2.0 Contractual Policies and Procedures

This section (Part II of the Faculty Handbook, including Sections 2.0 through 2.16 and all appendices to Part II) contains the approved policies and procedures of the College of Saint Benedict (the college) [Saint John's University (the university)] concerning the terms and conditions of employment of the faculty of the college [university]. Part II is incorporated into the individual contract of employment of each faculty member. Where the terms and provisions of an individual contract of a faculty member are inconsistent with the general policies contained herein, the provisions of the individual contract shall supersede. Otherwise, the provisions of Part II of the Faculty Handbook are legally binding on all parties for the specific period covered by a contract and will not be changed during that period.

Revisions of Part II of the Faculty Handbook can occur only in accord with the procedures of Section 2.16. The provost is charged with keeping on file the official copy of the Faculty Handbook, including all revisions.

Should there be any misapplication or misinterpretation or violation of the specific provisions of this section by a chair, program director, dean, or other officer of the college [university], the faculty member involved in such a situation may informally refer such actions to the Faculty Handbook Committee or file a grievance under procedures found in Sections 2.15 and 4.1.

2.0.1 Nondiscrimination

It is the policy of the college [university], as articulated in the “Joint Human Rights Policy” (see appendix to Part II), not to discriminate unlawfully against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, age, sexual orientation, marital status, sex, national origin, ancestry, religion, veteran's status, or physical impairment. The college [university] does, however, have a policy on preferential hiring and retention, as described in Section 2.3.3.

The policy of nondiscrimination includes, but is not limited to:

1. recruitment and employment of applicants who possess the necessary qualifications and/or experience for appointment to the faculty;
2. renewal of faculty contract, tenure, promotion, and separation from the college [university];
3. sabbatical leave or other leave with or without pay; faculty development programs, grants, awards sponsored by the college [university];
4. establishment of salary, benefits, workload, and other rights belonging to a faculty member.

Moreover, it is the policy of the college [university] that no employee shall discriminate against another employee on any of these grounds.

2.1 Faculty Rank

The faculty comprises all persons having contractual appointment for the instruction of students at the college [university]. It consists of two distinct groups: tenured or tenure-track faculty and term-appointment faculty. Faculty holding tenure-track (probationary) and tenured (continuous) contracts are subject to review as specified in 2.5 Faculty holding term appointments (non-tenure-track) receive term contracts (for a specified term, usually one academic year), and have more limited rights and responsibilities, as defined here (Sections 2.1.3 and 2.1.4) and concerning evaluation (Section 2.5) and separation (Section 2.13).

2.1.1 Definitions

It will be helpful to note the meaning of some phrases used throughout the following sections on specific ranks:

1. The phrase "professional equivalent" is intended to allow for the occasional possibility of a "nontraditional" appointment, namely that prominent persons without the appropriate terminal academic degrees in their discipline may nonetheless possess experience and professional recognition (e.g., in the creative arts, business, the medical community) that may in the judgment of the college [university] substitute for the usual academic degree. Such a possible substitution affords the flexible consideration of exceptional candidates without reducing appropriate standards for appointment.
2. "A graduate institution of recognized standing" means an institution accredited by one of the six regional accrediting associations in the United States (e.g., North Central) or, for faculty members educated in other nations, a recognized university of international standing.
3. "An appropriate terminal degree" means a graduate degree from an institution of recognized standing, other than the earned doctorate, that is judged appropriate by college [university] policy for the faculty position to which an individual is appointed. The provost, in consultation with the dean of the faculty, the academic dean and the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology], makes the final decision concerning the appropriate terminal degrees for faculty positions.
4. The phrase "or its equivalent for reduced-load faculty" means that a requisite number of years of service (e.g., six years prior to tenure review) can be fulfilled over a longer period by a reduced-load faculty member (see Section 2.1.2.2) based on the arithmetic total of the various fractions of full-time service stipulated in that faculty member's contracts over that period.
5. Tenure and probation are defined in Sections 2.6.1 and 2.6.2.

2.1.2 Tenured/Tenure-track Faculty: Workload

A tenured/tenure-track faculty member is a full-time or reduced load employee of the college [university] who has been appointed to one of the four academic ranks: instructor, assistant professor, associate professor, or professor. Members of the tenured/tenure-track faculty receive continuous contracts (if tenured) or probationary contracts (if on tenure-track). See Section 2.6 for an explanation of tenure, probation, and the tenure-review process.

2.1.2.1 Full-time Tenured/Tenure-Track Faculty

A full-time faculty member:

1. has full-time teaching duties or has teaching and other duties (e.g., chairing a department, counseling, research) equivalent to a full-time teaching load (see Section 2.10.3);
2. fulfills the other duties and responsibilities of a faculty member (see Section 2.10.3); and
3. holds academic rank as described in Section 2.1.2

2.1.2.2 Reduced-load Tenured/Tenure-Track Faculty

Reduced-load faculty are those who are tenured/tenure-track, as defined in Section 2.1.1, and who hold an appointment which is less than full time but ordinarily half time or more. They may be employed on probationary or continuous contracts. Such reduced- load faculty have pro rata contractual rights to promotion, tenure, and sabbatical leave as provided in the Faculty Handbook. They are full voting members of the Faculty Assembly and have, on a reduced-load basis, responsibilities for advising, service on committees, and all other responsibilities of full-time faculty members as detailed in the Faculty Handbook.

2.1.3 Tenured/Tenure-track Faculty: Criteria for Appointment

At the time of initial appointment of a full-time or reduced-load faculty member, the provost, in consultation with the dean of the faculty, the academic dean [the dean of the School of Theology] and the department chair, makes a judgment about rank for the initial contract using the criteria described below. Thereafter, changes in rank occur as described in Section 2.7. See Section 2.1.0 for the definitions of phrases used below.

2.1.3.1 Instructor

Criteria for rank of instructor shall be:

1. possession of a master's degree from a graduate institution of recognized standing, or its professional equivalent;
2. either proven or presumptive potential to obtain an appropriate earned doctoral degree or appropriate terminal degree; and
3. either proven or presumptive potential to fulfill the duties and responsibilities of a faculty member.

This rank is not a permanent rank for full-time faculty.

2.1.3.2 Assistant Professor

Criteria for the rank of assistant professor shall be:

1. possession of an appropriate earned doctorate or appropriate terminal degree from a graduate institution of recognized standing, or its professional equivalent;
2. evidence of or presumptive potential for teaching effectiveness;
3. evidence of or presumptive potential for scholarship in appropriate fields; and
4. evidence of or presumptive potential to fulfill the other duties and responsibilities of a faculty member.

This rank may be a permanent rank.

