Faculty Senate Actions, Meeting #123

The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

MOTION:
=======

The UAF Faculty Senate recommends to the Board of Regents that the attached list of individuals be awarded the appropriate UAF degrees pending completion of all University requirements. [Note: copy of the list is available in the Governance Office, 312 Signers' Hall.]

EFFECTIVE: Immediately

RATIONALE: These degrees are granted upon recommendation of the program faculty, as verified by the appropriate department head. As the representative governance group of the faculty, we are making that recommendation.

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

RESOLUTION OF RECOGNITION
FOR
F. STUART CHAPIN III

WHEREAS, F. Stuart "Terry" Chapin, Professor in the Department of Biology and Wildlife and Institute of Arctic Biology is the first person in Alaska to be elected to the National Academy of Sciences, and

WHEREAS, Terry Chapin is the recipient of numerous awards, including Member of the Swedish Royal Academy of Agriculture and Forestry, Member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 2002, Outstanding faculty member, UAF (2002), and

WHEREAS, Terry Chapin initiated and served as the director of the Interdisciplinary Graduate Education and Training Program in Regional Resilience and Adaptation, and

WHEREAS, Terry Chapin is internationally known for his work on arctic plant ecology and global climate change and has published over 280 scientific papers in these research areas, and

WHEREAS, Terry Chapin has greatly increased the attention to interactions between humans and global climate change, including recognition of the value of knowledge held by Native Alaskans, now

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the UAF Faculty Senate congratulates Terry Chapin on his election to the National Academy of Sciences and recognizes him as an outstanding faculty member and international ambassador for UAF.

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

RESOLUTION OF RECOGNITION
FOR
WENDY EHNERT

WHEREAS, Wendy Ehnert, AP science teacher at Lathrop High School, in March received the National Presidential Award for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching and was one of four of the 94 awardees invited to address Congress, and

WHEREAS, Wendy Ehnert was selected to be a Fulbright exchange teacher for the Czech Republic in 2001-02, and

WHEREAS, Wendy Ehnert has earned a Masters degree from UAF, and

WHEREAS, Wendy Ehnert has long maintained contacts and collaborations with UAF faculty to further her teaching skills and provide opportunities for students, now

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the UAF Faculty Senate congratulates Wendy Ehnert in receipt of her award and recognizes her as an outstanding graduate of UAF and contributor to education in Alaska.

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

OUTSTANDING SENATOR OF THE YEAR AWARD
FOR
C. PETER McROY

WHEREAS, C. Peter McRoy has served as the president of the University Assembly from 1981-1983; and

WHEREAS, C. Peter McRoy has served the UAF Faculty Senate in numerous capacities, often in leadership roles, since 2000; and

WHEREAS, C. Peter McRoy has made major contributions to bylaw changes that made the UAF Faculty Senate more representative of university faculty as a whole; and

WHEREAS, C. Peter McRoy has made major contributions in review of the draft Master Plan for the UAF campus to ensure a faculty voice; and

WHEREAS, C. Peter McRoy has proven skills as a negotiator between faculty and university administration that have contributed significantly to successful conclusion of Faculty Senate business;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the UAF Faculty Senate recognize C. Peter McRoy as Outstanding Senator of the Year for Academic Year 2003-2004.

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

OUTSTANDING SENATOR OF THE YEAR AWARD
FOR
JANE WEBER

WHEREAS, Jane Weber has served the UAF Faculty Senate in numerous capacities, often in leadership roles, since 1993; and

WHEREAS, Jane Weber has communicated effectively with the UAF College of Rural Alaska (CRA) faculty about relevant and important issuesthat come to the Faculty Senate, and, therefore, the CRA faculty have been connected to the on-going process of shared governance; and

WHEREAS, Jane Weber has done a wonderful job representing CRA in the Faculty Senate and, therefore, the CRA faculty have come to rely on Jane to represent the interests of the CRA students, mission, and faculty; and

WHEREAS, Jane Weber has made major contributions to UAF Developmental Studies culminating in the establishment of the CRA Department of Developmental Education, which Jane will chair next academic year; and

WHEREAS, Jane Weber always has had the education of students as her top priority;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the UAF Faculty Senate recognize Jane Weber as Outstanding Senator of the Year for Academic Year 2003-2004.

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION
FOR
MARSHALL LIND

WHEREAS, Marshall Lind is retiring on July 1, 2004, after serving 40 years in Alaska education; and,

WHEREAS, Marshall Lind was Commissioner of the Alaska Department of Education from 1971-1983, and again from 1986-1987, serving under four governors for a combined total of more than 13 years; and,

WHEREAS, Marshall Lind was involved with the creation of the Regional Educational Attendance Areas and the implementation of the Molly Hootch Consent decree; and,

WHEREAS, Marshall Lind has served in various positions for the UA system, from visiting professor of education to dean of the School of Extended and Graduate Studies; and,

WHEREAS, Marshall Lind served as chancellor of the University of Alaska Southeast from 1987-1999 prior to coming to UAF and served as chancellor of the University of Alaska Fairbanks from 1999-2004; and,

WHEREAS, Marshall Lind, in that time, has been a strong proponent of academic freedom and has consistently advanced the concept of shared governance with staff and faculty; and,

WHEREAS, Marshall Lind continually sought to strengthen the commitment to diversity and workplace ethics and has been instrumental in strengthening university ties to the larger community; and

WHEREAS, Marshall Lind was the recipient of the 2002 Denali Award from the Alaska Federation of Natives, the highest honor AFN gives to non-Natives, for his commitment to serving the educational needs of rural and Native Alaskans; and,

WHEREAS, the faculty of the University of Alaska Fairbanks, through its Faculty Senate, wish to acknowledge the outstanding contributions to higher education of Marshall Lind, the chancellor of UAF; now,

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the UAF Faculty Senate acknowledges and proclaims to all that Marshall Lind has rendered outstanding service to the faculty, staff, students, alumni and administration of UAF and to the citizens of Alaska, and hereby express its deep appreciation.

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION
FOR
PETE P. PINNEY

WHEREAS, Pete Pinney has served the UAF Faculty Senate in a manner deserving of the UAF Faculty Senate's greatest admiration and respect; and

WHEREAS, Pete Pinney has served as Senator to the UAF Faculty Senate from 2001-2003; and

WHEREAS, Pete Pinney has served as a member of the Curricular Affairs Committee and as chair of the Curriculum Review Committee from 2001-2002; and

WHEREAS, Pete Pinney has served as Chair of the Administrative Committee and as President-Elect of the UAF Faculty Senate from 2002-2003; and

WHEREAS, Pete Pinney has served as a member of the UAF Governance Coordinating Committee from 2002-2004; and

WHEREAS, Pete Pinney has served as a member of the UA Faculty Alliance from 2002-2003, and as chair of the UA Faculty Alliance from 2003-2004; and

WHEREAS, Pete Pinney has served as a member of the UA Systemwide Governance Council from 2003-2004; and

WHEREAS, Pete Pinney has served as a member of the UA Ad Hoc Committee on Accountability & Sustainability and as a member of the Chancellor's Search Committee in 2004; and

WHEREAS, Pete Pinney has served as President of the UAF Faculty Senate from 2003-2004 and has championed collegiality, honesty, integrity, and respectful resolve; and

WHEREAS, The UAF Faculty Senate wishes to acknowledge the outstanding service rendered the faculty and the University by the work of Pete Pinney as he concludes his term as president; now

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the UAF Faculty Senate acknowledges the many contributions of Pete Pinney and expresses its appreciation for his exemplary service.

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

MOTION:
=======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the "UAF Advanced Placement Credit" for Foreign Languages to incorporate Alaska Native Languages (p. 16 of the 2003-2004 catalog).

CAPS - Additions
[[ ]] - DeletionsUAF Advanced Placement Credit

Foreign Language/ ALASKA NATIVE LANGUAGE

After completing the course in which you were placed (above 101) and earning a B grade or higher, you may ask to receive [["bonus"]] credit for the two immediately preceding prerequisite courses, if any. However, credit cannot be awarded for such courses if university credit has already been granted for them (for example, through College Board Advanced Placement national tests or credit transfer from another college). [[Bonus]] Credit will not be awarded for special topics courses, individual study courses, literature or culture courses, CONVERSATION COURSES, OR ANY COURSE TAUGHT IN ENGLISH.

EFFECTIVE: Fall 2004

RATIONALE: Alaska Native Languages may be used to fulfill the Foreign/Alaska Native languages option in the B.A. , as part of the "Perspectives on the Human Condition" in the Baccalaureate Core, and they may also be used to fulfill the Humanities and Social Science requirement in the A.A.S. This brings the Advance Placement Credit in line with other degree requirements which include Alaska Native Languages as a language option.

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

MOTION:
=======
The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the policy on Stacked and Cross-listed Courses (p. 181, 2003-2004 UAF Catalog and UAF Faculty Senate Academic Course and Degree Procedures Manual ).

