Committees, UCC, Chairs, and Deans

[Section VII of Faculty Handbook]

A. University Committees

Nominations to University Standing Committees are made by the Committee on Committees composed of the chair of the Faculty Senate (who will chair the committee), the chair of the Administrative Senate, the chair of Classified Senate, the President of the Graduate Student Senate, the President of the Student Senate, and a member of the Dean's Council. The President appoints the University Standing Committees.

B. University Curriculum Council

The University Curriculum Council, a statutory body established by the Faculty Senate in order to discharge the Faculty Senate's responsibilities with respect to curricular matters, is the final organization in a system of committees composed of departmental curriculum committees, college curriculum committees, and the University Curriculum Council itself. The function of the University Curriculum Council is to make recommendations in curricular matters that include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:

1. addition, relocation, and deletion of academic programs and degrees;
2. the schedule of program review and the review process itself;
3. after formal review, the quality and priority of existing academic programs;
4. addition, deletion, and changes in courses;
5. academic program or department name changes and addition, deletion, and changes of master curriculum file prefixes, and major codes;
6. academic requirements;
7. implementation and maintenance of the General Education program.

The Curriculum Council is the final recommending voice in curricular matters. Its recommendations go through the Provost to the President for final approval.

The University Curriculum Council is organized into four Standing Committees:  Program, Program Review, Individual Course, and General Education. The Program Committee is concerned with addition, and first follow-up of new programs, as well as deletion, relocation, and changes in existing academic programs, degrees, master curriculum file prefixes, and major codes. The Review Committee is concerned with cyclic review and evaluation of existing programs. The Individual Course Committee is concerned with coordination at the university level of addition, deletion, and changes in all individual course offerings. The General Education Committee is concerned with the implementation and maintenance of the General Education Program. If issues concerning educational and program requirements cannot be assigned to a standing committee, they will be reviewed by a special committee appointed by the chair. When dealing with graduate programs, the Curriculum Council and its committees work with the Graduate Council.

The University Curriculum Council's membership consists of:

1. thirty faculty members, among whom are all members of the Educational Policy and Student Affairs Committee of the Faculty Senate, the vice chair of the Faculty Senate, and four faculty representatives of the Graduate Council: three members of the Curriculum Committee of the Graduate Council who are cross-appointed to the Program Committee of UCC and the chairperson of the Graduate Council;
2. the deans or designees of the following units: College of Arts and Sciences, College of Business, Scripps College of Communication, Patton College of Education, Russ College of Engineering, College of Fine Arts, College of Health Sciences and Professions, Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, University College, Honors Tutorial College, Voinovich School of Leadership and Public Service, and the Graduate College; one administrator must be cross-appointed to the program Committee of UCC and the Graduate Council Curriculum Committee;
3. one regional campus dean, chosen by said deans as their representative;
4. a member of the Alden Library staff;
5. five undergraduate students and two graduate students; and
6. a non-voting representative of the Provost's Office.

The vice chair of the Faculty Senate serves as the voting chair of the Curriculum Council.  The Committee on Committees recommends five undergraduate students and two graduate students as alternates. The alternates have no vote, but are accorded the opportunity to participate in discussions of the full council as well as to participate in activities of the committees. Members of the Curriculum Council are appointed by the President upon the recommendation of the Committee on Committees.

The structure of the University Curriculum Council is subject to annual review by the Faculty Senate. Matters related to courses, academic programs, academic requirements, and review of programs routinely come before the University Curriculum Council; the Faculty Senate shall determine whether exceptional curricular matters should be handled by the University Curriculum Council or by the Faculty Senate itself.

C. Graduate Council

The Graduate Council reviews, coordinates, and serves as an advocate for graduate education at Ohio University. The council has both advisory and policy-recommending responsibilities for graduate education. It initiates, reviews, and recommends University-wide policy and new directions for graduate education.

Four members (three faculty and one administrator) of the Curriculum Committee of the Graduate Council are cross-appointed to serve as voting members of the University Curriculum Council and UCC’s Program Committee. The primary charge of these members will be to represent the concerns of the Graduate Council although they will be voting members of both Councils. Through the cross-appointed members of the Graduate Council and UCC, Graduate Council advises UCC on the approval and implementation of graduate programs.

