Minutes of the University Faculty Council Meeting of March 1, 2002

 

 

The meeting was called to order at 12:00 p.m. by Howard Eglit with Paul Anderson, Howard Chapman, Liam Coffey, Dimitri Gidaspow, Phil Nash, Greg Prygrocki, Peggy Smith, and Xian Sun present. Guests Allan Myerson, Ed Reingold and Mary Anne Smith also attended the meeting.

 

The Council had unanimously approved the February 8, 2002 minutes by e-mail.

 

Howard Chapman, Chair of the Financial Affairs Committee, gave the following report:

 

The committee has been meeting with John Collins, Vice President for Business and Finance, on a regular basis and he has been very forthright in discussing the university's financial condition. Collins reported to the committee that tuition will be increased approximately 3% at the Main Campus and 5% at the DTC. The administration is considering increasing student fees or imposing additional fees. The proposed fee schedule will be discussed with the committee at the next meeting. The university is budgeting very conservatively and approximately $4 million of "potential or achievable" revenue will not be included in the initial budget.

 

The committee suggested to Collins that the university consider offering an early retirement program that would give the university discretion to accept offers or reject offers based on the university's interest. Collins said he would discuss this suggestion with the administration.

 

The university's cost for health insurance benefits will increase substantially (about 7% for the HMO plan and 21% for the PPO plan. Collins said he will seek input from the committee regarding how the employees' share of the increase should be administered, i.e., increase the premiums, medical co-pay amounts, prescription co-pay amounts, or some combination.

 

The Council discussed this issue and it was moved and approved by a vote of 8-0 that the Council solicit faculty input on the alternatives once dollar figures are available.

 

The administration has still not determined what Kent faculty salary data will be disclosed to the committee for the annual faculty salary report. John Collins said he will discuss the issue with President Lew Collens and a decision will be made shortly.

 

Peggy Smith reported that the Sexual Harassment committee should have a draft of a proposed policy by next month.

 

Prof. Alan Myerson, Dean of the Armour College of Engineering and Science, presented a proposal to create a new Department of Biomedical Engineering. Biomedical Engineering activities have increased dramatically in the past two years. A Ph.D. program was started in fall 2001 supported by a $1 million grant from the Whitaker Foundation. A B.S. program has been approved and will admit is first students in fall 2002; this program also received a $1 million grant from the Whitaker Foundation. With the establishment of B.S. and Ph.D. programs, Myerson stated it is appropriate to form a department of biomedical engineering. The department will house the academic programs along with the five tenure track faculty who currently reside in the Pritzker Institute of Medical Engineering. Creation of this new department will have no financial impact on the university. The Council voted to recommend creation of the department by a vote of 8-0 with one abstention.

 

The Council discussed the procedure for the election of UFC officers for the next academic year. However Eglit stated that the College Faculty Councils must elect members to the UFC by April 15 so the UFC can elect its Chairperson to start the Council's business next fall.

 

The Council continued the discussion of adding a rank of Distinguished Research Professor to the Handbook. It was moved that the proposal be tabled and approved by a vote of 3-0 with 4 abstentions.

 

At the request of President Collens, the Council renewed the discussion to change the Revised Standards and Procedures for Promotion and Tenure to provide for expanding the probationary period before awarding tenure where compelling circumstances have arisen to interfere substantially with a candidate's ability to pursue his or her teaching, scholarly activities and/or service. This proposal had been tabled at the November 16, 2001 meeting of the Council. Prof. Ed Reingold, Chairman of the Department of Computer Science and Mary Anne Smith, Vice President and General Council, spoke in favor of the proposal. After considerable discussion, the Council passed the following proposal by a vote of 8-0. The proposal will be forwarded to the Campus Faculty Councils for their approval and then to their departments for comment.

 

Standards for Extending the Probationary Period of Tenure-Track Faculty

 

Under the Revised Standards and Procedures for Promotion and Tenure the maximum probationary period before the awarding of tenure is seven years. (IIT Faculty Handbook, Appendix C, Section 3) This policy sets forth the conditions and procedures for extending the probationary period where compelling circumstances have arisen to interfere substantially with a candidate's ability to pursue his or her teaching, scholarly activities and/or service.

 

It is in the best interest of IIT to promote and to tenure a faculty of the highest quality in ways that are fair and humane. To ensure fairness and equity in administering the system of academic tenure, IIT must provide consistent conditions and standards. For these reasons, extensions of the probationary period are reserved for unusual and compelling circumstances. IIT's ability to attract and retain a faculty of the highest quality is enhanced by supporting faculty members in balancing personal and family obligations with professional and scholarly achievement.

 

Conditions

 

An extension of the probationary period may be granted for one year upon request when an event or compelling circumstances cause substantial impairment of a candidate's ability to pursue his or her teaching, scholarly activities, and/or service. No more than two such extensions will be granted. Such extensions of the tenure period may be granted independent of a faculty member taking a leave of absence (as defined in Section 7 of the Faculty Handbook). Such leaves of absence may also extend the probationary period.

 

There are three grounds for granting an extension. (1) An extension may be granted in the case of disability or extended and/or severe personal illness. (2) An extension may be granted for compelling obligations to a member of the family or household that requires significant time away from university duties. (3) An extension may be granted under other extraordinary circumstances beyond the control of the faculty member.

 

The candidate's record before the event must be consistent with the preservation of institutional quality. The candidate must be making appropriate, demonstrable progress toward attaining tenure. This criterion is deemed to be satisfied automatically if the candidate has been or will be appointed to a second probationary term.

 

 

An extension of the probationary period should be requested when it becomes clear that circumstances, consistent with the policy, will substantially impede the faculty member's progress toward achieving indefinite tenure. Requests during the last year of probation of a faculty member are strongly discouraged and will be granted only in rare and extraordinary circumstances. A department head who recognizes the need for a faculty member to request an extension of the probationary period is encouraged to discuss this policy with that individual and to do so in a timely manner. A faculty member should feel free to approach his or her unit head for information concerning this policy or with an individual request for an extension.

 

 

The request for an extension of the probationary period must be initiated in writing by the faculty member and addressed to the head of his or her academic unit. The request must clearly state the special circumstances in the faculty member's situation that might justify an extended probationary period. The faculty member should attach any appropriate supporting documentation. The request must also state explicitly that the faculty member making the request understands that he or she will not enjoy an entitlement or stronger claim to tenure by virtue of continued membership on the faculty beyond the customary probationary period.

 

In order to move forward, the request must be approved by the academic unit head after consultation with the academic unit committee on tenure and promotion. If the academic unit head is a dean or director, the request if approved is forwarded to the campus vice president*. If the academic unit head is a department chair, the request if approved is forwarded to the dean, and then, if approved by the dean, to the campus vice president.

 

Upon approval of the request by the campus vice president, a special written agreement outlining the terms and conditions will be prepared. The agreement will specify the reasons for the extension and will clearly state the faculty member's new tenure period. The written agreement will be circulated to obtain the signature of the faculty member and the signatures of the campus and university officials required for such agreements.

 

*Interim procedure for the 2001-02 academic year: for the main campus, the president shall serve in the role of campus vice president for purposes of this procedure.

 

The next meeting of the Council will be held on April 5, 2002 at the Main Campus. The meeting adjourned at 2:20 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

Howard S. Chapman, Secretary

 

_________________________

 

Howard S. Chapman

Professor of Law

Chicago-Kent College of Law

565 W. Adams Street

Chicago, IL 60661

312-906-5131

hchapman@kentlaw.edu