CAPS - Additions
[[ ]] - Deletions

Stacked and Cross-listed Courses

[[The same course is sometimes offered by more than one discipline. Such offerings are referred to as "cross-listed" courses]] SOME COURSES ARE OFFERED BY AN INTERDISCIPLINARY PROGRAM (SUCH AS "WOMEN'S STUDIES) WITH A SPECIFIC DISCIPLINARY CONTENT (E.G., HISTORY). SOME COURSES CONTAINING INTERDISCIPLINARY CONTENT ARE SPONSORED BY SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS (E.G. THEATER/ART/MUSIC 200X). BOTH TYPES OF COURSES ARE 'CROSS-LISTED' and are designated in the class listings by "cross-listed with _____".

Courses are [[also]] sometimes offered simultaneously at different levels (100/200 or 400/600, for example) with higher level credit requiring additional effort and possibly higher order prerequisites from the student. Such courses are referred to as "Stacked" courses and are designated in the class listings by "Stacked with ____". In the case of 400/600 level stacked courses, graduate standing or permission of the instructor is required for graduate enrollment and a higher level of effort and performance is required on the part of students earning graduate credit.

Courses simultaneously stacked and cross-listed [[will be]] ARE designated in the class listing as "stacked with ___ and cross-listed with ___."

FOR ALL STACKED COURSES, [[In all cases,]] the course syllabus (not the catalog) must stipulate the course content and requirements for each level [[and/or discipline]]. The catalog should indicate [[if there is a difference in content.]] THE DIFFERENCE IN PREREQUISITES FOR EACH LEVEL.

EFFECTIVE: Fall 2004

RATIONALE: This wording clarifies the cross-listing/stacked course descriptions and removes the contradiction between paragraphs 1 ('the same course') and 4 ('difference in content').

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

MOTION:
=======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to approve a change in the residency requirements for military personnel (and dependents) pursuing an AA/AAS approved* program as part of the ServiceMembers Opportunity College (SOC) from 15 credits to 6 credits.

(*NOTE: Current approved AAS degree programs are: Applied Accounting, Airframe & Powerplant and Culinary Arts)

EFFECTIVE: Upon approval by the Board of Regents

RATIONALE: UAF is listed as a ServiceMembers Opportunity College (SOC) institution. The ability to continue this relationship is dependent upon the participation displayed by agreements signed by the military personnel with UAF. There has not been an incentive to prepare this documentation with the existing policy--typically military personnel can meet the residency requirement during their service time and have not felt the need to formalize the process. However, the lack of such agreements has jeopardized the continuation for UAF in this network. By having an incentive, similar to UAA's, and more feasibly formalizing electronically the SOC agreement, UAF stands to maintain status and gain a greater working relationship with the military units in the Fairbanks community.

- UAF's membership as a SOC Network institution assures the continued presence of UAF on Ft. Wainwright (weekly visits by UAF Admissions Counselor and a representative from TVC).

- As a SOC Network institution, UAF would be "eligible" to offer degree programs on the Army installations in Alaska, to include Ft. Greely as it becomes an Army Guard installation manned by 350+ active duty Guard members and their families.

- The Army Education Center is eager to have UAF retain its status as a SOC Network institution as it views UAF as a critical partner in the educational opportunity arena for Ft. Wainwright soldiers and their families. Family members, spouses and age-appropriate dependents, are eligible for the SOC programs.

- The Department of the Army, Voluntary Education division, and SOC are waiting to hear from UAF, through the Education Center, about their decision to retain status as a SOC Network institution.

- UAA currently has a 3-credit residency requirement for this program

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

MOTION:
=======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to adopt regulations for course syllabi as follows:

"Syllabus Requirements for all UAF courses"

During the first week of class, instructors will distribute a course syllabus. Although modifications may be made throughout the semester, this document will contain the following information (as applicable to the discipline):

1. Course information: title, number, credits, prerequisites, location, meeting time.

2. Instructor (and if applicable, Teaching Assistant) information: name, office location, office hours, telephone, email.

3. Course readings/materials: course textbook, author, publisher. Supplementary readings (indicate whether required or recommended) and any supplies required.

4. Course description: content of the course and how it fits into the broader curriculum; expected proficiencies required to undertake the course, if applicable. May include, and must be consistent with, catalog course description.

5. Course Goals (more general) and Student Learning Outcomes (provide examples)

6. Instructional methods: describe the teaching techniques (eg: lecture, case study, small group discussion, private instruction, studio instruction, values clarification, games, journal writing, use of Blackboard, audio/video conferencing, etc.).

7. Course calendar: a schedule (daily or weekly major topics or assignments). You may call the outline Tentative or Work in progress to allow for modifications during the semester.

8. Course policies: specify course rules, including your policies on attendance, tardiness, class participation, make-up exams, and plagiarism/academic integrity.

9. Evaluation: specify how students will be evaluated, what factors will be included, their relative value, and how they will be tabulated into grades (on a curve, absolute scores, etc.)

10. Support Services: describe the student support services (local and/or regional) appropriate for the course.

11. Disabilities Services: The Office of Disability Services implements the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and insures that UAF students have equal access to the campus and course materials. State that you will work with the Office of Disabilities Services (203 WHIT, 474-7043) to provide reasonable accommodation to students with disabilities."

EFFECTIVE: Fall 2004

RATIONALE: The quality and content of syllabi vary tremendously across UAF. This legislation will both provide a guide to what needs to be in a syllabus and require instructors to provide them.

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

MOTION:
=======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the Graduate Full or Part-time Status/Study Load policy (p. 40, 2003-2004 Catalog) as follows:

CAPS - Additions
[[ ]] - Deletions

FULL OR PART-TIME STATUS/STUDY LOAD

As a graduate student if you're registered for nine or more semester credits, with three or more at the 600 level, you are classified as a full-time student (audited credits are not counted toward workload). You may enroll in up to [[18 ]] 14 credits per semester without special permission. To enroll in 15-19 credits [[or more, you need a 3.0 cumulative grade point average]], YOU MUST BE IN GOOD STANDING AND YOU MUST OBTAIN an overload approval from your advisor and department [[head]] CHAIR. ENROLLMENT IN 20 OR MORE GRADUATE CREDITS WILL BE ALLOWED ONLY IN EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES, AND REQUIRES GOOD STANDING AND OVERLOAD APPROVAL FROM YOUR ADVISOR, DEPARTMENT CHAIR, AND DEAN, AND THE DEAN OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL.

EFFECTIVE: Fall 2004

RATIONALE: This proposes new wording on limits to number of credits/semester. This would replace the first paragraph under "FULL OR PART-TIME STATUS/STUDY LOAD" on p. 40 of the current catalog. The limit of 14 credits is calculated by using the ratio to full-time credit load for the undergraduate limit of 18: 18/12 = 3/2. Multiplying this ratio by the full-time graduate load gives 3/2 X 9 = 27/2 = 13.5, and rounding up gives 14.

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

MOTION:
=======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the Graduate Degree Requirements for the Master of Arts with Project and the Master of Science with Project (p. 47 of the 2003-2004 Catalog) as follows:

[[ ]] = Deletions
CAPS = Additions

Master of Arts – with Project

a. Successfully complete at least 30 credits of course work
including at least [[six]] THREE credits of project work (698).

Master of Science – with Project

a. Successfully complete at least 30 credits of course work
including at least [[six]] THREE credits of project work (698).

EFFECTIVE: Fall 2004

RATIONALE: The purpose of the project is to provide students with a "capstone experience" that differs from a standard class in the level of independent work required. At least nine departments or programs (including Physics, Resource and Applied Economics, and the proposed program in Community Psychology) consider three credits sufficient to provide such an experience, especially for projects that are practical in nature. It is the type of work rather than the number of credits that distinguishes the project from a standard class. The current 6-credit requirement reduces the flexibility of the student in taking other recommended or required courses. This amendment will allow the programs that currently list 3-6 credits among their requirements to keep these requirements while not affecting programs wishing to maintain a 6-credit minimum.

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

MOTION:
=======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the "Appeals Policy for Academic Decisions Other Than Assignment of Grades" to require that the faculty members who rendered the decision (faculty committee or department chair) review their decision during the informal review process.

EFFECTIVE: Immediately

RATIONALE: The intent of the Informal review process is for the Provost to request that the original committee or department chair review their academic decision (as is done in grade appeals) to make sure that the decision was not made in error. The intent was not that one faculty member (e.g. a department chair) could override the findings of another group of faculty (such as a comprehensive examination committee) without consultation. This amendment calls for the faculty members who rendered the original decision to revisit that decision to determine if it was made in error, or if the decision stands. The student may then proceed with the formal appeals process.

*****************

CAPS - Additions
[[ ]] - Deletions

APPEALS POLICY FOR ACADEMIC DECISIONS
Other Than Assignment of Grades

I. Introduction

The University of Alaska is committed to the ideal of academic freedom and so recognizes that academic decisions [[(i.e., non-admission to or dismissal from any UAF program)]] are a faculty responsibility. Therefore, the University administration shall not unduly influence or affect the review of academic decisions that are a faculty responsibility.

