2008-2009
FACULTY SENATE
The sixth
regular meeting of the 2008/2009
Tuesday, February 24, 2009, at 2:10
p.m. in the
AGENDA
I. Call to Order
II. Approval of Minutes
III. Special Order of the Day
A. Roll Call
Report
on Faculty Employment, to include a longitudinal profile of faculty tenure
status and tenure status of permanent and temporary faculty (by unit).
Report
of the Task Force on Fixed-Term Appointments (9-06)
D.
Kevin Seitz, Vice Chancellor for Administration and
Finance
E. Janice
Tovey, Chair of the Faculty
F. Election of Faculty Officers Nominating
Committee
According to ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix A, Section
VIII.
IV. Unfinished Business
V. Report of Committees
A. Admission and Retention Policies
Committee, Wendy Sharer and Gary Levine
Proposed Revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual, Part V. Academic Information,
Section
I. Academic Procedures and Policies in reference to class roll
verification
(attachment 1).
B. Committee on Committees, Tom Caron
1. Second
University Environment
Committee Charge (attachment 2).
2. Nominee for Appellate Hearing Committee (attachment 3).
C. Educational Policies and Planning
Committee, Sandra Warren
1. Proposed change
in name of BSBA
in Management Accounting to BSBA in Accounting in the Department of
Accounting,
2. Request for
authorization to establish a MS
in Sustainable Tourism in the Center for Sustainable Tourism, Division of
Research and Graduate Studies.
D. Faculty
Governance Committee, Puri
1. Proposed revision to ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix C. Section
III.
Evaluation, in reference to the Student Opinion of
Instruction Survey
(attachment 4).
2. Proposed revisions to ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix D, Section
V.
Procedure for Review of
Notice of Non-Reappointment or Non-Conferral of
Permanent Tenure (attachment 5).
(Link to changes made to UNC
Code Policy #101.3.1 that necessitated these revisions.)
3. Proposed revisions to ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix D. Section
VI.
Due Process Before Discharge or the
Imposition of Serious Sanctions
(attachment 6).
(Link to changes made to the UNC
Code, Section 603 that necessitated these revisions.)
Curriculum matters contained in
the minutes of the January
22, 2009, and February
12, 2009, Committee meetings.
VI. New Business
Faculty Welfare Committee, Bruce Southard
Recommendation
on proposed increase in fees for parking permits.
Faculty Senate Agenda
February 24, 2009
Attachment 1.
ADMISSION AND RETENTION POLICIES COMMITTEE REPORT
Proposed Revisions to the ECU Faculty Manual, Part V. Academic
Information,
Section I.D. Class Roll Verification
(Deletions are noted in strikethrough and additions are noted in bold
print)
“D. Class and Enrollment Verification Class Roll Verification
Each semester, the
registrar sends class roll verifications to all instructors for each class they
teach. The purpose of these forms is to verify the accuracy of the lists of
properly registered students. Specific instructions for noting discrepancies
and returning the forms accompany the class roll verifications and should be
followed carefully.
Twice each semester—once near the
beginning of the term (prior to census day) and once near the mid-point of the
term—the registrar contacts each instructor in order to verify student
enrollment in that instructor’s classes.
At the beginning of the term, the
purpose of the verification is to ensure the accuracy of the lists of properly
registered students. At the mid-point of the term, the
purpose of the verification is to identify any students who are no longer
attending class. In the event that a faculty member teaches a course in which
attendance is not regularly taken, he or she should note any students who have
ceased participating and submitting work.
Specific instructions for responding
to the registrar will accompany the requests for class enrollment verification
and should be followed carefully. Due to the significant impact students’
enrollment status can have on their financial aid eligibility, the amount of
financial aid the university is allowed to disburse, and the amount of
financial aid the university is required to return, timely faculty response to
class enrollment verification requests is essential.”
February
24, 2009
Attachment 2.
COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES REPORT
Second reading of proposed revisions to the Academic
University Environment Committee Charge
(Additions
are noted in bold print.)
1. Name: University Environment Committee
2. Membership: 7 elected faculty
members.
(5 from the Division of Academic Affairs and 2 from the Division of Health
Sciences.)
Ex-officio members (with vote): The Chancellor or appointed representative, the
Provost or appointed representative, the Vice Chancellor for Health Sciences or
appointed representative, the Vice Chancellor for Administration and Finance or
appointed representative, the Vice Chancellor for Student Life or appointed
representative, the Chair of the Faculty, one faculty senator selected by the
Chair of the Faculty, and one student member from the Student Government
Association.
The chair of the committee may invite resource persons as necessary to realize
the committee charge. The chair of the committee may appoint such subcommittees
as deemed necessary by the chair.
3. Quorum: 5 elected members exclusive
of ex-officio.
4. Committee Responsibilities:
A. The committee recommends policies to
preserve, improve and advance the general physical environment of the
University.
