Department of Biology
Northern Michigan University
In the following bylaws, the term ‘Agreement’ refers to the current Master Agreement between the Northern Michigan University Board of Trustees and the Northern Michigan University Chapter of the American Association of University Professors.
- Membership and Voting
- Academic Senate and Bargaining Council Representatives
- Department Head
- New Faculty Appointment
- Faculty Chair and Departmental Committees
- Guidelines for Promotion and/or Tenure or Continuing Contract Status
- Professional Duties
- Professional Development Funds, Reassigned Time and Sabbaticals
- Procedure for Amending These Bylaws
1.1 Membership in the Department of Biology includes all members of the NMU AAUP bargaining unit with letters of appointment in biology. These members will be referred to hereafter as Biology Faculty.
1.1.1 Voting privileges in the Department of Biology are extended to all Biology Faculty.
1.1.2 Attendance at department meetings shall be restricted to the Department Head, Biology Faculty, educational staff, a graduate student representative, and invited guests.
1.2 Votes held outside of department meetings may be taken via written ballot (including electronic mail) when submitted to the Biology Faculty from the chair of any standing departmental committee. Within seven days of the initiation of voting, the Biology Faculty shall communicate their votes to the committee chair. The committee chair will record the votes and report the results to the Biology Faculty and Department Head.
1.2.1 Except as noted in 1.1.2 of these bylaws, nonvoting members may be invited to attend meetings upon a majority vote of the Biology Faculty.
1.2.2 A quorum will consist of a majority of the Biology Faculty. Departmental approval of any matter referred to it requires the assent of a majority of the Biology Faculty.
1.3 Department meetings will be called at the discretion of a departmental committee and/or the Department Head. The convener of the meeting will designate a recorder to prepare and circulate minutes.
1.3.1 An agenda will be prepared by the party or parties calling the meeting and will be distributed at least one day in advance of the meeting.
2.1 The election of a faculty member to serve as the Academic Senate representative will be done at a Department meeting in March. An Academic Senate member shall have at least three years at Northern Michigan University if possible, in accord with the Agreement.
2.2 A Biology Faculty member will be elected to serve as Bargaining Council Representative at the first Department meeting in March of years preceding the end of contract periods.
3.1 The Department Head is the chief executive officer of the Department.
3.2 During the process of selecting a Department Head the Biology Faculty will follow the procedure outlined in Article 3.1 of the Agreement.
3.3 The Department Head will be evaluated periodically in accordance with Article 3.1 of the Agreement. It is the responsibility of the Evaluation Committee to obtain information, including via open faculty discussion, from the faculty to be used in preparing the evaluation statement (Part II).
4.1 The procedure for appointing new faculty shall follow Article 5 of the Agreement.
4.2 Initial requests for academic appointments with academic rank shall be based on departmental needs and candidate qualifications as determined by the Department Head and with the approval of the voting membership. When possible, these initial requests should be developed in the winter semester for the following academic year.
5.1 Before the end of each academic year, the Biology Faculty shall hold an election to select a member to serve as Faculty Chair for the next academic year. Nominees shall be restricted to tenured Biology Faculty. The responsibilities of the Faculty Chair shall include chairing the Evaluation Committee, managing extra-departmental communications between the Biology Faculty and the administration, and coordinating department affairs if the Department Head position becomes vacant during an administrative year.
5.1.1 Faculty members are limited to three consecutive terms as Faculty Chair.
5.2 Department of Biology standing committees will include the Academic Programs Committee, Budget and Research Committee, Evaluation Committee, Graduate Committee, and the Safety and Resources Committee. Ad hoc Faculty Search Committees will be formed upon the direction of the Department Head. Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedures (Sturgis) will serve as a guideline in the event of procedural conflicts.
5.3 Standing committee membership shall be limited to Biology Faculty.
5.3.1 Committee membership shall be limited to three consecutive years on all standing committees. Faculty in their first year of appointment will not have any committee assignment unless they specifically request one.