The following procedures are designed to provide a means for students to seek review of academic decisions alleged to be arbitrary and capricious. THESE ACADEMIC DECISIONS MAY INVOLVE NON-ADMISSION TO OR DISMISSAL FROM ANY UAF PROGRAM THAT WERE MADE BY A DEPARTMENT OR PROGRAM THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT CHAIR, OR INVOLVE PASS/FAIL DECISIONS BY A COMMITTEE OF FACULTY ON NON-COURSE EXAMINATIONS (SUCH AS QUALIFYING, COMPREHENSIVE OR THESIS EXAMINATIONS) OR SATISFACTORY/UNSATISFACTORY EVALUATIONS ON STUDENT REVIEWS (SUCH AS THE ANNUAL REVIEW OF GRADUATE STUDENT PERFORMANCE). Before taking formal action, a student must attempt to resolve the issue informally. A student who files a written request for review under the following procedures shall be expected to abide by the final disposition of the review, as provided below, and may not seek further review of the matter under any other procedure within the university.

II. Definitions

A. As used in the schedule for review of academic decisions, a class day is any day of scheduled instruction, excluding Saturday and Sunday, included on the academic calendar in effect at the time of a review. Final examination periods are counted as class days.

B. "Department Chair" for the purposes of this policy denotes the administrative head of the academic unit offering the [[course]] PROGRAM (e.g., head, chair or coordinator of an academic department, or division coordinator or program chair if the faculty member is in the College of Rural Alaska).

C. "COMMITTEE OF FACULTY" FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS POLICY DENOTES THE GROUP OF FACULTY WHO RENDERED THE INITIAL DECISION BEING APPEALED. SUCH GROUPS MAY INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO: GRADUATE EXAMINATION COMMITTEES, GRADUATE ADVISORY COMMITTEES, AND THESIS DEFENSE COMMITTEES.

[[C]] D. The "dean/director" is the administrative head of the college or school offering the course or program from which the academic decision or action arises. For students at extended campuses the director of the campus may substitute for the dean/director of the unit offering the course or program.

[[D]] E. The next regular semester is the fall or spring semester following that in which the disputed academic decision was made. For example, it would be the fall semester for a final grade issued for a course completed during the previous spring semester or summer session. The spring semester is the next regular semester for an academic decision made during the previous fall semester.

III. Procedures

A. A student wishing to appeal an academic decision other than a grade assignment must first request an informal review of the decision.

1. Notification must be received by the Provost within 15 days from the first day of instruction of the semester in which the decision takes effect.

2. There may be extenuating circumstances when the deadlines cannot be met due to illness, mail disruption, or other situations over which the student may have no control. In such a case, upon request from the student, the Provost, after review of supporting documentation provided by the student, may adjust the deadlines accordingly. An extension of the deadline will be limited to one semester but every effort should be made to complete the appeal process within the current semester.

3. IN CASES WHERE THE DECISION WAS RENDERED BY A COMMITTEE OF FACULTY (SUCH AS THOSE DEALING WITH GRADUATE EXAMINATIONS AND EVALUATIONS), THE PROVOST WILL REQUEST THE APPROPRIATE COMMITTEE TO CONDUCT AN INFORMAL REVIEW OF ITS DECISION. THE COMMITTEE OF FACULTY WILL DETERMINE WHETHER ITS ORIGINAL DECISION SHOULD BE OVERTURNED OR CHANGED IN ANY WAY. THE COMMITTEE OF FACULTY WILL SUBMIT ITS RECOMMENDATION TO THE PROVOST THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT CHAIR AND DEAN/DIRECTOR WITHIN 10 DAYS.

[[3]] 4. IN ALL OTHER MATTERS, The Provost will request the appropriate department chair to conduct an informal review of the decision. The Department chair will determine whether the original decision should be overturned or changed in any way. The department chair will submit his/her recommendation to the provost through the dean/director within 10 days. In the event that the department chair is directly involved, the provost can ask the dean/director to conduct an informal review and submit his/her recommendations directly to him.

[[4]] 5. The Provost will consult with the student on the COMMITTEE OF FACULTY'S OR department chair's recommendation. If the student does not find that recommendation acceptable, he/she may request the Provost to conduct a formal review.

B. The formal review will be conducted as follows.

1. This formal review is initiated by the student through a signed, written request to the Provost.

a. The student's request for formal review may be submitted using university forms specifically designed for this purpose and available from the Office of the Provost.

b. By submitting a request for a review, the student acknowledges that no additional mechanisms exist within the university for the formal review of the decision, and that the university's administration including the college dean/director can not influence or affect the outcome of the formal review.

c. The request for a formal review must be received no later than 10 days after the student has learned the outcome of the informal review (IIIA4).

d. The request must detail the basis for the allegation that the decision was made on a basis other than sound professional judgment based upon standard academic policies, procedures and practices.

2. The Provost will appoint a 5 member review committee composed of the following:

a. One non-voting tenure-track faculty member from the academic unit in which the decision was made. This individual shall serve in an advisory role. This faculty member shall not be the individual(s) against whom the appeal is directed.

b. Two tenure-track faculty members from within the college or school but outside of the unit in which the decision was made. If available, one of these two members will be selected from the members of the UAF Faculty Appeals and Oversight Committee.

c. One tenure-track faculty member from outside the college or school in which the decision was made. If available, this member is to be selected from the members of the UAF Faculty Appeals and Oversight Committee.

d. The fifth member to be appointed by the Provost will be a non-voting student representative.

e. The campus judicial officer or his/her designee shall serve as a nonvoting facilitator for appeals hearings. This individual shall serve in an advisory role to help preserve consistent hearing protocol and records.

3. The committee must schedule a mutually agreeable date, time and location for the appeal hearing within 10 working days of receipt of the student's formal request.

a. During this and subsequent meetings, all parties involved shall protect the confidentiality of the matter according to the provisions of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and any other applicable federal, state or university policies.

b. To be considered by the committee, all written materials shall be submitted to the hearing facilitator no later than 48 hours before the start of the scheduled appeals hearing. To give all interested parties a chance to submit written materials, at least three business days shall elapse between the time the meeting is announced and the start of the meeting. New written materials presented after the 48-hour deadline or presented during the meeting will only be considered by agreement of all voting committee members. These procedures related to written materials also apply to all subsequent meetings.

c. Throughout the proceedings, the committee will encourage a mutually agreeable resolution.

d. The mandatory first item of business at this meeting is for the committee to rule on the validity of the student's request. Grounds for dismissal of the request for review are:

1) The student has not provided sufficient reason in support of the allegation that the academic decision was arbitrary and capricious.

2) This is not the first properly prepared request for appeal.

3) The request was not made within the policy deadlines.

e. In the event that the committee votes to dismiss the request, a written notice of dismissal must be forwarded to the student, instructor, department chair, dean/director and provost within five days of the decision, and will state clearly the reasoning for the dismissal of the request.

4. Acceptance for consideration of the student's request will result in the following:

a. A request for, and receipt of, a formal written response from the program department chair to the student's allegation.

b. A second meeting scheduled to meet within 10 days of the decision to review the request.

1) The student and the department chair or a representative of the program will be invited to attend the meeting.

2) The meeting will be closed to outside participation, and neither the student nor the instructor or department chair may be accompanied by anadvocate or representative. Other matters of format will be announced in advance.

3) The proceedings will be tape recorded and the tapes will be stored with the campus Judicial Officer.

4) The meeting must be informal, non-confrontational and fact-finding, where both the student and instructor or department chair may provide additional relevant and useful information and can provide clarification of facts for materials previously submitted.

5. The final decision of the committee will be made in private by a majority vote.

a. Actions which the committee can take if it accepts the student's allegation may include, but are not limited to, the following:

1) direct the program instructor or department chair to reconsider the decision,

2) provide a final alternative decision.

b. The academic decision review committee proceedings will result in the preparation of written findings and conclusions.

c. A formal, written report of the decision must be forwarded to the student, instructor, program/department chair, dean and Provost within five days of the meeting. The Provost shall then be responsible for communicating the decision to other relevant offices (e.g., Admissions, Registrar).

d. The decision of the committee is final.

C. The entire process must be completed by the end of the semester in which the decision first took effect.

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

MOTION:
=======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to approve the Unit Criteria for the Department of Anthropology.

EFFECTIVE: Immediately, Upon Chancellor Approval

RATIONALE: The committee assessed the unit criteria submitted by the Department of Anthropology. With some changes, agreed upon by the school representative the unit criteria were found to be consistent with UAF guidelines.

*******************

4/19/04

UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS

REGULATIONS FOR THE
APPOINTMENT AND EVALUATION OF FACULTY
AND
DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY UNIT CRITERIA
STANDARDS AND INDICES

THE FOLLOWING IS AN ADAPTATION OF UAF AND REGENTS CRITERIA FOR PROMOTION AND TENURE, SPECIFICALLY DEVELOPED FOR USE IN EVALUATING THE FACULTY IN THE DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY. ITEMS IN BOLDFACE ITALICS ARE THOSE SPECIFICALLY ADDED OR EMPHASIZED BECAUSE OF THEIR RELEVANCE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY FACULTY, AND BECAUSE THEY ARE ADDITIONS TO AND CLARIFICATION OF UAF REGULATIONS. THESE UNIT CRITERIA ARE FOR USE IN THE ANNUAL EVALUATION OF FACULTY AS WELL.

CHAPTER I

Purview

The University of Alaska Fairbanks document, "Faculty Appointment and Evaluation Policies," supplements the Board of Regents (BOR) policies and describes the purpose, conditions, eligibility, and other specifications relating to the evaluation of faculty at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF). Contained herein are regulations and procedures to guide the evaluation processes and to identify the bodies of review appropriate for the university.