B. The committee provides
recommendations to mitigate the loss of habitat that includes repairing or
replacing landscaping of the university that have been displaced owing to
planned or unplanned actions.
C. The committee makes recommendations
relating to traffic flow patterns, hardened sidewalk designs, speed limits, and
parking facilities in and around the University campuses.
D. The committee indexes and recommends
policies for maintenance of those trees of significant size and type,
culturally historic landscape features, and ground covers possessing aesthetic,
historic, and/or environmental value.
E. The committee reviews potential and
actual effect of university projects upon water quality and quantity,
runoff, and other physical impacts upon the community.
F. The committee shall be familiar with the current
G. The
committee promotes sustainability efforts on campus, which include energy and
resource conservation, recycling, and the reduction of waste.
H. The committee raises the awareness and
promotes how sustainability issues are included in the curriculum. The committee also promotes how faculty
research in areas related to sustainability.
5. To Whom The Committee Reports:
The committee reports to the
6. How Often
The Committee Reports:
The committee reports to the
7. Power Of The Committee To Act
Without
The Committee may draft reports, hold hearings, or seek advice as necessary.
8. Standard Meeting
Time:
The committee meeting time is scheduled for the fourth Thursday of each month.
February
24, 2009
Attachment 3.
COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES REPORT
Nominee for Appellate Hearing Committee
The Committee on Committees has not finalized their list of
nominees. If you are a tenured faculty
member and interested in serving this one year term, please contact Professor Tom
Caron at caront@ecu.edu.
2008/2009 HEARING COMMITTEE
|
Regular Members |
Academic Unit |
Term |
|
Donna
Lillian |
English |
2009 |
|
James
Holloway |
Business |
2010 |
|
Mohammed
Tabrizi |
Technology
and Computer Science |
2010 |
|
Hanna
Jubran |
Art and Design |
2011 |
|
Tara
Jeffs |
Education |
2011 |
|
Alternate Members |
|
|
|
Cal
Christian |
Business |
2009 |
|
Cathy
Hall |
Psychology |
2009 |
|
open |
|
2010 |
|
Richard
Bloch |
Medicine |
2011 |
|
Michael
Felts |
Health
& Human Performance |
2011 |
February
24, 2009
Attachment 4.
FACULTY GOVERNANCE
COMMITTEE REPORT
Proposed revision to ECU Faculty
Manual, Appendix C.
Section III. Evaluation in reference to the Student
Opinion of Instruction Survey
Revise Section III. Evaluation, 1.
Teaching to read as follows:
(Deletions are noted in strikethrough and additions are noted in bold print)
“1. teaching
The quality of teaching
must be evaluated using multiple methods as chosen from among the following, as
determined by the unit code. If not
determined in the unit code, the voting faculty (as defined by Appendix L)
shall determine the multiple procedures to be followed.
a. formal methods of peer
review, including direct observation of the classroom teaching of new and
tenure-track faculty.
b. review by the unit
administrator and/or peers of course materials such as syllabi, reading lists, outlines,
examinations, audiovisual materials, student manuals, samples of student’s work
on assignments, projects, papers, examples of student achievement, and/or other
materials prepared for or relevant to instruction.
c. data from surveys of
student opinion when an individual faculty member’s data vary consistently
(more than 2 semesters) and significantly (more than 2 standard deviations)
from the unit’s median for similar courses.
d. other procedures provided for in unit
codes.
1. teaching
The quality of teaching must be evaluated by means of
a. data
from surveys of student opinion, when such data have been gathered in
accordance with established procedures of the department or the university
which guarantee the integrity and completeness of said data. As part of the
effort to evaluate the teaching of faculty members, each unit shall either:
develop and use its own instrument(s) as approved by the chancellor to
determine student opinion of teaching or utilize the instrument developed by
the Teaching Effectiveness Committee to determine student opinion of teaching.
b. formal
methods of peer review, including direct observation of the classroom teaching
of new and tenure-track faculty.
c. procedures
provided for in unit codes;
2. research and creative activities;
3. patient care;
4. services
rendered on department, school, college, and university committees, councils,
and senates; service to professional organizations; service to local, state and
national governments; contributions to the development of public forums,
institutes, continuing education projects, patient services and consulting in
the private and public sectors; and
5. other responsibilities as may be
appropriate to the assignment.
The relative weight given to teaching, research/creative activity, and service
in personnel decisions shall be determined by each unit code. In no case,
however, shall service be weighed more heavily than either teaching or
research/creative activity. (
February
24, 2009
Attachment 5.
FACULTY GOVERNANCE
COMMITTEE REPORT
Proposed revisions to ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix D, Section
V. Procedure for Review of Notice of Non-Reappointment or Non-Conferral of
Permanent Tenure
Link to
changes made to UNC
Code Policy #101.3.1 that necessitated these revisions.
