additional charitable beneficiaries.  Trust assets must be managed separately for each trust.  Proposed charitable remainder annuity trusts for which the college is trustee and/or administrator must be funded initially with an asset threshold determined by Institutional Advancement. 
+
+							Charitable Remainder Annuity Trust – This trust differs from the unitrust in that the annual income payment is a set dollar amount determined when the trust is established.  No additions to the trust are allowed after the trust is established.  Trust investments are managed separately for each trust.
+
+									Proposed charitable remainder annuity trusts for which the college is trustee and/or administrator must be funded initially with assets of at least $100,000. 
+
+							The college recommends that trusts be limited to one or two income beneficiaries. 
+
+							Donors are encouraged to name a trust company, the trust office of their bank, or their community foundation as trustee. 
+
+							Charitable Lead Trust – This trust pays to the college (and perhaps another charitable organization) a stream of payments for a specified period of years, at the end of which time the assets of the trust are distributed to non-charitable designees (e.g., the donor’s children or grandchildren).  The assets of this trust must also be managed separately.
+
+							Proposed charitable lead trusts must normally be funded initially with assets of at least $200,000. 
+
+							Income received by the college as the result of a charitable lead trust is used and/or invested by the college for the purposes specified in the trust agreement.  In those cases where the trust agreement indicates no specific purpose, income received is treated as an unrestricted asset of the college. 
+
+							Charitable Gift Annuities (irrevocable) – Annuities are owned by the college. Proposed charitable gift annuities are funded initially with assets the fair market value of which is at least $10,000. 
+
+							Immediate Payment of Gift Annuity – In exchange for a gift, the donor/annuitant is guaranteed a fixed annual income during each annuitant’s life.  Upon the death of the annuitant(s), the funds are directed to the college as designated by the donor.  The annuity ends with the death of the last income beneficiary. 
+
+							Annuity payments are made at the donor’s choice: quarterly, semi-annually or annually.
+
+							Deferred Payment Gift Annuity – A deferred payment gift annuity is governed by the same rules described in the preceding paragraph, with the exception that the first annuity payment to the annuitants is delayed for one or more years following the effective date of the agreement.  The interest earned in the interim is credited to the contract, which increases the amount of the annuity.
+
+Retained Life Estates in Real Property – In such an arrangement the donor gives a remainder interest in a personal residence, second home or farm.  The property is gifted to the college but the donor retains the right to occupy the property until death, at which time all rights to the property pass to the college.  The donor usually pays all expenses related to the property during his/her lifetime, but various alternative arrangements may be negotiated by the college president and the vice president for institutional advancement.
+
+Gift of Life Insurance: The college accepts gifts of new and existing whole life insurance (no term or non-dividend policies).  The donor or insured designates the college as the sole owner and irrevocable beneficiary.  The college will not accept gifts of life insurance policies that have a loan against the value without the consent of the president.  All policies will provide for waiver of premiums in case of disability.  There will be no automatic loan provisions.  If the donor does not respond to a premium bill by the due date, the college will cash it in for the surrender value.  At all times, the college reserves the right to cash in the policy or retain it as an investment.
+
+Endowed Fund Guidelines
+
+The amount needed to establish a named endowment at Canisius College is $25,000.  The fund may be started with a smaller amount provided that it is the intention of the benefactor to reach the $25,000 level over time.
+
+Minimum amount to establish academic department funds, professorships, and chairs will be determined by the vice president for institutional advancement in consultation with Senior Leadership Team.
+
+In the case of scholarship funds, the benefactor may specify that the scholarship is to be awarded (a) solely on the basis of academic merit, (b) solely on the basis of financial need, or (c) on a combination of academic merit and financial need.
+
+The benefactor may further specify that the scholarship should be given to (a) student(s) in the College of Arts & Sciences or a specific department within that college, (b) student(s) in the Wehle School of Business or a specific department within that school, (c) student(s) in the School of Education and Human Services or a specific department within that school or (d) students within a particular class or category that is sufficiently broad and whom the college wishes to recruit (e.g. graduates of principal feeder high schools).
+
+The benefactor may suggest other criteria for the awarding of the scholarship, but such restrictions must be discussed with the college to ensure that the targeted class is of a sufficient size that would enable the college to award the scholarship each year.  
+
+With respect to any criteria desired by the benefactor, the college prefers that all criteria be stated as a first preference: that is, that if the college, after reasonable efforts, is unable to award the scholarship to a student meeting the exact criteria, the college would undertake to award the scholarship to another worthy student who meets as many of the criteria as possible.  After criteria are established, the college’s Office of Student Records and Financial Services will select students based on criteria for a particular scholarship. 
+
+Scholarship accounts may not be established to make tuition payments and/or provide for financial gain for a related party or family member of the donor.  A donor or member or representative of the donor’s family may not solely select the recipient(s) of a named scholarship; however, a donor or member or representative of the donor’s family may participate in an objective selection process as a member of a committee, in which case donors or their family members or representatives may not make up the majority of the committee.  Members of a selection committee must disclose any relationship with any applicant and in the case of a relationship that would create the appearance of a conflict of interest, must refrain from voting on that particular applicant. 
+
+Benefactors establishing an endowed scholarship will receive an annual accounting of the scholarship fund from the college.  The accounting will include the current market value and the name(s) and amount awarded for any recipient during that year.
+
+In the case of donations made to the college in honor of or in memory of another person, the college will consult with the individual or family of the individual so honored to ascertain the honoree’s wishes.  If there is a desire to fund the scholarship at the minimum level (whether through the solicitation of donations from others or through a commitment by the honoree or the honoree’s family), a separate endowed scholarship in the honoree’s name shall be established.  Except in extenuating circumstances authorized by the college president, if the scholarship is not fully funded within five years of formation, any donation funds received will be transferred to the College Commemorative Endowed Scholarship Fund (Endowed) and designated in honor of the honoree.  
+
+With respect to other endowed funds, the college and the donor must agree on the purposes of the fund and the recognition to be accorded the donor.  In particular, endowed funds that would require that the college present an award or some other periodic recognition in the name of the donor or the donor(s)’s family must be approved by the vice president for institutional advancement and the president.
+
+Gift Acknowledgement/Stewardship
+
+							Institutional Advancement is responsible for the processing, recording, acknowledging, and maintenance of records and files and related correspondence and documents for all gifts of cash, securities, gifts-in-kind, pledges, and grants from private sources including individuals, corporations, and private foundations secured through Institutional Advancement initiatives.  Any employee receiving such a gift must promptly forward it and all pertinent correspondence to Institutional Advancement for deposit, accounting, and acknowledgment.  Only Institutional Advancement may issue the official tax receipt for a gift to the college.  All acknowledgements letters must include language thanking the donor.
+
+All personal gift records identifying a donor will be treated with professional discretion and will be subject to the normal listings and uses of the college.  Gift records of donors requesting confidentiality or anonymity will be accorded such.  However, the college may disclose such information or documentation as authorized by such a donor or as may be required by law.  Where confidentiality or anonymity is not requested, Institutional Advancement will work closely with the Office of College Communications to prepare and issue all news releases and other internal and external media releases as appropriate. 
+
+Naming Opportunities
+
+The college welcomes the opportunity to honor those who have rendered extraordinary service or support to Canisius College.  Facilities, spaces, endowments, or programs may be named for individuals or entities whose accomplishments or generosity advance the academic mission of the college, further the capacity of the college to meet its teaching and scholarly objectives and to serve its community, and enhance the growth and reputation of the institution.  A decision to construct or renovate a building, establish an endowment, or create a program is to be taken on the basis of established academic and other operational criteria and approved in keeping with the college’s established mission.  In all instances, naming will be independent of all appointment, admission, and curriculum decisions.  To ensure the appropriateness of the honor, the college will follow the guidelines listed below as it makes decisions on a case-by-case basis with regard to naming facilities, spaces, endowments, or programs.
+
+Criteria for Selection of Honorees: Naming a facility, space, endowment or program for an individual, organization, or corporation is one of the highest honors that Canisius College can bestow.  This recognition is a lasting and powerful affirmation of the honoree’s connection to the college’s mission.  As such, honorees must have exemplary character, an unqualified reputation for honesty, personal integrity, and the highest standards of personal and professional ethics.
+
+Extraordinary Service: Honorees who have been employed by the college must have given extraordinary service to the institution in a teaching, research, service, or administrative field with such exceptional distinction that their contributions are widely recognized by their peers, both at the college and elsewhere.  The recognition afforded the honoree may also include private financial contributions related to the naming opportunity.  Honorees may not be in active service at Canisius College or hold elected office at the time of the naming, unless the circumstances are exceptional and approved by the board of trustees.
+
+Private Financial Support: Individuals who have not been college employees, corporations, and other organizations may be considered for naming recognition if they have made significant financial contributions to the college related to the naming opportunity.  Decisions regarding such recognition are made on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the guidelines below and also take into consideration the total cost of the project, the availability of other funds, and the level of financial contribution.  
+
+In order for a facility, space, endowment, or program to be named based upon a contribution, the following conditions will normally be met:
+
+The gift must be in irrevocable form, e.g., trust, contract for will (with present value being used for all deferred commitments), or to be paid over a period of no longer than five years based upon a signed commitment.  A deferred gift is not normally acceptable for a facility where construction is dependent upon the gift;
+
+A bequest gift from a donor who is still alive will not normally be considered for a naming opportunity;
+
+The person for whom the name is assigned has some reasonable connection to the facility, space, endowment, or program being so designated;
+
+Unless the gift is required to construct or equip the facility to be named, the gift normally must be used to establish a program endowment restricted to an appropriate department or program closely associated with the facility;
+
+If a school, department, or program is to be named, a restricted endowment supporting that school, department or program normally will be established.
+
+In special circumstances, the vice president for institutional advancement and college president may make exceptions to the above guidelines.
+
+Levels of Financial Support: The following general guidelines must be taken into consideration in determining a significant level of financial support in a given situation: 
+
+New Facilities: a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of construction costs. 
+
+Renovation of Facilities: a minimum of seventy-five percent (75%) of the cost of renovating a facility. 
+
+Existing Facilities without Renovation: a minimum of seventy-five percent (75%) of the fair market value of the facility.
+
+Collections: donation of the collection or at least fifty percent (50%) of the value of the collection. 
+
+Tribute Markers: fifty percent (50%) of the cost or value of associated items (e.g. trees, gardens).
+
+Endowments: The amount needed to establish a named endowment at Canisius College is $25,000.  The fund may be started with a smaller amount provided that it is the intention of the benefactor to reach the $25,000 level over time.
+
+Programmatic Entities: determined on a case-by-case basis. 
+
+At the discretion of the college president, in consultation with the board of trustees, exceptions to the above guidelines may be made.
+
+Naming Approval Procedures: Since naming facilities, spaces, endowments, and programs has a long-term impact on the college, the approval process is designed to ensure such action is in the best interest of the college:
+
+Institutional Advancement will review all naming requests.  In the best interest of the college and prospective honorees, information relating to any naming request or plan will remain confidential until appropriate approvals have been obtained;
+
+Institutional Advancement will discuss the potential naming with the president and other appropriate Senior Leadership Team members;
+
+Upon receiving general approval from the president, the board of trustees will be notified for initial clearance; and
+
+Upon commitment by the donor (if applicable), the board of trustees as a whole will be asked to approve the naming.
+
+Duration of Name: Naming of facilities, spaces, endowments and programs in honor of individuals is generally expected to last the lifetime of the facility, space, endowment or program.  Naming of facilities, spaces, endowments, and programs in honor of corporations or other organizations will have a set number of years attached to the naming which will be determined on a case-by-case basis and listed in the signed gift agreement.  Naming associated with a particular facility, space, endowment, or program will not preclude further naming within the facility, space, endowment, or program.  If at any time following the approval of a naming, circumstances change substantially so that the continued use of that name may compromise the public trust, the president will consult with the board of trustees, regarding future action.  The college reserves the right to remove any name that would not reflect positively on the college or would conflict with the purpose or mission of the college.
+
+Other Miscellaneous Matters
+
+Responsibility for IRS Filings upon Sale of Gift Items
+
+Institutional Advancement is responsible for filing IRS Form 8282 upon the sale or disposition of any asset sold by the college within three (3) years of receipt.  The college must file such form within 125 days of the date of sale or disposition of the asset.  The Form 8282 will be prepared by Institutional Advancement and delivered to the donor(s).
+
+Gifts Solicited in States Requiring Registration
+
+Certain states require registration in order to solicit residents of that state either via direct mail or telephone. Institutional Advancement satisfy the registration requirements annually in compliance with each state’s guidelines.
