The fourth meeting of the Faculty Senate for 1998-99 was convened in 25 Law Building, Minneapolis campus, on Thursday, April 22, 1999, at 3:52 p.m. Coordinate campuses were linked by telephone. Checking or signing the roll as present were 115 voting faculty/academic professional members, 1 ex officio member, and 9 nonmembers. President Mark Yudof presided.

Agenda Items I and II are considered to be noncontroversial or "housekeeping" in nature and are offered as a "Consent Agenda" to be taken up as a single item with one vote. Any item will be taken up separately at the request of a senator. A simple majority is required for approval.

The Faculty Senate minutes are available on the Web at the following URL:

MOTION:

The Faculty Senate authorizes the Faculty Consultative Committee to make technical changes in all Faculty Senate policies and practices to accommodate the change to semesters, with the understanding that such changes will be clerical only, and that any changes of a substantive nature, or that are subsequently in need of clarification, will be brought to the Faculty Senate for action.

SARA EVANS, Chair
FACULTY CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE

DISCUSSION:

The Consent Agenda was approved with no discussion.

APPROVED

MOTION:

To approve the following amendments to Faculty Tenure: (deletions are in [brackets] and additions are in CAPS)

Amendment to section 5.3:

Section 5.3 [Definition] CREDITING of Academic Year. A faculty member is considered to have served an academic year if the appointee serves at least [two-thirds time for three quarters or full time for two quarters of the nine month academic year or any equivalent combination] TWO-THIRDS TIME DURING THE FACULTY MEMBER'S ACADEMIC YEAR APPOINTMENT.

Unless otherwise agreed in writing, periods during which a faculty member is on [paid leave for professional development (single quarter leave, sabbatical furlough, etc.)] A SINGLE SEMESTER OR OTHER PAID PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT LEAVE or IS on leave to teach or conduct research at another academic institution count as service, but periods in which the faculty member is on sick or disability leave or on leave in some non-faculty capacity do not count as service.

If a faculty member transfers to a position [in the non-] OUTSIDE OF THE regular faculty, the time spent in the [non-regular] OTHER position does not count for the purpose of this section.

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

Amendment to Section 11:

Section 11. Fiscal Emergency

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11.61(b) A good faith effort should be made to use temporary suspensions or voluntary furloughs rather than terminations. In this third stage, the Board of Regents may impose the temporary or permanent reduction of faculty compensation or the reduction of fringe benefits, in excess of those approved in the second stage. Suspensions without pay for [one quarter] NO MORE THAN ONE-THIRD OF THE ANNUAL APPOINTMENT in any year may be ordered in accordance with objective criteria, provided that faculty members are given at least six months notice.

COMMENT ON AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 5.3:

(1) The current language in the first paragraph provides that if a faculty member serves for two-thirds of a nine-month academic year divided into quarters, however accomplished, the academic year counts for tenure eligibility. The proposed change accomplishes the same objective under semesters by specifying that an academic year (as defined by the faculty member's appointment type) counts towards tenure eligibility if the faculty member has worked the equivalent of two-thirds time for that academic year, no matter how accomplished. The title was also modified because the section does not actually define "academic year," it specifies rules for the crediting of academic years towards tenure.

(2) The change in the second paragraph removes reference to single quarter leaves and conforms the terminology to the recently adopted policy on professional development leaves.

(3) The change in the third paragraph conforms the language to other portions of Faculty Tenure, removing references to "non-regular" faculty.

COMMENT ON AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 11:

Section 11.61(b) provides the rules governing the suspensions of faculty members that may occur if the University declares a fiscal emergency and has exhausted other specified avenues for resolving the fiscal crisis. The proposed change allows for the identical suspension of pay -- one-third of an annual appointment -- but defines it directly as one-third of a year rather than as a single quarter.

REQUIRED ACTION:

Pursuant to Section 19 of Faculty Tenure, amendments to the Tenure Code are to be submitted to the Faculty Senate for its advice and recommendation before final action by the Board of Regents. The Faculty Senate must solicit the recommendations of the Faculty Affairs Committee, the Judicial Committee, and the Tenure Subcommittee before giving its advice and recommendation. All three committees have approved the amendments as submitted.

CAROL CHOMSKY, Chair
TENURE SUBCOMMITTEE

KENT BALES, Chair
FACULTY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE

ED FOGELMAN, Chair
JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

DISCUSSION:

With no questions, a vote was taken and the motion was approved.