2.1.3.3 Associate Professor

Criteria for the rank of associate professor shall be:

1. possession of an appropriate earned doctorate or appropriate terminal degree from a graduate institution of recognized standing, or its professional equivalent;
2. a minimum of six years (or its equivalent for reduced-load faculty) of ranked full-time teaching in a regionally accredited college or university;
3. evidence of sustained, noteworthy teaching effectiveness; and
4. evidence of noteworthy research, scholarship, creative or professional activities and/or service.

Ordinarily, promotion to the rank of associate professor is applied for and granted during the sixth year of service, as a part of review for and granting of tenure. This rank may be a permanent rank.

2.1.3.4 Professor

Criteria for the appointment to the rank of professor shall be:

1. possession of an appropriate earned doctorate or appropriate terminal degree from a graduate institution of recognized standing or its professional equivalent;
2. minimum of 12 years of full-time ranked teaching in a regionally accredited college or university (or its equivalent), or a minimum of six years of full-time teaching at the rank of associate professor at the college [university];
3. evidence of strong performance at the level of associate professor of all faculty duties and responsibilities described in Section 2.5; and
4. evidence of excellence in teaching and in either scholarship/creative work or in service to the university.

This rank may be a permanent rank.

2.1.4 Term-appointment Faculty: Workload

Faculty members who hold term appointments (see Section 2.2.1.1 for a description of term contracts) may serve either part time or full time.

2.1.4.1 Part-time, Per-course Faculty

Part-time, per-course faculty teach less than full time and

1. usually have duties entailing only teaching and consultation with students as described in Section 2.10.3.2 (a, b, c, and h);
2. meet or exceed the criteria of the appropriate academic title defined in Section 2.1.4 below;
3. always receive a term contract (see Section 2.2.1.1);
4. receive fringe benefits only if their contract is for greater than three-sixths time; and
5. do not accumulate time toward tenure, promotion, or sabbatical leave.

Part-time, per-course faculty are expected to be available outside of class at least one-and-a-half hours per week for each course taught to consult with students regarding their course work.

2.1.4.2 Full-time Term-appointment Faculty

Although full-time faculty members are ordinarily either tenured or on tenure-track, special full-time appointments unrelated to tenure are sometimes appropriate for limited periods. See Section 2.2.1.1 for policies governing term contracts. Such faculty members

1. usually have duties and responsibilities similar to those of the tenured/tenure-track faculty;
2. meet or exceed the criteria of the appropriate academic title defined in Section 2.1.4 below;
3. always receive a term contract (see Section 2.2.1.1);
4. receive fringe benefits; and
5. do not accumulate time toward tenure, promotion, or sabbatical leave.

2.1.5 Term-appointment Faculty: Criteria for Appointment

Term-appointment faculty have the same academic freedom and responsibilities in the management of courses as tenured/tenure-track faculty. Although they are formally appointed by the president at the recommendation of the provost, arrangements for term-appointment faculty are ordinarily worked out between the chair and the dean of the faculty, and academic dean [and/or the dean of the School of Theology].

Term-appointment faculty do not accumulate time toward tenure, promotion, or sabbatical. Should a faculty member with a term appointment subsequently receive a probationary appointment, the length of the probationary period prior to tenure review is determined in accord with Section 2.3.6, "Initial Rank and Length of the Probationary Period."

2.1.5.1 Instructor

Instructors are hired on a greater than 3/6 term contract. An instructor should have at least a master's degree in the appropriate field, or its professional equivalent.

2.1.5.2 Visiting Professor by Rank

The title visiting professor is assigned to an individual with a terminal degree, hired for more than 3/6, on a term contract basis, at the appropriate rank (visiting assistant, visiting associate, or visiting full professor).

2.1.5.3 Adjunct Professor by Rank

A faculty member who holds a term appointment on a part-time basis (3/6 or less) will receive a contract as adjunct instructor, adjunct assistant professor, adjunct associate professor, or adjunct professor, depending on qualifications.

2.1.5.4 Post-Doctoral Fellow

This title is assigned to individuals who receive a fellowship which may include teaching and time allocated for research on a term-contract basis.

2.1.5.5 Artist or Writer or Scholar in Residence

This title is assigned to individuals who have demonstrated outstanding ability in performance in the creative arts (art, music, poetry, writing, and theater) or in scholarship and who are appointed to teach and/or pursue other duties at the college [university], ordinarily for a limited period of time on a term contract on either a part-time, per-course or full-time basis.

2.1.6 Special Rank Faculty

Such an appointment is made only after the president has consulted with the provost, the dean of the faculty, the academic dean [the dean of the School of Theology], and the department chair has issued a recommendation to the college’s [university’s] Board of Trustees. Special rank appointments carry with them no contractual workload obligations. (See Section 2.12.3 for status and privileges of retired faculty members.)

2.1.6.1 Trustees Professor

An appointment as Trustees professor recognizes a current faculty member extraordinarily distinguished in arts, education, or the professions. The special rank of Trustees professor is an honorary title and does not affect compensation arrangements. A Trustees professor might hold only this special rank and receive a part-time, per-course contract. A tenured full-time member of the faculty may be appointed as Trustees professor without giving up any rights associated with his or her current rank, ordinarily that of professor.

2.1.6.2 Professor Emerita/us

This rank may be assigned to associate professors or professors who have limited or terminated their responsibilities as a faculty member for valid reasons (e.g., retirement, illness) after 15 or more years of distinguished and meritorious service to the college [university].

The title professor emerita/us is an honorary one and does not affect salary or fringe benefits that might be involved in any part-time, per-course contract between the individual and the college [university]. Appointees will have their names recorded at this rank in the catalog during the remainder of their lifetimes.

2.1.6.3 Professor Alumna/us

The honorary title of professor alumna/us may be assigned to a faculty member with 15 or more years of service at the college who is not given the title professor emerita/us and who voluntarily leaves employment with the college. Appointees will have their names recorded at this rank in the catalog during the remainder of their lifetimes.

2.1.7 Administrators with Faculty Status

Administrative officers (e.g., dean, provost, or president) do not receive faculty contracts but may hold faculty rank while they are in administrative positions. Those who teach while in administration at the college [university] have the same academic freedom and responsibilities in the management of courses as full-time tenured/tenure-track faculty. Administrative officers who hold tenured faculty rank have the right to retain tenure and rank following the completion of their administrative contract. Time in administrative positions ordinarily does not count toward promotion, tenure, or sabbatical leave, except in the case of a tenured/tenure-track faculty member who serves as an academic administrator for the full academic year and who also teaches one quarter time or more during that academic year.