5.4 The Biology Faculty will elect chairs of the Evaluation Committee (5.1) and Graduate Committee (5.10.1). Chairs for other committees will be elected by committee members.
5.4.1 Committees will establish their own operating procedures in compliance with these Bylaws.
5.5 Committee responsibilities are not restricted to those specifically stated in these Bylaws. All committees shall assume responsibility for those matters that appropriately require their attention. Proceedings of all committee meetings will be made available to any faculty member, unless otherwise specified in these Bylaws.
5.5.1 Between academic years, committees are empowered to act on behalf of the Department of Biology, in consultation with the Department Head. All such actions will be reported during the first Fall meeting of the Department.
5.6 Should a conflict of interest arise on any committee, a member may recuse themselves from deliberations on the matter under consideration. A committee member may also be excluded from deliberations of a committee on a specific matter (e.g., conflict of interest) by majority vote of the other members.
5.7 The Academic Programs Committee is charged with responsibility for the continuing evaluation of the undergraduate academic programs of the Department, for making recommendations to the administration regarding student grievances, for making recommendations regarding transfer equivalencies, and for making recommendations to the administration regarding waivers and substitutions for undergraduate degree requirements.
5.8 The Budget and Research Committee is responsible for advising the Department Head about matters regarding departmental budget requests and allocations. The committee is also responsible for evaluating and ranking NMU student research funding proposals, Biology Development Fund proposals, and NMU Biology scholarships. Committee recommendations will be submitted to the Biology Faculty for approval.
5.9 The Evaluation Committee shall consist of all tenured Biology Faculty.
5.9.1 A quorum shall consist of a majority of the Evaluation Committee.
5.9.2 Faculty cannot serve on the Evaluation Committee in the year they apply for Promotion.
5.9.3 The Evaluation Committee will serve as an advisory committee to the Department Head. It will serve as representative of the Department as a whole, concerning itself with all matters referred to it.
5.9.4 The Evaluation Committee will serve as a nominating committee for all other standing committees of the Department and for faculty search committees. Nominations for committee membership will be presented to the Department at a departmental meeting within the first two weeks of each academic year. Faculty Search Committee nominations will be made on an ad hoc basis upon the direction of the Department Head.
5.9.5 The Evaluation Committee is charged with preparing the evaluation of each faculty member according to Article 5 of the Agreement. The committee will make recommendations concerning all questions relating to promotion and tenure in accordance with Article 5 of the Agreement.
5.9.6 Criteria to be considered by the Evaluation Committee in the annual evaluation will include Teaching and Assigned Responsibilities, Scholarship and/or Professional Development, and Professional Service. Examples of specific activities which fall within each category and which might be included in individual evaluations are listed in Section 6 of these Bylaws.
5.9.7 At least one member of the Evaluation Committee will attend a lecture, laboratory, or discussion section(s) at least once every evaluation period for any faculty member being evaluated and provide a written critique to the Evaluation Committee and the faculty member.
5.9.8 The faculty member must be notified of any additions to the faculty member's departmental personnel file (other than annual evaluations) within twenty (20) days.
5.10 The Graduate Committee is charged with making recommendations for academic standards, policies, and requirements for the Master's degree. They shall review all applications by prospective students, including applications for graduate assistantships, and make recommendations regarding acceptance of students and awarding of assistantships. Their recommendations must be submitted to the entire voting membership of the Department for approval. The Graduate Committee shall also make recommendations to the Department Head regarding teaching assignments for current teaching assistants. The committee will review and make decisions regarding special cases submitted to it by a graduate student, a graduate student's advisory committee, the Department Head, or the Graduate School.
5.10.1 Before the end of each academic year, the Biology Faculty shall hold an election to select a member to serve as Graduate Program Director for the next academic year. The Graduate Program Director shall serve as Graduate Committee Chair.
