UWL By-law Template for Academic Departments (2018)
(Faculty Senate required components last updated 2017 when the campus-wide post-tenure review policy was endorsed. Recommendations/guidance to departments was updated 2-2018.)
UWL By-law Template - Academic departments are required to use the structure of the bylaws indicated below and the wording that is provided. In addition, guidance notes are provided in text boxes ingrey font, recommendedwording and/or notes are provided in text boxes initalicized grey font.The URLs in these by-laws have been updated but should be reviewed regularly for accuracy.
It is imperative to have clear dates regarding changes to by-laws. UWL policy indicates that personnel policy must be in place 6 months prior to use for decisions (e.g., merit and promotion). However, appeals to tenure decisions require the ability for a candidate and a committee to review the tenure criteria that was in place at the time of hire. A faculty member who wishes to be reviewed under tenure criteria that was adopted after his/her hire should formally indicate the decision formally to the chair who should inform both the Dean and HR.
History of the Template: In 2008, UWL’s Faculty Senate charged an “ad-hoc” by-law committee to
●Determine which components of bylaws are required and recommended.
●Develop a standard format/structure for required components.
●Determine a timeline by which all departmental bylaws must be submitted to the dean to be posted on the college website.
The purpose of a standard template is to aid faculty and administrators in the ability to efficiently and systematically be able to retrieve germane information. The template for departmental bylaws was approved by Faculty Senate and the Chancellor and departments were charged to have their by-laws reflect the template and be posted publicly online by September 2009. The by-law template was slightly modified in 2012 and 2015. In 2016 Faculty Senate approved the Statement on School of Education Affiliated Faculty Teaching, Scholarship, and Service Expectations. In 2017, the campus-wide post-tenure review policy was passed.
The UWL By-law Template for Academic Departments with the required wording is provided on the next page.
UWL By-law Template for Academic Departments (2018)
I.Title with name of department and date of last by-law adoption
II. Organization and Operation
Department members are governed by six interdependent sets of regulations:
1. Federal and State laws and regulations;
2. UW System policies and rules;
3. UWL policies and rules;
4. College policies and rules;
5. Shared governance by-laws and policies for faculty and academic staff; and
6. Departmental by-laws.
Note: Departmental by-laws tie the functions/actions of the department to these rules, providing the basic rules of the department, as an organization. Generally speaking, by-laws: define the primary characteristics of the department; serve as fundamental instructions on establishing the department structure; document how the department and its members will function; can be more specific and/or more stringent than Federal, State or UW System laws, policies but must be in compliance with them. When a department endorses their by-laws they are determining procedures that cannot be changed or suspended without proper notice and consideration. By-laws should have tight clarity and precision in wording and punctuation so that interpretation will be consistent. There should be an indisputable meaning in the by-laws with each sentence being clear and standing alone without reference to previous or succeeding sentences for its meaning.The process by which voting is conducted (by whom and under what conditions) are a crucial component to by-laws as are the criteria and procedures for personnel evaluations such as merit, retention, promotion, and tenure. Unambiguous by-laws are a benefit to individual faculty members, the department, and the university. By-laws should be reviewed regularly.
A. Preamble
Note: Many departments provide a brief history of the department such as when it was established.B. Meeting Guidelines
Department meetings will be run according to the most recent edition of Robert’s Rules of Order ( and WI state opening meeting laws ( at (
Note: Provide information regarding minutes - who takes them and how are they circulated.Potential Wording Sample: Minutes will be recorded by a voting member or the departmental ADA and distributed in a timely fashion to department members. Copies of the minutes of department meetings and committee meetings shall be in a secure location by the department. Minutes from closed meetings will be taken by the Department Chair and written within one week of the proceedings. They will be available by request.
C. Definitions of Membership & Voting Procedures
Note: Any individual with tenure or a contract with the department has departmental membership. Departmental membership allows an individual to be eligible for departmental allowances such as travel money and determines an individual's home department in terms of signatures for activities such as grants when such needs are associated with the content and mission of the home department.Of particular importance, departmental membership determines the primary personnel review unit associated with annual review, retention, promotion, sabbatical, and post-tenure review, etc.Membership is more stable and long-term than voting rights. Voting rights can vary based on by-laws determinations such as percent of instructional appointment.Note:Make sure to define the criteria by which voting rights are determined. It is best when the criteria is as "stable" as possible - such that a department need not have to frequently determine who is a voting member. All ranked (tenure-track or tenured) faculty should vote and there should be a criteria to guide whether IAS or non-instructional academic staff are also voting members of the department. Majorities are often referred to as "simple" indicating 50% or more, alternates are "majority +1" or a "supermajority" defined as 2/3rd or in very rare conditions ¾. Departments often hold to a super majority for personnel decisions. However, departments may wish to consider a higher quorum standard rather than a higher majority standard for personnel decisions. The wording should explicitly address proxies. Normally, experts recommend against proxies. The wording should indicate whether the voting majorities are of those present or those voting (those voting is recommended). The wording should indicate the type of acceptable voting. If a paper ballot is allowed – they must be signed and kept securely for seven years. Robert’s Rules indicates that abstentions do not affect the voting outcome (they are non-votes). Late or non-received ballots, a non-response to a vote, or improperly marked ballots shall be treated the same as a non-vote and should not be counted in determining the vote. In addition, abstentions and blank votes are treated as non-votes and are ignored. For example, if 20 ballots were cast with 2 voting yes, 1 voting no, and 17 abstaining, the motion would pass. Abstention votes in retention, promotion, or tenure matters are discouraged except when a conflict of interest exists or the voter has no or little knowledge of the person being considered. Bylaws sometimes specify something like "a majority of the members present" or "a majority of the tenured or ranked faculty" for certain motions. In such cases, there is a precise number needed to pass, so blank ballots, non-votes or abstentions have the effect of being a negative vote. These types of provisions are discouraged because they can present difficult legal issues if ballots are late, non-received or if faculty chose to be absent or do not vote.