Revise Section V. to read as
follows:
(Deletions are noted in strikethrough and additions are noted in bold print):
“V. Procedure
for Review Appeal of Notice
of Non-Reappointment or Non-Conferral of Permanent Tenure.
A. Deadlines for Appeal Review
Failure to
submit the review appeals documents specified in this section
within the time periods allotted constitutes a waiver of the right to have
the decision reviewed appeal the decision. However, before the
expiration of the deadline the faculty member may request an extension,
provided that the request is made in writing and presented to the Hearing
Committee. individual or committee who is next to consider the appeal.
Within 10 calendar working days of receiving a request for extension,
decisions on requests for extension of time shall be made by the Hearing
Committee. individual or committee who is next to consider the appeal.
The Committee will endeavor to complete the review within the time limits
specified except under unusual circumstances
such as when the time period includes official university breaks and holidays and
when, despite reasonable efforts, the Committee cannot be assembled.
B. Request
for Hearing with the Faculty Hearing Committee
Within 25 calendar
working days of
receiving written notice from the vice chancellor or chancellor of non-reappointment or non-conferral of permanent tenure, a faculty
member (hereinafter, the complainant) may request a hearing before the Faculty
Hearing Committee.
1. The Hearing Committee
The
Hearing Committee shall be composed of five members and five alternates
each of whom is a full-time, permanently tenured voting faculty member without
administrative appointment (as per Appendix D, Section IV). Members shall be elected in accordance with
the procedures for election of appellate committees specified in the Bylaws of
the East Carolina University
Upon
organization, the members of the Hearing Committee shall elect a chair and a
secretary. Because hearings in matters of non-reappointment or conferral of
permanent tenure can present complex and difficult questions of fact, policy
and law, and because of the central role of the committee in gathering and preserving
the evidence upon which most subsequent decisions related to the matter will be
based, it is important for the chancellor to ensure that faculty committee
members, as well as relevant administrators and aggrieved faculty members, The members of the committee are to be appropriately
trained in accordance with guidelines and procedures jointly established by the
faculty officers and chancellor. Should
any committee officer be absent at the beginning of a hearing, the committee
shall elect an alternate officer for the purposes of the hearing. (
When the
committee is convened to consider any matter associated with a complainant's
request for a hearing, those committee members who hold an appointment in the complainant's
academic unit, those who might reasonably expect to be called as witnesses,
those who might reasonably expect to be asked to serve as advisors (see Section
V.D.2, Conduct of the Hearing) to any party of the hearing, or those who may
have any other conflict of interest should disqualify themselves from
participation in the activities of the committee related to this specific
request for a hearing. The complainant
and those individuals or groups who are alleged to be responsible for the
action or actions described by the complainant in the request for the hearing
(hereinafter, the respondents) are permitted to challenge committee members for
cause. The other members of the
committee will decide on any potential disqualifications if a committee member
is so challenged but wishes to remain.
When membership of the
committee falls below the specified five members and five alternates, the
When,
between elections, membership of the committee falls below the specified five
members and five alternates, the chair of the faculty, in consultation with the
Committee on Committees, shall appoint members to the committee. Vacancies on
the committee will be filled by first moving alternates to members and by
making appointments as alternates.
Upon
receipt of a request for a hearing, the chair of the committee shall determine
the availability of the regular elected members and alternates, and shall select from
those available one or more alternates, as necessary. The ranking of the available alternates for
selection shall be determined by their years of service to the University. That available alternate who is most highly
ranked shall attend all sessions of the hearing and shall replace a regular
member should that member be unable to attend the entire hearing.
The committee may at any time
consult with an attorney in the office of the University Attorney who is not
presently nor previously substantively involved in the matter giving rise to
the hearing, nor will advise the University administrator(s) regarding following the
committee action(s) during the review.
(See Part VIII, Responsibilities of Administrative Officers.)
2. Initiation of the Hearing Process
The basis
for a request for a hearing must be found in one or more of the following reasons: (a) the decision was based on any ground
stated to be impermissible in Section 604B of The Code of The University of
North Carolina; (b) the decision was attended by a material procedural
irregularity.[i]
In
addition, the University Equal Employment Opportunity policy prohibits
employment discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Section
604B of The Code of The University of North Carolina states: “In no event shall a
decision not to reappoint a faculty member be based upon (a) the exercise by
the faculty member of rights guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United
States Constitution, or by Article I of the North Carolina Constitution, or (b)
the faculty member's race, color,
sex, religion, creed, national origin, age, disability, veteran’s status honorable service in the armed services of the
United States or other forms of discrimination prohibited under policies adopted by
campus Boards of Trustees, or (c) personal malice. For purpose of this section, the term ‘personal malice’ means dislike,
animosity, ill-will, or hatred based on personal characteristics, traits, or
circumstances of an individual.” (See UNC Policy 101.3.1.II.B for details)
"Material
procedural irregularity" means a departure from prescribed procedures
governing reappointment and conferral of permanent tenure that is of such
significance as to cast reasonable doubt
upon the integrity of the original decision not to reappoint or
not to confer permanent tenure. Whether a material procedural
irregularity occurred, and whether it is material, shall be determined
by reference to those procedures which were in effect when the initial decision
not to reappoint or not to confer permanent tenure was made and communicated.
