New Business —

Meeting Agenda

1 – Review the 2024-25 committee charge 

2 – Review 2023-24 end-of-year report and plan set out there for fall and spring review of unit/department SPPT submissions this academic year

3 – Overview of summer research on unit/department SPPT review status by Faculty Fellow Megan Patterson

4 – Discuss fall review plan

Discussion:

The committee reviewed the standing and specific charges for FY25. 

Members found some parts of the specific charges to be confusing. 

Regarding specific charge 1:

1. Assist University stakeholders with ongoing development of guidelines for including and accounting for work in the areas of service, community-engaged scholarship etc., and entrepreneurship in the promotion and tenure process.

The committee discussed the importance of preserving the limits on the committee’s role in fulfilling this charge. 

We understand our role as reviewing SPPT for clarity and consistency with senate regulations, not weighing in on or trying to provide guidance for the substantive requirements for tenure and promotion across the university – this individual units/departments to determine as appropriate for their respective disciplines.

Regarding specific charge 2:

1. Develop plans for SPPT to become a more pro-active and effective committee. Set up a system so that future iterations of this committee can work constructively with the Administration to accomplish two main goals:

   1. Identify recurring or past problems in tenure and promotion procedures and practices and take steps to fix those problems.

      1. Gather information from past chairs of P&T committees (above Department level)

      2. Gather information from past chairs of Faculty Right Board 

      3. Establish a protocol that automatically shares any external review comments about P&T processes with SPPT

   2. Use best practice guidelines and exemplary documents to guide departments and schools whose procedures are reviewed by SPPT.

      1. Review department procedures that have been approved by past SPPT committees and identify exemplary documents (e.g., statements of mentoring plans)

      2. Review documents used to guide mid-level and above review (in schools that do that) and ensure they promote assessments in line with FSRR.

The committee discussed 2(a) as presenting a research task but also a “system” for ongoing information gathering by the committee in the future. 

The committee is unclear what is meant by “external review comments” in 2(a)(iii) - Nisha commented perhaps this is a task better assigned to UCPT. 

The committee discussed 2(b) as calling for collection of suitable sample documents to extent they may be helpful to units/departments seeking to improve their SPPT.

Regarding specific charge 3:

1. Be prepared to consult with United Academics of the University of Kansas *UAKU) if requested, in matters of relevant to the work of the committee.   

Ari volunteered to help on outreach/communications with the new faculty union if need arises. 

Suzanne said a FacEx representative will be assigned to the committee and help clarify. 

The committee went on to discuss the policy audit and deadline for units/departments to submit SPPT in need of review by Friday, Oct. 4. 

The committee has yet to receive any SPPT in need of review, Uma will check with Office of Faculty Affairs if they are receiving any to get a sense of the review task ahead. 

The committee discussed (and Uma circulated during the meeting to committee members) a policy audit summary prepared by Yolanda Huggins in the Office of Faculty Affairs together with Faculty Fellow Megan Patterson. 

The committee agreed to the following tasks between now and the next meeting: 

(1) review policy audit document, prepare to discuss next steps; 

(2) consider approaches to performing specific charge 2. 

Uma will send out an agenda and summary of committee pre-meeting tasks/preparation. 

Other items of discussion: 

• Nisha noted the importance of messaging from the Office of Faculty Affairs regarding limit of SPPT’s current purview to tenure-track positions, not newer professor positions (professors of practice, etc).

• Nisha raised the need for clarity on whether department and school review standards, where they coexist but differ, should be sent to the SPPT committee for simultaneous review (example of her home unit, Architecture, in need of SPPT review for both levels)

The committee agreed to a tentative date and time for the next SPPT meeting: 

• Monday Oct. 7 at 1:30 PM-2:30 PM

Uma will check with Amy/Yolanda if she or an alternate can attend at that time and confirm to committee.

Meeting adjourned.