The university, through the UAF Faculty Senate, may change or amend these regulations and procedures from time to time and will provide adequate notice in making changes and amendments.

These regulations shall apply to all of the units within the University of Alaska Fairbanks, except in so far as extant collective bargaining agreements apply otherwise.

The provost is responsible for coordination and implementation of matters relating to procedures stated herein.

CHAPTER II

Initial Appointment of Faculty

A. Criteria for Initial Appointment
Minimum degree, experience and performance requirements are set forth in "UAF Faculty Appointment and Evaluation Policies," Chapter IV. Exceptions to these requirements for initial placement in academic rank or special academic rank positions shall be submitted to the chancellor or chancellor's designee for approval prior to a final selection decision.

B. Academic Titles
Academic titles must reflect the discipline in which the faculty are appointed.

C. Process for Appointment of Faculty with Academic Rank
Deans of schools and colleges, and directors when appropriate, in conjunction with the faculty in a unit, shall observe procedures for advertisement, review, and selection of candidates to fill any vacant faculty position. These procedures are set by UAF Human Resources and the Campus Diversity and Compliance (AA/EEO) office and shall provide for participation in hiring by faculty and administrators as a unit.

D. Process for Appointment of Faculty with Special Academic Rank
Deans and/or directors, in conjunction with the faculty in a unit, shall establish procedures for advertisement, review, and selection of candidates to fill any faculty positions as they become available. Such procedures shall be consistent with the university's stated AA/EEO policies and shall provide for participation in hiring by faculty and administrators in the unit.

E. Following the Selection Process
The dean or director shall appoint the new faculty member and advise him/her of the conditions, benefits, and obligations of the position. If the appointment is to be at the professor level, the dean/director must first obtain the concurrence of the chancellor or chancellor's designee.

This letter of appointment establishes the nature of the position and, while the percentage of emphasis for each part may vary with each workload distribution as specified in the annual workload agreement document, the part(s) defining the position may not.

CHAPTER III

Periodic Evaluation of Faculty

A. General Criteria
Criteria as outlined in "UAF Faculty Appointment and Evaluation Policies," Chapter IV, AND DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY UNIT CRITERIA, STANDARDS AND INDICES, evaluators may consider, but shall not be limited to, whichever of the following are appropriate to the faculty member's professional obligation: mastery of subject matter; effectiveness in teaching; achievement in research, scholarly, and creative activity; effectiveness of public service; effectiveness of university service; demonstration of professional development and quality of total contribution to the university.

For purposes of evaluation at UAF, the total contribution to the university and activity in the areas outlined above will be defined by relevant activity and demonstrated competence from the following areas: 1) effectiveness in teaching; 2) achievement in scholarly activity; and 3) effectiveness of service.

Bipartite Faculty
Bipartite faculty are regular academic rank faculty who fill positions that are designated as performing two of the three parts of the university's tripartite responsibility.

The dean or director of the relevant college/school shall determine which of the criteria defined above apply to these faculty.
Bipartite faculty may voluntarily engage in a tripartite function, but they will not be required to do so as a condition for evaluation, promotion, or tenure.

B. Criteria for Instruction
A central function of the university is instruction of students in formal courses and supervised study. Teaching includes those activities directly related to the formal and informal transmission of appropriate skills and knowledge to students. The nature of instruction will vary for each faculty member, depending upon workload distribution and the particular teaching mission of the unit. Instruction includes actual contact in classroom, correspondence or electronic delivery methods, laboratory or field and preparatory activities, such as preparing for lectures, setting up demonstrations, and preparing for laboratory experiments, as well as individual/independent study, tutorial sessions, evaluations, correcting papers, and determining grades. Other aspects of teaching and instruction extend to undergraduate and graduate academic advising and counseling, training graduate students and serving on their graduate committees, particularly as their major advisor, curriculum development, and academic recruiting and retention activities.

1. Effectiveness in Teaching
Evidence of excellence in teaching may be demonstrated through, but not limited to, evidence of the various characteristics that define effective teachers. Effective teachers

a. are highly organized, plan carefully, use class time efficiently, have clear objectives, have high expectations for students;

b. express positive regard for students, develop good rapport with students, show interest/enthusiasm for the subject;

c. emphasize and encourage student participation, ask questions, frequently monitor student participation for student learning and teacher effectiveness, are sensitive to student diversity;

d. emphasize regular feedback to students and reward student learning success;

e. demonstrate content mastery, discuss current information and divergent points of view, relate topics to other disciplines, deliver material at the appropriate level;

f. regularly develop new courses, workshops and seminars and use a variety of methods of instructional delivery and instructional design;

g. may receive prizes and awards for excellence in teaching.

h. CURATORS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA MUSEUM WITH A FACULTY APPOINTMENT IN ANTHROPOLOGY TYPICALLY HAVE A PORTION OF THEIR WORKLOAD ASSIGNED TO THE DEPARTMENT. THE DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY WILL EVALUATE THE CURATOR'S TEACHING RECORD.

2. Components of Evaluation
Effectiveness in teaching will be evaluated through information on formal and informal teaching, course and curriculum material, recruiting and advising, training/guiding graduate students, etc., provided by:

a. systematic student ratings, i.e. student opinion of instruction summary forms,

and at least two of the following:

b. narrative self-evaluation,

c. peer/department chair classroom observation(s),

d. peer/department chair evaluation of course materials.

1. Achievement in Research, Scholarly and Creative Activity
Whatever the contribution, research, scholarly or creative activities must have one or more of the following characteristics:

a. They must occur in a public forum.

b. They must be evaluated by appropriate peers.

c. They must be evaluated by peers external to this institution so as to allow an objective judgment.

d. They must be judged to make a contribution.

2. Components of Research, Scholarly and Creative Activity
Evidence of excellence in research, scholarly, and creative activity may be demonstrated through, but not limited to:

a. Books, reviews, monographs, bulletins, articles, proceedings and other scholarly works published by reputable journals, scholarly presses, and publishing houses that accept works only after rigorous review and approval by peers in the discipline.

b. Competitive grants and contracts to finance the development of ideas, these grants and contracts being subject to rigorous peer review and approval.

c. Presentation of research papers before learned societies that accept papers only after rigorous review and approval by peers.

d. Exhibitions of art work at galleries, selection for these exhibitions being based on rigorous review and approval by juries, recognized artists, or critics.

e. Performances in recitals or productions, selection for these performances being based on stringent auditions and approval by appropriate judges.

f. Editing or refereeing articles or proposals for professional journals or organizations.

g. Scholarly reviews of publications, art works and performance of the candidate.

h. Citations of research in scholarly publications.

i. Published abstracts of research papers.

j. Reprints or quotations of publications, reproductions of art works, and descriptions of interpretations in the performing arts, these materials appearing in reputable works of the discipline.

k. Prizes and awards for excellence of scholarship.

l. Awards of special fellowships for research or artistic activities or selection of tours of duty at special institutes for advanced study.

m. Development of processes or instruments useful in solving problems, such as computer programs and systems for the processing of data, genetic plant and animal material, and where appropriate obtaining patents and/or copyrights for said development.

n. ALL PEER-REVIEWED PUBLICATIONS SHALL BE CONSIDERED SIGNIFICANT. THIS INCLUDES NOT ONLY THE WRITING OF JOURNAL ARTICLES AND BOOK CHAPTERS BUT THE EDITING OF BOOK AND JOURNAL VOLUMES.

o. MULTIPLE-AUTHORED, PEER-REVIEWED PUBLICATIONS SHALL BE EVALUATED IN TERMS OF THE AUTHOR'S CONTRIBUTION, TO BE DELINEATED IN THE NARRATIVE STATEMENT OF THE PROMOTION AND TENURE FILE.

p. RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONS AS EDITOR OF VOLUMES OF THE APUA (ANTHROPOLOGY PAPERS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA) SHALL BE CONSIDERED COMPARABLE TO RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONS AS EDITOR OF OTHER PEER REVIEWED BOOKS AND JOURNAL VOLUMES.

q. CURATORS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA MUSEUM WITH A FACULTY APPOINTMENT IN ANTHROPOLOGY TYPICALLY HAVE A PORTION OF THEIR WORKLOAD ASSIGNED TO THE DEPARTMENT. THE DEPARTMENT WILL EVALUATE THE CURATOR'S RECORD OF RESEARCH.

D. Criteria for Public and University Service
Public service is intrinsic to the land grant/sea grant/space grant tradition, and is a fundamental part of the university's obligation to the people of its state. In this tradition, faculty providing their professional expertise for the benefit of the university's external constituency, free of charge, is identified as "public service." The tradition of the university itself provides that its faculty assumes a collegial obligation for the internal functioning of the institution; such service is identified as "university service."