APPROVED

FOR INFORMATION:

At the request of the Judicial Committee, the Tenure Subcommittee and Executive Vice President and Provost Bruininks approved the following addition to the Judicial Committee Rules:

Add to Rule 2, Definitions, the following:

2(b) -- "Vice Chair" -- A member of the University Senate Judicial Committee elected by the full committee to act in place of the Chair when the Chair is temporarily unable to act as Chair.

Renumber Rules 2(b) through 2(m) to become 2(c) through 2(n).

COMMENT:

This amendment was requested so that there would be an individual designated to substitute for the Chair if, for example, the Chair recused him/herself from participating in a matter because of a conflict of interest or if the Chair were otherwise unable to act, perhaps because of extended illness. To avoid any possible claim of impropriety in the case of a recusal, the Committee intends to elect a Vice-Chair at the beginning of the year rather than wait until circumstances arise requiring a substitute. The Judicial Committee thought it best to leave open-ended the circumstances when the Chair would be unable to act as Chair in order to provide flexibility in implementation and avoid burdening the Procedures with much specific language about why and how a substitution would be accomplished. The Tenure Subcommittee concurred. Because the Chair normally does not sit on a hearing panel, a question was raised whether the elected Vice-Chair could do so. The consensus was that until called upon to act as Chair, the Vice-Chair could serve on hearing panels.

REQUIRED ACTION:

As required by Sections 13.2 and 16.3 of Faculty Tenure, this amendment to the Judicial Committee Rules of Procedure proposed by the Judicial Committee has been approved by the Tenure Subcommittee and the senior academic administrator. The change must be reported to the Faculty Senate and the Board of Regents before it takes effect.

CAROL CHOMSKY, Chair
TENURE SUBCOMMITTEE

FOR INFORMATION:

The Judicial Committee asked the Tenure Subcommittee to consider whether changes should be made to the Tenure Code to ensure that it adequately specifies how faculty promotions are to be considered and reviewed. Although promotions are clearly covered by the Code, the Tenure Subcommittee agreed that clarity would be assisted by adopting an Interpretation of the Code that explicitly refers review of promotion decisions to the Judicial Committee. The Tenure Subcommittee decided to submit proposed language to the Judicial Committee and Faculty Affairs Committee and to Executive Vice President and Provost Bruininks for their comments before formally adopting an interpretation.

The following Interpretation has been formally approved by the Tenure Subcommittee and Executive Vice President and Provost Bruininks:

11. Interpretation of Section 15: Judicial Committee Review of Decisions on Promotions

As stated in the Preamble, the tenure regulations "provide a comprehensive set of policies dealing with the relationship between the University and its faculty," including decisions regarding promotions in rank that may or may not involve questions of tenure. When a faculty member's request for promotion is not approved, the Judicial Committee shall conduct a review in a manner analogous to the review of tenure decisions (see Section 7.7). Such cases may be brought directly to the Judicial Committee without a requirement that the faculty member exhaust all other available University remedies before bringing the case to the Judicial Committee.

COMMENT:

Section 27 of the Tenure Procedures already specifies that "procedures for considering promotions should parallel those for consideration of candidates for tenure . . . ." Interpretation 11 makes clear that the Judicial Committee has authority to review appeals by faculty members from a failure to promote and would do so in a manner analogous to that used for review of tenure decisions. Section 7.7, referenced in the Interpretation, lists the standards by which the Judicial Committee will review a termination of probationary appointment. The section says the Committee "will review allegations that the decision was based in significant degree upon any of the following:

1. Personal beliefs, expressions or conduct which fall within the liberties protected by law or by the principles of academic freedom as established by academic tradition and the constitutions and laws of the United States and the state of Minnesota;

2. Factors prescribed by applicable federal or state law regarding fair employment practices;

3. Substantial and prejudicial deviation from the procedures described in subsections 7.4 [procedures for taking action in academic unit] and 7.6 [procedures for review of decision by academic unit] and the procedural rules promulgated pursuant to those subsections;

4. Failure to consider data available at the time of decision bearing materially on the faculty member's performance;

5. Demonstrable material prejudicial mistakes of fact concerning the faculty member's work or conduct;

6. Other immaterial or improper factors causing substantial prejudice; or

7. Other violation of University policies or regulations."

Pursuant to Section 16.2 of Faculty Tenure, an interpretation of the Code must be approved by the Tenure Subcommittee and Executive Vice President and Provost Bruininks. Once approved, it is forwarded to the Faculty Senate for information and to the Board of Regents for action. The Board must adopt the interpretation before it takes effect.