The Hearing Committee shall ask the chancellor to certify what procedures were
then in effect if that question is a matter of dispute. (
The
complainant's request for a hearing must specifically identify and enumerate
all reasons for the request. The request
must include (a) a description that is as complete as possible of the actions
or the failures to act which support each specified contention; (b) the
identification of the respondents; (c) an enumeration and description of the
information or documents which are to be used to support the contention (copies
of the described documents are to be made a part of the request for a hearing);
(d) the identification of persons who may be willing to provide information in
support of the contention; and (e) a brief description of the information
those persons identified in (d) may provide and (f) a copy of the
vice chancellor’s notice of non-reappointment or non-conferral of permanent
tenure. The
complainant's request for a hearing shall be made to the chair of the Hearing
Committee and delivered to the
C. Validation of the Request for
Hearing.
Validation
of the complainant's request for a hearing is the first step in the hearing
process. The Hearing Committee shall
convene within 15 calendar days after receipt of the complainant's
request for a hearing. The committee
shall notify the complainant of the meeting date by a method that provides
delivery verification and is consistent with UNC Policy 101.3.3. The committee shall meet in executive session
and the meeting will be conducted according to the latest edition of Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised. The committee's evaluation of the
complainant's request for a hearing shall be limited solely to the documents
and information submitted as part of the complainant's request for a hearing.
The complainant may submit
additional documentation and information supporting the request for a hearing
up to 72 hours 4 calendar days prior to the committee
meeting. All documentation and
information submitted after the original request for a hearing must (a) support
contentions set forth in the original request for a hearing and (b) be
delivered to the
Documentation
and information that do not meet criteria set forth in the previous
paragraph will not be accepted and will be returned to the complainant.
The
Hearing Committee's review of the complainant's request for a hearing
shall be limited solely to determining whether the facts alleged by the
complainant, if established, would support the contention that the decision not
to reappoint or not to confer permanent tenure was based upon any of the
grounds stated as impermissible in Section 604B of The Code of The University of North Carolina or was attended by
a material procedural irregularity.
Based on their review and evaluation of the submitted material, the
committee shall decide whether the request for a hearing is to be validated.
If the
request for a hearing is not validated, the complainant shall be notified by a
method that provides delivery verification and is consistent with UNC Policy
101.3.3, within 10 calendar days of the committee meeting. Such a determination confirms the decision
not to reappoint or not to confer permanent tenure. (
The
complainant, within 10 calendar days of receipt of the Hearing Committee's
decision, may accept the decision of the Hearing Committee not to validate a
hearing or may appeal to the chancellor the decision not to conduct a
hearing. The chancellor, within 14 calendar days of the complainant's
appeal, shall decide to confirm the committee's decision or shall support the
complainant's request for a hearing. (
The
complainant, within 10 calendar days following receipt of the chancellor’s
decision, may accept the chancellor's confirmation of the Hearing Committee's
decision not to validate a hearing or may appeal to the Board of Governors the decision not to conduct a hearing. (
If the
committee validates the request for a hearing, or if the decision not to
validate the request for a hearing is not supported by the chancellor, the
committee shall so notify the complainant by a method that provides delivery
verification and is consistent with UNC Policy 101.3.3 and begin the processes
necessary to set the time and date for the hearing.
D. Procedures for the Hearing.
1. Time and Date of Hearing
If the
request for a hearing is validated, the committee shall provide a complete copy
of the request for a hearing to the
individuals named in the request for a hearing. The committee shall set the
time, date, and place for the hearing.
The date for the hearing must be within 30 42 calendar
working days of
the notification to the complainant that the request for a hearing was
validated, except under unusual circumstances
such as when a hearing request is received during official university breaks
and holidays and despite reasonable efforts the hearing committee cannot be
assembled. The committee shall then notify
the complainant, the respondents, the chair of the faculty, and the chancellor,
of the time, date, and place of the hearing.
At least 15 21 calendar working days before the hearing,
the complainant shall notify the committee, the respondents, the chair of the
faculty, and the chancellor of the identity of the complainant’s advisor, if
any, and whether or not the advisor is an attorney. (“Attorney” is defined as
anyone with a Juris Doctor, or other recognized law degree, regardless of
whether or not that person is licensed to practice law in the State of
2. Conduct of the Hearing
The chair
of the Hearing Committee or an regular elected member of
the committee if the chair is unavailable, is responsible for conducting the
hearing and for maintaining order during the hearing. Except as provided for herein, the hearing
shall be conducted according to the latest edition of Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised. Attendance at the hearing is limited to the
committee's members and alternates, the complainant, one person who may advise
the complainant, the respondent(s), and one person who may advise the
respondent(s). If there is more than one
respondent, the respondents will designate a spokesperson for the hearing.