5.10.2 Service as Graduate Program Director will be considered an additional assigned responsibility.
5.10.3 A Graduate Program Director may serve more than three consecutive terms.
5.11 The Safety and Resources Committee oversees issues in the Department, including but not limited to coordinating safety training and compliance with the University Chemical Hygiene Plan, coordinating efforts to facilitate research in the Department, and monitoring compliance in the Department with permits and permissions required for the conduct of research, including Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC), and Institutional Review Board (IRB) forms. All compliance action recommendations will be communicated to the Department Head. The committee is also responsible for advising the Department in matters regarding departmental equipment and space resources.
5.12 Faculty Search Committees shall be formed upon the direction of the Department Head. Biology Faculty wishing to serve on a Faculty Search Committee shall notify the Evaluation Committee that they would like to be nominated in accordance with 5.9.4 of these Bylaws.
5.12.1 Faculty Search Committees will be disbanded once the search process is completed either through a successful hire or through administrative closure of an unsuccessful search.
6.1 Recommendations for promotion will be in accordance with Article 5 of the Agreement. In addition to the requirements for promotion listed in the Agreement, the following are examples in the three judgmental areas of evaluation regarded as significant by the Biology Department. The more specific criteria contained in these Bylaws, including the examples, must be understood to amplify the language in the Master Agreement, not diverge from it. The lists are not intended to be complete or ordered by rank. Other types of activities may be considered.
The lists include common types of activities and are meant to establish a norm. Furthermore, it is not expected that any individual will be active in all of the examples listed. Finally, some items, e.g., “editor or reviewer” appear on more than one list; in such cases the item may not be double counted.
When appropriate, achievements in any of these areas that address goals established in prior evaluations should be noted.
6.2 Teaching, Advising, and Other Assigned Professional Responsibilities
Within the Biology Department, this criterion includes professional responsibilities in such areas as teaching, advising and other areas of assigned responsibility. The following list includes examples of common types of activities.
a. Demonstration of solid understanding of the subject matter being taught and ability to effectively convey that understanding to students.
b. Continued positive teaching evaluation by students and peers.
c. Continued positive advising evaluation by students and peers.
d. Written appraisals of student learning for each course taught.
e. Production of instructional aids that enhance learning in the classroom and laboratory.
f. Continued efforts toward course improvement, including utilization of student feedback.
g. Development of new course offerings or major revisions of existing courses.
h. Involvement in curriculum development projects at the department, university, regional, or national level.
i. Design of laboratory or field equipment that enhance learning in the laboratory or field.
j. Attendance at teaching workshops and subsequent incorporation of material into course offerings.
k. Availability for student and peer consultation.
l. Willingness to provide educational opportunities that would not otherwise be available, such as directed studies and working with freshman fellows.
m. Effective direction of students in research or thesis projects.
6.3 Scholarship and/or Professional Development
The Master Agreement specifies that the Department shall provide a listing of the types of scholarship and professional development activities that are considered appropriate for these criteria in this department. Types of peer review are described that may be demonstrated in biology. The following sections then provide descriptions of scholarly activities based on the four forms of scholarship, as well as professional development activities, with examples of artifacts that might be produced by these endeavors. It is common for activities to meet the definitions offered for more than one of the forms of scholarship.
Examples of Peer Review
The department recognizes the importance of peer review and its appropriateness for the discipline of biology. We further recognize that peer review may be demonstrated in all areas of scholarship and that it may be manifested in a variety of ways. The list that follows is meant to give examples of types of peer review that may be observed in our discipline with the recognition that it is not exhaustive.
Scientific peer review of publications with anonymous referees.
Editorial review, including scientific content, by a publisher or editor.
Review of reports by scientific agency personnel.
Review by submission committees (as for conference contributions), scientific committees or other groups of scientists.
Review of scholarly activity as evidenced by letters from collaborators or other scientists in the field.