CAROL CHOMSKY, Chair
TENURE SUBCOMMITTEE

FOR INFORMATION:

There appears to be a typographical error in the Tenure Code that crept in when the so-called Sullivan version was created that ultimately led to the current version of the Code. In Section 7.7, the Code lists 7 allegations that may be reviewed by the Judicial Committee in a case of allegedly improper termination of probationary appointment. Number 2 refers to "factors prescribed by applicable federal or state law regarding fair employment practices," but it should read "factors PROscribed by applicable federal or state law . . . ." The chair of the Faculty Consultative Committee and Business and Rules Subcommittee agreed with the Tenure Subcommittee that this mistake was clearly a typographical error and not an intended substantive change. Thus, the correction has been made and is reported to the Faculty Senate for information.

CAROL CHOMSKY, Chair
TENURE SUBCOMMITTEE

FOR DISCUSSION:

SECTION I. PREAMBLE

Subd. 1. The Intellectual Property policy exists to encourage research and innovation, clarify ownership of Intellectual Property rights, create opportunities for public use of University innovations, and ensure the equitable distribution of monetary and other benefits derived from such Intellectual Property.

Subd. 2. This policy applies to all faculty, staff, students, and any other persons employed by the University; to all persons receiving funding administered by or other compensation from the University; and to all graduate students and post-doctoral fellows regardless of funding or employment status.

Subd. 3. This policy is effective as of the date of adoption and applies to Intellectual Property disclosed to the University thereafter.

Subd. 4. The President, with the advice of the Vice President for Research and the Faculty Senate, shall adopt procedures to implement this policy.

SECTION II. DEFINITIONS

Subd. 1. "Creator" or "Creators", as used in this policy, means the individual or group of individuals who invented, authored, or were otherwise responsible for the intellectual creation of the Intellectual Property, as defined in the applicable intellectual property statutes.

Subd. 2. "Intellectual Property" as used in this policy means any invention, discovery, improvement, copyrightable work, mask work, trademark, trade secret, and licensable know-how and related rights. Examples of intellectual property include, but are not limited to, individual or multimedia works of art or music, records of confidential information generated or maintained by the University, data, texts, instructional materials, tests, bibliographies, research findings, organisms, cells, viruses, DNA sequences, other biological materials, probes, crystallographic coordinates, plant lines, chemical compounds, and theses. Intellectual property may exist in a written or electronic form, may be raw or derived, and may be in the form of text, multimedia, computer programs, spreadsheets, formatted fields in records or forms within files, databases, graphics, digital images, video and audio recordings, live video or audio broadcasts, performances, two or three-dimensional works of art, musical compositions, executions of processes, film, film strips, slides, charts, transparencies, other visual/aural aids or CD-ROMS.

Subd. 3. "Net Income" shall mean the gross monetary payments the University receives as a result of transferring rights in the Intellectual Property less the University's out-of-pocket expenditures (including legal fees) for protecting, developing, and transferring that intellectual property.

Subd. 4. "Regular Academic Work Products" means any copyrightable work product which is an artistic creation or which constitutes or is intended to disseminate the results of academic research or scholarly study.

Examples of Regular Academic Work Products include, but are not limited to, books (including class notes and textbooks), theses and dissertations, articles, non-fiction, fiction, poems, musical works, dramatic works including any accompanying music, pantomimes and choreographic works, pictorial, graphic and sculptural works, or other works of artistic imagination. Course materials designed for the web, distance education, or technology-oriented education are Regular Academic Work Products. Software specifically needed to support a Regular Academic Work Product or which is designed to disseminate the results of academic research and scholarly study is also considered a Regular Academic Work Product.

Subd. 5. "University Employees" or "Employees" as used in this policy includes faculty, staff, students, and any other persons employed, part-time or full-time, by the University.

Subd. 6. "Specially Commissioned Work" is a work specially ordered or commissioned and which the University and the Creator expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them shall be considered as such.