The Graduate Council recommends to the University Curriculum Council the elimination of graduate programs and degrees at Ohio University. (See Section II.D.4.c for procedures for the elimination of graduate programs.) Other recommendations by the Council go through the Provost to the President for final approval.

Members of the Graduate Council are nominated by the Committee on Committees and appointed by the President. The Graduate Council shall have a voting majority of members with faculty status.

Its membership shall consist of:

1. fourteen members with faculty status (with a minimum of five from doctoral programs and five from master's-degree-only programs);
2. the deans or designees of the following Colleges: Arts and Sciences, Business, Scripps, Patton, Russ, Fine Arts, Health Sciences and Professions, Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine and Universities Libraries; and the directors or designees of the Center for International Studies and the Voinovich School;
3. four graduate students, including the President of the Graduate Student Senate (with a minimum of one student from a doctoral program and one from a master's-only program);
4. the dean (or designee) of the Graduate College as a nonvoting member.

D. Appointment and Evaluation of Department Chairs and School Directors

For the purposes of this policy, departments, schools, and regional campus divisions are equivalent units, and the roles of department chair, school director, and regional campus academic division coordinator are also equivalent.

When a vacancy exists, the college dean will be responsible for initiating action through the department to secure a new chair or director. The dean and the faculty shall jointly establish selection criteria and review the qualifications of all candidates. Department chairpersons division coordinators, and directors of schools shall be selected by the dean with the advice and approval of the faculty (including Tenure Track and full-time – at or above 0.80 FTE – Instructional and Clinical faculty) of the department, division, or school. Initial appointments of chairs and directors require the approval of the Provost. However, non-tenured faculty (pre-tenure Tenure Track, Instructional or Clinical faculty) should not be appointed to chair a department, division or school except under compelling circumstances as agreed upon by faculty. Clinical and Instructional faculty are hired primarily to mentor or teach students and because of their role at the university and non-tenure status may not be appropriate choices. When making such assignments, consideration must be given to rank, length of contract, and possible service restrictions of Clinical or Instructional appointments. If such appointments are deemed appropriate, only non-tenure track faculty on long term contracts and at higher ranks should be considered. If the dean and faculty cannot come to consensus on a Chair candidate, then a special committee appointed by the chair of faculty senate and a representative from the provost’s office, shall arbitrate.

1. Chairs' and directors' appointments will be continued on a year-to-year basis. At the time of initial appointment, it may be agreed by the dean and the department or school faculty that the appointment will not exceed a given number of years. Before reappointment, it is the dean's responsibility to review the effectiveness of a chair or director by consultation with the faculty of the department. The appointment may be terminated by the chair or director, by the dean after consultation with the faculty, or by written request to the dean of two-thirds of the faculty of the department or school.
2. There will be an annual evaluation of all department chairs. The promotion and tenure committee (excluding the department chair) or equivalent departmental committee shall be responsible for carrying out the evaluation. A report of the results of this evaluation shall be furnished to the chair and the dean.
3. When it is known that a chair or director is to be away from the University for more than a few days or whenever a temporary vacancy exists, arrangements are made by the dean for the appointment of an acting chair or director.

E. Appointment and Evaluation of Deans and Executive Officers

All sections of the following Board of Trustees policy that deal with the appointment, evaluation, and reappointment/termination of deans are a matter of Faculty Handbook policy.

This policy provides for the appointment and evaluation of the major administrative officers of the University, including the President, Provost, Vice Presidents, Executive Dean for Regional Campuses, Deans, and the Director of the Center for International Studies. It outlines regularized procedures for the search, appointment, evaluation, reappointment, and termination of these officers.