Presentations at conferences with documented selection processes.
Acceptance of proposals by funding agencies or other project supervisors.
Documentation of participation of scientists in collaborative projects which implies approval of the focus and goals of the project.
Selection as a scientific consultant or editor which implies previous review of scholarly work.
Letters from peers using materials developed as part of the scholarly activity (e.g., users of newly developed pedagogical methods).
Requests for reprints, or citations.
Scholarship of Discovery
The scholarship of discovery is defined as an original production or the testing of a theory, principle, or knowledge. Examples appropriate to Biology include traditional experimental, survey, quantitative and/or qualitative study and research. Artifacts or outcomes that might be used to document this activity include:
a. Scientific papers submitted or published in professional journals, agency reports,
or reports submitted to granting agencies.
b. Published abstracts and presentations at scholarly forums.
d. Authorship of books or monographs.
e. Reports/theses generated by supervised students through research or thesis projects.
C. Scholarship of Integration
Scholarship of integration involves using knowledge found within and across disciplines to create an original understanding or insight that reveals larger intellectual patterns. Examples include a textbook or synthesis that summarizes what is known about a topic or process. Other examples of artifacts relevant to the biological sciences are listed below. It is noted that there are many subdisciplines within biology and therefore integration across fields, yet within biology, fits well in this area.
Coordination or participation in integrative workshops, conferences or symposia documented by completion of event.
Communication of scholarly work at meetings, conferences, or by publication of articles in the popular press or on the Internet.
Scientific or popular articles, reviews, books, or other documents that integrate information across subdisciplines or disciplines.
Planning documents or grant proposals documenting collaborative project development.
D. Scholarship of Application
The scholarship of application involves bringing knowledge to bear in addressing a significant issue or problem by using existing research or creative activities to influence current or future conditions. Examples include providing expert testimony, production of technical reports, a substantive grant proposal, a white paper associated with consultancies or grants, public policy analysis or professional presentation. Additional examples of artifacts produced by biologists are listed below.
Consultant reports in the area of one’s expertise.
Preparation of government reports in the area of one’s expertise.
Funded grant applications.
Submitted grant applications.
e. Reviews or letters demonstrating the application of one’s expertise as an editor or
reviewer for scholarly or professional organization publications or grant applications.
f. Presentations, opinion papers and other written artifacts related to the application of one’s expertise.
g. Collection and presentation of scientific data applied to a specific problem such as public health or an environmental survey.
E. Scholarship of Teaching
The scholarship of teaching involves proposing and empirically testing a pedagogical procedure that transforms or improves teaching practices. Examples of artifacts include the following:
Authorship of written or electronic teaching materials.
Reviews or letters documenting editorial work related to the application of one’s pedagogical expertise.
Data collection and presentation in a report, publication, or other presentation method related to the evaluation of pedagogical approaches or other teaching issues.
Presentations, opinion papers and other written artifacts related to the application of one’s pedagogical expertise.
F. Professional Development
Professional development is defined as activities intended to maintain currency in one’s discipline, developing new professionally related expertise or participation in other professionally related activities that don’t necessarily result in a scholarly outcome. Examples relevant to the Biology Department are provided below.
Attending professional conferences.
Attending professional workshops.
Developing a new, or maintaining a current, certification.
Obtaining an additional degree or training related to one's field.
Engaging in other professionally related training activities.
Developing new collaborative relationships.
Other appropriate professional activities, when confirmed by the departmental evaluation committee and the department head.
6.4. Professional Service
Professional service is defined as activities on departmental, college, and university-wide committees, service to the student body, service through professional organizations, and professionally related community service. Examples relevant to the Biology Department are provided below.
Service on departmental and university committees, or in the academic governance structure; evidence of contributions to the work of the committee, such as writing reports or holding office.
Individual efforts apart from committees that bring innovation and improvement to department and university programs, e.g., creating web page content, maintaining web pages, establishing or curating natural history collections, or overseeing facilities.