SECTION III. OWNERSHIP

Subd. 1. University Ownership. Subject to the exceptions identified in Sec. III, Subd. 2. (a) and (b), the University shall be the sole owner of all Intellectual Property created through the use of University resources or facilities, supported directly or indirectly by funds administered by the University, developed within the scope of employment by University Employees, agreed in writing to be a Specially Commissioned Work, or assigned in writing to the University. This shall include, but is not limited to, Intellectual Property developed by University Employees, persons receiving funding administered by or other compensation from the University, or graduate students and post-doctoral fellows regardless of funding or employment status.

Subd. 2. Exceptions to University Ownership.

a) As provided in subd. 1, the University shall have no ownership rights in the following Intellectual Property, which shall be owned by its Creator(s):

Subd. 3. Rights to Publish. Nothing in this policy shall be construed as affecting the rights of Creators to publish, except that Creators must agree to observe a limited period of nondisclosure if such nondisclosure is necessary to secure certain rights to the intellectual property.

Subd. 4. University Use of Educational Materials. Use by the University of educational materials developed with University support but owned by the Creator(s) will be governed by the provisions of the Policy on Educational Materials.

SECTION IV. DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME

Subd. 1. Intellectual Property Derived From Academic Research or Scholarly Study.

a) Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the University and Creator, in the event that the University receives income from Intellectual Property that is derived from academic research or scholarly study, that is disclosed to and licensed or otherwise transferred by the University's technology transfer unit, and that is not agreed in writing to be a Specially Commissioned Work, any Net Income will be divided as follows:

Subd. 2. Other Intellectual Property. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the University and Creator, if the University receives income from Intellectual Property disclosed to and licensed or otherwise transferred by the University's technology transfer unit and not covered by Subd. 1, it may be appropriate to share some portion of the Net Income with the Creator in the form of a bonus or other temporary salary supplement. Any such distribution will be made in the discretion of the Vice President for Research in consultation with the head of the Creator's unit.

SECTION V. UNIVERSITY RESPONSIBILITIES

The University shall have the responsibility to:

University Employees, all persons receiving funding administered by or other compensation from the University, and all graduate students and post-doctoral fellows regardless of funding or employment status, have a responsibility to:

Failure to comply with the provisions of this policy is a violation and may result in discipline of an Employee in accordance with applicable University policies and procedures. Sanctions may include, but are not limited to letter of admonition; ineligibility of the employee for grant applications, Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, or supervision of graduate students; suspension; nonrenewal of appointment; and dismissal.

I have read and understand the attached Board of Regents "Intellectual Property Policy" and agree to abide by it. I understand that the provisions of that policy apply to all faculty, staff, students, and any other persons employed by the University, to all persons receiving funding administered by or other compensation from the University, and to all graduate students and post-doctoral fellows at the University.

I agree to disclose to the University all intellectual property that I develop through the use of University resources or facilities, supported directly or indirectly by funds administered by the University, or developed within the scope of my employment by the University, unless such intellectual property is excluded from University ownership by the Policy as Regular Academic Work Product or as student work. I also agree to disclose to the University all intellectual property I create when so required by a written agreement with the University or with a third party.

For all developments I have agreed to disclose under the previous two sentences, I agree to sign all papers and provide all assistance necessary to give the University title to such intellectual property, enable the University to obtain patent, copyright, or other suitable protection for such development, and enable the University to satisfy the terms of any applicable funding arrangement. I also agree to provide reasonable assistance to the University in identifying companies that may be interested in such developments and in providing information to such companies.

I understand that nothing in the Board of Regents "Intellectual Property Policy" or this agreement restricts my right to publish the results of research I perform at the University, but I agree to abide by reasonable restrictions on the timing of such publication necessary to protect ownership rights in the intellectual property. I also understand that I am not required to disclose technical developments to the University made without the use of University funds or University administered funding, unless I agree in a separate writing to do so.

I understand that this agreement does not give me any rights to developments not conceived by me.

Name (Please print or type)________________________________________________________

Date__________________________________________________________________________

Signature______________________________________________________________________

Social Security Number___________________________________________________________

KENT BALES, Chair
FACULTY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE

LEONARD KUHI, Chair
RESEARCH COMMITTEE

DISCUSSION:

President Yudof began by introducing Christine Maziar as the Vice President for Research and Dean of the Graduate School.

Professor Carol Chomsky, a member of the working group drafting the Intellectual Property Policy, said that this policy is being presented for discussion today and will be brought back in May for approval. This policy will actually replace two current polices, the Patent and Technology Transfer Policy, which has been in place since October 10, 1986, and the Educational Materials Policy, which has been in place since April 14, 1967. Some of the changes being proposed are in response to changes in federal regulations. This policy has been under revision for five years, but a revised version has never been approved.