+
+Gifts from Foreign Sources
+
+		Compliance with federal anti-money laundering requirements is required for individual gifts in excess of $100,000, for donors making smaller gifts totaling $250,000 in one year, and for gifts drawn on foreign bank accounts, sent from a foreign jurisdiction, or from a donor with a foreign address.
+
+		The college complies with Section 117 of the Higher Education Act requiring that institutions report to the Department of Education any gift or contract with a Foreign Source valued at $250,000 or more considered alone or in combination with all other gifts from or contracts with that foreign source within a calendar year.
+
+							Institutional Advancement will submit foreign gift reports using the Federal Student Aid's Electronic Application (E-App).
+
+							RELATED POLICIES
+
+							Alumni Solicitations Policy
+
+							Conflict of Interest Policy
+
+							Gift Accounting Policy</s>"
+<s>[INST] Updated Record Retention Schedule (Draft 1).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Updated Record Retention Schedule (Draft 2).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Vaughn College recognizes and endorses the importance of fair procedures for reviewing grievances properly without fear of prejudice or reprisal.txt [/INST] Vaughn College recognizes and endorses the importance of fair procedures for reviewing grievances properly without fear of prejudice or reprisal.  The College agrees to use its best efforts to encourage the informal and prompt settlement of grievances, as defined below.
+
+Definition
+
+A grievance is defined as an alleged misapplication, misinterpretation, or violation of any provision in this Faculty Handbook.  However, for appeals concerning promotion and tenure decisions, see Subsections 1.9.16 and 1.9.1.7.  For appeals concerning dismissal for cause and terminations due to financial exigency, see Subsection 1.12.5.  Any other concern will be treated as a complaint.
+
+	Issues Not Open to Grievance
+
+	The following issues cannot be made the subject of a grievance:
+
+	Determination or content of a Faculty Handbook policy, procedure, rule or regulation appropriately approved by the College governance system;
+
+		Those items falling within the jurisdiction of other College policies and procedures (i.e., Tenure, Promotion, Sexual or Gender-Based Misconduct, Discrimination and Harassment claims, etc.);
+
+	Normal actions taken or recommendation made by members of the College administration or applicable committee members acting in an official capacity in the grievance process;
+
+	Failure to satisfy the grievant after the grievance process has been completed.  
+
+Ad Hoc Faculty Grievance (“Grievance Committee”)
+
+Ad hoc Faculty Grievance Committees are appointed by the President of the Faculty Senate in accordance with Article IV of the Faculty Senate Bylaws. 
+
+General Rules of Procedure for Grievance
+
+The time schedule for each step is to be carefully observed.  Time limits may be extended by mutual agreement of the parties involved and should be communicated in writing to all parties through the Grievance Committee.  Minor deviations that do not cause significant negative consequences for either party shall not necessarily invalidate the process or decision.
+
+All proceedings will be closed and confidential to protect the parties and the College.
+
+Faculty Grievance Procedure
+
+Step One: Attempted Resolution	
+
+A faculty member who feels that there are grounds for a complaint or possible grievance should first discuss informally the matter with his or her Department Chair.
+
+Step Two:  Formal Complaint or Grievance
+
+	1.		Should the informal step fail to resolve the matter to the satisfaction of the faculty member, he or she may submit a complaint or grievance in writing to the Vice President of Academic Affairs, stating in detail the subject matter of the grievance or complaint, the specific section of the Faculty Handbook which is in dispute, the informal steps taken with the specific supervisor(s) named, and the remedy requested.
+
+	2.	The Vice President of Academic Affairs will respond in writing to the faculty member within seven (7) calendar of receiving the grievance letter.  The response will acknowledge receipt of the faculty member’s letter and indicate whether the faculty member’s letter has met the definition of a grievance.  
+
+If the Vice President of Academic Affairs determines that sufficient grounds exist, he or she will appoint an ad hoc Faculty Grievance Committee to investigate the faculty member’s grievance.  Membership of the ad hoc committee will consist of three to five senior full-time faculty members, each having one vote and appointed by the Vice President of Academic Affairs.   
+
+Should the Vice President of Academic Affairs find that there is not a grievance but only a complaint, he or she will work with the parties directly involved in an attempt to resolve the complaint. Should either party not be satisfied with the Vice President of Academic Affairs’ recommendation to resolve the complaint, either party may, within ten (10) working days, appeal to the College President, who will render a final decision within ten working days and will inform, in writing, all parties involved of his or her decision.  The College President’s decision regarding the complaint is final.
+
+Step Three: Formal Grievance 
+
+The request for grievance and any supporting materials will be provided to the ad hoc Faculty Grievance Committee for examination.   The committee will have investigative powers and may interview persons who it believes may have information potentially relevant to the faculty member’s grievance.  The committee will interview the faculty member to discuss and clarify the issues raised in the grievance.  Whenever the committee believes that a meeting with other individuals could lead to a better understanding of the issues in the grievance, it will meet with the appropriate party.  
+
+The ad hoc committee will prepare a written report for the parties and the College President within thirty days of being assigned the case.  The committee’s report will include findings of fact and conclusions with respect to the grounds alleged and, where appropriate, will make recommendations for corrective action and final resolution of the grievance.  The committee’s findings will be limited to consideration of whether grounds for the grievance have been established by the faculty member by the greater weight of the evidence. 
+
+Step Four: College President Review
+
+	1.		The Grievance Committee’s recommendations for corrective action and final resolution of the grievance may either be accepted by all parties or rejected by any party.  Rejection or acceptance by either party must be communicated in writing to all persons involved within ten (10) working days after receipt of the committee’s written report.
+
+	2.		If the recommended disposition is not accepted by either of the parties, the College President will review the committee’s report and recommended disposition and make a decision (that is not subject to appeal) on the grievance within twenty (20) working days of his or her receipt of communication that either party has rejected the Grievance Committee’s recommendations.  The College President will communicate his or her decision in writing to all parties.
+
+College President is a Direct Party to the Grievance
+
+	1.		Should the President be a direct party to the grievance, the grievant may file a petition to the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees for a review of the record.  Such an appeal will be filed within ten (10) working days of the President’s decision.  The Executive Committee or a special committee designated by it will review the case at a meeting called for that purpose and give a final decision on the grievance.  Only when the President is directly involved will such a review take place.
+
+	2.		The Board’s review committee will ordinarily inform in writing all parties of its decision within ten (10) working days of its review of the record.
+
+Outside Court/Agency Action
+
+1.	Should any grievant initiate court or agency action on a grievance, the College reserves the right to discontinue internal procedures or to continue the same to complete a record as the case may warrant.
+
+2.	A grievance that has been filed and resolved by, or is on appeal in, an outside court or 	agency cannot then be presented as a grievance.</s>"
+<s>[INST] Vaughn IWPM Proposal v3.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Vaughn IWPM Proposal v4.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Vaughn Memo.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Vaughn Revised IWPM Proposal v3.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] VC Audit Report.txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Versions of Financial Exigency Policies.txt [/INST] Version Approved by the Faculty
+
+															b.	Elimination of Faculty Positions 
+
+															Termination of an appointment with tenure, or of a nontenured appointment before the end of the contract period may occur because of (1) a financially exigency or (2) the discontinuance of an academic program or department of instruction due to educational considerations as set forth below.
+
+	Termination Due to Financial Exigency
+
+Termination of an appointment with continuous tenure, or of a probationary or other nontenured appointment before the end of the specified term, may occur under extraordinary circumstances because of a demonstrably bona fide financial exigency, i.e., a severe financial crisis that fundamentally compromises the academic integrity of the institution as a whole and that cannot be alleviated by less drastic means.
+
+As a first step, there should be an elected faculty governance body  that participates in the decision that a condition of financial exigency exists or is imminent and that all feasible alternatives to termination of appointments have been pursued, including expenditure of one-time money or reserves as bridge funding, furloughs, pay cuts, deferred-compensation plans, early-retirement packages, deferral of nonessential capital expenditures, and cuts to noneducational programs and services, including expenses for administration.
+
+Judgments determining where within the overall academic program termination of appointments may occur involve considerations of educational policy, including affirmative action, as well as of faculty status, and should therefore be the primary responsibility of the faculty or of an appropriate faculty body.  The faculty or an appropriate faculty body should also exercise primary responsibility in determining the criteria for identifying the individuals whose appointments are to be terminated. These criteria may appropriately include considerations of length of service.
+
+The responsibility for identifying individuals whose appointments are to be terminated should be committed to a person or group designated or approved by the faculty. The allocation of this responsibility may vary according to the size and character of the institution, the extent of the terminations to be made, or other considerations of fairness in judgment. The case of a faculty member given notice of proposed termination of appointment will be governed by the following provisions.
+
+Before any proposals for program discontinuance on grounds of financial exigency are made, the faculty or an appropriate faculty body will have opportunity to render an assessment in writing of the institution’s financial condition.
+
+[Note: Academic programs cannot be defined ad hoc, at any size; programs should be recognized academic units that existed prior to the declaration of financial exigency. The term “program” should designate a related cluster of credit-bearing courses that constitute a coherent body of study within a discipline or set of related disciplines. When feasible, the term should designate a department or similar administrative unit that offers majors and minors.]
+
+The faculty or an appropriate faculty body will have access to at least five years of audited financial statements, current and following-year budgets, and detailed cash-flow estimates for future years.
+
+In order to make informed recommendations about the financial impact of program closures, the faculty or an appropriate faculty body will have access to detailed program, department, and administrative-unit budgets.
+
+Faculty members in a program being considered for discontinuance because of financial exigency will promptly be informed of this activity in writing and provided at least thirty days in which to respond to it. Tenured, tenure-track, and contingent faculty members will be informed and invited to respond.
+
+If the administration issues notice to a particular faculty member of an intention to terminate the appointment because of financial exigency, the faculty member will have the right to a full hearing before a faculty committee. The hearing need not conform in all respects with a proceeding conducted pursuant to Section 3.13.4, but the essentials of an on-the-record adjudicative hearing will be observed. The issues in this hearing may include the following:
+
+The existence and extent of the condition of financial exigency. The burden will rest on the administration to prove the existence and extent of the condition. The findings of a faculty committee in a previous proceeding involving the same issue may be introduced.
+
+The validity of the educational judgments and the criteria for identification for termination; but the recommendations of a faculty body on these matters will be considered presumptively valid.
+
+Whether the criteria are being properly applied in the individual case.
+
+If the institution, because of financial exigency, terminates appointments, it will not at the same time make new appointments, except in extraordinary circumstances where a serious distortion in the academic program would otherwise result. The appointment of a faculty member with tenure will not be terminated in favor of retaining a faculty member without tenure, except in extraordinary circumstances where a serious distortion of the academic program would otherwise result.
+
+Before terminating an appointment because of financial exigency, the institution, with faculty participation, will make every effort to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position within the institution.
+
+In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial exigency, the faculty member concerned will be given notice or severance salary not less than as prescribed in Section 3.13.3.1.
+
+
+
+
+Last Working Draft - Tracked
+
+															
+
+	Termination Due to Financially Contingent Situations and Resource Allocation
+
+Termination of a tenured faculty member or, prior to the end of the term of appointment, of a tenure-track faculty member may occur because of the declaration of a financially contingent situation as described below. 
+
+For purposes of this policy, a “financially contingent situation” is a serious financial condition that is likely in the future to threaten the fiscal soundness of the university’s programs or services. It is not required that the university invade or deplete capital prior to determining that there is a financially contingent situation. It is also not required that the viability of the institution as a whole is threatened prior to determining that there is a financially contingent situation.
+
+	Criteria
+
+The criteria to be employed in financially contingent situations in allocating resources to University programs and services fall under three headings: Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality. These will at times compete and at other times converge. If and when Ohio Wesleyan University meets contingencies that require institutional contraction and reorganization, these sets of criteria will be used in complementary fashion as guidelines. The order of their enumeration should not be taken to indicate their order of priority. Neither should it be presumed that all three will be weighed equally in making particular decisions. Particular circumstances may encourage the assignment of greater weight to one or another in particular cases, even though in financially contingent situations it is to be expected that fiscal pressure may emphasize reference to the criterion of cost effectiveness. What is important is that the campus community, in considering contingency reductions, identify and grapple directly with what are likely to be very difficult choices from among options that all carry significant costs and/or benefits in terms of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality. The objective must be to arrive at wise judgments.
+
+	MISSION
+
+Because Ohio Wesleyan University is a specific private university with a specific heritage, a major consideration associated with any reduction or change in size will be to preserve its essential character by maintaining those programs and activities judged to be more central to that character. To do so will require reference to several questions. How closely does the program or service in question fit the stated mission of Ohio Wesleyan University? How importantly does it contribute toward a non-curricular campus ambience vital to Ohio Wesleyan's liberal arts heritage? Is it essential in serving other programs?