2.2 Faculty Contracts

All faculty contracts include the policies and procedures governing faculty employment as described in Part II (Section 2.0 and subsections: "Contractual Policies and Procedures").

2.2.1 Types of Contracts

2.2.1 Term Contracts

Term contracts are limited to the term of employment stated in the contract and carry no presumption of renewal. Term contracts do not lead to tenure. Should a faculty member with a term appointment subsequently receive a probationary appointment, the length of the probationary period prior to tenure review is determined in accord with Section 2.3.6, "Initial Rank and Length of the Probationary Period." Compensation and responsibilities are ordinarily worked out and agreed upon in writing between the appointee and the dean of the faculty, [and/or the dean of the School of Theology], in consultation with the department chair. See Sections 2.1.3 and 2.1.4 for a further description of term appointments.

Although a part-time, term-contract appointment might be appropriate for many years in succession, full-time faculty members are ordinarily either tenured (receiving a continuous contract; see Section 2.2.1.3 below) or on tenure-track (receiving a probationary contract; see Section 2.2.1.2 below). Full-time term contracts are routinely limited to no longer than three years.

In special circumstances (for example, for summer teaching), tenured/tenure-track faculty of the college [university] may receive term contracts in addition to their regular contracts.

Full-time, term-contract faculty will receive annual departmental reviews.

2.2.1.2 Probationary Contracts

Probationary contracts are given to tenure-track faculty members (see Section 2.1.1), and are renewable annually. (See Section 2.6.1 for the definition of probationary status.) Any decision by the college [university] not to reappoint a probationary faculty member must follow the procedures described in Section 2.13.3, "Non-reappointment of Probationary Faculty."

2.2.1.3 Continuous Contracts

Continuous contracts are given to faculty members who have been granted tenure. (See Section 2.6, "Tenure Policy and Procedures.") Continuous contracts are subject to the terms and conditions of employment that exist at the time of issuance of annual contracts (see Section 2.2.4) by the college [university] as described in Section 2.0. A faculty member with a continuous contract is entitled to annual contract renewal unless either the faculty member or the college [university] has terminated the contract in accord with the procedures of Section 2.13, "Separation."

2.2.2 Locus of Appointment

All faculty appointments by probationary or continuous contract have as their locus of appointment their academic department [and/or the School of Theology], as stated in their contract. Faculty members teaching in the general curriculum or other interdisciplinary programs shall have their locus of appointment in one of the academic departments. Faculty members with joint appointments shall have their locus of appointment in the administrative home department as identified in their memorandum of understanding.

2.2.3 The Contract Year

Ordinarily, the contract year for faculty members begins with the first day of the fall faculty workshop and ends with spring commencement and submission of final grades.

2.2.4 Issuance and Return of Contracts

Except for initial appointments or after third-year review (see Section 2.13.3.1) or in situations of financial emergency (see Section 2.13.5) or by mutual agreement of the Assembly and the president, all probationary and continuous contract offers for the subsequent academic year must be issued by the college [university] on or before April 1 and be signed and returned on or before April 15, or the first working day thereafter. (See section 4.1.3 for the definition of the term “working day”.) If a contract offer is not accepted by April 15 (or by 15 days after the date of issuance of contracts, if that occurs after April 1) and if special arrangements have not been made with the provost by that date, the offer automatically expires.

These same policies ordinarily apply to the renewal of term contracts. When it is not possible to determine by March 1 whether the term position will be continued for the following year, the provost notifies the faculty member in writing of the date by which a decision will be made. The provost or dean of the faculty then either notifies the faculty member of non- renewal in writing or issues the new contract by the date specified in the previous letter.

2.2.5 Special Note on Members from Religious Orders

The provisions of the Faculty Handbook apply equally to faculty members who are members of Saint Benedict's Monastery, Saint John's Abbey, or other religious orders, even though such faculty members are technically agents of their order rather than employees of the college [university].

2.3 Recruitment and Appointment

The quality of initial appointments is vital to the quality of teaching and scholarship to which the college [university] is committed. The following statements of policy for recruitment to the faculty are intended to aid department chairs, the provost, the dean of the faculty, the academic dean and others who are involved in making initial appointments.

All new members of the faculty shall receive a copy of the Faculty Handbook by the time of their initial contract offer. Part II of the Faculty Handbook exists as an integrated part of every contract, with the remaining parts helping to delineate many of the terms and conditions of faculty employment. New faculty members will be subject to all amendments to the Faculty Handbook, even those enacted subsequent to their signing a contract (see Section 2.16.6.c.).

2.3.1 Authority to Hire

Sole authority to hire and retain faculty members is vested in the president. This authority is customarily exercised through the provost and the dean of the faculty, by procedures established to assure adequate consultation with the faculty and full compliance with human rights norms.

2.3.2 Nondiscrimination

Hiring will occur in accord with the standards for nondiscrimination described in Section 2.0.1.

2.3.3 Preferential Hiring and Retention

In [compliance with the University’s bylaws and in] order to maintain the Benedictine character of the college [university], preference in hiring and retention is given to qualified applicants who are members of Saint Benedict's Monastery [Saint John's Abbey]. Procedures for such preferential hiring are found in Section 3.1; procedures for layoff, including preferential consideration of Benedictines, are found in Section 2.13.5.

The college [university] also reserves the right to recruit and hire internally without outside searches under special circumstances and in compliance with state and federal nondiscrimination laws. (See also Section 2.0.1, "Nondiscrimination.") The college [university] also recognizes the obligation to maintain its Catholic and ecumenical character and reserves the right to the extent permitted by law to strengthen that character in its hiring decisions.

2.3.4 Procedures for Recruitment

The recruitment of faculty members is the responsibility of the provost, dean of the faculty, and academic dean in consultation with the department chairs. Procedures for recruitment are found in Section 3.2.

2.3.5 Campus-specific Employment

Although faculty members work in departments jointly sponsored by the College of Saint Benedict and Saint John's University, unless otherwise indicated in their contract, they are employees of only one institution and do not acquire the rights or privileges of employees of the other.

2.3.6 Initial Rank and Length of the Probationary Period

Initial rank and length of the probationary period shall be determined at the time of hiring in accord with Section 2.1. Provisions concerning tenure and the length of the probationary period in light of previous experience will be determined by the provost in accord with Sections 2.6.1 and 2.6.3. Even persons tenured elsewhere ordinarily receive probationary contracts at the time of initial appointment at the college [university]. In rare cases, tenure for candidates holding CSB (SJU) contracts may be granted immediately by the college’s Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees (university’s Board of Trustees) after recommendation of the Rank and Tenure Committee, the provost, and the president.