1. Public Service
Public service is the application of teaching, research, and other scholarly and creative activity to constituencies outside the University of Alaska Fairbanks. It includes all activities which extend the faculty member's professional, academic, or leadership competence to these constituencies. It can be instructional, collaborative, or consultative in nature and is related to the faculty member's discipline or other publicly recognized expertise. Public service may be systematic activity that involves planning with clientele and delivery of information on a continuing, programmatic basis. It may also be informal, individual, professional contributions to the community or to one's discipline, or other activities in furtherance of the goals and mission of the university and its units. Such service may occur on a periodic or limited-term basis. Examples include, but are not limited to:

a. Providing information services to adults or youth.

b. Service on or to government or public committees.

c. Service on accrediting bodies.

d. Active participation in professional organizations.

e. Active participation in discipline-oriented service organizations.

f. Consulting.

g. Prizes and awards for excellence in public service.

h. Leadership of or presentations at workshops, conferences, or public meetings.

i. Training and facilitating.

j. Radio and TV programs, newspaper articles and columns, publications, newsletters, films, computer applications, teleconferences and other educational media.

k. Judging and similar educational assistance at science fairs, state fairs, and speech, drama, literary, and similar competitions.

l. APPLIED ANTHROPOLOGICAL WORK WITH COMMUNITIES AND ORGANIZATIONS.

2. University Service
University service includes those activities involving faculty members in the governance, administration, and other internal affairs of the university, its colleges, schools, and institutes. It includes non-instructional work with students and their organizations. Examples of such activity include, but are not limited to:

a. Service on university, college, school, institute, or departmental committees or governing bodies.

b. Consultative work in support of university functions, such as expert assistance for specific projects.

c. Service as department chair or term-limited and part-time assignment as assistant/associate dean in a college/school.

d. Participation in accreditation reviews.

e. Service on collective bargaining unit committees or elected office.

f. Service in support of student organizations and activities.

g. Academic support services such as library and museum programs.

h. Assisting other faculty or units with curriculum planning and delivery of instruction, such as serving as guest lecturer.

i. Mentoring.

j. Prizes and awards for excellence in university service.

3. Evaluation of Service
Each individual faculty member's proportionate responsibility in service shall be reflected in annual workload agreements. In formulating criteria, standards and indices for evaluation, promotion, and tenure, individual units should include examples of service activities and measures for evaluation appropriate for that unit. Excellence in public and university service may be demonstrated through, e.g., appropriate letters of commendation, recommendation, and/or appreciation, certificates and awards and other public means of recognition for services rendered.

CURATORS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA MUSEUM WITH A FACULTY APPOINTMENT IN ANTHROPOLOGY TYPICALLY HAVE A PORTION OF THEIR TIME ASSIGNED TO THE DEPARTMENT. THE DEPARTMENT WILL EVALUATE THE CURATOR'S RECORD OF SERVICE TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA MUSEUM COMMITTEE (SEE BELOW).

Curation

CURATORS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA MUSEUM (UAM) CAN HOLD A TENURE-TRACK FACULTY POSITION. RANK AND TENURE ARE HELD WITHIN DEPARTMENTS AT UAF, AND CURATORS ARE THUS TREATED AS JOINT APPOINTMENTS BETWEEN A DEPARTMENT AND UAM. AS IS THE CASE FOR ALL TENURE-TRACK FACULTY IN THE DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY, CURATOR'S PERFORMANCES ARE EVALUATED ON THE BASIS OF THEIR ACTIVITIES IN TEACHING, RESEARCH AND SERVICE.

1. CURATION INVOLVES THE MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT OF A FORMALLY RECOGNIZED UNIVERSITY COLLECTION THAT EXISTS TO SERVE AS A RESEARCH RESOURCE FOR STUDENTS AND RESEARCHERS AT UNIVERSITY, STATE, NATIONAL, AND INTERNATIONAL LEVELS. EXAMPLES OF CURATORIAL ACTIVITIES INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO:

a. MAINTAINING, ENHANCING, AND ENLARGING THE COLLECTION (INCLUDES COMPUTERIZATION AND DATABASE DEVELOPMENT, ARCHIVAL UPGRADES, SPECIMEN CONSERVATION AND IDENTIFICATION, AND ADDING SPECIMENS OR OBJECTS TO EXISTING COLLECTION);

b. INTERACTING WITH STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND WITH THE PUBLIC ON COLLECTIONS-RELATED ISSUES;

c. FACILITATING COLLECTIONS USE THROUGH LOANS, EXCHANGES, AND VISITING RESEARCHERS;

d. MAINTAINING APPROPRIATE PERMITS (AS NEEDED FOR THE COLLECTIONS);

e. SUPERVISING COLLECTIONS MANAGERS, STUDENT EMPLOYEES, AND VOLUNTEERS;

f. WORKING WITH PUBLIC PROGRAM STAFF TO CREATE EXHIBITS AND EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES APPROPRIATE TO THE COLLECTION;

g. PURSUING FUNDING FOR COLLECTIONS GROWTH AND MAINTENANCE; AND

h. PRODUCING CURATORIAL OR COLLECTIONS-RELATED PUBLICATIONS, REPORTS, AND/OR MANUALS.

i. ENSURING UNIVERSITY COMPLIANCE WITH STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS THAT PERTAIN TO THE COLLECTION.

2. SPECIFIC CRITERIA FOR CURATORIAL PERFORMANCE:

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR AND CURATOR

EVIDENCE OF CURATORIAL ABILITY AND A COMMITMENT TO DEVELOPING AND MANAGING RESEARCH COLLECTIONS RELEVANT TO THE AREA OF SPECIALIZATION INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING:

a. CURATORS WILL DEVELOP THE COLLECTIONS AS A PERMANENT RECORD OF THE NATURAL AND/OR CULTURAL DIVERSITY OF ALASKA AND THE CIRCUMPOLAR NORTH AND AS A RESEARCH RESOURCE FOR STUDIES OF BIOLOGICAL AND/OR CULTURAL DIVERSITY.

b. COLLECTIONS CARE INCLUDES RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PHYSICAL CONDITION AND STORAGE OF OBJECTS/SPECIMENS, CORRESPONDING DOCUMENTATION, BUDGETARY MANAGEMENT, AND ANNUAL REPORTS.

c. CURATORS WILL PRESERVE THE SPECIMENS, ARTIFACTS, OBJECTS, AND MATERIAL UNDER THEIR PURVIEW THROUGH THE USE OF METHODS AND TECHNIQUES PROFESSIONALLY ACCEPTED WITHIN THEIR RESPECTIVE DISCIPLINES.

d. CURATORS WILL ENSURE THAT ALL RECORDS AND FIELD NOTES CONCERNING COLLECTION MATERIALS ARE MAINTAINED IN A SECURE FASHION AND MEET OR EXCEED DOCUMENTATION STANDARDS FOR THEIR RESPECTIVE DISCIPLINE.

e. CURATORS WILL MAINTAIN CURRENT ACCESSION FILES, DEACCESSION FILES, AND CATALOGUES OF OBJECTS IN THEIR COLLECTIONS. THEY WILL DEVELOP ELECTRONIC DATABASES WITH COMPUTER DATA FORMATS THAT FOLLOW DATA STANDARDS OF THE RESPECTIVE DISCIPLINE AND UAM.

f. CURATORS WILL DEVELOP, MAINTAIN, AND REVISE WRITTEN POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR CAUTION OF OBJECTS OR SPECIMENS IN THEIR COLLECTIONS.

g. CURATORS WILL TAKE PART IN INTERPRETIVE ACTIVITIES OF THE MUSEUM IN ORDER TO FULFILL THE MUSEUM'S MISSION TO INTERPRET THE NATURAL AND CULTURAL HISTORY OF ALASKA. IN THIS REGARD, PREPARATION OF SMALL EXHIBIT IS APPROXIMATELY THE EQUIVALENTS OF PUBLICATION OF A PROFESSIONAL ARTICLE; PROJECT DIRECTION OF A LARGE COMPLEX EXHIBIT THAT INCLUDES PREPARATION OF A SERIOUS CATALOGUE IS APPROXIMATELY THE EQUIVALENT OF PUBLICATION OF A SCHOLARLY BOOK.

h. CURATORS WILL ACTIVELY PREPARE GRANT APPLICATIONS FOR EXTERNAL SUPPORT FOR THEIR CURATORIAL ACTIVITIES AND COLLECTION-BASED RESEARCH.

ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR AND CURATOR

CONSISTENT CONTRIBUTIONS TO INTERPRETIVE (EDUCATION AND EXHIBITION) ACTIVITIES OF THE MUSEUM, RESPONSE TO COLLECTION-RELATED INQUIRIES (FROM OTHER PROFESSIONALS, THE PUBLIC AND STATE AGENCIES) AND/OR DEVELOPMENT OF INTERPRETIVE MATERIALS FOR THE PUBLIC-AT-LARGE ARE EXPECTED. USE OF THE COLLECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND/OR RESEARCH MUST BE EVIDENT. ACTIVE SOLICITATION FOR EXTERNAL FUNDS TO SUPPORT CURATORIAL ACTIVITIES AND COLLECTION-BASED RESEARCH MUST BE EVIDENT.

