2009 Provost’s Procedures for Personnel Cases- 1September 2009

BINGHAMTON UNIVERSITY

PROCEDURES FOR PERSONNEL CASES

Office of the ProvostSeptember 2009

This document is intended to be helpful to Department Chairs, Deans, Directors, and Initiating Personnel Committees (hereafter referred to as IPC) by serving as a guide to the effective fulfillment of their recommendations on personnel cases. It defines deadlines, describes salient provisions of Article VII of the Faculty By-Laws, establishes other administrative procedures, and clarifies the criteria the Administration will use in reaching decisions on personnel cases. These guidelines have been developed after consultation with the University Personnel Committee.

  1. TIMETABLE
  2. A Timetable for renewal of all term appointments and for promotions is attached at the end of these Procedures.
  3. Faculty members who are on temporary appointments, e.g. visiting appointments and part-time appointments for a period of no more than one year, need not be considered for renewal by IPCs. However, if a person presently on temporary appointment is to be offered a term appointment, the prescribed procedures for an initial appointment, including affirmative action procedures, must be followed.
  4. DEFINITIONS
  5. Academic Subdivision: a Department; a non-departmentalized School; Health, Physical Education and Athletics; the Library.
  6. Committee Chair
  7. The IPC will elect a Chair-with-vote from its membership. If the IPC elects the department Chair, that individual shall chair the IPC without vote.
  8. The IPC for non-departmentalized Schools elect Chairs from their memberships. The Chair has voting privileges.
  9. Special Personnel Committees elect Chairs-with-vote from their memberships.
  10. Secretary: Each IPC shall elect a Secretary from among its membership to keep such records as the Committee designates.
  11. Director: For purposes of Article VII, this means the Director of Libraries and the Director of Health, Physical Education andAthletics.
  12. Inter-Unit Joint Appointment: An appointment to a position in more than one academic unit or subunit. Teaching obligation, line, space, and salary are shared between subdivisions. However, the personnel berth is assigned to only one academic subdivision. Personnel cases involving faculty with such appointments will normally require reports and recommendations from both the personnel berth and non-personnel berth areas.
  13. Interdisciplinary Affiliation: A faculty member may participate actively in a campus sponsored interdisciplinary group(s) and be acknowledged as a member of that group, but not have a formal joint appointment in that interdisciplinary group(s). Interdisciplinary groups may be interdisciplinary majors, minors, certificates, concentrations, research/scholarly enterprises, or outreach/service endeavors.
  14. PROCEDURES FOR PERSONNEL CASES OTHER THAN INITIAL APPOINTMENTS
  15. Responsibilities of Department Chair, Dean, or Director
  16. Personnel cases and the information contained within them are assembled according to the Faculty Personnel Action Summary which can be found on the Provost’s webpage
  17. The Chair of a Department guides the IPC in assembling information relevant to the cases it considers (see 3.2.2 below).
  18. In non-departmentalized Schools, the Dean or Director assists the Chairs of the IPCs in gathering information relevant to their cases (see 3.2.2 below).
  19. The Department Chair, Dean, or Director shall provide to the Student Advisory Committee, if constituted, a roster of all declared majors and graduate students.
  20. The Department Chair sends an independent report and recommendation to the University Personnel Committee through the Dean or Director at the same time the IPC report is forwarded. The Department Chair sends a copy to the Chair of the IPC, to be made available to IPC members. A copy is also sent to the faculty member concerned.
  21. When the faculty member has an inter-unit joint appointment, the Chair of the unit in which the personnel berth resides will forward his/her report to the Dean of the unit where the personnel berth resides and also to the Dean/Director of the non-personnel berth subdivision as well.
  22. In non-mandated personnel actions for faculty with inter-unit joint appointments, one of the academic units may opt not to undertake the review, most usually because the individual does not meet that unit’s criteria for promotion. A personnel action of this kind would result in a promotion in only one unit, e.g. Prof. of X, Associate Professor of Y.
  23. The Dean or Director sends a recommendation to the President through the Provost no later than the date indicated on the attached Timetable. The Dean or Director sends a copy of the report to the Chair of the IPC and, when there is an inter-unit appointment, to the Dean/Director of the unit having the appointment, to be made available to the Committee and to the faculty member concerned. The preceding includes all advisory reports and recommendations received in cases of faculty with inter-unit joint appointments.
  24. The non-personnel berth Dean/Director, in the case of an inter-unit joint appointment, will send comments and recommendation to the Dean/Director of the personnel berth unit.
  25. In writing evaluative reports, special care should be taken to conform to the policies in the UUP contract governing Official Personnel Files (see 3.7. following). Deans and Directors may return improperly done reports to the authors for revision.
  26. Responsibilities of the Initiating Personnel Committee
  27. Each fall semester, the IPCs (excluding Special Personnel Committees) must make the faculty members in their academic units/subunits aware of the performance criteria and procedures used in personnel cases, as well as of the rights and prerogatives of faculty members. This may be done in meetings of the faculty, or in some other manner acceptable to them.
  28. Individual faculty members may also petition the IPC at a time consistent with the year’s Timetable, in writing, that their own or another’s case be considered.
  29. No later than the date indicated on the Timetable, the Chair of the IPC must notify each faculty member whose status is under consideration of the necessary performance information to be provided, and of the information presently in the individual’s file. The file should include an up-to-date vita, recommendations from Masters in the case of College Fellows, Student Opinion of Teaching surveys when available, evaluations and reports of Student Advisory Committees, the record of previous IPC considerations, copies of publications, and any other information that the Chair considers to be useful to the Committee.