There will be an equal number of persons advising the complainant and
respondent(s). The person advising the complainant but who may not
take an active part in the proceedings. The person advising the respondent(s)
at the hearing may be the respondents, either an
Any such record is a part of the personnel inquiry and must be treated
with appropriate confidentiality. Only the immediate parties to the
controversy, the responsible administrators and attorneys, and the members of
the University governing boards and their respective committees and staff are permitted
access to such materials. (
The
hearing shall begin with an opening statement by the committee member chairing
the hearing. This statement shall be
limited to explaining the purpose of the hearing and the procedures to be
followed during the hearing. The hearing
chair explicitly will note that the committee shall consider only information
bearing on the allegations presented in the complainant's request for the
hearing.
Following
the opening remarks by the hearing chair, the complainant shall present his or
her contentions and any supporting witnesses and documentary evidence. The
respondent(s), through their spokesperson representative, may
then reply to these contentions and present any supporting witnesses and
evidence. During these presentations, the complainant, and the respondent(s),
through their spokesperson representative, may cross-examine
opposing witnesses. Committee members may question witnesses for purposes of
clarification. At the conclusion of the
hearing, the complainant may make a summary statement of up to ten minutes
in duration. If the complainant elects to do so, then the respondent(s),
through their spokesperson, will be given the same opportunity the complainant and
then the respondent(s) will be given the opportunity to provide summary
statements.
E. Procedures After the Hearing
After the
hearing, the committee shall meet in executive session and begin its
deliberations or shall adjourn for no more than two calendar working
days, at which time it shall reconvene in executive session to determine
whether it sustains or does not sustain the allegations stated in the request
for the hearing. In reaching its
decisions the committee shall consider only the testimony and other materials
entered or presented as evidence during the hearing. The Complainant shall have
the burden of proof. The standard applied by the committee being that the
evidence is clear and convincing by the greater weight shall be that the
preponderance of the evidence to establishes that a basis for
his or her contentions is found in one of the reasons listed in Section V.B.2.
Initiation of Hearing.
Within 14
calendar 10 working days of finishing its deliberations the
committee shall provide the complainant, respondents, and the chancellor with a
copy of the committee's report and, a copy of the court reporter's transcript
of the hearing. (
If the
Hearing Committee determines that the complainant's contention has not been
established, it shall, by simple, unelaborated statement, so notify the
complainant, the respondents, the chair of the faculty, and the chancellor.
Such a determination confirms the decision not to reappoint or not to confer
permanent tenure.
If the
Hearing Committee determines that the complainant's contention has been
satisfactorily established, it shall notify the complainant, the respondents,
the chair of the faculty, and the chancellor by written notice and shall
recommend further substantive review.
Within 42 calendar
30 working days after receiving the
recommendation of the Hearing Committee and
the transcript, the chancellor shall notify the complainant, the
respondents, the chair of the faculty, and the chair of the Hearing Committee
what further substantive review, if any, will be made of the original decision
not to reappoint or not to confer permanent tenure. If the chancellor is considering taking action inconsistent with the
committee’s recommendations, the chancellor shall request within 14 calendar
10 working days that a joint meeting with the committee
occur. At the joint meeting, the chancellor will communicate his or her
concerns and the committee will have an opportunity to respond. The joint
meeting must occur within the 42 calendar 30 working day period. in the preceding paragraph.
The chancellor must base his or
her decision on a thorough review of (1) the record evidence from the hearing
and (2) the report of the committee. While the chancellor should give deference
to the advice of the faculty committee, the final campus-based decision is the
chancellor’s.
The
chancellor will inform the complainant of his or her decision in writing by a
method that produces adequate evidence of delivery. In the event of an adverse
decision, the chancellor's notice must inform the complainant: (1) that, within
14 10 calendar days of the complainant's receipt of the decision,
the complainant may file a notice of appeal with the president requesting
review by the Board of Governors in accordance with the Board of Governors
Policy 101.3.1, (2) that a simple written notice of appeal with a brief
statement of its basis is all that is required within this fourteen ten-day
period, and (3) that, thereafter, a detailed schedule for the submission of
relevant documents will be established if such notice of appeal is received in
a timely manner matter. (
[i] Appeals based on
material procedural irregularity shall refer only to personnel actions which
are initiated after the approval of material procedural irregularity as a basis
for a request for a hearing. “
February
24, 2009
Attachment 6.
FACULTY GOVERNANCE
COMMITTEE REPORT
Proposed revisions to ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix D, Section VI.