1. Search

   1. A search committee will be established by the person responsible for making the appointment to assist in the identification, evaluation, and recommendation of highly qualified candidates.
      1. The committee should be small enough to work effectively but large enough to accomplish its task. (A reasonable range is six to fourteen.)
      2. In case of an academic appointment, the chair of the committee will be a faculty member.
      3. The committee should include representatives of the major constituencies of the position. The search committee for a dean will include faculty, students, and a dean. Half of the faculty will be elected by the Tenure Track faculty members of the academic unit involved. The Provost will appoint the other half from the faculty of the college or unit after consultation with the department or school chairs.
      4. The search committee for a President is appointed by the Board of Trustees and works under the guidance of the Board. The committee will include representatives from the major constituencies of the University.
   2. The charge to the committee and a general description of the position to be filled will be given by the person responsible for making the appointment. In the case of deans and directors, the general description will be developed by the Provost in consultation with the members of the committee.  The committee is responsible for ensuring that affirmative action principles are observed. It will meet with the Officer of University Equity and Civil Rights Compliance (ECRC) early in its deliberations.
   3. The deliberations of all search committees and their final report will be in confidence.

2. Appointment

   Appointment is on an annual basis with the expectation that it will be continued from year to year with a program of annual evaluation during the continued appointment. A comprehensive evaluation will occur approximately every five (four to six) years. The year of the first comprehensive evaluation will be scheduled by the President or Provost at the time of first appointment. A reappointment decision follows this comprehensive review as provided below.

3. Annual Evaluation

   1. The Board of Trustees is responsible for the annual review of the President.
   2. Each administrative officer will be evaluated on an annual basis for the purposes of salary review, identification of areas of administrative improvement, and personal development.
   3. The person responsible for making the appointment (President or Provost) is responsible for coordinating the review. The major constituencies of the position will be asked to contribute information for the evaluation.
   4. In the case of  deans (or dean equivalents)8 who are appointed to academic units with at least five full-time faculty with tenure/promotion homes in the unit and who provide annual/promotion/tenure evaluations of those faculty, a committee of Tenure Track faculty, half of whom will be appointed by the faculty senators from the college or unit, and half of whom will be appointed by the Provost, will conduct the annual review. At least one of the members of the committee appointed by the faculty senators9 from the college or unit will serve on the evaluation committee for two years. Each evaluation committee shall have access to previous annual and comprehensive evaluations of the dean being evaluated. Tenure Track, Instructional, and Clinical faculty with home promotion/tenure departments/schools in each college or area will have an opportunity to participate in the evaluation of their dean by means of a questionnaire that contains both standard questions and questions specifically relevant to the academic unit of the dean. This questionnaire must be anonymous with no tracking of individual responses to different questions (such as "respondent 12 answered X to question 1 and Y to question 2"). As a general rule, different constituencies' responses should be disaggregated by sub-population (e.g. Tenure-Track and Instructional/Clinical Faculty responses). However, if after the data has been returned, and if the committee determines that the number of Instructional or Clinical Faculty responses is so low as to place any individual at professional risk it can take the extraordinary action of not disaggregating as appropriate. The questionnaire may include space for written comments; however, colleges are encouraged to keep the questionnaire concise. After consultation with the Provost, the committee will issue its final report. It shall be the responsibility of the Provost to discuss the results of the committee's evaluation with the dean.
   5. Should the committee's report to the Provost identify a particularly serious problem, the Provost shall discuss the issue with the dean and report to the committee on the disposition of the matter. If significant concerns continue to be expressed in subsequent annual reviews and there are no clear indications of improvement in the dean's performance, the President or Provost should give serious consideration to terminating the contract of the dean.
   6. All annual faculty evaluation reports of academic deans (as applicable) become a part of their permanent personnel records and shall be on file in the office of the Provost and shall be available by application through the Office of Legal Affairs, subject to the same restrictions that apply to faculty files (see Section 1.D).