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	COST EFFECTIVENESS & MARKETABILITY
+
+Attentiveness to the cost effectiveness and marketability of programs and services is a key characteristic of a well-run institution. Cost-effectiveness must be one guideline in determining staffing levels and whether or not to maintain programs or services. The University must therefore be sensitive to the constituencies it serves and to their preferences. While Ohio Wesleyan cannot mindlessly add or subtract staff or programs or services to track short-term fluctuations in cost effectiveness, neither can it ignore longer term or more profound shifts as it decides which subject areas, programs, or services to maintain and at what staffing levels. The following non-prescriptive questions related to cost effectiveness and marketability must be asked: What is the relationship between direct expenses and revenues in a given area? What is the actual and relative cost of a graduation unit (or, in the case of non-academic areas, other service unit)? What is the trend line for both, and for enrollments and student/staff ratio? Is the program or service duplicative?  What is the present and future demand for the program among existing and potential student populations as measured by internal data sets (e.g., enrollments, numbers of majors, programs served, etc.), labor market projections, external stakeholder feedback, and national and state policy/economic projections and placement data?
+
+	QUALITY
+
+Since the primary purpose of Ohio Wesleyan University is to provide excellent instruction in the liberal arts and selected career options, and comparable quality in non-academic services, it must consider program or service quality in making program, service, and faculty staffing decisions. In dealing with any financially contingent situation, it will seek to retain its best personnel, programs, and services, as one top priority. It will strive to adjust programs and services and retain or retrain individuals so as to maintain the best possible teaching and learning environment. Major issues associated with this guideline are complex and difficult. Among them are the following: Is the program or service and its faculty generally perceived by Faculty (staff, where non-academic services may be involved), students, and alumni to be of high quality? Do students, in or associated with it, perform throughout the University at average or higher levels? Is the faculty versatile as well as strong?
+
+	The guidelines of Mission, Cost Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality are contradictory. Any one of them used exclusively could lead to very serious imbalances in the focus and operation of the University. Recognition that each of these three needs to be considered and that each provides an outward boundary for the decision process will encourage an intelligent and equitable response to financially contingent situations as well as to ordinary conditions.
+
+	Making Contingency Decisions
+
+If financially contingent situations require reductions in personnel and/or academic departments or programs resulting in the termination of faculty appointments or services , the University will balance a need for timely action with the need for shared decision-making.  In both determining whether such a situation exists and in shaping difficult decisions that contingencies might require, the President will engage in extensive consultation with appropriate faculty committees, administrators, and where conditions allow, students, before making a recommendation to the Board of Trustees as follows:  
+
+Determination of Financial Contingent Situation
+
+The Board of Trustees is solely authorized to determine that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent.
+
+The University Governance Committee shall be invited to be present when the Board of Trustees considers matters related to financial contingency and may, at the discretion of the Chair of the Board of Trustees, be invited to address the Board on behalf of the faculty as part of the Board's deliberations. The President shall present relevant financial data to the Committee of University Governance (UGC) that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent, and that reasonable means for coping with the situation have been exhausted without resorting to the elimination of faculty positions. 
+
+Framing of Proposal to Address Financial Contingent Situation
+
+
+
+In the event that the Board of Trustees declares that a financial contingent situation exists or is imminent, the President shall be responsible for framing a proposal for addressing the situation.  If the proposal might require reductions in academic departments or interdisciplinary programs and the termination of faculty positions, the President, prior to framing the proposal, shall engage in an extensive academic program review process.
+
+Academic Program Review Process
+
+Step 1: The initial step in the Academic Program Review process will be the development by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness of a set of common quantitative data for all academic programs at the University showing trends in course enrollments, student credits delivered, graduated majors, declared majors, direct instructional expense, and other performance metrics agreed upon by Academic Affairs, Academic Planning and Allocation Committee (APAC), and UGC. The data will be made available transparently to all faculty through appropriate means such as live data dashboards. 
+
+Step 2. Following the publication of the data, each academic department and interdisciplinary program will be charged by Academic Affairs to complete self-studies, following criteria set by APAC. 
+
+Step 3. Following receipt of the department and program self-studies, APAC will evaluate each department in relation to Mission, Cost-Effectiveness and Marketability, and Quality (see above) and issue a report to the President.
+
+Step 4. The President shall convene a Joint Committee comprised of eight faculty members, six of which are elected by the faculty (or appointed by the Executive Committee if an election is unsuccessful) from individuals serving on each of the following faculty committees: UGC, Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC), Committee on Academic Programs (CAP), and APAC; and two of which are appointed by the President from the tenure-line faculty.  In addition, the Joint Committee shall include the Provost and appropriate academic administrators responsible for data and curriculum as designated by the Provost.  From the faculty membership, the President shall appoint the convener of the Joint Committee.
+
+After considering the department self-studies and APAC report, the Joint Committee shall:
+
+Develop recommendations for the appropriate number and size of departments and interdisciplinary programs, as well as the appropriate number of majors and minors;
+
+Identify opportunities for program enhancement; and
+
+Suggest the optimal configuration of departments and interdisciplinary programs. 
+
+In addressing these areas, the committee’s recommendations may include (a) the discontinuation and/or reduction of departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors; (b) the elimination of faculty positions; (c) recommendations about reconfiguring departments, interdisciplinary programs, majors, and minors by reassigning positions; (d) enhancement of programs; and (e) changes in policies and procedures that would improve the functioning or efficiency of the academic program. 
+
+The President, following consultation with the Executive Committee of the Faculty, will determine the date by which the Joint Committee’s recommendations to the President must be provided.  Following its deliberations, the Joint Committee shall issue its formal recommendations in writing to the President.  
+
+Step 5. The President will review the Joint Committee report and issue a written proposal to the members of the faculty addressing the financially contingent situation.  The President’s written proposal will also be referred to CAP as to curricular impact, to APAC as to the implications for the academic plan, to the FPC as to personnel implications, and to the affected departments and interdisciplinary programs identified in the proposal.  
+
+Each committee and affected department and interdisciplinary program will have a 30-day period to develop their recommendations to the President.  The manner in which the committees and affected departments and interdisciplinary programs arrive at their recommendations is at their respective discretion.
+
+Step 6. The respective committees and affected departments and interdisciplinary programs may submit to the President written recommendations for changes to the proposal.  The President will consider the recommendations. If the President adopts the recommendations, the President will incorporate them into the final plan submitted to the Board of Trustees. If the President does not adopt the recommendations, the President will transmit to the Board of Trustees both the President’s final proposal and the alternative proposal(s) prepared by the faculty committees and affected departments and interdisciplinary programs.  The Board of Trustees shall approve the final plan to address the financial contingent situation and retains ultimate authority for approving proposals as to department or interdisciplinary program and position reductions and terminations responding to a financially contingent situation.
+
+Step 7. The President shall render the final decision on terminations for reasons of financial contingency and notify the faculty member(s) involved in accordance with the Notification provisions below. 
+
+Step 8. After the completion and implementation of decisions for institutional contraction to deal with a financially contingent situation, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.
+
+Priorities 
+
+In making recommendations and final decisions on individual faculty reductions in accordance with the Academic Program Review Process procedures above, the following sequence and criteria shall apply:
+
+Sequence:
+
+Consideration of faculty attrition resulting from resignation, retirement, or other severance actions. 
+
+Termination of Part-time and Visiting faculty positions within the affected department(s) or interdisciplinary program(s). 
+
+Termination of tenure-track and/or tenured positions within the affected department(s) or interdisciplinary program(s).  The appointment of a faculty member with tenure within the same department or program will not be terminated in favor of retaining a full-time tenure-track faculty member, except in circumstances where a serious distortion of the department or interdisciplinary program would otherwise result.  
+
+Criteria: 
+
+The qualifications of faculty members as documented in official personnel files and as judged relative to the needs of the University and the potentially affected department or interdisciplinary program.
+
+Given relatively equal standing as determined in a above, seniority as determined by length of service at the University.
+
+Notification
+
+Notification of termination will be sent from the President to the faculty member. The notice will specify the reasons for such termination, the effective date of termination, the faculty member's right to retraining (if applicable), and right to an appeal.
+
+In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial contingency, full-time non-tenure faculty members will be given notice or severance salary in accordance with Section 3.13.3.1.  Tenured faculty will be provided with termination payments in accordance with Section 3.13.5.1.
+
+
+
+Appeals
+
+If the administration issues notice to a tenure line faculty member of an intention to terminate the appointment because of financial contingency, the faculty member will have the right to file a grievance in accordance with Section 3.14.3. 
+
+Reassignment and Retraining
+
+Before the President issues notice to a tenure line faculty member of the University’s intention to terminate an appointment because of a formal discontinuance of a department or interdisciplinary program, the University, subject to a review of qualifications (see Section 3.4.5 - Faculty Qualification) and retraining possibilities (see Section 3.10.3 – Retraining Leave), will consider the faculty member for suitable administrative or teaching position vacations within the University.  See Section 3.13.5.1 below for additional information.
+
+When a suitable position is not available within the University, with or without retraining, and the faculty member is not agreeable to any optional alternative courses of action (i.e., change in status to part-time), the faculty member’s appointment may be terminated.
+
+Reinstatement Rights
+
+In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial contingency, the place of the faculty member concerned will not be filled by a replacement within a period of three years, unless the released faculty member has been offered reinstatement and at least thirty days in which to accept or decline it.
+
+
+
+
+Original University Policy
+
+Chapter V.
+
+E. Contingencies and Resource Allocation 
+
+l. 	Criteria 
+
+The criteria to be employed in financially contingent situations in allocating resources to University programs and services fall under three headings: Mission, Cost Effectiveness, and Quality. These will at times compete and at other times converge. If and when Ohio Wesleyan University meets contingencies that require institutional contraction, these sets of criteria will be used in complementary fashion as guidelines. The order of their enumeration should not be taken to indicate their order of priority. Neither should it be presumed that all three will be weighed equally in making particular decisions. Particular circumstances may encourage the assignment of greater weight to one or another in particular cases, even though in financially contingent situations it is to be expected that fiscal pressure may emphasize reference to the criterion of cost effectiveness. What is important is that the campus community, in considering contingency reductions, identify and grapple directly with what are likely to be very difficult choices from among options that all carry significant costs and/or benefits in terms of Mission, Cost Effectiveness, and Quality. The objective must be to arrive at wise judgments. 
+
+MISSION
+
+Because Ohio Wesleyan University is a specific private university with a specific heritage, a major consideration associated with any reduction or change in size will be to preserve its essential character by maintaining those programs and activities judged to be more central to that character. To do so will require reference to several questions. How closely does the program or service in question fit the stated mission of Ohio Wesleyan University? How importantly does it contribute toward a non-curricular campus ambience vital to Wesleyan's liberal arts heritage? Is it essential in serving other programs? 
+
+COST EFFECTIVENESS
+
+Attentiveness to the cost effectiveness of programs and services is a key characteristic of a well run institution. Cost-effectiveness must be one guideline in determining staffing levels and whether or not to maintain programs or services. The University must therefore be sensitive to the constituencies it serves and to their preferences. While Ohio Wesleyan cannot mindlessly add or subtract staff or programs or services to track short term fluctuations in cost effectiveness, neither can it ignore longer term or more profound shifts as it decides which subject areas, programs, or services to maintain and at what staffing levels. It must ask what is the relationship between direct expenses and revenues in a given area? What is the actual and relative cost of a graduation unit (or, in the case of non-academic areas, other service unit)? What is the trend line for both, and for enrollments and student/staff ratio? Is the program or service a ""native recruiter?"" Is it duplicative? 
+
+QUALITY
+
+Since the primary purpose of Ohio Wesleyan University is to provide excellent instruction in the liberal arts and selected career options, and comparable quality in non-academic services, it must consider program or service quality in making program, service, and staffing decisions. In dealing with any financially contingent situation, it will seek to retain its best personnel, programs, and services, as one top priority. It will strive to adjust programs and services and retain or retrain individuals so as to maintain the best possible teaching and learning environment. Major issues associated with this guideline are complex and difficult. Among them are the following: Is the program or service and its staff generally perceived by Faculty (staff, where non-academic services may be involved) and students to be of high quality? Do students, in or associated with it, perform throughout the University at average or higher levels? Is the staff versatile as well as strong? 
+
+…..
+
+The guidelines of Mission, Cost Effectiveness, and Quality are contradictory. Any one of them used exclusively could lead to very serious imbalances in the focus and operation of the University. Recognition that each of these three needs to be considered and that each provides an outward boundary for the decision process will encourage an intelligent and equitable response to financially contingent situations as well as to ordinary conditions. 