Due Process Before Discharge or the Imposition of Serious Sanctions
Link to
changes made to the UNC
Code, Section 603 that necessitated these revisions.
Revise Section VI. to read as
follows:
(Deletions are noted in strikethrough and additions are noted in bold print):
VI. Due Process Before Discharge or the
Imposition of Serious Sanctions
A. Sanctions Penalties
A faculty member who is the beneficiary of institutional
guarantees of tenure shall enjoy protection against unjust and arbitrary
application of disciplinary sanctions penalties. During the period of such guarantees, the
faculty member may be discharged from
employment, suspended, or demoted in rank or serious sanctions may be imposed or
suspended from employment or diminished in rank only for reasons of:
1. incompetence, including significant, sustained unsatisfactory performance after the
faculty member has been given the opportunity to remedy such performance and
fails to do so within a
reasonable time;
2. neglect of duty, including sustained failure to meet
assigned classes or to perform other significant faculty professional
obligations; or
3. misconduct of such a nature as to
indicate that the individual is unfit to continue as a member of the faculty, including violations of professional
ethics, mistreatment of students or other employees, research misconduct,
financial fraud, criminal or other illegal, inappropriate or unethical conduct.
To justify serious disciplinary actions, such misconduct should be either: (i)
sufficiently related to a faculty member’s academic responsibilities as to
disqualify the individual from effective performance of university duties, or
(ii) sufficiently serious to adversely reflect on the individual’s honesty,
trustworthiness or fitness to be a faculty member.
These sanctions penalties
may be imposed only in accordance with the procedures prescribed in this
section. For purposes of the Faculty
Manual these regulations, a faculty member serving a stated term
shall be regarded as having tenure until the end of the term. These procedures shall not apply to
non-reappointment (Section V) or termination of employment (Section VII).
B. Notice
Written notice of intent to discharge the faculty from employment or to impose serious sanction, together with a written specification of the
reasons suspend from employment or to diminish in rank (these sanctions penalties hereinafter
in Section VI are referred to as “the
sanction” "the penalty") shall be sent by the vice
chancellor with supervisory authority or by the vice chancellor's designee
to the faculty member by a method that
provides delivery verification and is consistent with UNC Policy 101.3.3. The statement shall include notice of the
faculty member's right, upon request, to both written specification of the
reasons for the intended penalty and a hearing by the Due Process Committee
(Section VI.E.). (Faculty Senate
Resolution #99-10)
C. Penalty Without
Recourse
If, within 14
calendar [i]
10 working
days after the faculty member receives the notice and written specification of the reasons referred to in Section
VI.B. above, the faculty member makes no written request for either a
specification of reasons or a hearing, the faculty member may be discharged or serious sanction imposed penalized
without recourse to any institutional grievance or appellate procedure.
D. Specification of
Reasons and Hearing Request
If, within 10 working days after the faculty member
receives notice referred to in Section VI.B. above, the faculty member makes a
written request to the vice chancellor with supervisory authority, method that provides delivery verification
and is consistent with UNC Policy 101.3.3, for a specification of
reasons, the vice chancellor with supervisory authority or the vice
chancellor's designee shall supply such specification in writing by a method that provides delivery verification
and is consistent with UNC Policy 101.3.3, within 10 working days after
receiving the request.
A faculty member's shall
timely submit a request for a hearing is to be directed
to the vice chancellor with supervisory authority in writing by a method that provides delivery verification
and is consistent with UNC Policy 101.3.3. Upon receipt of such a
request the vice chancellor with supervisory authority shall, within 10 calendar ten working days, notify the chair of
the Due Process Committee of the need to convene a hearing in accordance with
Section VI.F.1. If the faculty member makes no written request to the vice
chancellor with supervisory authority for a hearing within 10 working days
after receiving the specification, the faculty member may be penalized without
recourse to any institutional grievance or appellate procedures. (Faculty Senate Resolution #99-10).
If the faculty member shall submit a timely request for a hearing,
the Chancellor shall ensure a process is in place so that the hearing is timely
accorded before the Due Process Committee.
E. Due Process Committee
The Due Process Committee (hereinafter “Committee”) shall be composed of five members and
five alternates each of whom is a full-time, permanently tenured voting faculty
member without administrative appointment per Appendix D, Section IV. Members
shall be elected in accordance with the procedures for election of appellate
committees specified in the Bylaws of the Due Process Committee shall
elect a chair and a secretary. Should
any cCommittee officer be absent at the
beginning of a hearing, the cCommittee shall
elect an alternate officer for the purposes of the hearing.
When the cCommittee
is convened to consider any matter associated with a faculty member's request
for a hearing, those cCommittee
members who hold an appointment in the faculty member's academic unit, those
who might reasonably expect to be called as witnesses, or those who may have
any other conflict of interest should disqualify themselves from participation
in the activities of the cCommittee
related to this specific request for a hearing.
