Senate Document Number 5404S

Date of Senate Approval 04/08/04

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Statement of Faculty Senate Action:

FWDC 13:     Changes in the review process for Off-campus Scholarly Assignments (Revision of SD1488S)

Effective Date: immediately

Replaces:

Faculty Handbook section 4.1.4.2 (#6 under "Eligibility")

Faculty Handbook section 4.1.4.3 (#3 under "Procedures for Application, Approval, And Accountability")

Rationale:
Over the past few years, there has been such an increase in the number of requests for Off-Campus Scholarly Assignments that the system for advising the Vice Chancellor of Academic Affairs about these matters needs revision. Many considerations impact the decision to approve or deny a request in any given year. Besides the quality of the proposed project, for example, are issues of available resources and the number of requests from a given department. Routing these proposals through a sub-committee composed of representatives from the University Research Council (URC) and the University Teaching Council (UTC) provides for an informed, cross-disciplinary group that can advise the Vice Chancellor. Furthermore, such an advisory group can also provide an opportunity for peer review and feedback about scholarly activity not available in the current system. Scholarly activity is defined broadly to include projects that enhance the development of faculty members in their area of appointment. Such an advisory group has the opportunity to monitor and encourage these activities.

Faculty Handbook section 4.1.4.2 (#6 under "Eligibility")

"6. As a general rule, a faculty member's proposal for an off-campus scholarly assignment must be made at least nine months in advance of an assignment."

Delete the above and replace with the following:

6. As a general rule, a faculty member's proposal for an off-campus scholarly assignment must be made at the start of the academic year preceding the year in which the off-campus scholarly assignment may occur.

"3. Once a final draft of the proposal has been accepted and approved by the department Chair, and the time-frame for the off-campus scholarly project identified, the Chair is responsible for arranging all final details of university support with the VCAA. The VCAA, after reading the proposal and consulting with the Chair (and in some cases, the faculty member) will approve or deny the applicant's request. The VCAA will communicate in writing to the faculty member, with a copy to the department Chair, his or her decision. A negative decision may be accompanied by brief but specific reasons for rejecting the application, such as a statement regarding the feasibility of the project, or lack of resources. Rejection of a proposal should include ways in which the proposal might be improved to enhance acceptance in the future."

Delete the above and replace with the following:

3. Once the draft of the proposal has been accepted and approved by the Department Chair, and the time frame for the off-campus scholarly project identified, the Chair sends it to the Provost. All proposals for the following academic year will be submitted to the Provost by early October (exact date to be determined by the Provost).

The Provost then distributes all requests to a sub-committee for review and advisement. The sub-committee will be composed of two representatives selected from URC and two selected from UTC. (The Provost will ask URC and UTC to appoint their members to this sub-committee.)

The sub-committee (URC and UTC representatives) will transmit its recommendations to the Provost no later than the end of November.

The Provost will communicate his or her decisions in writing to the faculty members, with a copy to each of their department chairs. A negative decision must be accompanied by brief but specific reasons for rejecting the application, such as a statement regarding the feasibility of the project, or lack of resources. Rejection of a proposal must include ways in which the proposal might be improved to enhance acceptance in the future.