Service as an officer of a professional organization or performing other noteworthy service for such an organization.
Service as a professional consultant, either on or off campus.
Directing or organizing workshops, symposia, and seminars, or judging at science fairs or other similar events
Organizing conferences, workshops, or training activities that provide a way for others in the professional community to enhance their expertise.
Participation in programs with elementary or secondary schools or other elements of the community.
Writing grant proposals seeking external funding for the Department, and more favorably, funding of these proposals.
Service as an adviser to students, organizations or other service to the student body.
Service in a mentoring capacity with new faculty.
Service as a support person in recruitment and retention of students, or serving in a leadership role in major efforts of this sort.
Participation in professionally related community service.
6.5 Guidelines for Evaluation
The following guidelines will be used by the Evaluation Committee in determining recommendations for promotion to academic ranks.
When a promotion is being considered, a history of sustained professional achievements of the types listed in 6.1, or comparable achievements, will be expected. Faculty applying for promotion to any rank must demonstrate activity in all three judgmental criteria (Teaching and Other Assigned Responsibilities, Scholarship and/or Professional Development, and Professional Service).
All applicants for promotion shall demonstrate effectiveness in Teaching and Other Assigned Responsibilities. The relative importance of Scholarship and/or Professional Development and Service shall be specified in the annual evaluation procedure, as specified in the Agreement. If the Evaluation Committee or Department Head believes the faculty member or the Department would be better served by placing the emphasis differently, they will consult with the faculty member. The ultimate ranking of Scholarship and/or Professional Development and Service will be as specified by the Agreement.
The demonstration of effectiveness and contributions is understood to be cumulative during the evaluative period.
6.5.1 Standards for Academic Ranks and Promotion
a. Assistant Professor: Standards for this rank are a doctoral degree; demonstrated effectiveness in assigned responsibilities, (e.g., mastery of content of pertinent areas of his/her discipline and effective classroom technique), scholarship and/or professional development, and professional service (e.g., advising; departmental, and/or school or university committees, or professionally related community service). In addition to the criteria noted above, the following standards must be met for promotion to Assistant Professor:
i. For teaching, advising, and other assigned professional responsibilities, applicants for promotion to Assistant Professor must demonstrate they have met the criteria specified in Sections 6.2.a-c. In addition, applicants should demonstrate two (2) accomplishments described in Sections 6.2 d-m, or other accomplishments related to teaching, advising, and other professional responsibilities that are not listed in Section 6.2.
ii. Applicants for promotion to Assistant Professor who emphasize Scholarship and/or Professional Development should demonstrate at least two (2) activities specified in Section 6.3 in Scholarship and/or Professional Development. At least one (1) activity must be in the area of Scholarship and meet the definition of peer review (6.3.A). Scholarship accomplishments may be in any of the forms of scholarship recognized in the Master Agreement. Faculty emphasizing Scholarship and/or Professional Development must demonstrate the accomplishment of at least one (1) activity meeting the definition of Professional Service specified in 6.4 of these Bylaws.
iii. Applicants for promotion to Assistant Professor who emphasize Professional Service should demonstrate at least two (2) activities specified in Section 6.4. Faculty emphasizing Professional Service must demonstrate the accomplishment of at least one (1) activity representing peer reviewed scholarship.
Exceptions may be permitted by the Evaluation Committee for unusual scholarly or professional achievement.
b. Associate Professor: For promotion to Associate Professor, the Evaluation Committee shall evaluate professional achievements during the evaluative period. In addition to the criteria noted above, the following standards must be met for promotion to Associate Professor:
i. For teaching, advising, and other assigned professional responsibilities, applicants for promotion to Associate Professor must demonstrate they have met the criteria specified in Sections 6.2.a-c. In addition, applicants should either demonstrate at least three (3) accomplishments described in Sections 6.2.d-m. Alternatively, applicants may demonstrate accomplishments related to teaching, advising, and other professional responsibilities that are not listed in Section 6.2.