Any agreement shortening the usual length of the probationary period (see Section 2.6.3, "Eligibility to Apply for Tenure") or specifying the terminal degree required for tenure (see Section 2.1.0.c, "An appropriate terminal degree") ordinarily will be stipulated in a letter of appointment, accompanying the initial contract offer, from the dean of the faculty with a copy to the academic dean, and department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology].

2.3.7 Summer-session Faculty [for the Saint John’s University Handbook only]

Summer-session faculty are selected by the dean of the School of Theology in accordance with the needs of the university. Summer-session faculty are offered term contracts for the teaching of specific courses. See Section 2.1.4.1 for a description of part-time, per-course faculty.

When a regular member of the School of Theology faculty has accrued less than full- time service toward eligibility for tenure (see 2.6.2), sabbatical (see 2.9.2), or promotion (see 2.7) (e.g., due to monastic responsibilities), the university shall count regular graduate courses taught during the summer term toward eligibility. Teaching during the summer term may not be counted to shorten the usual eligibility periods.

2.4 Employment Records

The college [university] maintains employment records for each faculty member as required for the implementation of college [university] policies concerning faculty members. Such records are maintained with appropriate safeguards to ensure security and confidentiality.

2.4.1 Availability of Employment Records

The records concerning a faculty member are available on a need-to-know basis to the president, the provost, the dean of the faculty, the academic dean, the college [university] counsel, and the Human Resources director. The faculty member, or someone authorized in writing by the faculty member, may have access to the non-confidential portions of such records. The faculty member may, for the cost of duplication, request that copies of any non-confidential materials in the file be provided by the college [university].

2.4.2 Mandated Release of Employment Records

Information in the file will be released pursuant to subpoena or in other circumstances where the college [university] is required by law to release the information. The faculty member will be informed by the college [university] about any such release of information.

2.5 Faculty Evaluation: Policy, Criteria, and Evidence

Faculty members are evaluated throughout their careers at the college [university]. They have the right to regular evaluation to identify their areas of excellence and to target areas where improvement is appropriate. Judgments concerning the quality of each faculty member's performance are necessary to make college [university] decisions with respect to the renewal of term appointments, the continuation of probationary appointments, as well as the granting of tenure, promotions, and sabbaticals. Although the criteria for evaluation address different aspects of professional life, faculty members are expected to meet these criteria within an integrated professional identity in which the values of teacher and learner are interwoven into ongoing career development.

Evaluations

Formal evaluations of tenured/tenure-track faculty are carried out by the Rank and Tenure Committee during the third year of full-time appointment, during the sixth year (resulting in a decision on the granting of tenure), and before promotion in rank. Procedures for these evaluations are described in Sections 2.6, "Tenure," and 2.7, "Promotion." Periodic review of tenured faculty occurs in accord with Section 2.8, "Post- tenure Review." Although tenured faculty are not formally evaluated annually, they should periodically consult with the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] concerning their programs of professional development. (See Section 2.9.1, "Planning for Professional Development.")

Department chairs [and the dean of the School of Theology] are expected to arrange annual evaluations of probationary members of their department in a detailed manner. For faculty with a joint appointments, the chair of the administrative home department initiates the review, but the chairs of both departments [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] complete separate annual evaluations, as well as a joint statement on how the memorandum of understanding is functioning, For all annual evaluations, the chair sends an evaluation to the dean of the faculty, with a copy to the candidate. The dean of the faculty and academic dean may participate in this evaluation if appropriate and are responsible for ensuring that department chairs complete these reviews annually. The chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] is also responsible for arranging formative evaluation of term-appointment faculty yearly.

If desired, untenured faculty may seek out (for example, with the help of the department chair or the Learning Enhancement Service) the participation of a non- departmental senior faculty member or outside consultant to be part of a formative evaluation process. This person would not later be part of any summative evaluation of the candidate unless the candidate requested his or her participation.

In order to gather student reaction and recommendations for improvement, faculty members must -- at the frequency specified in Section 4.3 – conduct student course surveys at the end of their courses. Such student course surveys are the property of each faculty member as described in Section 4.3, but they must be submitted to the Rank and Tenure Committee at times of evaluation.

2.5.1 Teaching Effectiveness

Excellence in teaching is the most important goal of a faculty member at the college [university]. In all applications for third-year review, tenure, and promotion, teaching effectiveness must be addressed as the most important basis for seeking a positive review of the application.

Candidates must present evidence of effective teaching from any classes that they have taught, including department courses, department courses with general curriculum designation, general curriculum courses outside their department, and other courses outside their department, including programs abroad. (In semesters when emergency remote teaching is required, the dean of the faculty can determine that faculty have the option to not include the student course surveys as part of any review processes. In such circumstances, if a faculty member chooses not to include them as part of the review, the student course surveys shall not be used to evaluate faculty.) Although most teaching occurs in the context of a course, important teaching also occurs in moderating individual learning projects, honors theses, internships and in mentoring and/or apprenticeships. Consequently, a candidate may wish to include evidence related to these forms of teaching if appropriate.

The attributes and qualifications to be considered and documented in assessing teaching effectiveness include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:

1. command of one's field and its ongoing development as related to curricular needs;
2. ability to identify course-appropriate student learning goals;
3. integration of effective and inclusive pedagogies, practices, and course materials to promote student learning;
4. frequent use of student feedback to improve goals, pedagogies, and materials;
5. integration of college, university, and departmental goals and values into course goals and methods, as appropriate;
6. ability to help students relate one's discipline to other areas of knowledge and to the liberal arts tradition;
7. skill in communicating with students;
8. ability to provoke and broaden student interest in subject matter;
9. redesign of existing courses and development of new courses appropriate to the Academic Commitments to the Mission and goals of the college, university, and department; and
10. ongoing pattern of effort to improve teaching effectiveness.

A faculty member demonstrates effectiveness by assembling and presenting a teaching portfolio. The portfolio contents will vary according to the faculty member’s course, pedagogical approach and disciplinary practices, but must address the items listed above in 2.5.1. All teaching portfolios will include:

1. reflective statement describing personal teaching philosophy, strategies, and objectives; commitment to fostering diversity, equity, inclusion and justice in the classroom; as well as progress toward one's professional goals; and
2. the student course surveys, (considered by the Rank & Tenure Committee and by CSB/SJU Academic Affairs to be an indication of student experience rather than “evaluation” or “evidence”), and more importantly, the candidate’s summaries and analysis of those surveys, and a description of any changes in one’s courses as a response to student reaction.
   
