New Business —

Meeting Frequency

Kevin: asked how often committee should meet.

Rob: Meet as needed per specific charges. The committee agreed

Committee agreed that it should meet on as needed basis.

Reviewed Specific Charges

Amalia: Committee charges could be more focused (fewer rather than more) and that we prioritize them.

Rob: We should focus on charges that the committee receives specific requests about from FacEx.

Charge #2 needs more specific direction on what FRPR needs to do.

Since charges #4 and 7 seemed to be Chris Brown specific asks, we need clarity on if those issues will be pursued by his successor since he is leaving his role this semester, as we would not want to work on something that will go nowhere due to lack of leadership interest or support.

Charges 5 and 6 do not appear to be within FRPR purview.

Amalia: perhaps AP&P should take up charges 5 and 6?

Amalia: For charge #8, there was a survey in 2019 of non-tenure track faculty (Microsoft Word - FRPR FINAL REPORT.docx (ku.edu)). Asked why the work of this survey is being done again. Are we redoing a past effort?

Elizabeth: asked if the survey from 2019 considered departmental policies. Need to get clarity from FacEx on what it wants from FRPR.

Amalia: one suggestion is to do a sweep of policies on KU policy library and send results to FacEx.

Several mentioned that departments might not have anything in writing or in the policy library.

Another suggestion is to propose a university-wide policy on NTTF

Rob: look at FSRR to see if there is anything there and if there should be

Kevin: shared a survey he drafted for the committee’s consideration and discussion, which would be to capture department chair perspective on what policies their department has on NTTF rights and privileges pertaining to committees, voting and hiring decisions. He read specific ask in an email from Nate Brunsell on 9/13/22 regarding this issue for further clarity on the charge:

“Over several meetings, it has become clear that there is a lot of variability in how departments interact with non-TT faculty members (lectures, teaching professors, clinical faculty, etc.). VP Chris Brown suggested that these members should be allowed to vote on all issues except those involve TT faculty (hiring, promotion, etc.). I am under the impression that this is not the case in most departments and expect that some do not encourage these faculty to attend meetings, some might permit some voting (e.g. curricular issues), some may discourage participation. In other cases, faculty members might be allowed to attend, but not actively involved in which case this might appear as unrewarded service obligations on the part of the faculty member.”

Kevin: advised that he met with Jennifer Ng and Jenny Mehmedovic in Faculty Affairs/Development about their work on NTTF issues. They advised they are conducting focus groups with NTTF and reviewing results from the COACHE survey for insights. They indicated that what FRPR might be doing is distinct from their work, as we would be considering a policy/department leadership perspective on committee participation and voting rights and privileges, which will not be captured in their efforts. He then shared a chart drafted by Jenny M. with a summary of the various efforts at the university to collect data on NTTF issues.

Committee agreed that we need clarity from FacEx on what feedback it wants and what we should be looking into before moving forward on collecting any information.

We discussed charge 3, excused absence policy.

Rob: likes the bulleted list in latest draft compared to repeated paragraphs in previous draft.

Amalia: latest draft ok as is.

Kevin: advised of conversation with Susan Williams regarding background of this policy. Student athletes missed tests and other work, but faculty not letting them make up work or creating disproportionate strain to complete work. No consensus on generic excused absence policy at other similar universities. Need opportunity for students to work with Student Affairs to work with faculty on conflicts or when the student feels they cannot share specific details of absence.

Rob: yes to an appeal process for students.

Kevin: Stated that FRPR previously pushed policy back mainly due to “unforeseen life events” language. He suggested options for moving policy forward: edit unforeseen life events language to capture spirit of it but not impose too many restrictions on faculty or delete it altogether.

Committee agreed to accept excused absence policy as is and not edit it further.

Next Steps

Kevin will take committee feedback on all charges to FacEx, get clarity on charge #2 and 8, and advise that FRPR approves latest draft of excused absence policy.

Kevin will schedule next meeting by Zoom after receiving further direction from FacEx.

Committee adjourned.