+
+2. 	Making Contingency Decisions 
+
+If financially contingent situations require reductions in personnel and/or programs or services, the University will balance a need for timely action with the need for shared decisionmaking. In both determining whether such a situation exists and in shaping difficult decisions that contingencies might require, the President will engage in extensive consultation with appropriate faculty committees, administrators, and where conditions allow, students. 
+
+Responsibility for framing a proposal for program or services and/or personnel reductions to deal with a financial contingency will rest with the President. The proposal, when it pertains to academic programs and/or personnel, will be referred to the Committee on Academic Programs as to curricular impact, to the Academic Planning and Allocation Committee as to the implications for the academic plan, to the Faculty Personnel Committee as to personnel implications, and to the affected programs. When the proposal pertains to non-academic programs, services, and/or personnel, it will be forwarded to the Governance Committee and the Cabinet for consideration. These bodies will hold hearings as part of their deliberations. At the discretion of the President, an advisory student committee may also be created. These groups will severally consider the proposal(s) and in doing so may consult widely with faculty, students, and, where appropriate, with staff. They are to complete their deliberations within 30 calendar days of receipt of the President's proposal(s) and report their findings and recommendations to the President immediately upon finishing their deliberations. They may recommend acceptance, alteration, or otherwise, of the President's proposal(s). If and when they are unable to achieve concurrence with the President, and the President yet judges that reductions must be made, he or she will bear final responsibility for reporting to the Board of Trustees the proposed course of action. If there is a difference of views between the President and the committees, the President will ensure that the committees' proposals are forwarded to the Trustees when he/she forwards his/her proposal(s). The Board of Trustees retains ultimate authority for approving proposals as to program and position reductions and terminations responding to financial contingency situations. 
+
+After the completion and implementation of decisions for institutional contraction to deal with financial contingencies, the President will make available to the campus community a full report on the actions taken.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Volume I Review Process-Suggestions.txt [/INST] Volume I Review Process
+
+Kathleen Owens, PhD, Chair
+
+
+
+Proposed Changes to First Draft, December 2012
+
+
+
+Page 1:  Associate to Baccalaureate
+
+Page 2:  Add seal
+
+Page 3:  In 1831, “According to tradition,….”
+
+Pate 5:  1.1.6:  add membership in CMHE
+
+Page 6:  #9:  suggestion—accredited secondary school or equivalent
+
+Page 9:  Trustee terms begin on July 1 and end on June 30 [add this at end]
+
+Page 9:  do not add sentence in Section 2. Vacancies
+
+Page 10:  Section 8;  remove last sentence
+
+Page 11:  include for now but review with Committee on Governance &Trustees
+
+Page 12 (i) take out endowments; rest is OK
+
+Page 13:  Members rather than members; Treasurer rather than vice president; NOTE:  Chair of Board is not a member of the corporation
+
+Page 14: (b):  do not change 
+
+Page 15 Section 6:  President, not Board
+
+Page16:  last sentence:  capital M;  need to review with Committee on Governance &Trustees [not technically a Member of the Corporation]
+
+Page 18:  #9 separate into two functions and add as comment box:  Add new bullet as #1:  Steward the institution’s Catholic and Mercy identity…
+
+Page 20:  motivated by its commitment to Stewardship….;
+
+P age 22: (ii):  this is the role of the Executive Committee; also 5.B is Executive Committee
+
+Page 28 (1)  promote College’s Catholic and Mercy identity
+
+Page 29 1.3.12 #1: including Catholic and Mercy identity
+
+Page 31:  President’s Council is an advisory council
+
+Page 32:  Director of Honors Program reports to VPAA
+
+Page 33:  remove Director of Sports Information; Assistant to VP for Enrollment and Student Services; Coordinator of Enrollment Support Services
+
+Page 35:  Sponsor:  use same as on page 5
+
+Page 36:  VPA  A; VPFA and Public Safety; VPIA remove research and change to advancement services
+
+Page 37:  need enrollment responsibilities and marketing 
+
+Page 38:  1.4.2.7.1  needs to be re-aligned
+
+Page 38:  1.4.2.8:  being revised by Student Services
+
+Page 40:  all committees:  change “10 days in advance” to “prior to meetings”
+
+Page 45:  1.5.1.6:  #9 remove marketing and move to Enrollment and Marketing
+
+Page 46:  more information on Enrollment management needs to go into responsibilities
+
+Page 47:  need Deans Council and Academic Council definitions:  need to craft definition [Frank or Stephen?]
+
+Page 48:  1.5.2.2 check with Dawn and get new language; CHECK NAME OF COMMITTEE; it is Institutional Outcomes Assessment Committee and new By-laws are being sent [1/24]
+
+Page 48:  1.5.2.3:  see Jan 9 email from Cheryl re language and times
+
+Page 49:  delete College Imaging Committee  
+
+Page 50:  DAC:  delete “at least”
+
+Page 54:  not Campus Police but Public Safety
+
+Page 54:  Mission and Values:  Direction Statements; meets 9 times per year
+
+Page 55:  “review policies” not normally done; review with Donna
+
+Page 56:  eliminate “welfare” and need to get meeting frequency [Donna]
+
+Page 56:  Director of Campus Health and Wellness and other interested parties
+
+Page 57:  1.5.2.19:  change by-laws to charters and eliminate last sentence
+
+Page 57:  Standing Committees of the Faculty; Stephen draft charter for each of the Committees; look at General Ed curriculum Committee—this is a College committee; change location?
+
+Page 58:  Committees of the College:  this discussed elsewhere.
+
+Page 58:  delete all narrative and list any committee that has student representation, refer back to description in other section and just list number of students
+
+Page 60:  change guilt or innocence to responsible or not responsible
+
+Page 61:  mission, values and by-laws of the College [1.6.1]
+
+Page 63:  Volume II eliminate VPESS and VPFA; add SS for Mission and Planning and VPIA; Volume VI:  add VPFA; Volume VII:  add VPESS [get Word documents of Position Descriptions for Executive Council members from Donna]
+
+Page 63:  C1 and C2:  eliminate Executive Council
+
+Page 64:  60 day minimum:  discuss with Stephen; (b) vote occurs by electronic or paper ballot; The Faculty Council rather than EP&P
+
+Page 65:#3 take out Athletics in title and text and take out “team;” submit to VPESS; to appropriate EC member; VPESS rather than Assistant to the President
+
+Page 66:  discuss with Stephen
+
+Page 69:  discussed earlier
+
+
+
+
+
+1/21/2013		Page 2 of 2</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Volume III-3.6Consensual Relations Policy.txt [/INST] 3.3.6        Consensual Relations Policy
+
+CONSENSUAL RELATIONS POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+May 6, 2019
+
+Policy Number:
+
+III – 3.3.6
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable.
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+President
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President, Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+All Canisius College employees.
+
+History:
+
+
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this policy is to ensure that the employment and academic environment is free from real or perceived conflicts of interest when college employees or students, in positions of unequal power, are involved in consensual romantic or sexual relationships.
+
+POLICY
+
+The college prohibits romantic and/or sexual relationships between faculty/staff members and all students regardless of whether the relationship is consensual.  Nor may a faculty member exercise academic responsibility over a student with whom the faculty member has or had a romantic and/or sexual relationship, regardless of whether the relationship was consensual.  For purposes of this policy, “faculty member” includes any graduate student teaching assistants with respect to students whom they teach, supervise, or evaluate.
+
+The college also actively discourages consensual relationships of an intimate or sexual nature between supervisory personnel and those staff who report to them.  The college discourages such relationships because, among other reasons, there is an implicit imbalance of power in them.  The college expects its supervisors and administrators to act in a fair, impartial manner when making administrative decisions, avoiding every appearance of impropriety or favoritism that might arise from consensual relationships.
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+See policy statement above.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+Non-Retaliation
+
+No person shall retaliate against an individual for reporting a consensual relationship or participating in an investigation.  Any act of retaliation or reprisal violates this policy and will be treated as a separate matter.  Anyone found to have retaliated against someone making a report or participating in an investigation or disciplinary proceeding will be subject to corrective actions.
+
+Corrective Action
+
+Failure to comply with this policy can lead to disciplinary action, up to and including dismissal.  A more powerful party who enters into a consensual relationship and fails to comply with this policy should be aware that such action may constitute “malfeasance in office or willful or wanton neglect of duty.”  In such a case, the party may not be entitled to defense or indemnification by the college in any subsequent criminal or civil action or demand arising from or related to the relationship.
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct Policy</s>"
+"<s>[INST] VPAA Job Description 2019 SS Edits.txt [/INST] Spring Arbor University
+
+Vice President for Academic Affairs – Job Description
+
+
+
+Job Title:	Vice President for Academic Affairs
+
+                          Chief Academic Officer
+
+Department: 	Academic Affairs
+
+Reports to:	University President
+
+FLSA Status:	Exempt
+
+Date:		8/1/2019
+
+
+
+SUMMARY:
+
+The Vice President for Academic Affairs (VPAA) serves as the Chief Academic Officer of Spring Arbor University, providing vision, leadership, planning, development, direction, assessment, and administrative oversight for all facets of the academic programs at the university. The VPAA is responsible to lead innovatively and effectively in a rapidly changing educational environment.  
+
+
+
+RESPONSIBILITIES
+
+Serves as a member of the President’s Cabinet, reporting directly to the president.
+
+Keeping the President informed on all matters pertaining to the Academic Affairs of the University.
+
+In the absence of the President, the VPAA acts in his/her place
+
+Represents and advocates for the interests of the faculty, academic programs, and academic support units within an all-institutional context.
+
+Serves as a member of the Leadership Team, the Master Planning Committee, and the Crisis Response Team.
+
+Sets the academic vision of the university as part of the ongoing strategic planning process; works with faculty and other constituents to establish clear and attainable educational goals to support the accomplishment of that vision.
+
+Oversight of all academic units of the University, co-curricular units, and academic support units.
+
+Oversight of all University curricula.
+
+Expected to drive academic innovation, in collaboration with the faculty, to ensure that the university has a robust mix of academic programs that are market responsive and consistent with the University Concept.
+
+Uses data-driven indicators and analytics of academic performance and the effectiveness of academic programs and units related to academic quality, retention rates, graduation rates, employment rates, and cost of instruction to make sound recommendations and decisions.
+
+Responsible for academic policies and planning, including keeping the academic catalogs, calendars, transfer policies, the faculty handbook, and adjunct faculty handbook current and reflective of best practice; interprets, monitors, and assures compliance with academic policies. 
+
+Responsible for ongoing assessment and improvement of academic programs and units to ensure high quality, smooth operations, and effectiveness.
+
+Responsible for facilitating effective faculty governance, working in close cooperation with the Faculty Senate and other faculty committees.
+
+Knowledgeable about campus, online, and other nontraditional modalities, and undergraduate and graduate programs; able to build community across the boundaries of different constituencies.
+
+Oversees all recruiting, hiring, evaluation, retention, professional development, and performance of faculty and administrators of the academic units, including the academic search process, contracts, and the promotion and tenure process; exhibits a commitment to diversity and equity as part of these efforts.  
+
+Provides advisory recommendations to the President on all academic appointments, tenure and promotion matters and ensures that such processes comply with University policy.
+
+Ensures all faculty maintain a vibrant Christian commitment and teach their disciplines with Christ as the perspective for learning, and that faculty development activities and the promotion/tenure process supports these efforts. 
+
+Administers the budgets of all academic programs and units; ensures the strategic and effective use of funds and resources to support, enhance, and develop the academic programs and units.
+
+Effectively manages the physical resources of the academic programs and units, including all classrooms, labs, offices, and academic spaces.
+
+Enhances the financial strength of the university; has a deep understanding of the fiscal and physical resources necessary to support and build academic programs and units; makes wise decisions about the deployment of resources to ensure effective utilization and management of those resources. 
+
+Assists the Advancement Office with efforts to obtain new external funding to support academic programs and efforts.
+
+Ensures compliance with the academic requirements of the Higher Learning Commission (HLC), other program accreditors, and Department of Education regulations in all states where SAU offers programs. 
+
+Ensures the effective investigation, review, and response for student complaints, student appeals, and reports of academic dishonesty.
+
+Keeps abreast of current developments and trends in higher education and developments in federal and state regulations related to academics.
+
+Inspires trust through effectiveness as a team player and collaborator, including team mobilization, creative problem-solving, and nuanced judgment while maintaining an ethical, respectful, and Christ-honoring environment.