The working group members are from different areas of the University that would be affected by this policy, as well as a member from the General Counsel's Office and Vice President Christine Maziar. This version has been the subject of consultation with the Faculty Affairs Committee, Research Committee, Faculty Consultative Committee, Academic Staff Advisory Committee, Faculty Senate, Dean's Council, President's Executive Committee, and the Board of Regents.

Section I, subdivision 2 lists whom the policy applies to and is a broad list. The one category not intended to be covered by this policy is visitors. This issue will be dealt with in separate agreements with visitors before they arrive.

The working group also discussed whether certain information should be included in the policy or the procedures. Procedures will be drafted to further explain a list of issues generated by the policy. The question has been raised regarding not having the policy take effect until procedures are in place.

The major issue is when the University owns and when the creator owns the intellectual property developed using University resources. Along with that is the question of how the income derived from University-supported intellectual property should be distributed. Discussions were also held regarding the use of the term 'creator' in the policy.

Professor Chomsky then read through the policy and explained the subdivisions of the sections. She said that the working group still needs to further clarify the University's usage of educational materials development with University support. As in the Policy on Educational Materials, the working group wants to guarantee the University's right, for a period of time, to use educational materials internally without paying for them, even when these materials are owned by a faculty member. Clarification also needs to be made regarding the money given to the Office of the Vice President for Research to specify that it can only be used to support research and not put into the general funds of the institution. Concerns were also raised about distance education materials created and owned by faculty being in direct competition with the University. The working group will also continue to work on the procedures to accompany the policy. The floor was then opened for questions.

Q: How will this policy affect faculty relations with industry?

A: It was intended that the agreements between faculty and industry would supercede this policy.

Q: In Architecture, there has been controversy over who owns the work of the students. It has been resolved in past years and a policy has been developed which states that the University owns a student's conceptual image and the student owns the materials. This allows the students to take the works with them, while allowing the faculty to photograph the work for use in academic research and publication without obtaining a release or paying the student for the use of these images. How would the policy affect this arrangement?

A: This may need a separate written agreement that would specify a different division than the default under this policy. Without a separate agreement, if work was done for a course requirement, then it would be owned by the student.

Q: In the agreement to be signed, there is a statement that a person "...also agree[s] to provide reasonable assistance to the University in identifying companies that may be interested in such developments and in providing information to such companies." This statement creates several problems. First, a faculty member is here to teach and research. Intellectual property may come from this, but the policy should not require a faculty member to also be a salesperson. Second, there are potential ethical problems. A patented item might have potential use in a weapons system, which would lead the University into discussions with a company to market this item. Is the professor then required to cooperate if it is against his or her principles? I would suggest that this paragraph be deleted.

A: The emphasis in this statement should be placed on reasonable circumstances. Very often, faculty are in the best position to know the appropriate targets for the marketing of intellectual property. This does not mean that it is the faculty member's job to market the intellectual property. The intent is simply to seek cooperation from the faculty. With regard to the second point, concerning ethical problems, this is a valid point that the working group should discuss.

Q: Why does Section III, subdivision 2, part a. 2, use the term 'undergraduate'?

A: The working group wanted to extend the exemption to undergraduate research and thesis work used for an honors degree. The same exemption would not be appropriate for graduate and professional students who would be the most likely student members of the community to develop intellectual property in the course of laboratory projects or dissertation research projects. The regular academic work product provision would cover students as well as faculty.

Q: In Section III, subdivision 4, it states that "...educational materials...will be governed by the provisions of the Policy on Educational Materials." Was it mentioned earlier that this policy will be superceded by the Intellectual Property Policy?

A: At the last working group meeting, this language was added solely to protect the University's right to use materials. Since that time, the group realized that it does not make sense to cross-reference a policy that will virtually be inapplicable. The intention is to incorporate the substantive provisions in this policy and delete the cross-reference.

Q: What is defined as 'University support' in Section III, subdivision 4?

A: This has not been defined yet since this language was taken from the Educational Materials Policy. In that policy, it was defined in terms of special kinds of support.

Q: In Section IV, subdivision 1, part a, the words 'Net Income' are used. This implies that there is other income being used for expenditures. For faculty benefit, would it be wise to make a statement that there are expenses involved?

A: This term is defined in Section II, subdivision 3.