   Candidates must include additional evidence in the teaching portfolio as appropriate to their teaching and discipline, the specific form of which may include:
3. evaluation by department chair, [and/or the dean of the School of Theology,] and/or appropriate program directors;
4. evaluative statements from departmental/program colleagues;
5. review of course syllabi, course materials, and exams by peers inside or outside the two institutions;
6. continuing education in one's field or areas related to one's teaching responsibilities; and
7. participation in seminars, special courses, or workshops, whether sponsored by the college [university] or other organizations, on the development of teaching and learning skills.

2.5.2 Scholarship and Creative Work

The essential and constant element across disciplines and among the five criteria identified below is public accessibility for critique by one’s professional peers. Creative work requires public presentation and availability to critique by professional peers. Scholarship must be presented publicly (whether orally or in print) where professional peers regularly engage each other’s work.

Consequently, some evidence of scholarly engagement (e.g., attendance at professional meetings, scholarly writing not yet presented or published, the presentation of one’s scholarship to civic or church groups, or professional consultation services not subject to outside review by professional peers) or of creative effort (e.g., a concert prepared for but not yet publicly performed, an art work created but not yet exhibited) demonstrates only the commendable first steps toward scholarship and creative work as described below. Such activities require the faculty member's scholarly knowledge and/or creative ability and are professionally stimulating in important ways. In and of themselves, however, these activities are at best preliminary evidence for scholarship and creative work in academe.

The Rank and Tenure Committee must apply the evaluation criteria below to candidates from diverse departments. Consequently, departments shall develop, and periodically review departmental guidelines for evaluation that interpret from the perspective of a particular discipline the criteria and forms of evidence described below. Departmental guidelines shall be developed in consultation with the dean of the faculty and academic dean [or the Dean of the School of Theology] and shall be placed on file in the Office of Academic Affairs for advisory use by faculty evaluation committees. The guidelines shall also be communicated to new faculty members at the time of hiring and inform departmental discussions of candidates for third year review, tenure, and promotion. Faculty members shall consult these guidelines when drawing up their professional development plans. These departmental guidelines supplement but do not supersede the criteria and forms of evidence stipulated below.

Scholarly and creative work includes the following:

1. contribution to the advancement of knowledge and creativity related to one's disciplinary area(s);
2. contribution to the advancement of knowledge and creativity related to diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice;
3. integration and interpretation of disciplinary knowledge across fields of scholarship;
4. application of scholarly or artistic learning in actual settings to issues related to the human condition; and
5. innovative transformation of scholarly or artistic ways of knowing into student learning.

Demonstration of scholarly excellence may include, but is not necessarily limited to, the following evidence:

1. publications subject to peer review;
2. slides, recordings, or portfolios of artistic works or performance;
3. other relevant publications;
4. presentations of scholarly and/or creative work at professional meetings;
5. on-campus presentations of scholarship and/or creative work;
6. evaluation by department chair, program director [and/or the dean of the School of Theology];
7. evaluative statements by professional peers; and
8. award of grants, patents, prizes, or commendations.

2.5.2.1 Scholarship in the School of Theology

Because of the particular importance of ongoing research to graduate teaching in particular, the assessment of excellence in scholarship for members of the School of Theology faculty is made in light of the expectation that at a minimum such faculty will also publish their work periodically in scholarly or professional journals and that they will be active in at least one professional society.

2.5.3 Advising

In this residential, liberal arts, college [university] established in the Benedictine tradition, faculty members should place a special significance on helping students to plan and integrate educational and career choices. In collaboration with the offices for academic advising, the residence hall staff, personal and career counseling services, and other college [university] student support offices, faculty members are expected to advise students concerning the following goals:

1. exploration of life goals;
2. development of an educational plan consistent with the accomplishment of education objectives appropriate to life and career goals;
3. selection of a major/minor;
4. selection and scheduling of classes, internship experiences, independent study, and course work abroad;
5. identification of and connection to other college [university] services appropriate to a student's needs and goals; and
6. reflective progress in an education plan toward identified life goals.
7. Identification and reflection upon their role as a member of an antiracist, multicultural, ad inclusive community.

Evidence of excellence in the performance of the faculty advising responsibilities includes, but is not limited to, the following:

1. self-evaluation;
2. student letters;
3. evaluation by department chair;
4. evaluation by colleagues, if any, who have directly observed the candidate's advising;
5. contribution to group advising events;
6. participation in workshops and training sessions designed to improve advising skills [e.g. antiracist multicultural training]; and
7. evaluations by alumnae and alumni.

2.5.4 Service

Faculty members are expected to contribute to the governance, operational, and community concerns of their departments and the college [university]. Specific activities will vary, but faculty service will ordinarily:

1. contribute to the college [university] commitment to community and the common good;
2. call upon the faculty member's academic or professional expertise; and/or
3. promote inclusivity, equity, and justice in the institutions, among our students, in the profession, and in the community.

2.5.4.1 Service to the College [University]

Each faculty member's obligation to participate in governance and in other forms of service to the college [university] is rooted most fundamentally in the faculty's joint responsibility for the academic programs of the college [university] and for the common good essential to their vitality. Each faculty member must contribute to the success and continual Improvement of their department and/or program. Faculty members are not expected to serve on a college [university] standing or ad hoc committee before the year in which they apply for third-year review.

Service to the college [university] may include, but is not necessarily limited to, the following:

1. ongoing service on departmental [and/or School of Theology] committees, effective participation in meetings and in decision-making, curriculum development, and assessment processes of the department;
2. effective participation in faculty assemblies, on college [university] standing committees, and on other faculty committees (e.g., for planning, assessment, accreditation);
3. leadership roles in governance, faculty development, curriculum design, and/or other activities of the college [university];
4. service as chair of a department, a division, or a committee;
5. service as director of a program; leader in other faculty, professional or college [university] programs or associations;
6. representation of one or both institutions to the local, regional, national, or international community and/or
7. contribution to activities that support an inclusive, equitable, and just working and learning community (e.g., attending or leading workshops or trainings; participating in conversations, planning, or activities that strive to make our institutions int antiracist and multicultural communities).

Demonstration of service contributions to the college [university] must include, but is not necessarily limited to, the following types of evidence:

1. self-evaluation of activities and their relationship to one's professional identity;
2. evaluations by department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology], appropriate program directors, and/or other appropriate colleagues and administrators (e.g., committee chairs);
3. work products or summaries of work completed.

2.5.4.2 Service to the Students

Faculty members are encouraged to provide other service to students, which may include, but is not necessarily limited to, the following:

1. serving as advisor to a student organization;
2. participating in mentorship programs that serve students from underrepresented groups;
3. serving as moderator or facilitator of student activities;
4. planning and/or participating in co-curricular enrichment activities; and/or
5. serving as faculty resident.