Potential Wording Sample: Members of the department are defined as instructional academic staff members with a 50% contract, non-instructional academic staff members with 100% appointments, and all ranked (tenure-track or tenured) faculty (including those on leave or sabbatical who are in attendance) for the purpose of conducting business at any regular meeting.
Potential Wording Sample: Unless specifically indicated otherwise, a simple majority of those voting carries the vote. Voting occurs with a voice vote or a hand vote and any member can call for a roll call vote. Proxy voting is not allowed. Members who join by teleconference and have heard all the deliberation are eligible to vote.
NOTE: Voting in closed session (e.g., personnel review)
Voting in closed session cannot be anonymous or secret.And, any individual can request the vote and who voted which way (e.g., public record).Documentation is needed regarding the vote; however, “who voted how” need not be reflected in minutes if there is other documentation that exists and can be accessed.
D. Definitions of Quorum and Majority
Potential Wording Sample: A quorum for the purpose of conducting business at any department meeting shall be a simple majority of the persons eligible to vote.For personnel meetings a quorum is achieved with 2/3 of those eligible to vote.E. Changing by-laws
Potential Wording Sample: These by-laws may be amended by the following procedures: A two-thirds majority of the current department membership present and eligible to vote on by-laws is required to amend the by-laws; Any proposed amendment(s) shall be presented and distributed in writing at a department meeting and voted on at the next subsequent meeting; policies pertaining to personnel issues, which are the responsibility of the ranked-faculty (tenure-track or tenured), or of the tenured faculty may only be changed by those voting. Second readings can be waived for by-laws that do not pertain to personnel decisions.III. Faculty/Staff Responsibilities
A. Faculty
Faculty responsibilities are referenced in section IV of the Faculty Senate by-laws entitled "Responsibilities of Departments, Department Members and Department Chairpersons" (
Note: Departments should delineate additional responsibilities.B. Instructional Academic Staff Responsibilities and Expectations
Requests for IAS hiring will be presented to the college dean. The request will indicate one of the standard titles from the lecturer or clinical professor series and will outline specific duties including teaching and any additional workload. Total workload for IAS is defined as a standard minimum teaching load plus additional workload equivalency activities.
Note: Departments should delineate the types of duties/activities associated with workload equivalencies for IAS. The guidelines adopted by Faculty Senate provide some general guidance.C. Non Instructional Academic Staff Responsibilities and Expectations
Note: Departments should clearly delineate the types of duties/activities of non-instructional academic staff members.D. Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEI)
The department will follow the UWL SEI policy and procedure available on the Faculty Senate webpage ( Results from the Faculty Senate approved SEI questions are required for retention, tenure, and promotion for ranked faculty and for renewal and promotion of Instructional Academic Staff in the form of (1) the single motivation item and (2) the composite SEI consisting of the 5 common questions. For ranked faculty contract-renewal and both faculty and IAS promotion these numbers will be reported using the Teaching Assignment Information (TAI) form. The department will add both the motivation item and the composite SEI fractional median for each course. In addition, the candidate's overall fractional median for the term on both the single motivation item and the composite SEI are reported. Finally, the department adds the departmental fractional median for both the single motivation item and the composite, the minimum and maximum composite SEI for the department, and the candidate's rank in SEI scores relative to all departmental ranked faculty (tenure-track or tenured) for that term (e.g. 3 of 15).
Note: Departmental student evaluation of instruction items. If a department utilizes additional questions in the evaluation of teaching describe here. For IAS, departments should clarify the composition of the SEI comparison group for IAS (the department as a whole as a comparison group is recommended).IV. Merit Evaluation (Annual Review)
The results of merit reviews for all ranked faculty who have completed at least one academic year at UWL are due to the Dean's Office on Dec. 15 annually. Merit reviews reflect activities during the prior academic year ending May 31.