FOR DISCUSSION:

[As informed and modified by this discussion, this report will be presented for action in May as a resolution of the Faculty Senate.]

I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1. With the exception of students engaged as Teaching or Research Assistants or Associates, all personnel engaged primarily as teachers or as independent researchers who also have significant responsibilities for teaching, advising, and examining must be appointed in one of the appointments types defined below and described at greater length under "Appointment Types." The Tenure Committee will draft a new employment code that will leave intact the current tenure code except for the rules and procedures for appointing term faculty.

2. There shall be three kinds of faculty appointments: a.) Faculty (TTTF), b.) Collateral Faculty, and c.) Affiliated Faculty. [N.B. The Policy on Faculty Tenure calls the TTTF simply "the faculty." Herein this is rendered as "Faculty"; "faculty" generically denotes all three kinds of appointments referred to in this paragraph.]
   • Faculty appointments are described in the Policy on Faculty Tenure.

   • Collateral Faculty will have term appointments and may be re-appointed unless the terms of appointment prohibit it, such as with visiting faculty. Some personnel currently appointed as Academic Professionals will be appointed as Collateral Faculty, as will most (probably all) faculty on term appointment. Affiliated Faculty are already with us and are most frequently referred to as "adjunct"--a term currently used in several ways, hence the change.

   • Affiliated Faculty members are affiliated with a department or (more frequently) a program to teach or examine irregularly. Such Affiliated Faculty already may hold appointments within the University and be affiliated with unit(s) other than their "home," or they may be appointed from without because of the expertise that they add. [N.B. In some units Lecturers, Teaching Specialists, and Education Specialists now are called "adjuncts." They will become, for the most part, Collateral Faculty, not Affiliated Faculty.]

3. All faculty appointments must be made by the Faculty and confirmed by the appropriate academic administrators. Usually appointments are made only after a search, but in the process of reclassifying current employees described herein, there will be no search.

4. All Collateral Faculty searches and appointments must be made in a manner similar to current Faculty searches and appointments, except that local and regional searches may be most appropriate to the departmental unit's needs. Faculty (TTTF) must constitute a majority on search committees.

5. Similarly, Faculty must constitute a majority of committees conducting probationary reviews, merit reviews, and promotion reviews. However, Collateral Faculty of appropriate rank, if available, must also be included in such reviews of other Collateral Faculty. The academic performance of each Collateral Faculty member shall be reviewed annually for purposes of merit pay adjustments. The academic performance of each Collateral Faculty member also must be reviewed at least every sixth year for purposes of continuation or promotion or transfer into another appointment or termination, and in the manner devised by the unit for such purposes.

6. Collateral Faculty are of two general kinds, Professorial or Instructional. Those whose duties involve both teaching and either research or professional practice are Professorial Faculty and have titles parallel to those of the Faculty. Those whose duties are primarily as teachers are Instructional Faculty and have titles appropriate to that duty.

7. All faculty appointments have faculty titles. "Courtesy titles" no longer will be available for personnel holding non-faculty appointments (e.g., Academic Professionals), although such personnel may be made Affiliated Faculty and, as such, will have an "Adjunct" title.

8. Collateral Faculty may constitute no more than 15% of all faculty and ordinarily no more than 15% of all faculty within a collegiate unit. A head count of the Faculty and Collateral Faculty shall be the method of calculating the ratio. A collegiate unit, however, may seek an exemption from the 15% ceiling. Such units must present to the Executive Vice President or equivalent officer a collegiate plan demonstrating the need for additional Collateral Faculty. The plan also must include good reasons why their appointment will not endanger the academic quality or reputation of the collegiate unit requesting the exemption or of the departmental units affected by the exemption. The Academic Vice President shall seek the concurrence of the Senate Committees on Faculty Affairs and Educational Policy in granting such exemptions.

9. In all instances, Faculty (TTTF) must constitute a majority within all teaching units, both collegiate and departmental. A head count of the Faculty and Collateral Faculty shall be the principal method of calculating the ratio, except that paid Affiliated Faculty with Faculty appointments shall be aggregated into an FTE and counted with the Faculty of the unit. Paid Affiliated Faculty without Faculty appointments shall be calculated in like manner and counted with the Collateral Faculty. Unpaid or Volunteer Affiliated Faculty should not be considered in calculating a ratio.

10. Except where provided otherwise by a contract between the faculty member and the unit, Collateral Faculty are eligible for Faculty fringe benefits.

