Pending Changes to the ASPT System. Charles R. Mcguire Assoc. VP for Academic Admin. 401 HOVEY. Background. Five Year URC Review of ASPT Policies mandated by Art. II C. Review Conducted 2009-2010 by URC Consulted with Provost, Deans, Chairs/Directors
Charles R. Mcguire
Assoc. VP for Academic Admin.
No fixed effective date.
Revisions effective January 1 following approval by the Faculty Caucus of the Academic Senate. Art. II.C.
No current requirement on locus of tenure of members of DFSC/SFSCs or CFSCs
Require that members of DFSC/SFSC have locus of tenure in department. Art. V.A.
Require that members of CFSC have locus of tenure in college. Art. IV.A.
CFSC members may not participate in or be present at ASPT deliberations (including appeals) involving individuals from their own departments/schools. Art. IV.A.
That prohibition will be eliminated.
Silent on use of anonymous communications, except that anonymity of students in teaching evals is preserved.
Anonymous communications (aside from student evaluations) shall not be considered in any evaluative activities. Art. V.C.2.d.
Silent on Appointment of Search Committees.
Requires Dept./School, College and University policies to provide for appointment of search committees. Art. VI.A.
Silent on the necessity and content of letters of intent to hire candidates.
Requires a letter of intent, some content requirements, and requires that it be approved by both the Dean and the Provost. Art. VI.I.
No requirement as to format and content of activities reports.
Silent on electronic submission.
Silent on the content of annual evaluations
External evaluations are freely available to all faculty candidates, (in violation of Illinois law!) Art. VIII.D and Art. IX.D.3.
External evaluations are not available to the candidate without prior written permission of the evaluator. Same sections.
Mixes language freely throughout, using “unsatisfactory” and “insufficient” seemingly interchangeably. (Curiously, it only uses the term “satisfactory” and never “sufficient.”)
Uses ONLY the term “unsatisfactory” Art. XII.A.2, and elsewhere.
Little guidance as to the procedures to be used during appeals.
Lots of changes – see next slides….
Establishes a “formal meeting” as a preliminary step in all appeals, which must be requested by a faculty member following a negative recommendation, prior to any appeal from either the DFSC/SFSC or the CFSC.
Includes appeals of tenure, promotion, and performance evaluations (including PT Review).
Must be requested in writing within 5 business days of receipt of the recommendation, and must state the reasons.
Must give a reasonable time for arguments.
Material not originally presented may be allowed at the discretion of the DFSC/SFSC or CFSC.
Faculty members may be accompanied by a faculty advocate, who may advise the candidate but may not address the committee. Witnesses are not necessary but may be permitted.
Formal meetings are closed to all but the DFSC/SFSC or CFSC, the faculty member and advocate. The faculty member may request a meeting with the CFSC outside the presence of the DFSC/SFSC, but CFSC may meet with DFSC/SFSC later.
Formal rules of evidence are not required
Requires DFSC/SFSC or CFSC to reconsider prior decision and to issue a communication either affirming or changing the prior recommendation.
If changes to prior recommendation are made, no reference will be made to the prior recommendation.
The DFSC/SFSC may be represented by the Chair alone, and the CFSC may determine if other members may be present.
May appeal ONLY a negative CFSC decision on tenure and promotion to the FRC (even though both go forward to Provost and President). Art. XIII.C.1.
Separate Chair/ Director/Dean reports could not be appealed.
May appeal EITHER a negative DFSC/SFSC OR CFSC decision to the FRC. Art. XIII.D.1.
Permits an appeal of separate Chair/ Director/Dean reports (when in minority) to FRC. Art. XIII.D.3
Silent on many procedural issues.
Requires that a reasonable time be given for hearings.
Permits faculty advocate.
Hearings closed to all but CFSC, faculty member and advocate
If a CFSC decision results in a change to a DFSC/SFSC recommendation, the DFSC/SFSC letter shall be changed, and all prior communications shall be purged.
Silent on anonymous communications
Silent on files in HR
Provides “unqualified” right of access
Provides unlimited access to external peer review letters.
Requires notification of faculty member prior to surrender of file in response to a subpoena.
Prohibits use of anonymous communications except student evaluations.
Clarifies that HR files are accessible, along with Department/School or College files.
Eliminates “unqualified” language as inaccurate under applicable state law.
Provides peer reviews available only after written waiver.
Eliminates requirement that faculty member must be notified before surrender of file to a subpoena because of legal restrictions.
Provides that in second year of service, faculty must be notified of non-reappointment by December 15 (prior to date fall evaluation mat’l is available). Appendix 1, A.1,b.
Provides that in second year of service, faculty must be notified of non-reappointment by February 1 (after fall evaluation material is available). Appendix 1, A.1.b.
Currently (and erroneously) lists November 15 as the date to notify candidates of intended recommendations. Appendix 1. B., “November 15”
Provides candidates must be notified 10 days prior to submitting the recommendations to the CFSC, which are due December 15. No fixed date for intended recommendations. Appendix 1.B.
These Changes are Proposed only, and will not take effect until after action by the Faculty Caucus of the academic senate
Please use existing aspt guidelines until after action by the senate!