The faculty member and the vice chancellor with supervisory authority
are permitted to challenge cCommittee
members for cause. The other members of
the cCommittee will decide on any potential
disqualifications if a cCommittee
member is so challenged but wishes to remain. (Faculty Senate Resolution
#99-10)
When membership of the cCommittee
falls below the specified five members and five alternates, the Faculty Senate
will elect additional faculty members to the committee. Vacancies on the committee will be filled first
by moving alternates to member status and by electing new alternates and/or
members as needed to fill the committee roster.
Upon notification by the vice chancellor with supervisory
authority or the
vice chancellor's designee that a faculty member has
requested a hearing, the chair of the cCommittee
shall determine the availability of the elected members and alternates, and
shall select from those available one or more alternates, as necessary (see
Part XI of the ECU
Faculty Manual, UNC Code, Section 603).The ranking of the
available alternates for selection shall be determined by their years of
service to the University. That
available alternate who is most highly ranked shall attend all sessions of the
hearing and shall replace a regular member should that member be unable to
attend the entire hearing. (Faculty
Senate Resolution #99-10)
The cCommittee
may at any time consult with an attorney in the office of the University
Attorney who is not presently nor previously substantively involved in the
matter giving rise to the hearing, nor will advise the University
administrator(s) following the cCommittee
action(s). (See Part VIII,
Responsibilities of Administrative Officers.)
F. Procedures for the
Hearing
1. Time
and Date of Hearing
The Due Process Committee shall set the time,
date, and place for the hearing. The
Committee shall accord the faculty member 30 calendar days from the time it
receives the faculty member’s written request for a hearing to prepare a
defense. The Committee may, upon the faculty member's written request and for
good cause, postpone the date of the hearing by written notice to the faculty
member. The
date for the hearing must be within 30 working calendar days of the time the
committee receives the vice chancellor with supervisory authority's
notification of the faculty member's written request for a hearing.
The cCommittee shall notify the affected
faculty member, the vice chancellor with supervisory authority, and the chair
of the faculty of the time, date, and place of the hearing. The committee may, upon the faculty member's written
request and for good cause, postpone the date of the hearing by written notice
to the faculty member.
The Committee will ordinarily endeavor to complete the hearing within 90
calendar days except under unusual circumstances such as when a hearing request
is received during official university breaks and holidays and despite
reasonable efforts the Committee cannot be assembled.[i]
2. Conduct of Hearing
The hearing shall be on the written
specification of reasons for the intended discharge
or imposition of a serious sanction penalty. The chair of the Due Process
Committee, or an elected member of the cCommittee
if the chair is unavailable, is responsible for conducting the hearing
and for maintaining order during the hearing.
Except as provided for herein,
the hearing shall be conducted according to the latest edition of Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised. Attendance
at the hearing is limited to the cCommittee's
members and alternates, the faculty member requesting the hearing, counsel for
the faculty member, the vice chancellor with supervisory authority, or his/her
designee, and/or and counsel
for the vice chancellor. Other persons (witnesses) providing information to the
cCommittee shall not be present throughout
the hearing, but shall be available at a convenient location to appear before
the cCommittee as appropriate. For any hearing
from which an appeal may be taken, a professional court reporter must be used
to record and transcribe the hearing.
(Faculty Senate Resolution #03-37). The
hearing shall be closed to the public unless both the faculty member and the
Committee agree that it may be open.
The hearing shall begin with an
opening statement by the hearing chair limited to explaining the purpose of the
hearing and the procedures to be followed during the hearing. Following the opening remarks by the hearing
chair, the vice chancellor with supervisory authority, his/her designee, or his/her counsel shall present the
university's contentions and any supporting witnesses and documentary
evidence. The faculty member or the
faculty member's counsel may then reply and present any supporting witnesses
and documentary evidence. During these
presentations, the vice chancellor with supervisory authority, his/her designee, or his/her his or her
counsel, and the faculty member or his/her his or her
counsel, shall have the right to
confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, and to make argument may
cross-examine opposing witnesses. Committee
members may question witnesses for purposes of
clarification. At the conclusion
of the hearing, the faculty member and then the vice chancellor with
supervisory authority, or his/her designee, will be given the
opportunity to provide summary statements. (Faculty Senate Resolution
#99-10).
G. Procedures After
the Hearing
After the hearing, the cCommittee
shall meet in executive session and begin its deliberations or shall adjourn
for no more than two calendar working
days, at which time it shall reconvene in executive session. In reaching its decisions the cCommittee shall consider only the
testimony and other materials entered or presented as evidence during the
hearing and such written or oral
arguments as the committee, in its discretion, may allow. The University has
the burden of proof. In evaluating evidence, the Committee shall use the
standard of “clear and convincing” evidence in determining whether the
institution has met its burden of showing that permissible grounds for serious
sanction exist and are the basis for the recommended action.
