Approved by the Mānoa Faculty Senate on December 8, 2010
|Date||Document & Link||Committee|
|March 16, 2011
|December 8, 2010||CPM|
Second Report Regarding Proposed Amendments to Criteria for Tenure and Promotion of University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa Faculty
In our October 19 report, the Committee on Professional Matters (CPM) made the following conclusions and recommendations. The Committee on Professional Matters does not recommend that UHMFS support the revisions as proposed. Below, we articulate each of our recommendations.
The five proposed amendments were regarding
1. delegated authority for approving waivers (p.4)
a. CPM recommends that the UHMFS support amendment #1.
2. articulation of authorship conventions (p.7-9)
a. CPM requests additional time to better address the comments from UHM faculty on amendment #2.
3. associate professor and researcher tenure and promotion language (p.10-11)
a. CPM requests that VCAA‘s Office provide the origin of the ―well on their way‖ phrase and rationale behind the proposed modification. With the origin of wording and rationale, CPM will recommend that the UHMFS support amendment #3.
4. Deans' authority to consider dossier after TPRC assessment (p.15)
a. CPM requests that amendment #4 be revised to reflect the exact language of the UHPA contract on p.24 rather than an interpretation of the contract language. We also ask that the following be inserted after the contract language. ―Consideration by the Dean is for review only. This step is not an opportunity for the Dean to provide an additional assessment.‖ With that change, we also recommend that UHMFS support amendment #4.
5. relationship of external evaluator to faculty applicant (p.19)
a. CPM requests additional time to better address the comments from UHM faculty on amendment #5.
In response on October 19, 2010, VCAA Reed Dasenbrock provided rationale for items 2, 3, 4, and 5. In item 2, VCAA Dasenbrock agreed that the language needs to be further reviewed in terms of authorship conventions. The committee and OVCAA‘s office agreed to continue working on the wording and have a final version for Senate consideration at the February 2011 meeting. Submission to UHPA is needed in March 2011 at the latest. In item 3, VCAA Dasenbrock shared that the wording came from discussion with various unit directors. CPM now supports item #3. In item 4, VCAA Dasenbrock agreed to remove the changed language and quote the UHPA Contract language. CPM now supports item #4. In item 5, VCAA Dasenbrock agreed that the language needs to be further reviewed in terms of external evaluators and the issue of time and objectivity. The committee and OVCAA‘s office agreed to continue working on the wording and have a final version for Senate consideration at the February 2011 meeting. Submission to UHPA is needed in March 2011 at the latest.
Recommendations CPM asks that the Senate vote on items #1, 3, and 4. CPM is in favor of those three proposed changes.