  30. The up-to-date vita will be provided to the IPC by the faculty candidate under consideration; it must include:
  31. Degrees received, including dates and institutions.
  32. Previous academic and related employment, including time in various ranks.
  33. Complete citations for all publications and pieces accepted for publication, and any other creative activity if in the Fine Arts, distinguishing among the following categories: books authored, books edited, articles, papers and abstracts, book reviews, and any other publications, with some indication given as to whether the piece appeared in a refereed journal (works in progress should not be cited under "Publications"); for the Fine Arts, complete indication should be given of major pieces completed, gallery exhibitions, sound recordings, citation in publications, and any other pertinent information.
  34. Professional and scholarly activity, honorific membership or leadership in scholarly societies, editorial services to scholarly publications, consulting activity, professional honors and special recognition received, fellowships, and research grants received, professionally related public service, and University service.
  35. Information on contributions to the University's instructional mission must be part of the file including:
  36. Course program for at least the last two years (if at Binghamton that long), including semester, course number, course title, and enrollment.
  37. Records as principal supervisor of graduate students working on advanced degrees, distinguishing between completed and uncompleted degrees; as principal supervisor of post-doctoral scholars; as supervisor of independent work of graduate and undergraduate students.
  38. If the candidate has come to Binghamton University within three years of being reviewed, the IPC should solicit evidence of the quality of the candidate’s teaching from his/her previous institution.
  39. Copies of all, or a selection of, publications must be deposited in the subdivision office, and must be available to all faculty in the subdivision while the case is under consideration there.
  40. The Chair of the IPC must present to each faculty member of the academic subdivision a list of all those who are or will be considered by the IPC for promotion, tenure, or renewal. The Chair must also provide for each faculty member to be considered a summary of pertinent information including, but not limited to, educational background, professional experience, University and public service, and honors.
  41. The Chair of the IPC must notify the Student Advisory Committee, if extant, of all faculty members under consideration in the academic subdivision, and must request reports on the teaching effectiveness and student teacher relations for each.
  42. The Student Advisory Committee Should be informed that faculty members under consideration in the academic subdivision must not be compared and contrasted. Students may choose to have their comments forwarded anonymously.
  43. The IPC sends a copy of the Student Advisory Committee Report to the candidate concerned and informs the candidate in writing that he/she has five (5) working days to review the report and to respond in writing to the IPC.
  44. If a report from a Student Advisory Committee is not included in the personnel case, the reason shall be stated in the IPC report.
  45. The IPC, by majority vote, may request a caucus of all other faculty members in the academic subdivision, excluding the individual under consideration, to meet and discuss the case.
  46. The individual concerned may also request such a meeting.
  47. A summary report of this meeting must be submitted to the IPC.
  48. Before making a decision concerning tenure or promotion, the Administration normally requires that at least four independent letters of evaluation be obtained from noted scholars or professional practitioners outside the University who are recognized authorities in the candidate’s field of specialization. (Outside letters are notrequired for Library tenure decisions.) IPCs ordinarily solicit such letters, which will be a part of the records on which their recommendations are based. Evaluation rather than recommendation should be sought. The evaluators should comment on the quality of the faculty member’s research and publication (works or performances) and on the potential for future growth and continued contribution. The letters should, where appropriate, indicate whether the quality of the candidate’s work compares favorably to that of individuals promoted at the referee’s institution. . (A sample letter that units may wish to consider for use is attached as an Appendix.) If electronic letters are submitted in a candidate’s file, the IPC should attach a note discussing how the submission was authenticated when there is no signature attached.
  49. At least one of the letters is to be solicited from a person on a list submitted by the candidate, if so chosen, and such candidate-designated referees will be identified. It is important that at least two-thirds of the referees be designated by the IPC.
  50. The value of outside letters depends on their being from discriminating judges who are familiar with the candidate’s major works or who are willing to become familiar with them and who can evaluate their quality and significance objectively. Evaluators should be distinguished scholars or professional practitioners above the rankbeing proposed unless the promotion is to full professor. The higher the rank being recommended, the more renowned should be the writers of the evaluation letters. The choice of such persons is an important part of the total evaluation process. Those selected should not have a personal relationship with the candidate that would compromise their ability to offer an independent evaluation. For example, of the four required letters, external evaluators should not be a doctoral advisor, doctoral committee member, or co-author of the candidate. Binghamton values collaborative research and scholarship. Additional letters may be sought from co-authors for example to clarify the role the candidate played in the collaborative effort.
  51. Copies of all such letters and an evaluation of the credentials of the referees will accompany the IPC’s or Department Chair’s report. Any record of personal or extensive professional association with the candidate must be included in this evaluation.
  52. Outside letters will not be placed in Official Personnel Files unless released by their authors. In no case may the identity of the outside evaluator be indicated, unless also released. Customary assurances of confidentiality to referees are appropriate. All letters received in response to solicitation will become a part of the Official Personnel File when accompanied by the appropriate release.