Note:Adopted by the Faculty Senate, 4/7/77. "Distribution of merit compensation shall be determined by the individual departments or functional equivalents according to their bylaws and/or other departmental rules and regulations. Each department shall specify its procedures for appeals of merit decisions with a time limit set prior to the date the department reports evaluations to the dean."Potential Wording Sample: All faculty and IAS have a June 1st deadline for entering teaching, scholarship, and service activities into the electronic portfolios system (Digital Measures) on activities from the prior year June 1st – May 31st.
December 2014 Faculty Senate Promotion, Tenure and Salary (PTS) recommendations regarding Merit.
A. Evaluation Processes & Criteria
1. Faculty
NOTE: Reassigned dutieswithin departments (e.g., program directors)- Each department’s bylaws should include a description of how department chairs are evaluated for merit and other personnel purposes.
- Each department should have a brief description of the duties of other within department assignments and a description of how the individual is chosen. Workload determinations are subject to review/approval by the Dean/Director of the unit.
- For SOE-affiliated programs – please see therecommendedposition description and the recommendedprocess for selecting and evaluating Program Directors at
Promotion has particular requirements/guidance from JPC:
- 5.1.5. Full-time faculty with reassigned time. In reference to any period of time for which the faculty member has received reassigned time, a full-time faculty member with reassigned time to fulfill a position outside the expectations of a standard faculty member (e.g., department chair, director of a center or program, etc.) must provide two related documents in their promotion report: 1. One or more letters from their supervisor(s) (e.g., department chair, Dean, etc.) that outlines the job description for each reassigned-time appointment2. Documentation that illustrates the level of success in the role fulfilled by the appointment, such as performance reviews or other data that show how the aims of the appointment have been met. The candidate is responsible for uploading these documents into the promotion report.
2. Instructional Academic Staff in Permanent Budgeted Instructional Lines (otherwise see VI).
NOTE: Instructional Academic Staff who are in permanent budget lines (aka “Redbooked” -- 102 or Growth, Quality and Access) are automatically eligible for pay plan increases. However, to receive pay-plan increases they must have been deemed meritorious (or higher) by the department. Therefore, departmental by-laws must articulate the procedure and process for merit reviews associated with IAS (who are in permanent budget lines). The process may, but need not, mirror or be incorporated into faculty merit review procedures but the process must be clear.3. Non-Instructional Academic Staff (if included in merit processes, otherwise see VII).
4. Department Chair (if applicable)
NOTE: The Provost requests that all department chairs be formally reviewed at least once during each 3-year term. The review should involve feedback from the membership of the department and from the Dean. The format and timing of the review is up to each Dean. The review need not be associated with merit; however, each department should indicate how non-instructional assignments are reviewed (see note under 1 above).B. Distribution of Merit Funds
C. Appeal Procedures (if applicable)
V. Faculty Personnel Review
The department will follow the policies regarding retention and tenure described in the Faculty Personnel Rules (UWS 3.06 - 3.11 and UWL 3.06 -3.08) ttp://
NOTE: UWS 1.0 indicates that “days” refers to calendar days rather than working or business days - with references to how to treat holidays etc.NOTE: The probationary faculty member shall be notified in writing within seven days after each decision or recommendation at each reviewing level (UWL 3.06). For departments this is seven [calendar] days after the retention review meeting and can be limited to the results of the decision (if in accordance with department by-laws) and could take the form of an email. However, the letter from the department to the Dean (included as part of the departmental materials submitted to the Dean on each faculty member under contract review) should include the date of the vote, the numerical outcome, a clear indication of a 1 or 2 year contract recommendation, and departmental review of the strengths and weaknesses of the faculty member’s teaching, scholarship and service. Department by-laws can determine the length of time between the departmental retention review and the receipt of the letter; however, the probationary faculty member must receive the departmental materials before or at the deadline for the materials being sent to the Dean along with the individual faculty member’s annual report on activities and retention (or tenure) report since date of hire with narratives and additional evidence as provided.
NOTE:TENURE personnel ONLY
Candidates should be given the option of requesting an open meeting for the deliberative part of the meeting. The committee can still vote to close and close for the actual voting (see below).
NOTE:Voting - closed session
Voting in closed session cannot be anonymous or secret.And, any individual (within or outside the department or university) can request the vote and who voted which way (e.g., public record).Documentation is needed regarding the vote; however, “who voted how” need not be reflected in minutes if there is other documentation that exists and can be accessed. Paper or electronic balloting (although not secret) may make votes feel more comfortable at the time of the vote - particularly those who feel vulnerable.
Reminder - per Robert’s Rules - abstention is appropriate ONLY under two conditions: insufficient information (should not be the situation in a personnel review given candidate files) or a conflict of interest.
Tenure/retention decisions will be guided by the criteria established in the by-laws at the time of hire unless a candidate elects to be considered under newer guidelines. The criteria outlined in Section V. A & V. B. "Faculty Personnel Review" in these by-laws should be applied to faculty with a contract date after