ii. Applicants for promotion to Associate Professor who emphasize Scholarship and/or Professional Development should demonstrate at least three (3) accomplishments specified in Section 6.3 meeting the definition of peer review (6.3.A). Scholarship accomplishments may be in any of the forms of scholarship recognized in the Master Agreement. Faculty emphasizing Scholarship and/or Professional Development must demonstrate the accomplishment of at least one (1) activity meeting the definition of Professional Service specified in 6.4 of these Bylaws.
iii. Applicants for promotion to Associate Professor who emphasize Professional Service should demonstrate significant and sustained involvement in service activities including at least three (3) activities specified in Section 6.4. Faculty emphasizing Professional Service must demonstrate the accomplishment of at least one (1) activity representing peer reviewed scholarship.
Exceptions may be permitted by the Evaluation Committee for unusual
scholarly or professional achievement.
c. Professor: For promotion to Professor, the Evaluation Committee shall evaluate professional achievements during the evaluative period. In addition to the criteria noted above, the following standards must be met for promotion to Professor:
i. For teaching, advising, and other assigned professional responsibilities, applicants for promotion to Professor must demonstrate they have met the criteria specified in Sections 6.2.a-c. In addition, applicants should either demonstrate at least four (4) accomplishments described in Sections 6.2.d-m. Alternatively, applicants may demonstrate accomplishments related to teaching, advising, and other professional responsibilities that are not listed in Section 6.2.
ii. Applicants for promotion to Professor who emphasize Scholarship and/or Professional Development should demonstrate at least four (4) accomplishments specified in Section 6.3 meeting the definition of peer review (6.3.A). Scholarship accomplishments may be in any of the forms of scholarship recognized in the Master Agreement. Faculty emphasizing Scholarship and/or Professional Development must demonstrate the accomplishment of at least one (1) activity meeting the definition of Professional Service specified in 6.4 of these Bylaws.
iii. Applicants for promotion to Professor who emphasize Professional Service should demonstrate should demonstrate significant and sustained involvement in service activities including at least four (4) activities specified in Section 6.4. Faculty emphasizing Professional Service must demonstrate the accomplishment of at least one (1) activity representing peer reviewed scholarship.
iv. Exceptions may be permitted by the Evaluation Committee for unusual scholarly or professional achievement.
6.6 Tenure: Recommendations for tenure will be in accordance with Article 5 of the Agreement. A positive recommendation for tenure will be based on demonstrated effectiveness using the criteria required for promotion to Associate Professor in the three judgmental areas (Section 6.5 of these Bylaws) and the expectation of future contributions based on the evidence contained in the cumulative evaluation at Northern Michigan University, regardless of years in rank. Past work done by faculty while holding post-doctoral or tenure-earning positions at other institutions may also be considered if prior service credit was awarded.
6.7 Continuing Status: Recommendations for continuing status will be in accordance with Article 5 of the Agreement. A positive recommendation for continuing status will be based on demonstrated effectiveness in Teaching and other Assigned Responsibilities and departmental Service using the criteria of Section 6.2 and the expectation of future contributions based on the evidence contained in the cumulative evaluation at Northern Michigan University. The focus on teaching and departmental service will not preclude a candidate from including other types of service and scholarship and/or professional development activities for consideration in the review for Continuing Contract Status.
6.8 The faculty member may append to the evaluation any pertinent material. Conversely, the departmental committee may ask the faculty member for any information in the faculty member's possession that would aid the committee in its evaluation. Requested information must be appended to the evaluation.
6.8.1 After deliberation of a faculty member's case by the Evaluation Committee, a written recommendation will be prepared by the Committee. A faculty member who is not recommended for promotion and/or tenure by the Evaluation Committee, shall be notified in writing as to the reasons for this decision. This recommendation will include a tally of the committee's vote and will become a part of the evaluation of the faculty member. The completed evaluation will be forwarded by the Department Head to the Dean in accordance with Article 5 of the Agreement.