11. While the initial year of appointment for Collateral Faculty may be for a term of less than an academic year, subsequent appointments must be for at least one academic year's duration. After an appropriate probationary period and a rigorous review, appointments should be of longer duration, either in the form of multi-year contracts or as "rolling" appointments (such as the "rolling J") or as continuous appointments. Collegiate units shall determine which of these appointments to use.

12. As is appropriate to faculty members employed and carefully reviewed by the faculty and administration of the University, Collateral Faculty should participate in professional development programs created for the Faculty or in similar programs.

13. Collateral Faculty shall be incorporated into departmental and collegiate governance, though with such restrictions as are deemed fit by the units. Units may not, however, deny participation in curriculum planning, oversight, and development to Collateral Faculty.

14. We recommend that the constitutions of the Assemblies and Senate be amended to grant representation to Collateral Faculty. We also recommend that the 15% ceiling apply without exception in making such calculations. In other words, units may be granted an exception for making appointments, but the Collateral Faculty within those units will not have full representation in the faculty governance of the University.

15. We recommend a revision of the Professional and Administrative (P&A) classification system that will be corollary to the one set out here. The following distinction may be generally useful to those appointing P&A personnel.
    • "Academic Professionals" (AP) do work related to a specific, qualifying degree. Examples: psychologists, lawyers, librarians, physicians, academic advisers.

    • "Professional Administrators" (PA) do work administrative in nature, for which an advanced degree may or not be required and may well not be directly relevant to the administrative duties. Examples: directors or coordinators of a program or center, department heads or chairs, deans, presidents.

16. Units and faculty must use the academic titles appropriate to the category of appointment.

1. Each collegiate unit shall decide by 15 October 1999 what kinds of Collateral Faculty, if any, it intends to employ.

2. An oversight committee shall be constituted out of the memberships of the Senate committees of Educational Policy and Faculty Affairs and the Academic Staff Advisory Committee. The committee shall interpret this document whenever necessary, add to it necessary implementing language, mediate between employees and units when necessary, and be the initial hearing board for any disputes arising out of reclassification.

3. All personnel currently appointed as Academic Professionals (or, perhaps, in some few instances, as Administrative Professionals) but who do faculty work as defined in 1 and 2 above shall be reclassified or re-assigned to non-faculty duties within their current classification. Reclassification must be without disadvantage in benefits or in terms of employment, unless specific changes in benefits or terms of employment are requested by the person being reclassified and agreed to by the unit. The reassignment of duties for P&A personnel with significant faculty duties may be within their current classification or within another, but in either case without disadvantage in benefits or terms of employment. For this reason the Academic Professional category "Education Specialist" should be kept for those whose academic support duties are or become primarily administrative, as in writing tutorial centers, audio-visual labs, etc.

4. An Academic Professional whose activities or responsibilities are primarily teaching or independent research may request appointment in any of the Collateral Faculty categories of appointment that are used by the collegiate unit. However, the power to decide if the teaching or research of that individual matches the needs of the departmental unit remains within that unit.

5. The Senate Committee on Faculty Affairs shall appoint a subcommittee to monitor the implementation of these changes until the academic year 2004-5. It may be continued by a vote of the Faculty Senate, to which it shall report as it sees fit or is directed to do by the Faculty Consultative Committee.

1. Faculty (TTTF)

2. Collateral Faculty

Kent Bales, Chair
Faculty Affairs Committee
Joint Committee on Faculty Appointments

DISCUSSION:

Professor Kent Bales, chair of the Academic Appointment Subcommittee, started by asking faculty to read the handout from the Academic Staff Advisory Committee (ASAC). It lists several concerns that still exist. The Subcommittee has dealt with some of them, but not sufficiently to satisfy their concerns.

He said that throughout this process the support of the Senate, the President, and the deans have been invaluable. Some of the deans that have been spoken to have been supportive but with reservations, the biggest one being about the 15% ceiling on collateral faculty.

Professor Bales then listed several reasons why a change is needed, with the most important one the need for a conversation between regular faculty and other people who teach introductory courses on what lower division curriculum should look like. This will lead to much better undergraduate courses.

He then discussed two different ways of describing the faculty under this new configuration. One group is the professorial faculty, the Tenure and Tenure-Track Faculty (TTTF) described in the Tenure Code. Also included are collateral faculty, who must have terminal degrees and whose work must involve a mix of teaching and research. These people will hold the title of professor. The remainder of the faculty are the instructional faculty who are hired just to teach. It seems inappropriate for these people to also hold the title of professor.