Evidence of effectiveness in service to students may include, but is not necessarily limited to, the following:

1. self-evaluation of the contribution by the faculty member;
2. evaluations from students; and/or
3. evaluations by the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] and/or program director(s).

2.5.4.3 Service to the Profession

Faculty members are encouraged to support professional organizations appropriate to their profession and/or discipline. Service activities in support of the profession include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:

1. leadership positions in professional organizations;
2. service on a professional editorial board; and/or
3. other service to professional organizations.

Evidence of service to the profession/discipline may include, but is not necessarily limited to, the following:

1. self-evaluation of activities and/or
2. evaluation statements from professional peers.

2.5.4.4 Professional Service to the Community

Faculty members are encouraged to provide to the general community service related to their professional expertise. Professional service to the community may include, but is not necessarily limited to, the following:

1. appointment in a professional capacity to a state, regional, or national post; and/or
2. professional service as a consultant or resource person to a nonprofit organization or community group.

Evidence of professional service contributions may include, but is not necessarily limited to, the following:

1. self-evaluation of activities and their relationship to professional identity;
2. evaluations by leaders or representatives of community groups;
3. awards and recognition; and/or
4. summaries or examples of service or work done.

2.5.4.5 Other Public Service

Faculty members often provide service to the community in activities unrelated to professional or academic expertise. Although not as important for professional evaluation as other criteria listed in Section 2.5, such community participation is a real contribution to society and a part of the missions of the college and university. Such activities may include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:

1. leadership position or other public service in church or community activities or organizations.

Documentation of such public service may include, but is not necessarily limited to, the following:

1. self-evaluation and/or
2. awards or recognition.

2.5.5 Professional Identity

The professional life of a faculty member should be more than a series of unrelated activities. Ideally each faculty member has and continues to develop a professional identity that integrates the activities of teaching, advising, scholarship/creative work, and service with the individual's personal qualities, personal professional goals, and the missions of the college and university.

2.5.5.1 Personal Qualities

The strength of the college [university] depends in large measure on the character of its faculty. Faculty members are expected to demonstrate the following qualities:

1. love of learning and the free interchange of ideas;
2. personal integrity;
3. personal and social maturity; and
4. respect for colleagues, students, and other members of the college and the university communities.

Demonstration of personal qualities may include, but is not necessarily limited to, the following:

1. self-evaluation; and
2. evaluations by colleagues, students, or other members of the college [university] communities.

2.5.5.2 Professional Development

Commitment to lifelong learning and growth should be important to faculty members and to students in the liberal arts and the Benedictine tradition. Faculty members are expected to engage in planning for and documenting the ongoing development of their professional skills and performance in all of the major areas identified in Section 2.5. Professional development plans must demonstrate how the individual's development is related to the needs of the department, the college [university], and/or one’s profession. (See Section 2.9, "Faculty Development," for policies and procedures for professional development.)

Criteria for professional development include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:

1. reflection on roles and responsibilities in the department [and/or the School of Theology] and the college [university];
2. reflection on roles and responsibilities in an antiracist, multicultural, and inclusive community in the department [and/or the School of Theology] and the college [university];
3. identification of goals targeted for professional growth during the next three to five years; and
4. frequent engagement in activities appropriate to the achievement of goals targeted.

Evidence of excellence in professional development includes, but is not necessarily limited to, the following:

1. self-evaluation of areas previously targeted for professional growth and the results achieved to date;
2. an up-to-date program for professional development; and
3. evaluation by department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] of the faculty member's development and the value to the department of the faculty member's progress achieved and planned.

2.5.5.3 Support of the Missions of the College and University

The college [university], in close cooperation with Saint John's University [the College of Saint Benedict], seeks to provide a residential liberal arts education in the Catholic tradition within the context of the Benedictine values of its sponsoring monastery. It is expected that all faculty members will contribute to the Academic Commitment to the Missions as well as to the missions of the college and university. (For reference purposes, mission statements of the college and university and the Academic Commitments to the Missions are published Part 1.1.3 of the Faculty Handbook and in the Academic Catalog.)

Candidates are expected to include a statement describing ways in which the different aspects of his or her professional life (see Section 2.5) as a faculty member of the college [university] contribute to intellectual life and learning and other aspects of the missions of the college and university and the Academic Commitments to the Missions.

Faculty colleagues writing letters of evaluation are encouraged to address the candidate’s respect for missions of the college and university and the Academic Commitments to the Missions.

The college [university] welcomes into the academic community scholars from different cultural and religious backgrounds whose varied personal experiences and perspectives enrich intellectual and religious dialogue and who believe that scholarly pursuits should be undertaken with full confidence that knowledge and truth will not be diminished by rigorous examination of all points of view. Given this diversity of origin and the wide variety of academic pursuits in which the faculty engage, it is recognized that the extent to which Christian, Catholic and Benedictine values will affect each faculty member will vary and that faculty members may contribute in many different ways to the overall mission of the college and university. Respect for the missions of the college and university and the Academic Commitments to the Missions does not impinge on academic freedom (see Section 2.10.1). The college [university] is deeply respectful of the privacy of the individual conscience in matters of religion, so a specific response to the religious aspects of the missions is not expected.

2.6 Tenure Policy and Procedures

The college [university] recognizes the value of tenure as promoting not only academic freedom but also the stability, in a Benedictine sense, of the college [university] as a community of teachers and scholars dedicated to these ideals.                                            

Because of the long-term consequences of the granting of tenure, the probationary review processes are carefully structured to assist in the development of each candidate for tenure as well as to allow for a careful evaluation of every candidate. Although the review for tenure focuses most directly on the qualifications of the candidate, other considerations enter into every individual decision to confer tenure, including the particular needs within a department and the financial resources of the college [university]. A decision not to grant tenure does not, therefore, necessarily reflect an unfavorable judgment of the candidate.

Tenure for candidates holding CSB (SJU) contracts is granted by the college’s Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees (university’s Board of Trustees) on the recommendation of the president, who is guided by the recommendations of the Rank and Tenure Committee and the provost.

2.6.1 Definition of Probationary Status

Ordinarily, tenure is granted only after a probationary period of teaching at the college [university]. The probationary period gives individuals time to improve their performance and to demonstrate their abilities. It also gives colleagues the time to observe and evaluate them on the basis of performance in faculty positions. During the probationary period, a faculty member has the same academic freedom as a tenured faculty member.