4. Comprehensive Review

   1. There will be a more comprehensive review approximately every fifth year to provide a general appraisal of executive performance and accomplishment. The comprehensive review is more explicitly judgmental in nature than the annual evaluation described above. In the case of academic deans, the comprehensive review as outlined below is to provide a basis for determining if a reappointment should be recommended. The next comprehensive review will occur within five years following reappointment and will be completed recently enough that it clearly provides meaningful feedback prior to any reappointment. Evaluations should be completed within the regular academic year.
   2. The Board of Trustees is responsible for the comprehensive review of the President. The Board of Trustees will select a review committee including representatives from the University to assist with the comprehensive review.
   3. For executive officers other than the President, the person responsible for making the appointment is responsible for the comprehensive review. For those executive officers other than academic deans, the review committee will be appointed by the President or Provost who will meet with the committee to discuss the scope, procedures, and goals for carrying out the review. These committees will prepare a report including recommendations that will be considered by the President or Provost prior to any action.
   4. In the case of academic deans, Heritage College of Medicine (HCOM) campus deans, Regional Higher Education campus deans, and the Regional Higher Education Executive Dean the majority of the review committee will consist of faculty from the college or regional campus, with a majority of these faculty members appointed by the faculty senator(s) from the college or regional campus in consultation with the chair of the Faculty Senate.
      1. The remainder of the faculty and other members will be appointed by the Provost. The comprehensive review committee may include faculty (tenure-track, instructional, and/or clinical), administrative staff, and students. The faculty members serving on the committee will elect the chair from their own number.
      2. The Provost (or Provost designee) will meet with the committee to discuss the general description of the position, the goals and achievements of the college or regional campus, and the general areas of assessment of the dean and general procedures for carrying out the review. The review is to be an intensive one considering the overall performance and accomplishments of the dean.
      3. The review committee will gather and assess a full range of information including the dean's self-assessment, pertinent reports including the annual evaluation reports and other data and written general assessments by faculty and appropriate administrators and other constituents. In addition, the committee is encouraged to use personal interviews. The faculty of the college or regional campus should be informed of the comprehensive review of their dean. The faculty serving on the committee will be Tenure Track faculty. The committee will provide an evaluation form to all Tenure Track, Instructional, Clinical Faculty, and any other identifiable constituents deemed appropriate by the committee, which includes an outline of the areas of assessment and the opportunity to provide an anonymous evaluation. After completing the rest of the form, the faculty will be provided the opportunity to add observations and comments including their recommendation on the reappointment of the dean. As a general rule, different constituencies’ responses should be disaggregated (e.g. Instructional, Clinical Faculty, office staff, etc.). However, if after data has been returned, and if the committee determines that the number of Instructional Faculty, Clinical Faculty, or other constituency responders is low enough to place any individual at professional risk, it can take the extraordinary action of not disaggregating data as appropriate.
      4. The review committee will conclude its analysis by preparation of a report with preliminary recommendations, including a recommendation of non-reappointment or reappointment. The dean will be provided an opportunity to comment on the draft report before a final version is submitted to the Provost. The recommendations of the review committee are to represent their assessment of the full range of information obtained. The evaluation from the faculty of the college or regional campus is to be given critical weight in the development of recommendations by the review committee. In the case where a substantial number (approaching an absolute majority) of the Tenure Track faculty summarize their concerns about the dean's performance by recommending non-appointment, but the committee recommends reappointment, the committee will recommend positive steps to be taken that would lead to the restoration of confidence of the faculty.
      5. The Provost will normally follow the review committee's recommendations, except in extraordinary circumstances and for reasons discussed with the committee, with an opportunity for its response prior to final action.
      6. Following the comprehensive review, the Provost will distribute a report to the faculty of the college or regional campus. The report will include the Provost's summary of actions taken as a result of the review and the committee's summary of their findings and recommendations.
      7. The questionnaire used in annual evaluations subsequent to the first comprehensive review will provide the opportunity for faculty to request that a comprehensive review be undertaken the next year. An absolute majority of the Tenure Track faculty may thereby call for the Provost to schedule the comprehensive review for the next year.

5. Termination

   An appointment may be terminated by the President, the Provost, or the appointee.

F. Appointment of Assistant and Associate Deans

Assistant and associate deans are appointed by their deans in consultation with the faculty. Initial appointments and changes from assistant to associate status require the approval of the Provost. These are annual appointments and will be continued from year to year until terminated. The appointment may be terminated by either the appointee or the dean.