+
+Demonstrates a high level of professionalism, integrity, and respect for others; practices active listening and open communication to build trust and unity; models a strong personal relationship with Jesus Christ. 
+
+Other duties as assigned by the University President.
+
+
+
+SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITES
+
+Supervises the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs, the Deans of the Academic Schools, the Registrar, the Director of eLearning, and the Executive Administrative Assistant for Academic Affairs. Works with subordinates to ensure clear communication, appropriate and effective delegation, ongoing feedback, and professional development. Carries out supervisory responsibilities in accordance with the organization’s priorities and applicable laws. 
+
+
+
+QUALIFICATIONS
+
+A Ph.D. or other terminal degree from a regionally accredited institution is required.  At least five years of experience working in a position of academic leadership at the dean level or higher is required.  Demonstrated skills in leadership, collaboration, program development, creative thinking, problem solving, budget and personnel management, strategic planning, accreditation, effective teaching in various modalities, and research are strongly preferred. Must have excellent oral and written communication skills, public speaking skills, be self-motivated, possess good supervisory skills, be results oriented, and be able to manage multiple priorities.  
+
+
+
+Spring Arbor University is a community of learners distinguished by our lifelong involvement in the study and application of the liberal arts, total commitment to Jesus Christ as the perspective of learning, and critical participation in the contemporary world.  The VPAA will have a deep and evident faith in Jesus Christ and a love for His church.  He/she will have an unwavering commitment to SAU’s Statement of Faith and champion the spiritual formation and holistic development of all students.  He/she will be able to articulate how they would be able to teach in their discipline with Jesus Christ as the foundation for learning and will be someone who possesses a deep sense of calling to advance the integration of faith and learning through the ministry of Christian education.  The individual will exhibit a life and service that is in full accord with the Spring Arbor University Concept and Community Covenant. 
+
+
+
+	Experience working in multicultural academic environments preferred and individuals from diverse populations are encouraged to apply.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Wehaton Peer Links.txt [/INST] Muhleberg College (see pages 36-42): https://www.muhlenberg.edu/media/contentassets/pdf/about/provost/handbook/faculty-handbook-january-2022.pdf
+
+												
+
+												Haverford College (see pages 35-36: https://www.haverford.edu/sites/default/files/Office/Provost/Faculty-Handbook_December2021.pdf
+
+												
+
+												Hamilton College (see pages 29-31): https://www.hamilton.edu/documents/July2021FacultyHandbook.pdf
+
+												
+
+												Washington and Jefferson College (see pages 44-47): https://wiki.washjeff.edu/display/facstaff/Home
+
+												
+
+												Ursinus College (see pages 8-11): https://www.ursinus.edu/live/files/3287-faculty-handbook-2019-2020
+
+												
+
+												Dickinson College (see pages 4-6 through 4-9): https://www.dickinson.edu/download/downloads/id/5973/chapter_4.pdf
+
+												
+
+Bates College (see pages 1.9-1.10): https://www.bates.edu/dof/files/2019/03/Complete-Faculty-Handbook-2018-2019.pdf
+
+
+
+Trinity College (pages 110-111): https://internet3.trincoll.edu/FacMan/FacultyManual.pdf</s>"
+<s>[INST] Wheaton College Bylaws (1st Draft).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Wheaton College Bylaws (1st Working Group Draft).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Wheaton College Bylaws (June Working Draft).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Wheaton College Bylaws - Faculty Draft.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Wheaton College Bylaws - Final Draft (Clean).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Wheaton College Bylaws - Final Draft (Post 5.25 Faculty Meeting).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Wheaton College Bylaws - Final Draft (Post Faculty Meeting).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Wheaton College Bylaws - Final Draft (Tracked).txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Wheaton College Bylaws - Final Draft-Doc to Merge.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Wheaton College Bylaws - Final Draft-JS2.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Wheaton College Bylaws - Final Draft.txt [/INST] </s>
+<s>[INST] Wheaton College Faculty Bylaws (1st Draft)(5.24 Version).txt [/INST] </s>
+"<s>[INST] Whistleblower Protection Policy.txt [/INST] WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION POLICY
+
+
+
+PURPOSE 
+
+The purpose of this policy is to provide a mechanism and encouragement for individuals to report Wrongful Conduct or raise any ethics-related questions or concerns, free from any fear of retaliation.
+
+APPLICABILITY
+
+All members of the Olin College community.
+
+POLICY STATEMENT
+
+Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering is committed to conducting College operations in an ethical, safe and lawful manner and expects all faculty, staff, administration and students to abide by Massachusetts laws and regulations, Federal laws and regulations, and Olin College policies. Accordingly, it is the policy of Olin College to encourage all members of the College community, acting in good faith, to raise any ethics-related questions and report suspected or actual Wrongful Conduct to the College to the Vice President for Administrative Services & Innovation, Director of Human Resources or via the College’s secure reporting tool, EthicsPoint. Information reported will remain confidential and will be impartially evaluated.
+
+This policy is intended to protect any individual associated with the College who makes a good faith disclosure of suspected Wrongful Conduct from retaliation.  College community members who take Retaliatory actions against reporting individuals will be subject to discipline by the College.  Such disciplinary action may include termination, suspension, expulsion, cancellation of the applicable vendor contract, removal from campus, and/or any other action the College deems necessary.
+
+All members of the campus community are obligated to cooperate fully in the investigation of any allegation of Wrongful Conduct.
+
+The College’s prohibition against Retaliation is not intended to prohibit supervisors and the administration from exercising legitimate supervisory responsibilities in the usual scope of their duties.  Moreover, the right of a whistleblower for protection against retaliation does not include immunity for any personal wrongdoing that is alleged and investigated.
+
+
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+Baseless Claim: an allegation made with reckless disregard for its truth or falsity.
+
+Good Faith Report: an allegation of Wrongful Conduct made by an individual who believes that Wrongful Conduct may have occurred.  However, an allegation is not in Good Faith if it is made with reckless disregard for or willful ignorance of facts that would disprove the allegation.
+
+Protected Disclosure: communication about actual or suspected unethical behavior or Wrongful Conduct engaged in by a member of the College community based on a good faith and reasonable belief that the conduct has both occurred and is wrongful under applicable law and/or College policy.
+
+Retaliation: taking adverse action against an individual making a complaint under a College policy or against any person cooperating in the investigation of a complaint under a College policy.  Retaliation includes intimidation, threats, harassment, and other adverse action including adverse job action and adverse academic action against any such complainant or third party.
+
+Wrongful Conduct: violations of applicable state and federal laws or regulations, fraud, accounting irregularities, auditing abuse, falsification or records, improper destruction of College records, conflicts of interest, impeding a College or law enforcement investigation, violation of a government contract or grant requirement, research misconduct, serious violation of College policy, or the use of College property, resources, or authority for personal gain or other non-College related purpose except as provided under College policy.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+I.	Reporting Procedures
+
+Members of the campus community may report suspected Wrongful Conduct or compliance issues anonymously and without fear of retaliation through EthicsPoint. This external service may be accessed by internet (http://olinedu.ethicspoint.com by computer or https://olinedu.navexone.com/ by mobile device) or by calling a toll-free number (844-548-0642).  Reports may also be filed directly with the Director of Human Resources or the Vice President for Administrative Services & Innovation. The identity of individuals making reports will be protected to the extent permitted by law.
+
+II.	Investigation and Resolution
+
+The Vice President for Administrative Services & Innovation as well as the Director of Human Resources will receive a copy of the EthicsPoint report unless they are involved in the complaint, in which case, the Chair of the Audit Committee of the Board of Trustees will receive a copy of the report. All reports will be investigated and appropriate corrective action will be taken if warranted. In addition, all complaints are reported periodically to the Audit Committee of the Board of Trustees.  In addition, if illegal activity is suspected, the case will be referred to local law enforcement.
+
+All information obtained during the investigation will be handled on a “need to know” basis.  In investigating, the College may enlist outside legal, accounting, or other advisors as appropriate to conduct any investigation.
+
+III.	Baseless Claims
+
+Any reporting individual who knowingly reports false information with reckless disregard may be subject to disciplinary action. 
+
+IV.	Other Remedies and Appropriate Agencies
+
+In addition to the internal complaint process set forth above, any member of the campus community who has information concerning allegedly unlawful conduct may contact the appropriate government agency.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] WORKERS COMPENSATION LIGHT DUTY POLICY.txt [/INST] WORKERS COMPENSATION LIGHT DUTY POLICY
+
+Effective Date:
+
+[TBD]
+
+Policy Number:
+
+III – 
+
+Supersedes:
+
+Not Applicable. 
+
+Issuing Authority:
+
+[TBD]
+
+Responsible Officer:
+
+Associate Vice President, Human Resources & Compliance
+
+Applicability:
+
+All Canisius College employees.
+
+History:
+
+
+
+
+
+PURPOSE
+
+The purpose of this Policy is to establish the authority for temporary light-duty assignments, as well as procedures for granting temporary light duty as appropriate to College employees returning to work from a work-related injury or illness.
+
+POLICY
+
+Canisius College provides a light duty program for all employees who sustain a workplace injury or illness. Where availabe, the college will provide a modified or light-duty assignment to an employee with an approved workers’ compensation claim, once the employee has been cleared to temporary modified/restricted work by a licensed medical professional. Placement into a light-duty position is on a temporary basis.  
+
+The approval of a modified or light-duty assignment is optional, and the offer may be modified or ended at any time in accordance with the operational needs of the college, even if the employee’s physician has not released the employee to regular duty. A modified or light-duty assignment may consist of any tasks, full-time or part-time, in an employee's position that the employee is qualified to perform when unable to perform regularly assigned duties.  An employee who is working a modified or light-duty assignment will be held to the same standards of accountability for performance and conduct standards as an employee on regular duty. While performing a modified or light-duty assignment, the employee is responsible for adhering to restrictions imposed by the employee’s treating physician and may not exceed those restrictions until released by the doctor. It is also the employee’s responsibility to immediately inform Human Resources of any changes made to the employee’s work capacity while working a modified or light-duty assignment. If the employee is unable to return to work without restrictions at the end of the modified or light-duty assignment, the employee may be placed on the appropriate leave.
+
+If a modified or light-duty assignment is offered by the college, an employee’s refusal to accept the offer of light duty may affect the employee’s right to workers’ compensation benefits and will be determined by the third-party administrator.  
+
+DEFINITIONS
+
+	Modified/Light-Duty Assignmenta work capacity assigned to an injured worker by a treating physician stating that the employee is not capable of performing their regular job duties, but is capable of working in a modified or restricted capacity within their normal job classification.
+
+	Regular Dutya work capacity given to an injured worker by a treating physician stating that the injured worker is capable of returning to work without restrictions or modifications to their normal job classification.
+
+PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES
+
+An injured employee who sustain a workplace injury or illness is responsible for immediately notifying the employee’s supervisor and Human Resources once the employee’s treating physician releases the employee to perform any type of modified or light-duty work. The employee’s notice must include a signed, written copy of the modifications/light-duty restrictions from the employee’s the treating physician. Upon receipt of the treating physician’s written documentation, Human Resources will coordinate with the employee’s supervisor to determine if a modified or light-duty assignment is available. If such a position exists, the employee will be contacted by the supervisor and expected to return to work on the next scheduled business day. Upon return, the employee will be restricted to performing duties consistent with the modifications/light-duty restrictions identified by the employee’s treating physician. The employee will not be permitted to work outside the prescribed restrictions until cleared to do so by the employee’s treating physician. The employee’s supervisor is responsible for monitoring the tasks being completed by the employee to ensure that the employee is working within their prescribed restrictions.
+
+If a modified or light-duty assignment is not available, the employee will be continued on workers’ compensation leave. Should a light duty assignment become available prior to a change in the employee’s work capacity, the employee will be notified by either the supervisor or Human Resources, and will be expected to return to work on the next business day.
+
+RELATED POLICIES
+
+Benefits Required by State and Federal Law Policy
+Workplace Accidents and Safety Policy</s>"
+"<s>[INST] Workplace Discrimination and Harassment.txt [/INST] Workplace Discrimination and Harassment
+
+Equal employment opportunity is the law. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination and harassment based on race, color, religion, ethnicity, sex and national origin and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits sexual harassment of students and employees in educational programs and activities. Other federal, state, and local laws prohibit various forms of discrimination and harassment. NYIT is committed to providing equal opportunity in accordance with the law, a positive working environment where diversity is embraced, and a workplace free from unlawful discrimination and harassment. For that reason, NYIT has developed a policy on workplace discrimination and harassment and is committed to its enforcement. NYIT's policy applies to all employees throughout the organization, as well as non-employees that you or your employees may come in contact with, including: contractors, consultants, delivery persons, guest speakers, students, vendors, and visitors.