The probationary period begins with an appointment as a full-time or reduced-load tenured/tenure-tracked faculty member (see Section 2.1.1) at the rank of instructor or higher, and ordinarily shall not exceed six full academic years of service (or its equivalent for reduced-load appointments) at the college [university]. If newly hired faculty members are given credit for previous teaching experience (shortening the length of the probationary period), this information ordinarily will be stated in writing in the initial contract, in accord with Section 2.3.6. Candidates who apply for third year review with fewer than two years of probationary status at the-college [university], and/or promotion and/or tenure with fewer than six years of probationary status at the-college [university], may choose the evidence they provide from former institutions (recognizing that the procedures, standards, and criteria can vary at other institutions). Candidates arriving with previous experience aas a faculty member at another accredited higher education institution can choose to include evidence of accomplishments from the prior six years, including material produced while at another institution.

The decision on reappointment or non-reappointment of probationary faculty members is made annually by the president, employing the recommendation of the provost and the results of the annual evaluation by the department chair in consultation with the dean of the faculty and academic dean [and/or by dean of the School of Theology]. (See Section 2.5.0.1 for a further description of the annual review process.) Non-reappointment of a probationary faculty member can occur only in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.13 (see especially Section 2.13.3, "Non-reappointment of Probationary Faculty") and cannot be based on reasons which involve a violation of academic freedom or the college’s [university’s] policy on nondiscrimination (see Section 2.1.1).

2.6.2 Definition of Tenure

Conferral of tenure means that a faculty member is entitled to annual contract renewal unless either the faculty member or the college [university] terminates the contractual relationship in accord with the procedures of Section 2.13, "Separation."

2.6.3 Eligibility to Apply for Tenure

The qualifications necessary to be considered for tenure include:

1. possession of an appropriate earned doctorate or appropriate terminal degree from a graduate institution of recognized standing, or its professional equivalent, as described in Section 2.1.0;
2. the rank of assistant professor; and
3. the expected completion of six years of full-time probationary service (or its equivalent for reduced-load faculty) by the end of the academic year in which application for tenure is made. Time on leaves will count toward tenure only if the faculty member and the college [university] agree to this in writing at the time the leave is granted. (For definition and procedures for leaves, see Sections 2.9.3, "Other Professional Leaves," and 2.11, "Nonprofessional Leaves.")

In rare cases, the provost may recognize extraordinary circumstances or performance by authorizing a review for tenure prior to the usual deadline on the recommendation of or in consultation with the department chair [the dean of the School of Theology] and the dean of the faculty, and academic dean. Such a candidate for tenure must nonetheless meet the usual deadlines described in Section 2.6.4.b and c.

2.6.4 Application Notice, Deadlines, and Stopping the Clock for Third-year Review and/or Tenure

Each spring the Office of Academic Affairs will prepare and send to all current faculty a list of all faculty members who, according to college [university] records, will be eligible for third- or sixth-year review during the following academic year and who are thus expected to apply for formal review. Any faculty member who believes that he or she has been mistakenly omitted from or included in the list must promptly make this known directly to the dean of the faculty who oversees this process. Any disputes over eligibility will be resolved by the provost.

Also during the spring term, the Rank and Tenure Committee notifies the faculty of guidelines, procedures, and deadlines applicable for reviews in the following academic year. It is the responsibility of each candidate to meet all deadlines:

1. A faculty member intending to submit a file for review at the third or sixth year must inform the Rank and Tenure Committee of that intention by the deadline announced by the committee, a date prior to the deadline for submission of the file.
2. A file of appropriate materials (as established by departmental policy) must be submitted to the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] for review by departmental colleagues (see Section 2.6.5.2.2 below) by the deadline set by the chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology].
3. The complete file (File A, described in Section 2.6.5.2 below) must be submitted by the deadline set by the Rank and Tenure Committee. The file is presented to the secretary to the dean of the faculty who is responsible for transmitting the file to the committee.

2.6.4.1 Extensions of Probationary Period (Stopping the Clock) for Third-year Review and/or Tenure

For a tenure-track faculty member, the clock for third-year review and/or tenure may be stopped one time, for one academic year, in the event of the birth of a child, the adoption of a child, or the illness of an immediate family member (spouse, child, parent, parent-in-law, or domestic partner). In addition, when faced with other extraordinary adverse circumstances, a tenure-track faculty member may submit to the dean of the faculty a request for a one-year extension of the probationary period. Such requests are limited to cases in which there have been reasons beyond the faculty members control resulting in being deprived of the ability and potential to fulfill the criteria in section 2.5. The request should include a detailed description of the circumstances thought to warrant such an exception, including necessary documentation (such as medical certification in cases of prolonged illness during the probationary period). Faculty who want to extend the probationary period must consult with their department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] about timing of the stoppage.

A tenure-track faculty member who wants to extend the probationary period must provide written notification of his or her intent to do so. Written notification must be presented to the dean of the faculty and to the department chair. Notification can be presented any time during the probationary period, with the following exception: if notification is given in the calendar year when third-year or tenure files are to be submitted, then it must be given by May 1 at the latest. The period in which the clock is stopped is ordinarily the academic year after notification; proposals for retroactive stoppages must be approved by the dean of the faculty. Proposals for extensions of the probationary period are reviewed by the dean of the faculty and the provost and approved by the presidents of the college [university].

During the period that the clock is stopped, the faculty will continue to teach a regular teaching load, to advise students, and to engage in ordinary departmental service, but will be free of obligations for other forms of service and for research. Pursuant to section 2.5.0.1 of the faculty handbook, faculty who stop the clock must continue to collect student course opinion surveys for the courses that they teach. In semesters when emergency remote teaching is required, the dean of the faculty can determine that faculty have the option to not include the student course surveys as part of review processes. In such circumstances, if a faculty member chooses not to include them as part of the review, the student course surveys shall not be used to evaluate faculty.

In the event that two tenure-track faculty members are married or partnered, the right to stop the clock will apply to both.

Extensions of the probationary period do not exclude or preclude other faculty options such as parental leave or an unpaid leave of absence.

Finally, third-year-review and tenure candidates who receive extensions will be evaluated by the same standards as candidates who do not receive extensions.

2.6.5 Procedures for Third-year and Tenure Review

It is the responsibility of the Rank and Tenure Committee to conduct a formal review of probationary faculty members, in their third and sixth year of probationary status at the college [university], or upon request by the provost, as described in Section 2.6.3.

2.6.5.1 Simultaneous Application for Tenure and Promotion

All candidates applying for tenure is simultaneously applying for promotion to the rank of associate professor unless they have already achieved that rank. The committee will use the materials for the tenure review as the basis for its recommendation concerning promotion.