PROFESSOR AND CURATOR

SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT OF THE COLLECTIONS UNDER THE CURATOR'S CARE IS EXPECTED. THIS DEVELOPMENT INCLUDES SUSTAINED GROWTH OF THE COLLECTIONS AS RESEARCH RESOURCES AND AS A MEANS OF FULFILLING THE MUSEUM'S MISSION OF ACQUIRING, PRESERVING IN PERPETUITY, INVESTIGATING, AND INTERPRETING OBJECTS AND SPECIMENS RELATING TO THE NATURAL AND OR CULTURAL HISTORY OF ALASKA AND THE CIRCUMPOLAR NORTH. SIGNIFICANCE OF COLLECTIONS WILL BE MEASURED IN TERMS OF RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE, VALUE TO UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA RESEARCH AND INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS, AND VALUE TO NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH PROGRAMS. THE CURATOR SHOULD BE A RECOGNIZED AUTHORITY IN HIS/HER FIELD, LOCALLY AND NATIONALLY. THEY MUST HAVE A RECORD OF SUCCESS IN ACQUIRING EXTERNAL FUNDS FOR THEIR CURATORIAL ACTIVITIES AND COLLECTION-BASED RESEARCH.

3. EVALUATION OF CURATION
A COMMITTEE COMPOSED OF THE TENURED CURATORS AT THE MUSEUM WILL PROVIDE AN EVALUATION TO THE UNIT PEER COMMITTEE. IN FORMULATING CRITERIA, STANDARDS AND INDICES FOR EVALUATION, PROMOTION, AND TENURE, THE MUSEUM SHOULD INCLUDE EXAMPLES OF CURATORIAL ACTIVITIES AND MEASURES FOR EVALUATION APPROPRIATE FOR THAT UNIT. EXCELLENCE IN CURATION MAY BE DEMONSTRATED THROUGH, E.G., APPROPRIATE LETTER OF COMMENDATION, RECOMMENDATION, AND/OR APPRECIATION, CERTIFICATES AND AWARDS, AND OTHER PUBLIC MEANS OF RECOGNITION FOR SERVICES RENDERED.

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

MOTION:
=======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to approve the Unit Criteria for the Department of Mathematics.

EFFECTIVE: Immediately, Upon Chancellor Approval

RATIONALE: The committee assessed the unit criteria submitted by the Department of Mathematics. With some changes, agreed upon by the school representative the unit criteria were found to be consistent with UAF guidelines.

*******************

4/23/04

University of Alaska Fairbanks

Regulations for the
Appointment And Evaluation Of Faculty
AND
DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES

UNIT CRITERIA STANDARDS AND INDICESTHE FOLLOWING IS AN ADAPTATION OF UAF AND REGENTS' CRITERIA FOR PROMOTION AND TENURE, SPECIFICALLY DEVELOPED FOR USE IN EVALUATING DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES (DMS) FACULTY IN THE COLLEGE OF SCIENCES, ENGINEERING AND MATHEMATICS. ITEMS IN BOLDFACE ARE THOSE SPECIFICALLY ADDED OR EMPHASIZED BECAUSE OF THEIR ADDITIONS TO AND CLARIFICATION OF UAF REGULATIONS. THESE UNIT CRITERIA ARE FOR USE IN THE ANNUAL EVALUATION OF DMS FACULTY AS WELL.

CHAPTER I

PURVIEW

The university, through the UAF Faculty Senate, may change or amend these regulations and procedures from time to time and will provide adequate notice in making changes and amendments.

These regulations shall apply to all of the units within the University of Alaska Fairbanks, except in so far as extant collective bargaining agreements apply otherwise.

The provost is responsible for coordination and implementation of matters relating to procedures stated herein.

CHAPTER II

INITIAL APPOINTMENT OF FACULTY

B. Academic Titles
Academic titles must reflect the discipline in which the faculty are appointed.

F. Letter of Appointment
The initial letter of appointment shall specify the nature of the assignment, the percentage emphasis that is to be placed on each of the parts of the faculty responsibility, mandatory year of tenure review, and any special conditions relating to the appointment.
This letter of appointment establishes the nature of the position and, while the percentage of emphasis for each part may vary with each workload distribution as specified in the annual workload agreement document, the part(s) defining the position may not.

CHAPTER III

PERIODIC EVALUATION OF FACULTY

A. General Criteria
Criteria as outlined in "UAF Faculty Appointment and Evaluation Policies," Chapter IV, AND DMS UNIT CRITERIA, STANDARDS AND INDICES evaluators may consider, but shall not be limited to, whichever of the following are appropriate to the faculty member's professional obligation: mastery of subject matter; effectiveness in teaching; achievement in research, scholarly, and creative activity; effectiveness of public service; effectiveness of university service; demonstration of professional development and quality of total contribution to the university. IN EACH AREA CANDIDATES WILL BE RANKED BY THE DMS PEER REVIEW COMMITTEE (PRC). THE PRC CONSISTS OF ALL TENURED MEMBERS OF THE DMS. MEMBERS OF THE PRC WHO ARE ON SABBATICAL OR OFF CAMPUS FOR EXTENDED PERIODS HAVE THE OPTION OF PARTICIPATING, BUT THIS IS NOT REQUIRED. CANDIDATES WILL BE RANKED IN EACH CATEGORY ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING SCALE: OUTSTANDING, SUPERIOR, SATISFACTORY, NEEDS IMPROVEMENT AND UNACCEPTABLE.

1. TENURE. A CANDIDATE FOR TENURE WILL BE JUDGED ON THE BASIS OF PERFORMANCE AND INDICATIONS OF POTENTIAL IN ALL THREE CATEGORIES, WITH EMPHASIS PLACED ON THE INTERVAL SINCE THE LAST PROMOTION OR HIRE, WHICHEVER IS MOST RECENT. A CANDIDATE NEED NOT DEMONSTRATE EQUAL PERFORMANCE IN ALL THREE AREAS. IN ORDER TO QUALIFY FOR TENURE, A FACULTY MEMBER SHOULD NORMALLY HAVE SERVED FOR AT LEAST FIVE YEARS AT THE RANK OF ASSISTANT PROFESSOR. A CANDIDATE SHOULD NORMALLY ATTAIN AT LEAST A SATISFACTORY RATING IN TEACHING, RESEARCH AND SERVICE AND AT LEAST SUPERIOR IN TEACHING OR RESEARCH.

2. ASSISTANT PROFESSOR. A FACULTY MEMBER AT THE ASSISTANT PROFESSOR LEVEL MUST HAVE AN EARNED DOCTO RATE OR DEMONSTRATED EQUIVALENT. DEMONSTRATED EQUIVALENCE WILL BE DECIDED ON AN AD HOC BASIS BY THE PRC. A COMMITMENT TO TEACHING, RESEARCH AND SERVICE MUST BE APPARENT.

3. ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR. AN ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR SHOULD NORMALLY HAVE SERVED AT LEAST FIVE YEARS AT THE RANK OF ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OR HIGHER. A RECORD OF QUALITY INSTRUCTION AND RESEARCH IS IMPORTANT. THE DMS RECOGNIZES THAT AT THIS LEVEL SERVICE IS SECONDARY TO TEACHING AND RESEARCH. YOUNG FACULTY CAN PROFITABLY SPEND THEIR TIME ESTABLISHING A RESEARCH RECORD AND PERFECTING TEACHING TECHNIQUE. IN ORDER TO QUALIFY FOR THE RANK OF ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, A FACULTY MEMBER SHOULD, UNDER NORMAL CONDITIONS, HAVE MET THE REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED FOR TENURE.

4. PROFESSOR. THIS IS THE GREATEST SINGLE HONOR THAT THE UNIVERSITY CAN BESTOW UPON A MEMBER OF ITS FACULTY. THE HONOR MUST THEREFOR BE MADE UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE CANDIDATE'S TOTAL DEMONSTRATED CONTRIBUTION TO THE UNIVERSITY AND THE MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES. THE HONOR IS RESERVED FOR THOSE WHO HAVE DEMONSTRATED OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE IN THEIR FIELDS. SPECIFICALLY, A CANDIDATE MUST HAVE ATTAINED AN OVERALL AVERAGE RANKING OF SUPERIOR IN TEACHING, RESEARCH AND SERVICE, WITH NO AREA LOWER THAN SATISFACTORY. ADDITIONALLY, IF ONE OF RESEARCH OR TEACHING IS RANKED SATISFACTORY, THE OTHER MUST BE OUTSTANDING.

Bipartite Faculty
Bipartite faculty are regular academic rank faculty who fill positions that are designated as performing two of the three parts of the university's tripartite responsibility.

The dean or director of the relevant college/school shall determine which of the criteria defined above apply to these faculty.