+
+Non-Discrimination
+
+NYIT prohibits all forms of unlawful discrimination. View our Non-Discrimination Statement. 
+
+In accordance with this Statement, all employees will be treated in a manner free of any bias or prejudice prohibited by law. NYIT will insure that all decisions concerning the terms and conditions of employment, including but not limited to recruitment, decisions to hire, promotions, compensation, benefits, transfers, reductions in staff, and rehire, will be made in accordance with the laws defining equal employment opportunity. Consistent with applicable law, no employment decision will be based on: race or color, ethnicity, sex or gender, marital status, pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, age, disability (where otherwise qualified), creed, religion, reproductive health decisions of the employee or their dependent, or any other protected classification.
+
+In accordance with New York State Labor Law 203-E, reproductive health decisions of the employee or their dependent which are protected from discriminatory and retaliatory action include, but are not limited to, using or accessing a particular drug, device or medical service. Employees will never be asked to sign a waiver or other document denying the right to make their own reproductive health care decisions. The institution will not access an employee's personal information regarding the employee's or the employee's dependent's reproductive health decision making without the employee's prior informed affirmative written consent. Employees have the right under New York State law to bring a civil action against the institution for alleged violations of these rights.
+
+Discriminatory Harassment Including Sex Harassment
+
+Discriminatory harassment is defined as subjecting an individual, on the basis of the individual's membership in a protected class, to humiliating, abusive, or threatening conduct that creates an intimidating, hostile, or abusive work environment; alters the conditions of employment; or unreasonably interferes with an individual's work performance. Harassment includes but is not limited to: epithets or slurs; negative stereotyping; threatening, intimidating or hostile acts; denigrating jokes; and display or circulation in the working, learning and living environment (including through email) of written or graphic material. Sexual harassment, which is described in further detail below, is a form of discriminatory harassment. Sexual harassment is also a violation of NYIT’s Gender Based Misconduct Policy.
+
+NYIT's policy prohibits any harassment based on race or color, ethnicity, sex or gender, marital status, pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, age, disability, creed, or religion. Sexual harassment in the workplace includes unwelcome conduct which is either of a sexual nature or which is directed at an individual because of that individuals’ sex or gender (including pregnancy, childbirth and related medical conditions), gender identity or gender expression (including transgender status) and/or sexual orientation when: (1) submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment, (2) submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as a basis for employment decisions affecting such individual, or (3) such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating hostile or offensive working environment. 
+
+Sexual harassment can be verbal (e.g. words, jokes, insults or teasing), visual (e.g., offensive posters, symbols, cartoons, drawings, computer displays, text messages, social media posts or e-mails) or physical conduct (e.g., unwanted touching, physically threatening another) that denigrates or shows hostility or aversion towards an individual based on sex or gender, gender identity, gender expression and/or sexual orientation. 
+
+Examples of conduct that violate this policy include: 
+
+unwelcome sexual advances, flirtations, advances, leering, whistling, touching, pinching, assault, blocking normal movement
+
+requests for sexual favors or demands for sexual favors in exchange for favorable treatment
+
+obscene or vulgar gestures, posters, or comments
+
+sexual jokes, noises, or comments about a person’s body, sexual prowess, sexuality, sexual experience, or sexual deficiencies
+
+propositions, or suggestive or insulting comments of a sexual nature
+
+derogatory cartoons, posters, and drawings
+
+sexually-explicit e-mails, text messages, posts or voicemails
+
+conversation about one’s own or someone else’s sex life
+
+conduct or comments consistently targeted at only one gender, even if the content is not sexual 
+
+teasing or other conduct directed toward a person because of the person’s gender
+
+sex stereotyping
+
+Sexual harassment may involve individuals of the same or different sex. The complainant does not necessarily have to be the person harassed but could be anyone affected by the offensive conduct.
+
+Reporting Policy Violations
+
+If you are an employee and believe that this policy has been violated you are encouraged to promptly report the offensive conduct immediately to the Office of Human Resources, and in the case of Gender Based Misconduct, to the Title IX Coordinator, or to any supervisor with whom you feel comfortable. Complaints that a student has engaged in offensive conduct should be reported immediately to the Office of Student Life, which has the authority to commence student disciplinary proceedings according to disciplinary procedures set forth in the Student Code of Conduct. In the case of Gender Based Misconduct, reports involving students should be made to the Title IX Coordinator. Every supervisor who learns of any employee’s concern about conduct in violation of this policy, whether in a formal or informal complaint, must immediately report the issues raised to the designated offices set forth above.
+
+Reports may be made orally or in writing. Written complaints may be submitted internally using the complaint form appearing at the end of this policy. 
+
+Confidentiality and Non-retaliation
+
+Confidentiality will be protected to the maximum extent possible, consistent with a fair and thorough investigation and NYIT’s obligation to ensure the safety of the community. The investigation of such complaints will generally require limited disclosure on a need-to-know basis. 
+
+Retaliation is adverse conduct taken because an individual reported an actual or perceived violation of this policy, opposed practices prohibited by this policy, participated in the reporting and investigation process set forth in this policy or testified or assisted in an investigation or proceeding involving an actual or perceived violation of this policy. Adverse conduct includes, but is not limited to any action that would keep an employee from reporting discrimination or discriminatory harassment; shunning and avoiding an individual who reports such misconduct; express or implied threats or intimidation intended to prevent an individual from reporting such misconduct; and denying employment benefits because an applicant or employee reported or encouraged another employee to report under this policy or participated in the reporting and investigation process. 
+
+Retaliation against individuals who complain of discrimination or harassment or who testify or assist in any investigation or proceeding involving discrimination or harassment is unlawful and prohibited by this policy. Offending employees will be subjected to appropriate disciplinary action, up to and including suspension or termination of employment. 
+
+Complaint/Grievance Investigation
+
+All complaints or grievances reported as set forth above or information about suspected discrimination or discriminatory harassment will be investigated. NYIT will initiate an investigation within 5 business days of receipt of the complaint or grievance and will complete investigations with reasonable promptness, depending upon the complexity of the matter and the number and availability of witnesses, but generally in no more than 60 days. NYIT will keep parties abreast of the status of the investigation and its anticipated completion, and will notify the parties of the outcome of the investigation within 10 business days of the completion of the investigation. All persons involved, including complainants, witnesses and alleged perpetrators will be accorded adequate procedures to protect their rights to a fair and impartial investigation, including the ability to offer their own evidence and identify relevant witnesses. Any employee may be required to cooperate as needed in an investigation. Upon receipt of a complaint, Human Resources (or the Compliance & Title IX Office, where appropriate) will conduct an immediate review of the allegations and will determine if any interim actions are appropriate. If the complaint is oral, the complaint will be documented by NYIT.
+
+The accused will receive notice of the investigation, and both the complainant and the accused will be interviewed as part of the investigation, except in rare circumstances where either party may be unavailable or refuse to be interviewed. The complainant and the accused will have the opportunity to provide witnesses and evidence, and NYIT will conduct interviews and review documents or other information the investigator believes are relevant. The investigation will be documented by NYIT. Upon conclusion of the investigation, both parties will be notified of the final determination and any appropriate sanctions. NYIT will take all necessary steps to prevent further harassment and to correct its discriminatory effects on the complainant and others, if appropriate.
+
+Upon completion of the investigation, NYIT will determine whether the policy has been violated based upon its reasonable, good-faith evaluation of the information gathered during the investigation. NYIT will inform the complainant and the accused of the results of the investigation.
+
+Any employee found to have engaged in conduct in violation of this policy will be considered to have engaged in employee misconduct. Individuals who violate this policy (which includes supervisory or management personnel who fail to report or knowingly allow sexually harassing behavior to continue) will be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination from employment. Individuals who engage in conduct that rises to the level of a violation of law can be held personally liable for such conduct. Nothing shall limit the right of the institution to remove an employee immediately from job responsibilities, duties, or from the premises in the event that a violent or egregious act is claimed, or if the health and safety of NYIT community members is at risk. Nothing shall prevent the institution or any of its representatives from reporting criminal or violent acts or threats to civil or law enforcement agencies in order to protect the safety and well-being of members of the NYIT community. Such a report may be made regardless of whether a formal complaint has been submitted.
+
+If after investigating any complaint of discrimination or discriminatory harassment, the institution determines that knowingly false information has been provided, disciplinary action may be taken against the employee who has knowingly provided false information.
+
+Legal Protections And External Remedies
+
+Discrimination and discriminatory harassment (including retaliation) is not only prohibited by NYIT but is also prohibited by state, federal, and, where applicable, local law. Aside from the internal process at NYIT, employees may also choose to pursue legal remedies with the following governmental entities at any time. Harassers may also be subject to individual liability. 
+
+New York State Division of Human Rights (DHR)
+
+The DHR enforces the New York State Human Rights Law (HRL), codified as N.Y. Executive Law, art. 15, § 290 et seq., which protects employees, paid or unpaid interns and non-employees regardless of immigration status from unlawful discrimination, harassment or retaliation. The DHR has the power to award relief, which varies but may include requiring an employer to take action to stop the harassment, or redress the damage caused, including paying monetary damages, attorney’s fees and civil fines.
+
+DHR’s main office contact information is: 
+
+NYS Division of Human Rights 
+One Fordham Plaza, Fourth Floor 
+Bronx, New York 10458 
+718.741.8400 
+dhr.ny.gov
+
+United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
+
+The EEOC enforces federal anti-discrimination laws, including Title VII of the 1964 federal Civil Rights Act (codified as 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.). If an employee believes he/she has been subjected to harassment, he/she can file a “Charge of Discrimination.” The EEOC has district, area, and field offices where complaints can be filed. The EEOC does not hold hearings or award relief, but may take other action including pursuing cases in federal court on behalf of complaining parties. Federal courts may award remedies if discrimination is found to have occurred.
+
+The EEOC can be contacted by calling 1.800.669.4000 (1.800.669.6820 (TTY)), visiting its website at eeoc.gov or via email at info@eeoc.gov.
+
+Local Protections
+
+Many localities also enforce laws protecting individuals from discrimination and discriminatory harassment, including Nassau County and New York City. Employees may be able to file complaints in these localities.
+
+Contact the Local Police Department
+
+If the harassment involves unwanted physical touching, coerced physical confinement or coerced sex acts, the conduct may also constitute a crime. In such cases, employees may contact the local police department or, in an emergency, dial 911.</s>"
+"<s>[INST] [TG_Reviewed]ARTICLE II - Wheaton College Bylaws (Recommendations to SG)(12.22) - RP.txt [/INST] Article II.	Faculty Status, Contracts, and Initial Appointments
+
+Faculty Status – Types of Faculty Appointments
+
+The College appoints faculty members to one of the following types of faculty appointments:
+
+Full-time Teaching Faculty 
+
+Tenure-Line Faculty
+
+	Tenure Track Faculty
+
+	Tenured Faculty
+
+	Professor of the Practice
+
+Visiting Faculty 
+
+The College also reserves the right to assign faculty status to certain administrators (see Article II, Section 1.3) and to acknowledge faculty members who have separated from service with the College following distinguished careers with the honorary designation of Associate Professor or Professor Emeritus (Emerita) (see Article II, Section 1.4).
+
+1.1. Full-Time Teaching Faculty
+
+Full-time faculty teaching appointments are made to either a Tenure-Line or Professor of the Practice position in one of the College’s academic departments or program areas.  Regardless of the type of appointment line, members of the full-time teaching faculty have duties equivalent to a full-time workload (see the Employee Handbook for Faculty) in accordance with the duties and responsibilities delineated in the faculty member’s appointment contract.
+
+Members of the full-time teaching faculty enjoy the rights and protections set forth in these Faculty Bylaws.  Moreover, they are afforded full voting privileges at faculty and academic department or program meetings.  They also may serve on standing and ad hoc committees and task forces for which they are eligible.  Full-time teaching faculty are expected to adhere to the responsibilities and policies outlined in the Employee Handbook for Faculty and these Faculty Bylaws, as well as observe other College policies applicable to them to the extent they do not violate academic freedom.
+
+To be appointed to the full-time teaching faculty, candidates must possess the appropriate academic credentials and/or equivalent professional experience to teach courses in their academic discipline(s).
+
+Tenure-Line Faculty
+
+Tenure-Line faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who either hold a Tenure-Track probationary appointment or Tenured (continuous) appointment.
+
+Tenure-Track Faculty
+
+Tenure-Track faculty are full-time teaching faculty members who normally hold probationary appointments to one of two academic ranks: Instructor or Assistant Professor.  In rare circumstances, an initial appointment may be made at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.