(NOTE: Article 31.2 of the Agreement Between the State of New York and United UniversityProfessions provides for the inclusion of solicited letters when so released by their authors. Sample letters and release forms appear in the Appendix to this document. Forms are available through Deans’ and Directors’ offices and through Human Resources.)

3.2.6.5.The Committee’s report, as well as the recommendation of the Department Chair and the recommendation of the Dean or Director, should not contain the names, or any other identifying information, of the outside evaluators.

3.2.6.6.The IPC and/or the Department Chair may solicit evaluative letters from any other persons whom they deem appropriate (e.g., professional colleagues either within or outside of the University, or other persons with whom the candidate may have had professional association); all such evaluations included in the confidential file of solicited letters must be accompanied by a copy of the original letter of solicitation and an explanation of the reason for the solicitation if that is not included in the letter of solicitation.

3.2.7.Should Committees decide not to solicit letters, the Administration will obtain them. When the Administration obtains outside letters of evaluation, they will be made available to the IPC.

3.2.8.If the faculty member has an Interdisciplinary Affiliation the personnel berth IPC must invite and consider materials submitted by that interdisciplinary group as evidence of the candidate’s professional activities within that organization. The interdisciplinary group should coordinate solicitation of this material with the personnel berth Committee. Such materials must include letters solicited from external evaluators who can comment upon this aspect of the candidate’s professional activities. Other materials might include letters of support from students and colleagues in the program/organization, written evaluation of the individual’s contribution to the program/organization by the director, and internal evaluations of scholarly contributions to the interdisciplinary area. These materials become part of the record and are forwarded to the dean, provost, and president for their review of the candidate.

3.2.9.In cases of inter-unit joint appointments, an advisory IPC in the other academic subdivision of appointment(s) will be formed. Composition of these advisory Junior and Senior Personnel Committees are comprised of faculty formally affiliated with the program, following Article VII, Title B 3 in the Handbook.

3.2.10.In cases of inter-unit joint appointments, the personnel berth Committee will solicit a report and recommendation, including the Department Chair’s recommendation if a departmentalized School, from the advisory IPC in the other academic subdivision of appointment(s), to use in its deliberations. Additionally, the personnel berth committee must agree upon outside evaluators with the other academic subdivision of appointment and must solicit letters from those outside evaluators. In such cases, all outside letters must be solicited jointly so that the recommendations of both academic units/subunits will be informed by these evaluations of the candidate’s research record and potential. Any deviation from these procedures must be approved by the dean(s) and provost in writing in advance of the review. The report of the advisory IPC should speak to the candidate’s contributions to teaching, research, and service from the perspective of that academic unit(s).

3.2.11.The advisory IPC sends a copy of the report to the candidate concerned and informs the candidate in writing that he/she has five (5) working days to review the report and recommendation and to respond in writing to the advisory IPC report. This response, if any, shall be included in the evaluation file.

3.3.Committee Voting

3.3.1.At the conclusion of its deliberations, the IPC shall conduct a secret ballot on the case under consideration.

3.3.1.1.Reasonable efforts shall be made to secure the view of Committee members not in residence, and such members shall be entitled to attend Committee meetings and to participate fully in all deliberations when in attendance, and to vote when in attendance or when their votes obtained by mail would not unduly interfere with scheduling the successive procedural steps.