Current adjunct faculty hold tenure in another department at the University and are common in some colleges. Affiliated faculty, from outside the University, are also present in other colleges. These faculty should be acknowledged and recognized, but left as is. Under the current plan, unless a person is teaching more than one course per quarter, the committee does not want to be concerned with regulating the work and hiring of this person.

For collateral faculty, the faculty of a collegiate unit will decide which of the appointment types are appropriate to that unit. This proposal provides numerous variations of faculty types that can then be selectively used by each unit.

In regards to converting academic staff appointments to faculty appointments, the subcommittee has tried to keep old titles as much as possible. A problem has arisen regarding education specialists. By definition, these people should be academic support staff and not teachers. In many units, though, these people teach full time. Those who teach full time would keep the same rights and become collateral faculty. Those who do not would remain education specialists. What would change is the appointment title, the category, and then how they are counted. The floor was then opened for questions.

Q: It was said that the intent of the current document would leave the Law School clinical faculty alone, but that is not the interpretation of this document. These 6 full-time clinical faculty are integrated into the regular faculty. There is a concern that those terms which diminish the participation in governance, hiring, and selecting clinical colleagues are mandatory for units, while other terms are not. The term 'collateral' should also be changed, since this term is demeaning. Concerns also exist regarding the 15% and the ability to expand this category, especially if adjuncts are included. The document also states that collateral faculty are eligible for faculty benefits, but it does not make them mandatory. 12 years ago, the Law School had a discussion about status and title. Implementation of this policy might create serious problems with current and future hires. Therefore, it was urged that this document not be brought for action to the May Senate meeting.

A: The Law School constitution has been read and this document seems to validate what is in that constitution. For example, the concern about continuing continuous appointments was a decision by the Law School and one which the subcommittee assumes would continue to be made by the Law School. There are many titles that not perfect, but a distinction needs to be made.

Q: In Architecture, there are 12 TTTF and over 40 adjunct faculty. It would not be possible to move all these people under the collateral faculty title according to the present document. Architecture does appreciate how the subcommittee has grappled with issues such as who controls the department and who is responsible for governance and curriculum. Would all faculty become affiliated because they only teach one course per semester? Faculty who are eligible for benefits have historically been appointed at 75% time or more in Architecture. Does this change in the proposal?

A: If a person teaches one course per semester, they would become collateral faculty. If they teach one course per year, they would be affiliated or adjunct. The subcommittee is aware that Architecture presents unique problems, so the subcommittee does not want to hurt them through this proposal.

Q: There is an issue that still needs to be addressed. There are two motivations for this document. One is that people are hired to teach and given sub-faculty status. The other issue, for professional schools, is how the University, as an agency of higher education, exists in its relationship to the profession. The University needs to create a positive relationship with these professions. This need for balance must have a broader discussion regarding adjunct faculty with the professional schools

A: This is something that the subcommittee would be willing to discuss further.

Q: For Item 8, the last sentence seems to be vague. Does it mean that the Executive Vice President shall gain approval or seek the opinion of?

A: Concurrence is deliberately vague.

The senator commented that more explanation should be given to why this is left vague. It leaves a wide gap in the decision process.

Q: For Item 12, does the reference to 'professional development programs' refer to sabbaticals, graduate school, grants and aids, and single semester leaves?

A: Yes, this is what development programs means.

Q: By the inclusion of the Libraries in an earlier example as a place where the academic profession appointments were appropriate because of the limited amount of teaching, would academic professional titles continue? There is also mention that the academic professional and the academic administrative part should be looked at and set up in a corollary fashion. Is there any discussion where or how this discussion would happen? Would appointments continue as is until this point?

A: Yes. If this were to change, continuous appointments would most likely stay the same. The Executive Committee of ASAC would also like to see changes made in the categorization of appointment types. If this document were to pass and a transition committee were set-up, ASAC would be represented on it.

Q: There are 450 extension educators around the state. They are P&A positions but with rank which allows them to be promoted in a parallel system to professorial ranks. How will this proposal affect this arrangement?

A: They would remain P&A, but there would be a question of title. The subcommittee insists that the titles of professor go with faculty or collateral faculty appointments only. This would result in many people losing the faculty title and being very displeased.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:07 p.m.

Rebecca Hippert
Abstractor