+
+Tenure-Track faculty are eligible to stand for tenure (see Article IV, Section 4) at the conclusion of the candidate’s probationary period.
+
+Tenured Faculty
+
+Tenured faculty are full-time teaching faculty who hold tenured (continued) appointments (see Article IV, Section 4) at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.  
+
+Professors of the Practice
+
+Professors of the Practice are members of the full-time teaching faculty who possess expertise and achievements in a relevant field of instruction.  Duties entail the equivalent of a standard full-time teaching load (see Article IV, Section 1.1.1) and service activities (see Article IV, Section 1.3).  Specific responsibilities entailing course equivalencies will be detailed in individual appointment letters.
+
+Individuals appointed to the Professor of the Practice line are assigned the academic title of Professor of the Practice or Senior Professor of the Practice.  
+
+Professors of the Practice share equal standing in departments and programs with their Tenure-Line colleagues and have the following rights:
+
+Voting rights in faculty and department/program meetings
+
+Protection under the standards of notification for non-reappointment
+
+Eligibility for service on committees
+
+Access to and protection under the grievance procedures
+
+Academic freedom
+
+Faculty benefits and raises 
+
+Access to faculty development funds
+
+Appointment to the Professor of the Practice line, however, does not include eligibility for tenure, promotion to any tenure-seeking academic rank, or sabbatical leave, regardless of length of employment. 
+
+Professors of the Practice are offered initial annual term contracts, followed by eligibility for multi-year contracts of two- and three-year durations as specified in the Duration of Appointment section of these Faculty Bylaws (see Article II, Section 2.2.1).
+
+Professor of the Practice appointments must be externally posted and searched nationally through faculty search committees with approval by the Provost in accordance with Article II, Section 3.1.  In all instances, Professors of the Practice are subject to the evaluation policies and procedures described in Article IV, Section 2.3.
+
+Professors of the Practice may apply for open Tenure-Track positions.  If selected and appointed to a Tenure-Track position, credit for time spent as a Professor of the Practice at Wheaton College for promotion in rank and tenure review purposes will be negotiated and determined by the Provost in consultation with the chair of the Tenure Committee.
+
+Visiting Faculty
+
+Visiting Faculty are appointed for a fixed term on a full, part-time, or per-course basis to carry out instructional and any other responsibilities as delineated in the individual faculty member’s appointment letter.  Full-time Visiting Faculty may be appointed annually, for a semester, or a year, for a period not to exceed two years.  
+
+The visiting designation is used with one of the four academic ranks reserved for Tenure-Line Faculty (Visiting Instructor, Visiting Assistant Professor, Visiting Associate Professor, or Visiting Professor). 
+
+Visiting Faculty are not eligible for tenure, promotion, or sabbatical leave; however, they have the same academic freedom and access to and protection under the grievance procedures as their Tenure-Line colleagues.  See Article V of the Faculty Bylaws for additional information regarding the terms, rights, and responsibilities applicable to Visiting Faculty.
+
+Visiting Faculty may apply for open Tenure-Track positions.  If selected and appointed to a Tenure-Track position, credit for time spent as a Visiting Faculty member at Wheaton College for promotion in rank and tenure review purposes will be negotiated and determined by the Provost in consultation with the chair of the Tenure Committee.
+
+
+
+Faculty Legislation Visiting Faculty Definition (Part One, Section III.a(2))
+
+A faculty member is considered visiting when the individual’s appointment (full-time) is for a period normally not to exceed one year.  [November 5, 2004, p. 4486; May 4, 2007, p. 4640]  
+
+For such appointments, the Department Chair may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73]  
+
+In all cases where a faculty member is retained for more than one year on a full-time basis – whether the individual has a multiple year contract or a one-year contract that is being renewed – the Department Chair shall annually review the individual’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to do. A copy of this evaluation shall be shared with the faculty member and placed in the individual’s faculty personnel file.  [November 5, 2004, p. 4486] 
+
+Administrative Faculty
+
+Pursuant to Article I, Section 1 of these Faculty Bylaws, administrative faculty include administrators who serve in one of the following positions: 
+
+College President 
+
+Provost 
+
+Dean of Students 
+
+Dean of Advising
+
+Dean of Library Services
+
+Associate Librarian
+
+Dean of Admission
+
+Registrar
+
+Administrative Faculty are considered administrators for employment purposes, under terms and conditions of employment as stated in the College’s staff personnel policies.  Administrative Faculty have the privilege of vote and voice in accordance with the provisions stated in Article I, Section 2.  
+
+Faculty Rank and Retreat Rights for Administrative Faculty
+
+The President has the authority to assign Administrative Faculty a faculty rank that was earned through a faculty review at a comparable accredited or internationally recognized institution.  At its discretion, the Board of Trustees may assign an appropriate faculty rank, either at the time of appointment or subsequently.  Administrative Faculty holding academic rank are ineligible for promotion in rank during their terms of administrative service. 
+
+Administrative Faculty who are not already tenured faculty members at Wheaton College do not ordinarily receive tenure during their administrative term.  However, the President or Board of Trustees has the authority to assign retreat rights at the time of initial appointment.  
+
+Administrative Faculty hired with retreat rights are eligible to assume a faculty position and, in some cases, subsequently stand for tenure after the probationary period.  Prior to such an action, the President or Provost will consult with the relevant department or program to enable the department or program to review the candidate’s academic credentials, to meet with the candidate (if possible), and to make a recommendation.  When an Administrative Faculty member is granted retreat rights, the President will state in the initial appointment letter the conditions under which the individual may join the faculty at the conclusion of the administrative faculty appointment.
+
+Faculty Members Who Accept Administrative Appointments
+
+Full-time teaching faculty accepting full-time administrative appointments move automatically to the administrative appointment at the same rank classification.  Tenured faculty retain also tenure while holding the administrative appointment. 
+
+At the time of the initial administrative appointment, the President (or President’s designee) will state in the administrative appointment contract the conditions under which the person will return to the full-time teaching faculty and whether the time spent as an administrator will count toward promotion, tenure, or the next sabbatical leave.  Faculty members holding full-time administrative appointments who continue teaching and research or creative activities are eligible for certain academic promotions during their terms of administrative service and as assessed by the relevant faculty committees governing the process.
+
+
+
+Faculty Emeriti
+
+Emerita or emeritus status honors a full-time teaching faculty member's distinguished service and contributions during a career at the College, as well as the faculty member’s interest in an ongoing and meaningful connection with Wheaton.  
+
+A retiring full-time teaching faculty member’s department/program may request emerita or emeritus status for that colleague via a letter from the Department Chair or Program Coordinator to the Provost.  That letter should indicate that the department or program supports the request and outline the reasons why the department believes the faculty member’s contributions merit emeriti status.
+
+Following the recommendation of the department/program, the Provost will review the received nomination and make a written recommendation to the Board of Trustees to either confer/not confer emerita/emeritus status.  This recommendation shall not be subject to appeal.  The Board of Trustees officially confers emeritus status.  
+
+Faculty who retire at the Associate Professor level may, at the Provost’s discretion, be recommended for emeritus status.  The Chair or Program Coordinator’s letter to the Provost may make such a request, along with any recommendations for title.
+
+Emeriti Faculty are not considered employees of the College and therefore are not entitled to benefits.  They are considered members of the broader Wheaton community. and are expected to conduct themselves in accordance with College policy.  As members of the broader Wheaton community, Emeriti Faculty are welcome to participate in all College assemblies, colloquia, and other academic events.
+
+Emeriti Status Recognitions
+
+Emeriti Faculty are entitled to the following recognitions:
+
+Award of an inscribed seal of the College.
+
+Listing in the College Catalog and other College publications that collectively list the Faculty.
+
+The right to participate in College events and social functions with other faculty colleagues.
+
+Emeriti Status Privileges
+
+Emeriti faculty are entitled to the following privileges:
+
+Regular and on-line library and learning management software privileges it in accordance with applicable licensing agreements. 
+
+Email address and support including listing in Wheaton College directories. 
+
+Membership to athletic, fitness, and recreational facilities on campus. 
+
+Participation in College public ceremonies. 
+
+Revocation of Status
+
+Once awarded, emeritus status continues in perpetuity unless the recipient either requests to have status rescinded or violates the intent and spirit of emeritus status by engaging in serious dishonorable conduct in violation of law, rule, or policy and/or causes harm to the College’s reputation. 
+
+To revoke emeriti status without the consent of the individual, a written petition must be made by a member of the College to the President, and subsequently to the Board of Trustees, which has the final authority to revoke the individual’s emeritus status.  Actions or conduct protected by academic freedom and unlawful discrimination shall not be used to revoke emeriti status.
+
+Academic Rank and Faculty Titles
+
+The College recognizes the following academic ranks and titles: Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor, Professor of the Practice, Senior Professor of the Practice, and Visiting Faculty .  [May 13, 1963, p. 2715; Minutes of the Board of Trustees meeting, October 26, 1963, pp. 1055-57; November 18, 1963, pp. 2728-29] 
+
+Eight specific full-time teaching positions are titled Associate Faculty, as explained in Section O. [November 3, 2006, p. 4608] 
+
+	At the time of initial appointment, the President or Provost shall approve the faculty rank for all Full-Time Teaching faculty after receiving and considering the recommendation from the search committee.  Appointment to the rank of Associate Professor or Professor is subject to a formal vote of approval by the Board of Trustees.   
+
+	Initial faculty rank is assigned on the basis of the information below, which indicates the minimum qualifications for appointment to the rank.
+
+Instructor
+
+Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or equivalent terminal degree from an accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Instructors.  Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Assistant Professor effective the following academic year.
+
+Assistant Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility. In addition to academic or exceptional alternative equivalent experience qualifications, applicants seeking an initial appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor must demonstrate qualities that indicate potential and promise as an effective educator.
+
+Associate Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Associate Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility and, generally, six (6) years of full–time ranked teaching or a minimum of five (5) years of full–time teaching at the rank of Assistant Professor.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.1.1).
+
+Professor
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the rank of Professor is the appropriate terminal degree from a comparable accredited post-secondary institution or foreign institution or its professional equivalent in a discipline directly related to the individual's area of responsibility.  Appointment further requires that the person meet the standards for promotion to this rank (see Article IV, Section 3.2).
+
+Professor of the Practice
+
+The minimum qualification for appointment to the academic title of Professor of the Practice is the appropriate degree from a regionally accredited post-secondary institution or comparable foreign institution or the equivalent professional expertise and achievement in a relevant field of professional practice.  
+
+Faculty Contracts
+
+A faculty contract is a written mutual agreement between an individual granted faculty status and the College.  The contractual terms (appointment type, academic department/program, rank, salary, length of appointment, etc.) of every faculty appointment will be stated in writing only by the President or the Provost to the faculty member.  Academic departments and/or programs authorized to fill an open faculty position shall recommend candidates for appointment by the President or the Provost.  Under no circumstance is a faculty member or College employee authorized to offer an appointment or to enter a faculty appointment contract.  Any subsequent extensions or modifications of an appointment, and any special understandings, or any notices incumbent upon either party to provide, will be stated or confirmed in writing, and a copy will be given to the faculty member.
+
+Types of Faculty Contracts
+
+The following types of contracts are issued to individuals granted faculty status at Wheaton College:
+
+Tenure Track Contracts, Probationary Appointments
+
+Tenure-Line faculty members eligible for tenure receive tenure-track contracts and hold probationary appointments until they either receive tenure or separate from the College.  A probationary appointment is made with the understanding that both the College and the probationary faculty member will engage in a period of mutual evaluation—the probationary period—leading to the tenure decision.
+
+Faculty members eligible for tenure may be appointed to the rank of Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor, upon consideration of their qualifications and experience relative to the standards for appointment in rank. 
+
+A tenure-track appointment is normally renewable up to a total of seven (7) years of full-time service—i.e., a maximum of six (6) years prior to and including the year of the tenure decision, plus one (1) additional terminal year in the case of a negative tenure decision—unless the probationary period is either accelerated or extended in accordance with Article IV, Sections 4.1.2 and 4.1.3, respectively.  
+
+Faculty members holding tenure-track contracts undergo annual and reappointment reviews as specified in Article IV, Section 2.2.  A faculty member undergoing an unsuccessful tenure review will receive notice and will be allowed to complete a final year of the probationary appointment pursuant to a terminal contract (see Section 2.1.4 below).
+
+Tenured Contracts
+
+Tenured contracts are awarded to Full-time Tenure Line Faculty who have attained tenured status (see Article IV, Section 4).  The granting of tenure can only be effected by the procedures specified in the College’s Tenure Policy (see Article IV, Section 4) and upon the affirmative vote of the Board of Trustees.  De facto tenure is not awarded at Wheaton College.