6.9 All retention, promotion, and tenure deliberations of the committee and all such information made available to the committee are to be kept in strict confidence by members of the committee.
6.10 The faculty member shall review the faculty member's own evaluation and in accordance with Article 5 of the Agreement, shall have the right to add any written comments or pertinent material before it leaves the Department.
7.1 Full-time faculty members shall normally be assigned a twenty-four (24) credit-hour teaching load (or its equivalent) during the regular academic year (Fall and Winter semesters). For full-time faculty, twelve (12) hours is the normal credit hour load for each regular semester. The Department Head shall meet with faculty annually to discuss their load and shall provide each faculty member with a written summary of their assigned load credit at the beginning of the semester.
7.2 The Department Head has responsibility for the preparation of the teaching schedule. Course teaching assignments will be made by the Department Head after consultation with the faculty. The total load for the academic year should not exceed 24 (except as specified in the agreement).
7.2.1 In accordance with the Agreement (Article 6), the Department Head will develop written guidelines for structuring load assignments that will take into account large sections in single courses, number of preparations, nature of preparations, laboratory supervision and planning, supervision of special learning activities, supervision of field activities, number of advisees, administrative duties and other assigned responsibilities. These guidelines will be reviewed annually no later than March 1 and departmental approval is by majority vote.
7.3 Adjunct assignments for teaching lecture sections of a course should be approved by a vote of the Department. This vote may be taken by mail or email if needed to provide timely approval. Such a vote must meet the requirements for a quorum specified in Bylaws Section 1.3.
7.4 Spring and summer session employment.
7.4.1 Recommendations for course offerings shall be made by the Department Head in consultation with the Biology Faculty, taking into account probable enrollment, course demand, and other necessary factors.
8.1 Professional Development Funds: The Department Head will authorize expenditures of professional development funds allocated to faculty as provided by Section 220.127.116.11 of the Agreement. Typical uses for these funds will include, but not be limited to the following: travel to professional conferences, workshops, or collection sites; consultation visits to receive professional training or advice.
8.1.1 By October 15 each year, the Department Head shall notify each faculty member of the money available in the faculty member’s allotment. By this same date the Department Head shall also notify the Department faculty of how much carry-over money is available. Faculty members will have until November 15 to submit a written proposal to the Department Head for the expenditure of all or a portion of the carry-over money. The Department Head and Evaluation Committee will meet to evaluate the proposals. Any member of the Evaluation Committee requesting funding from this source will not participate in these deliberations. Money not spent by this procedure will be carried over into the following year.
8.2 Sabbaticals: The Evaluation Committee and the Department Head will evaluate Department members' applications for sabbatical leave in accordance with the sabbatical leave policy of the University (8.1 of the Agreement). Sabbatical applications will be ranked more favorably if evidence is provided of one or more of the following: the leave will enable the faculty member to participate in professional development activities, the leave is likely to strengthen the faculty member’s contributions to the Department and University; the leave will lead directly to enhanced education of students.
9.1 Copies of the proposed amendment must be presented to all of the voting membership at least seven days in advance of the time a vote is taken on that amendment.
9.2 The vote on the proposed amendment will be under the supervision of the Evaluation Committee and may be taken via a ballot circulated to the voting membership or at a departmental meeting.
9.3 An amendment to these Bylaws will require a majority vote of the voting membership and will become effective following the procedures specified in Article 3.1 of the Agreement.
9.4 When a new Agreement is negotiated, the Department Bylaws will be revised or amended to conform with the new Agreement. In areas of conflict, the new Agreement will supersede the Department Bylaws until the Bylaws are revised.
Approved by Dr. Paul Lang, Provost & Vice President, December 11, 2013
You can download your own copy of this file by clicking here.