Within 14 calendar 10 working days of finishing its deliberations or after the full transcript is received,
whichever is later, the cCommittee shall provide the faculty
member[i]
and the chancellor with a copy of its report, including materials entered as
evidence, and a copy of the court reporter's transcript of the hearing. In its report the cCommittee shall state whether or not it
recommends that the intended sanction penalty be imposed (Faculty Senate Resolution #03-37).
In reaching a decision, the chancellor shall consider only
the written transcript of the hearing and the report of the Due Process
Committee. Within 30 calendar working days of
receiving the report, the chancellor's decision shall be conveyed in writing to
the Due Process
Committee and the affected faculty member by a method that provides delivery verification and is consistent with UNC
Policy 101.3.3.
H. Appeal
If the chancellor concurs in a recommendation of the cCommittee that is favorable to the
faculty member, the decision shall be final.
If the chancellor rejects a finding, conclusion, or recommendation of
the Due Process
Committee, the chancellor shall state the reasons for doing so in a written
decision. If the chancellor either declines to accept a Committee
recommendation that is favorable to the faculty member or concurs in the cCommittee recommendation that is
unfavorable to the faculty member, the faculty member may appeal the chancellor's
decision to the Board of Trustees.
This appeal shall be transmitted through the chancellor and
shall be addressed to the chair of the Board.
Notice of appeal shall be filed received by the
chancellor within 14
calendar ten working
days after the faculty member receives the chancellor's decision. The appeal to the Board of Trustees shall be
decided by the full Board of Trustees; however, the Board may delegate the duty
of conducting a hearing to a standing or ad hoc committee of at least three members.
The Board of Trustees, or its committee shall consider the
appeal on the written transcript of the hearing held by the Due Process
Committee, but it may, in its discretion, hear such other evidence as it deems necessary, with the opportunity for rebuttal.
The Board of Trustees' decision shall be made as soon as reasonably possible within 45 working days after the chancellor has received the faculty
member's request for an appeal to the Trustees.
This decision shall be
final except that the faculty member may, within 14 calendar ten days after receiving the trustees' decision, file a written notice of
appeal, by certified mail, return receipt requested, or by another means that
provides proof of delivery, file a written petition for review to the Board of Governors by alleging if he or she alleges that one or more specified provisions of the Code of The University
of North Carolina have been violated. Any
such appeal petition to the Board of Governors shall be transmitted through the
President. ,and
the Board shall, within 45 working days, grant or deny the petition or take
such other action as it deems advisable.
If it grants the petition for review, the Board's decision shall be made
within 45 working days after it notifies the faculty member by a method that provides delivery verification
and is consistent with UNC Policy 101.3.3, that it will review the
petition.
The exercise of the Board of Governors’ jurisdiction is refined
to insure that primary emphasis remains properly focused on the campus
grievance procedures. Requests for
appellate review will be screened to determine whether the Board should
consider the issues raised in a petitioner’s request for review. The following basic standards will guide that
screening process:
1. The
Board will grant requests to review contentions that the grievance procedures
followed by the campus in a particular case did not comport with University
requirements that affect the credibility, reliability, and fairness of such
inquiries, thereby arguably depriving the grievant of a valid opportunity to
establish his or her contentions.
2. The
Board will grant requests to review University policy issues implicated by a
particular grievance, when the question appears to require intervention by the
governing board to clarify the definition, interpretation, or application of
such policies.
3. The
Board will review questions about the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain
the conclusion reached only if (a) the case involves a substantial interest of
the grievant, e.g., tenure or reappointment and/or (b) the history of the case
reveals disagreement, with respect to the sufficiency of the evidence to
sustain the grievant’s contentions, among the responsible decision makers,
i.e., the due process committee, the chancellor, or the board of trustees [i]; if
the responsible decision makers are in accord, normally no such appeal will be
entertained by the Board of Governors.
Under the foregoing prescriptions, it is necessary for
prospective petitioners to evaluate their circumstances carefully, to
understand the purposes of permissible appellate review, and to formulate
clearly and concisely their statement of the one or more grounds on which they
believe the Board should exercise its appellate jurisdiction. Thus, the first step in any appeal to the
Board of Governors will be an evaluation by the Board, through a designated
subcommittee, with staff assistance, of the grievant’s written statement of
grounds for appeal, to determine whether the issues sought to be raised warrant
Board attention, as judged by the three basic standards.
I. Suspension During
a Period of Intent to Discharge
When a faculty member has been notified of the institution's
intention to discharge the faculty member, the chancellor may reassign the individual to other duties or suspend
the faculty member at any time and continue the suspension until a final
decision concerning discharge has been reached by the procedures prescribed herein.
Suspension during a period of intent to discharge shall be exceptional and shall
be with full pay and benefits.”