Bipartite faculty may voluntarily engage in a tripartite function, but they will not be required to do so as a condition for evaluation, promotion, or tenure.

a. are highly organized, plan carefully, use class time efficiently, have clear objectives, have high expectations for students;

b. express positive regard for students, develop good rapport with students, show interest/enthusiasm for the subject;

c. emphasize and encourage student participation, ask questions, frequently monitor student participation for student learning and teacher effectiveness, are sensitive to student diversity;

d. emphasize regular feedback to students and reward student learning success;

e. demonstrate content mastery, discuss current information and divergent points of view, relate topics to other disciplines, deliver material at the appropriate level;

f. regularly develop new courses, workshops and seminars and use a variety of methods of instructional delivery and instructional design;

g. may receive prizes and awards for excellence in teaching.

h. DEMANDS HIGH PEDAGOGIC STANDARDS ESSENTIAL TO THE DEPARTMENT’S MISSION. THIS INCLUDES A DEMAND FOR EXCELLENCE AND AWARENESS OF STUDENTS’ NEEDS.

i. DISSEMINATION OF IDEAS INSIDE AND OUTSIDE THE CLASSROOM. THIS INCLUDES, BUT IS NOT RESTRICTED TO, STATISTICAL AND COMPUTING CONSULTING FOR STUDENTS; ASSISTING STUDENTS IN THE DESIGN OF EXPERIMENTS; DIRECTING UNDERGRADUATE AND GRADUATE RESEARCH.

a. systematic student ratings, i.e. student opinion of instruction summary forms,

and at least two of the following:

b. narrative self-evaluation,

c. peer/department chair classroom observation(s). THIS IS REQUIRED FOR UNTENURED FACULTY. THEY WILL BE EVALUATED BY THE PRC (WHICH INCLUDES THE DEPARTMENT HEAD AS A NONVOTING MEMBER). THIS COMMITTEE WILL SEND REPRESENTATIVES TO EVALUATE CLASSROOM PERFORMANCE AS WELL AS SYLLABI AND SAMPLES OF GRADED MATERIAL. REPRESENTATIVES WILL WRITE A REPORT WHICH INCLUDES A NARRATIVE PORTION AS WELL AS AN OVERALL RANKING OF TEACHING WHICH USES THE SCALE: OUTSTANDING, SUPERIOR, SATISFACTORY, NEEDS IMPROVEMENT, UNACCEPTABLE. UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES, WHEN A FACULTY MEMBER STANDS FOR TENURE, REPORTS FROM AT LEAST TWO YEARS SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE FILE. IN THE CASE OF DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN PEER OPINIONS AND STUDENT OPINIONS, THE FORMER WILL BE CONSIDERED TO BE MORE ACCURATE.

d. peer/department chair evaluation of course materials.

C. Criteria for Research, Scholarly, and Creative Activity
Inquiry and originality are central functions of a land grant/sea grant/space grant university and all faculty with a research component in their assignment must remain active as scholars. Consequently, faculty are expected to conduct research or engage in other scholarly or creative pursuits that are appropriate to the mission of their unit, and equally important, results of their work must be disseminated through media appropriate to their discipline. Furthermore, it is important to emphasize the distinction between routine production and creative excellence as evaluated by an individual's peers at the University of Alaska and elsewhere. CANDIDATES AT ALL LEVELS MUST DEMONSTRATE ACHIEVEMENT CONDUCTING RESEARCH IN AN INDEPENDENT AND CREATIVE FASHION. WORK WILL BE JUDGED FOR IMPORTANCE, ORIGINALITY AND QUALITY. CONSIDERATION WILL INCLUDE, BUT NOT BE RESTRICTED TO, THE CANDIDATE’S PAPERS PUBLISHED IN REFEREED JOURNALS AND REFEREED CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS, PAPERS, LECTURES AND PRESENTATIONS DELIVERED, OTHER PAPERS AND TECHNICAL REPORTS, BOOKS, RESEARCH PROPOSALS, SOFTWARE DEVELOPED AND RESEARCH DONE THR OUGH CONSULTING. THE WORK MUST BE PRESENTED IN A PUBLIC FORUM WHERE ITS CONTRIBUTION CAN BE JUDGED BY PEERS EXTERNAL TO UAF. THE RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONS FOUND IN A BOOK WILL BE BASED ON THE EXPOSITION OF NEW IDEAS. BOOKS WHICH ONLY GATHER MATERIAL FOUND IN OTHER LOCATIONS WILL BE CONSIDERED TO BE EXPOSITORY AND NOT RESEARCH DOCUMENTS.

THE DEPARTMENT EXPECTS FACULTY WITH A 30% RESEARCH LOAD TO BE PUBLISHING AT A RATE OF APPROXIMATELY ONE PAPER PER YEAR. AT A 50% LEVEL OR ABOVE THERE SHOULD BE APPROXIMATELY TWO. HOWEVER, IT SHOU LD BE EMPHASIZED THAT THIS IS ONLY AN APPROXIMATE GOAL. THE MORE IMPORTANT GOAL IS QUALITY RESEARCH. HIGH QUALITY RESEARCH CAN BE PRODUCED AND DISSEMINATED IN SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES AT A LOWER RATE. ACCORDINGLY, CANDIDATES SHOULD NOT TRY TO MEET A RESEARCH TARGET IN TERMS OF NUMBER OF PAPERS PUBLISHED. FURTHER, HEAVY PRODUCTION RATES OF LOW QUALITY PUBLICATIONS IS DISCOURAGED.

A CANDIDATE'S PUBLICATION AND FUNDING RECORD SHOULD BE COMPARED WITH INDIVIDUALS IN THE SAME OR RELATED DISCIPLINES. THE PRACTICE OF LISTING COAUTHORS WHO HAVE CONTRIBUTED LITTLE TO A PUBLICATION IS UNCOMMON IN THE MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES. NORMALLY, EACH COAUTHOR WILL HAVE MADE A SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTION. COAUTHORS ARE OFTEN LISTED ALPHABETICALLY.

CERTAIN DISCIPLINES FOUND IN MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES HAVE LITTLE OPPORTUNITY IN THE WAY OF EXTERNAL FUNDING. ACCORDINGLY, THE ABILITY TO FIND FUNDING SPEAKS WELL FOR A CANDIDATE AT ANY LEVEL. HOWEVER, ABSENCE OF FUNDING MAY NOT NECESSARILY SPEAK AGAINST THE CANDIDATE. DMS DOES NOT CONSIDER THE FUNDING OF GRANT PROPOSALS TO BE THE GOAL OF ANY RESEARCH PROJECT. RATHER, WE FOCUS ON WHAT IS ACHIEVED WITH OR WITHOUT RESEARCH FUNDING.

TO SUMMARIZE, THE PRIMARY RESEARCH METRIC IS NOT NUMBER OF PUBLICATIONS NOR GRANT MONEY. IT IS RESEARCH RESULTS AS MEASURED BY QUALITY, DEPTH AND ORIGINALITY.

1. Achievement in Research, Scholarly and Creative Activity
Whatever the contribution, research, scholarly or creative activities must have one or more of the following characteristics:

a. They must occur in a public forum.

b. They must be evaluated by appropriate peers.

c. They must be evaluated by peers external to this institution so as to allow an objective judgment.

d. They must be judged to make a contribution.

2. Components of Research, Scholarly and Creative Activity
Evidence of excellence in research, scholarly, and creative activity may be demonstrated through, but not limited to:

a. Books, reviews, monographs, bulletins, articles, proceedings and other scholarly works published by reputable journals, scholarly presses, and publishing houses that accept works only after rigorous review and approval by peers in the discipline.

b. Competitive grants and contracts to finance the development of ideas, these grants and contracts being subject to rigorous peer review and approval.

c. Presentation of research papers before learned societies that accept papers only after rigorous review and approval by peers.

d. Exhibitions of art work at galleries, selection for these exhibitions being based on rigorous review and approval by PEERS, juries, recognized artists, or critics.

e. Performances in recitals or productions, selection for these performances being based on stringent auditions and approval by appropriate judges.

f. Editing or refereeing articles or proposals for professional journals or organizations.

g. Scholarly reviews of publications, art works and performance of the candidate.

h. Citations of research in scholarly publications.

i. Published abstracts of research papers.

j. Reprints or quotations of publications, reproductions of art works, and descriptions of interpretations in the performing arts, these materials appearing in reputable works of the discipline.

k. Prizes and awards for excellence of scholarship.

l. Awards of special fellowships for research or artistic activities or selection of tours of duty at special institutes for advanced study.

m. Development of processes or instruments useful in solving problems, such as computer programs and systems for the processing of data, genetic plant and animal material, and where appropriate obtaining patents and/or copyrights for said development.

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INCLUDES, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, CONSULTING ON AND OFF CAMPUS, REFEREEING, JOURNAL WORK, SERVICE TO NATIONAL PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS, ORGANIZING CONFERENCES, IN-SERVICE TRAINING PROGRAMS, GIVING COLLOQUIUM LECTURES, REVIEWING PROPOSALS AND BOOKS.

Examples include, but are not limited to:

a. Providing information services to adults or youth.

b. Service on or to government or public committees.

c. Service on accrediting bodies.

d. Active participation in professional organizations.

e. Active participation in discipline-oriented service organizations.

f. Consulting.

g. Prizes and awards for excellence in public service.

h. Leadership of or presentations at workshops, conferences, or public meetings.

i. Training and facilitating.

j. Radio and TV programs, newspaper articles and columns, publications, newsletters, films, computer applications, teleconferences and other educational media.

k. Judging and similar educational assistance at science fairs, state fairs, and speech, drama, literary, and similar competitions.

a. Service on university, college, school, institute, or departmental committees or governing bodies.

b. Consultative work in support of university functions, such as expert assistance for specific projects.

c. Service as department chair or term-limited and part-time assignment as assistant/associate dean in a college/school.

d. Participation in accreditation reviews.

e. Service on collective bargaining unit committees or elected office.

f. Service in support of student organizations and activities.

g. Academic support services such as library and museum programs.

h. Assisting other faculty or units with curriculum planning and delivery of instruction, such as serving as guest lecturer.

i. Mentoring OF FACULTY.

j. Prizes and awards for excellence in university service.

