Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Fire Shelby Thames -> Fire Shelby Thames -> Fire Shelby Thames -> Faculty Senate and Faculty Manual
Post Info TOPIC: Faculty Senate and Faculty Manual
Robert Campbell

Date:
Faculty Senate and Faculty Manual
Permalink Closed

Since the Faculty Handbook at USM appears to be unfinished, and the section on termination procedures is bound to be, er, contentious...


Isn't it time for the Faculty Senate to take the initiative?


At a number of other institutions, including Clemson, the Faculty Senate Policy Committee drafts Faculty Manual language, and the Faculty Senate has to approved it by a 2/3's vote before it is sent on to the Board of Trustees for final approval.


At Clemson, there is plenty of consultation with the Provost and sometimes with other administrators, and there are times when the Faculty Manual has to be adjusted to deal with an administrative fait accompli, but the Senate's role as guardian of the Faculty Manual is the most important power it has.


When I heard that Jack Hanbury was rewriting the Faculty Handbook single-handedly, I knew that the Thames administration was out of control.  Letting Thames rewrite the Handbook in a series of uneasy exchanges with his PUC isn't a whole lot better, not least because the PUC isn't supposed to have any policy-making authority.  It's best for a faculty body to write the section on termination procedures (plus anything else that's due for revision) and put the onus on Thames and/or the Board  to turn the revisions down.


Robert Campbell



__________________
Joe Olmi

Date:
Permalink Closed

Colleagues,


As I recall the Faculty Handbook Committee, composed of representatives from the Senate, Administration, and faculty representatives selected by the Administration, had resolved the sections of the proposed handbook that dealth with tenure/promotion procedures and termination of tenured faculty. Myron Henry and Susan Hubble provided a tremendous amount of work while serving as the Senate representatives on that committee. I also believe that we had virtually settled/compromised on an acceptable version of those two fairly contentious issues, except from the Administration's standpoint as represented by Jack Hanberry. I recall a unified position less Mr. Hanberry. I would also encourage the PUC to request that history from Myron and others who served on that committee before restarting that process of addressing these sections of the proposed handbook. That work has been done. I feel certain that these issues were resolved with viable versions that should be acceptable to all concerned.


Joe Olmi


Faculty Senate Soon-to-be-Past Secretary



__________________
Robert Campbell

Date:
Permalink Closed

Joe,


Thank you for filling in those of us who didn't know the background.


In the present situation, I think the best strategy is to take the Faculty Handbook language that was arrived at (by everyone except Hanbury) and ask Thames to accept it, pronto.  Go on the offensive on this.  If he balks, ask him in public, at every opportunity, what happened to Hanbury--and why anyone should accept Hanbury's judgment on these matters.


But in the future, the Faculty Senate will be in a much stronger position if it can get the FH process changed to the one that prevails at many other universities.  The current procedure at USM gives the administration way too big a role.


Robert Campbel


 



__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
Fire Shelby Thames -> Fire Shelby Thames -> Fire Shelby Thames -> Faculty Senate and Faculty Manual
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse 		Powered by ActiveBoard