+
+A tenured faculty member has the contractual right to continuous appointments until the faculty member resigns, is dismissed for adequate cause (see Article IV, Section 8.2.1), or is terminated as a result of a reduction in force due to a bona fide financial exigency or program discontinuation (see Article IV, Section 8.2.2 and 8.2.3, respectively).
+
+Term Contracts
+
+Term contracts are offered to Professors of the Practice and Visiting Faculty and are limited to the term of employment outlined in the appointment contract.  Subject to College need, another term contract may be offered subject to the limitations set forth in these Faculty Bylaws.  Issuance of another term contract is solely within the discretion of the College and no other procedures apply.  
+
+Terminal Contracts
+
+A Terminal contract is the final annual contract issued to Tenure Track faculty whose contract will not be renewed or who have been denied tenure.
+
+Duration of Appointments and Notice of Termination
+
+The College will observe the following guidelines for rank and duration of appointments and notice of terminations:
+
+Duration of Appointments
+
+Candidates without the Ph.D. degree or its professional equivalent will ordinarily be appointed Instructors.  Those who have completed their professional training will ordinarily be appointed Assistant Professors.  Instructors who complete their training during an appointment will be promoted to Assistant Professor effective the following academic year. 
+
+The initial term of appointment for Tenure-Track Faculty will be either for one or two years as set forth in the individual faculty member’s appointment contract.
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	
+
+	Professors of the Practice will receive one-year appointments in the first two years of appointment.  At the end of the second annual contract year, a Professor of the Practice will be considered for a two-year contract.  When the fiscal and programmatic needs of the College permit, a summative review by the Committee on Faculty Scholarship and Promotions at the end of the two-year contract will assess eligibility for a three-year term contract.  Review at the end of the three-year contract will determine eligibility for a successive three-year contract.  See Article IV, Section 2.3.2 for additional information.  Overall, a Professor of the Practice’s employment is governed by the individual’s appointment contract.  The College may elect not to re-appoint the faculty member at the College’s discretion, regardless of the positive outcome of any review, if curricular needs change and/or enrollment declines.
+
+	Visiting Faculty will receive appointments on a per-course, semester, or annual basis. [February 4, 2005, p. 4492] 
+
+	Replacements for faculty members on leave and other temporary personnel will receive appointments of appropriate rank and duration. 
+
+Regardless of rank or duration of previous appointments, any non-tenure track member of the faculty or Professor of the Practice with two or more years of service at Wheaton may be given a one-year terminal contract.  In such a case, the standards of notification as described in Article II, Section 2.2.2 below will be observed. 
+
+Notice of Termination
+
+In decisions regarding reappointment or non-reappointment of full-time Tenure Track and Professors of the Practice faculty members, care will be taken to observe the following standards of notification (or salary in lieu of notice) endorsed in 1964 as the official policy of the American Association of University Professors: 
+
+Not later than March 1 of the first academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if a one-year appointment ends during the academic year, at least three months in advance of its termination. 
+
+Not later than December 15 of the second academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of the year; or, if an initial two-year appointment ends during an academic year, at least six months in advance of its termination. 
+
+At least twelve months before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years of service. 
+
+The notice provisions set forth above do not apply to Tenure-Track faculty and Professors of the Practice that have been issued a Terminal Appointment contract.
+
+Annual Contract Period
+
+The period of employment under a full-time faculty contract shall be for the 12-month period beginning July 1 and ending June 30, during which the individual shall receive salary and benefits. The contract will cover the duties associated with the position performed during the period which begins the week before classes begin through the week after Commencement and is known as the ""academic year."" 
+
+Primary Area of Appointment
+
+All faculty appointment contracts designate a department or academic program as the faculty member’s primary faculty appointment location.  It is from this department(s) or program(s) that recommendations for reappointment, promotion, tenure, and other actions concerning a Full-Time Teaching Faculty member are initiated.  A Full-Time Teaching Faculty member’s primary faculty appointment may be changed by the President (or President’s designee) to meet the curricular and organizational needs of the College.  
+
+Joint Appointments 
+
+When a faculty member’s contractual responsibilities require a significant portion of teaching and professional activity responsibilities be devoted to either multiple departments, interdisciplinary programs, areas of instruction, or other academic entities engaged in or responsible for the delivery of the curriculum, the faculty member may receive a joint appointment to a department and a specified program or to two departments.  A joint appointment may be established at any stage of faculty employment. 
+
+In making a joint appointment, a primary and secondary department or program will be clearly designated by the Provost in the faculty member’s appointment contract. Such designation may be revised at any stage of employment by the President (or the President’s designee) to meet the curricular or organizational needs of the College.  The primary department or program will serve as the faculty member’s administrative home, which will take the lead responsibility on personnel issues, central human resources reporting, appointment, promotions, tenure, coordination of annual performance review, conflict resolution, and changes in employment.  Often, but not always, the administrative home will be the department or program with the higher appointment fraction.
+
+The nature of a joint appointment varies and the assignment of duties in the secondary department or program will differ by department/program and candidate.  The details of the assignment of duties, the allocation of salary, departmental/program governance rights, and provision for office and laboratory space as applicable to both the primary and secondary departments/program will be communicated in a signed written memorandum of understanding signed by the two Department Chairs/Program Coordinators, the faculty member, and the Provost.  Additionally, negotiated changes to those details will be evidenced in a signed memorandum of understanding.
+
+The Department Chair/Program Coordinator of the secondary department/program must provide input for every evaluation for a jointly appointed faculty member.  In the case of promotion or tenure review, the secondary Department Chair/Program Coordinator must provide a written evaluation describing the nature and extent of the candidate’s involvement in, and contribution to, the secondary department/program.  In the faculty member’s tenure application, it is important to document how the candidate’s time is being spent, and contributions to each department/program need to be clearly documented.
+
+It is recognized that new opportunities, changes in faculty interest, faculty performance, changes in the College’s curricular needs or enrollments or other issues with the joint appointment may require review, renegotiation, or discontinuation of the original joint appointment.  If possible, a faculty member with a joint appointment will have the option of retreating to a full appointment at the primary department or program.  If retreat is not a possibility, the Provost is responsible for ensuring that the faculty member is made fully aware of the existing options.  Further, a short-term plan must be put in place to ensure a smooth transition with minimum disruption to the initiatives, projects, and teaching, that were the responsibility of the faculty member with the joint appointment.
+
+
+
+Recruitment and Appointment
+
+Full-Time Teaching Faculty 
+
+Vacancies shall be advertised in as many ways as are necessary in order to obtain a suitable pool of applicants in keeping with Wheaton's policy as an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer; for example: in professional journals, job rosters, etc.  Advertisements shall include a statement that the College is an Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Employer. The Department or Program/Search Committee may also want to write to graduate schools. 
+
+For legal purposes, records pertaining to the hiring process shall be retained in accordance with the College’s Record Retention schedule.  
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Normally departments/programs will establish their own search committee.  In the exceptional case of no continuing tenured member, the Provost will consult with the Advisory Committee.  The Provost will then ask the Committee on Committees and Agenda to set up the search committee. 
+
+The Search Committee shall review applications to determine who should be interviewed. Candidates may be interviewed at professional meetings to narrow the field. All members of the Search Committee will receive anti-bias training.  Moreover, the committee chair is expected to consult with the Office of Human Resources for interview guidance.
+
+After consulting with the Provost, the Chair of the Search Committee shall invite several candidates to visit the College.  The candidates shall be interviewed by members of the department, the Provost and/or the President, and students when possible.  During these interviews, candidates will be notified that any job offer is contingent upon successful completion of employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks, as well documentation of U.S. citizenship or upon maintaining the appropriate visa status and work authorization.  Moreover, notice of the availability of the College’s Annual Security Report will be provided to the interviewee, if the position was externally advertised.
+
+The Search Committee Chair shall send to the Provost a written recommendation from the Search Committee which shall state its majority opinion and indicate any disagreements within the Search Committee.  The written recommendation shall verify that the candidate’s preparation and qualifications are appropriate to the nature of the teaching assignment.  Candidate qualifications shall normally be measured, as applicable to the position, by advanced degrees held, evidence of scholarship, advanced study, creative activities, and teaching abilities, as well as relevant professional experience, training, and credentials. Exceptions may be made for individuals who do not hold advanced degrees but who are considered by the College to possess other demonstrated competencies and professional achievements that provide evidence to support excellent teaching and student achievement in the discipline.
+
+If the Provost or the President has reservations about following the recommendation for appointment, one or both shall consult with the Chair and may request that the Search Committee continue the search process. 
+
+If the recommendation for appointment is approved by the President or the Provost, after consultation with the Chair, the Provost shall make a written offer of appointment to the appointee, stating the precise terms and conditions of the appointment.  Such offer shall refer to, and be accompanied by, either a copy or a link to these Faculty Bylaws as then in effect.  In the written offer, the Provost may, after receiving and considering recommendations from the search committee, award credit toward the fulfillment of promotion and/or tenure eligibility based upon the candidate’s past professional experience at another higher education institution.  The decision to grant prior service credit takes into account the relevancy of the prior service to the College’s needs, the type of institution(s) at which service was provided, and the nature of the position being filled by the appointee.  Evidence as to the quality of the prior service will be entered into the candidate’s file. 
+
+The offer is contingent upon verification of the candidate’s academic credentials or alternative experience qualifications credentials and the successful completion of requisite employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks.  Moreover, an initial written offer of appointment to the rank of Associate Professor or Professor shall also indicate that the offer is subject to a formal vote of approval by the Board of Trustees, action on which is pending.  Notice of such Trustee action shall be sent to the candidate. 
+
+Each such offer shall also specify that it may be accepted only in writing.  If it is so accepted, the President or the Provost shall furnish copies of the offer and acceptance to the Chair for the department or program's records.  All data submitted by appointee in connection with the application for appointment shall be retained in the Provost's records indefinitely. 
+
+As soon as a vacancy has been filled, the Chair shall so advise the unsuccessful candidate(s) selected to be interviewed in writing. Human Resources will advise all other applicants.
+
+Note: Since years in academic rank are calculated based on full academic years, in the rare instance that a Tenure-Line Faculty and Professors of the Practice joins the College after November 1, the faculty member’s first year in rank or title will be calculated starting with the succeeding full academic year.
+
+Visiting Faculty
+
+A faculty member is considered visiting when his or her appointment (full-time) is for a period normally not to exceed one year. [November 5, 2004, p. 4486; May 4, 2007, p. 4640] 
+
+For such Visiting Faculty appointments, the Department Chair or Program Coordinator may modify the usual recruitment and appointment procedures set forth above in Article II, Section 3.1, provided that a suitable pool of candidates is obtained. A suitable pool might be as few as two persons or less under some circumstances. [March 6, 1992, pp. 3872-73].  In all instances, however, the Department Chair or Program Coordinator shall verify that the final candidate’s preparation and qualifications are appropriate to the nature of the teaching assignment.
+
+Candidates for a Visiting Faculty position that are selected for interviews will be notified that any job offer is contingent upon successful completion of employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks, as well documentation of U.S. citizenship or upon maintaining the appropriate visa status and work authorization.  Moreover, notice of the availability of the College’s Annual Security Report will be provided to the interviewee, if the position was externally advertised.  Any offer of appointment is contingent upon verification of the candidate’s academic credentials or alternative experience qualifications credentials and the successful completion of requisite employment eligibility verification, background, and reference checks.
+
+In all cases where a Visiting Faculty member is retained for more than one year on a full-time basis – whether the faculty member has a multiple year contract, a one-year contract that is being renewed for another term or a new per course term contract – the Department Chair/Program Coordinator shall annually review the faculty member’s teaching performance and whatever other services the faculty member in question was contracted to do.  A copy of this evaluation shall be shared with the faculty member and placed in the faculty member’s faculty personnel file. 
+
+[November 5, 2004, p. 4486] 
+
+Appointment of Foreign Nationals
+
+The College welcomes international faculty of high qualifications and assists faculty members whenever possible in securing visas and permanent residency.  
+
+Non-U.S. nationals who have secured a faculty position must maintain current legal status in the appropriate visa category and notify the College of any anticipated change of status. Moreover, Tenure-Line Faculty are expected to seek permanent residency as soon as possible after beginning their service to the College.  The loss of appropriate authorization to work in the United States may result in automatic termination of the faculty appointment, regardless of contractual status or type.
+
+All international faculty are requested to consult with Human Resources before accepting salaries, stipends, or honoraria from any other institution to ensure compliance with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and Department of State (J-visa program) regulations.
+
+		Wheaton College Faculty Bylaws – Page 33</s>"