K. SERVICE AS OUTSIDE REVIEWER ON THESIS COMMITTEES.

L. PREPARATION OF UNIVERSITY REPORTS.

M. PRESENTATION OF EXPOSITORY MATERIAL INCLUDING SOME TEXTBOOKS.

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

MOTION:
=======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to amend the UAF "Regulation for the Appointment and Evaluation of Faculty" as follows:

CAPS - Addition
[[ ]] - Deletion

Pg. 6
2. Components of Research, Scholarly and Creative Activity
[[f. Editing or refereeing articles or proposals for professional journals or organizations.]]

Pg. 8.
Insert after category 2. University Service but before 3. Evaluation of Service

3. PROFESSIONAL SERVICE

A. EDITING OR REFEREEING ARTICLES OR PROPOSALS FOR PROFESSIONAL JOURNALS OR ORGANIZATIONS;

B. ACTIVE PARTICIPATION IN PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS;

C. ACTIVE PARTICIPATION IN DISCIPLINE-ORIENTED SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS;

D. COMMITTEE CHAIR OR OFFICER OF PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS;

E. ORGANIZER, SESSION ORGANIZER, OR MODERATOR FOR PROFESSIONAL MEETINGS;

F. SERVICE ON A NATIONAL OR INTERNATIONAL REVIEW PANEL OR COMMITTEE.

EFFECTIVE: Immediately

RATIONALE: The University, through the UAF Faculty Senate, may change or amend these regulations and procedures from time to time and will provide adequate notice in making changes and amendments.

The UAF Faculty Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Unit Criteria has found aspects of the UAF document "Faculty Appointment and Evaluation Policies" unclear, inconsistent with current University practice, and of less than optimal utility.

There is currently inconsistency in how the Blue Book breaks down the category of Service and how it is treated in our annual reporting for the University. In the "Blue Book", Service consists of two parts: Public Service and University Service. In our annual reports, we must also indicate activities that constitute Professional Service. We believe it is appropriate to modify the "Blue Book" to reflect the way we are required to report our activities under the heading of Service so that all three types of service are included. Doing so will streamline the process of preparing a tenure or promotion file and allow faculty to more precisely categorize our activities in the evaluation process.

Under the current guidelines, activities such as reviewing grant proposals for funding agencies, serving as a referee for peer-reviewed journals, and serving as editor of a journal are categorized as research and creative activity. Discussions with faculty members at UAF and other institutions clearly indicate that these activities are more appropriately categorized under Professional Service. We propose to change such activities from being counted as Research and Creative Activities to examples of Professional Service. Activities such as authoring an edited book will continue to be counted as research and creative activities.

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

MOTION:
=======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to endorse the 2004-2005 committee membership as attached.

EFFECTIVE: Immediately

RATIONALE: New Senate members' preference for committee selection were reviewed and weighted against membership distribution from schools and colleges.

***************

2004 -2005

UAF FACULTY SENATE COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

STANDING COMMITTEES

Curricular Affairs

Nancy Ayagarak, Kuskokwim, CRA (06)
Carol Barnhardt, SOEd. (05)
Steve Cysewski, CRA (05)
Katrin Iken, SFOS (06)
Pete Pinney, CRA (06)
Rainer Newberry, CMS (06)--convener
Yuri Shur, CEM (05)
Jeannette Smith, CLA (05)
Joseph Thompson, CLA (05)
Ex-Officio: ^Tim Stickel, University Registrar
Wanda Martin, Advising Center
Nancy Dix, Admissions
Undergraduate Student

Faculty Affairs

Sine Anahita, CLA (06)
Scott Bailey, CMS (06)
Karen Erickson, CLA (05)
Jon Genetti, CMS (06)
Michele He'bert, CRA/CES (06)
Joan Leguard, CLA (05)
Shirish Patil, CEM (06)--convener
Anupma Prakash (06)
Craig Wisen, SOM (05)
Mingchu Zhang, SNRAS (06)

Unit Criteria

Brenda Konar, SFOS (06)
Debasmita Misra, CEM (06)
Gary Holton, CLA (06)--convener
CMS (05)
CRA/CES(05)
SNRAS/SOEd/SOM (05)

PERMANENT COMMITTEES

Committee on the Status of Women (elected)

Charlotte Basham, CLA (06)
Uma Bhatt, CMS (06)
Carol Gold, CLA (05)
Cindy Hardy, CRA (05)
Judith Kleinfeld, CLA (05)
David Koester, CLA (05)
Denise Thorsen, CEM (06)
Jane Weber (06), Senate rep. --convener

Core Review (Elected)

Jin Brown, Communication, CLA (06)--convener
Derick Burleson, English, CLA (05)
Alexei Rybkin, CMS, Math (06)
Paul McCarthy, Library
Doug Schamel, CMS, Sciences (06)
Jonathan Rosenberg, Social Sciences, CLA (05)
Humanities, CLA (06)
Other (06)
Undergraduate Student

Developmental Studies Committee (Elected)

Jane Allen, Kuskokwim, CRA (05)
Patty Baldwin, RSS
John Bruder, Bristol Bay, CRA (05)
Richard Carr, English, CLA (05)
John Creed, Chukchi, CRA (06)--convener
Pat Doak, Sciences, CMS (05)
George Guthridge, Bristol Bay, CRA (05)
Greg Owens, Math, CMS (06)
Wanda Martin, Advising Center
Joe Mason, Northwest, CRA (06)
Mary Matthews, SSSP
Cindy Hardy, Developmental Education (06)
Interior-Aleutians, CRA (06)
Tanana Valley Campus (06)
Rural campus Student Services

Faculty Appeals & Oversight Committee (Elected)

Steve Cysewski, CRA (06)
Larry Duffy, CMS (06)
Rajive Ganguli, CEM (06)
Robert Gorman, CES (05)
Terry Johnson, SFOS (06)
Paul Layer, CMS (05)--convener
Molly Lee, CLA (05)
Victoria Joan Moessner, CLA (06)
Allen Morotti, SOEd. (05)
Brenda Norcross, SFOS (05)
Michael Pippenger, SOM (05)
Lufti Raad, CEM (05)
Maria Reyes, SOEd (06)

SNRAS (05)
SNRAS (06)
SOM (06)

Faculty Development, Assessment & Improvement

Rich Boone, CMS (06)
Clifton Corkern, CRA/KCC (06)
Mike Davis, CRA (05)
Lee Haugen, SOEd. (06)--convener
Marjorie Illingworth, TVC
John Kawula, CLA, Library (06)
Joy Morrison, Faculty Development Office
Mike Nakoneczny, CLA (05)
Channon Price, CMS
Larry Roberts, CRA (05)
Tom Robinson, SOM

Graduate Academic & Advisory Committee

Ron Barry, CMS (06)
Cathy Cahill, CMS (05)
Mary Erhlander, CLA (05)
Patty Gray, CLA (06)
Catherine Koverola, CLA (05)
Christa Mulder, CMS (05)--convener
Doug Reynolds, SOM (05)
Jennifer Reynolds, SFOS (05)
Richard Wies, CEM (06)
Joan Parker-Webster, SOEd (06)
Ex-Officio: Susan Henrichs, Graduate Dean
Paul McCarthy, Library Director
Tim Stickel, University Registrar
Graduate Student
Graduate Student

OTHER:

UAF Governance Coordinating Committee

Abel Bult-Ito, President
Michael Hannigan, President-Elect

UAF Faculty Alliance Representatives

Abel Bult-Ito, President
Michael Hannigan, President-Elect
Pete Pinney, Past-President

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

MOTION:
======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to adopt the following calendar for
its 2004-2005 meetings.

EFFECTIVE: Immediately

RATIONALE: Meetings have to be scheduled and the Wood Center Carol Brown Ballroom reserved well in advance.

************

UAF FACULTY SENATE
2004-2005
Calendar of Meetings

Mtg. #	Date	Day	Time	Type
124	9/20/04	Monday	1:00 p.m.	audioconference
125	11/1/04	Monday	1:00 p.m.	face-to-face
126	12/13/04	Monday	1:00 p.m.	audioconference
127	2/7/05	Monday	1:00 p.m.	audioconference
128	3/7/05	Monday	1:00 p.m.	face-to-face
129	4/4/05	Monday	1:00 p.m.	audioconference
130	5/1/05	Monday	1:00 p.m.	face-to-face

Location: Wood Center Carol Brown Ballroom

*************************
The UAF Faculty Senate passed the following at its Meeting #123 on May 3, 2004:

MOTION:
=======

The UAF Faculty Senate moves to authorize the Administrative Committee to act on behalf of the Senate on all matters within its purview which may arise until the Senate resumes deliberations in the Fall of 2004. Senators will be kept informed of the Administrative Committee's meetings and will be encouraged to attend and participate in these meetings.

EFFECTIVE: May 3, 2004

RATIONALE: This motion will allow the Administrative Committee to act on behalf of the Senate so that necessary work can be accomplished and will also allow Senators their rights to participate in the governance process.