Report of the Faculty Personnel Committee Spring, 1999

  • 1. Members of the Faculty Personnel Committee during 1998-99 were Pat Bartlein, Geography; Doug Blandy, Arts Administration; Steve Durrant, East Asian Languages and Literature; Ray Frey, Physics; Leslie Harris, Law (vice-chair); Ed Kameenui, Special Education; Leslie Steeves, Journalism; Kent Stevens, Computer Science; Jean Stockard, Sociology (chair); Richard Trombley, Music; Heath Hutto, English (student); Ethan Knight, Law (student)
  • 2. The purpose of the FPC is to advise the Provost on all tenure and promotion cases.
  • 3. This mission statement has been satisfactory and reflects the work that the FPC does. Although not specifically mentioned, the FPC is occasionally asked to provide advice to the Provost on policy matters related to promotion and tenure.
  • 4. During the 1998-99 academic year the FPC reviewed 45 cases related to promotion and tenure. Seven of these cases involved new hires to the university. Three of the new hires were considered in the fall and 4 in the spring. The FPC has a dual role in the promotion and tenure process: 1) promoting the development of a high quality faculty, thus enhancing the reputation and academic well-being of the university; and 2) ensuring that faculty are treated as fairly as possible in the review process. Because the committee sees cases after they have gone through departmental, school and/or college reviews, the FPC is in a position to monitor the integrity of the promotion and tenure process throughout the University. It has, where appropriate, provided praise to departments, schools, and colleges that have done exceptionally well in preparing promotion and tenure files and has also, when needed, raised concerns about this process. In addition, the committee has sometimes suggested modifications to existing policies.
  • 5. NA
  • 6. The work load varies somewhat from one academic term to another. It tends to be lightest in the fall when there are usually few cases to consider, but much heavier in winter and spring -- ranging from 3 to 7 hours a week of reading and meetings plus an additional 5 hours in the weeks in which a member writes a report. Each committee member is typically responsible for writing 4 or 5 reports during the year. It should be noted that some reports take considerably more than the estimated 5 hours to prepare.
  • 7. We believe that the current mission and structure of the FPC serve the University well. Some institutions of higher education have a promotion and tenure system that is more streamlined and has fewer steps in the review process. Our experience leads us to believe that the numerous steps in our promotion and tenure process provide extra assurance that candidates will be treated fairly and that the quality of the University can be maintained and enhanced through promotion and tenure decisions. Thus we do not advocate (and in fact would oppose) any changes to the current structure.


    • Report received from Jean Stockard (Chair) 19 July 1999