2.6.5.2 Third-year and Tenure-review Files

Faculty members are reviewed during their third and sixth years (as described in Section 2.6.3) by the Rank and Tenure Committee based on the evaluation criteria listed in Section 2.5 and the committee's examination of the evidence contained in two review files for each faculty member reviewed. The tenure review may consider materials resubmitted by the candidate from the third-year review file.

File A: Professional portfolio of materials prepared by the faculty member. This file must contain:

1. current curriculum vitae;
2. a self-evaluative essay describing personal philosophy, strategies, and objectives concerning the criteria of Section 2.5;
3. evidence of teaching effectiveness: the teaching portfolio, as described in Section 2.5.1;
4. a current program of professional development (see Section 2.9.1) (including any earlier programs and an account of progress made on earlier goals);
5. letters of recommendation;
6. any earlier annual evaluations by the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology], and, for sixth-year review, the letter of evaluation from the Rank and Tenure Committee at the third-year review;
7. the letter of initial appointment, if it included any agreements pertinent to tenure review (see Section 2.3.6); and
8. the memorandum of understanding, in those instances where a faculty member has a joint appointment, if it included any agreements pertinent to tenure review; and
9. other specific evidence that the candidate has met the various criteria listed in Section 2.5.

No material may be placed in File A without the faculty member’s knowledge. It is the right and responsibility of the faculty member to make sure that this review file is complete. The candidate may add no materials to the file after the deadline.

File B: Materials solicited by the Rank and Tenure Committee. As described below in more detail, it is the responsibility of the Rank and Tenure Committee to solicit:

1. evaluations of the candidate from the appropriate chair(s) [and/or dean of the School of Theology] (see Section 2.6.5.2.1). For faculty members with joint appointments, the department chairs [and/or dean of the School of Theology] in addition to their individual chairs’ letters, will submit a joint chairs letter addressing the function and status of the memorandum of understanding.
2. departmental letter summarizing the departmental meeting (see Section 2.6.5.2.1) For faculty members with joint appointments, each department [and/or School of Theology] will hold separate department meetings and submit a separate departmental letter.
3. evaluations from the other members of the candidate’s department [and/or the School of Theology] (see Sections 2.6.5.2.2). For faculty members with joint appointments, evaluations from the other members of both of the candidate’s departments [and/or the School of Theology]; and
4. any items identified in Section 2.6.5.2.f above that may be in the candidate’s file located in the Office of Academic Affairs, but which were not submitted by the candidate;

No unsolicited materials will be accepted for File B, and materials in File B will be unavailable to the candidate, with the exception of the chair’s letter and the department letter, which must be shared with the candidate as described in 2.6.5.2.1. For faculty members with joint appointments, both chairs’ letters and both department letters must be shared with the candidate as described in 2.6.5.2.1.

At no time during the review process will the material in these two review files be available to anyone other than the members of the Rank and Tenure Committee [the dean of the School of Theology if appropriate], the dean of the faculty, the academic dean, the provost, the president, legal counsel, or, for those holding CSB (SJU) contracts, the college’s Executive Committee of the Board (university’s Board of Trustees). Upon completion of the review process, the review files will be closed.

Materials of a personal nature provided by the candidate (for example, manuscripts, reprints, student course surveys) are to be returned to the candidate.

Other material and all of the material solicited for File B will remain in a closed file in the Office of Academic Affairs. Where appropriate, these materials may be considered in subsequent formal reviews of the faculty member by the Rank and Tenure Committee. The materials in the files are not to be used for any other purpose, except as may be required by law.

2.6.5.2.1 Evaluation by the Department [and/or School of Theology] and Department Chair [and/or the Dean of the School of Theology]

It is the responsibility of the appropriate department chair(s) [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] to submit to the Rank and Tenure Committee a letter of evaluations for each candidate scheduled for formal review from their area. These evaluations must address the degree to which the candidate meets the evaluation criteria of Section 2.5. They must also evaluate the candidate in light of the educational needs of the department or program in both the near and long-term future. They must specifically include a judgment concerning the candidate’s eligibility for tenure (Section 2.6.3) as well as a projection of departmental faculty needs over the next three to five years (developed in conjunction with the dean of the faculty, and academic dean), especially as these projections relate to the qualifications of the candidate for tenure. If the department has developed guidelines for evaluation, (as described in Section 2.5.0.2) the chair will append a copy for the use of the committee.

Ordinarily, no probationary member of the faculty should serve as department chair. In the event that a department chair is scheduled for a third-year or tenure review, the dean of the faculty, and academic dean, in consultation with senior members of the department, will designate someone to prepare the evaluation.

In addition to the chair’s letter described above, a departmental letter will be composed as follows: The department chair [and/or dean of the School of Theology] will schedule a meeting of all tenured, tenure-track and full-time term contract members of the department [School] for the purpose of evaluating a candidate using the criteria set forth in section 2.5. Tenured members not on sabbatical, leave or external appointment (e.g. study abroad) are required to attend. Tenure track and full-time term contract members are invited, but not required to attend. (See also section 2.6.5.2.2). In reviews involving faculty members with joint appointments, each department [and/or the School of Theology] will schedule separate meetings or the purpose of evaluating the candidate.

One person chosen by those present at the meeting will act as the secretary at the meeting. Ordinarily, the department chair cannot serve as secretary; however, if no non-chair tenured member of the department is available or present to serve as secretary, the chair (or chair-designate) will serve as secretary. The secretary will draft a departmental letter preserving the anonymity of persons making comments. This letter will be circulated among those who attended the meeting. If a department member feels that his/her comments are not accurately represented, that member and the secretary will work together to resolve the discrepancy. After the final draft has been distributed, all faculty members in the department who attended the meeting will indicate their agreement with the accuracy of the letter’s representation of the department meeting by signing it. Tenured members who are not present at the meeting because of sabbatical, leave, study abroad appointment or for other reasons have the right to review the letter but do not sign it.

The candidate will have the opportunity to respond to the contents of the chair’s letter as well as the departmental letter. In reviews involving faculty members with joint appointments. The candidate will have the opportunity to respond to the contents of both chairs’ letters as well as both departmental letters. The chair(s) delivers both letters of evaluation to the candidate at least one week prior to the deadline for the candidate’s submission of the review file, to allow the candidate time to respond. Should either of these letters be late, the candidate must still submit the file by the usual deadline but will have the option of submitting an additional written response to a tardy letter by a later deadline, to be set by the chair of the Rank and Tenure Committee upon request from the candidate.

2.6.5.2.2 Evaluation by Department Members

At both third-year and sixth-year review, the Rank and Tenure Committee solicits an evaluation of each candidate from all tenured, tenure track and full-time term members of that person’s department(s) [and/or the School of Theology]. Departments may establish policies for this review process, but in any case, the department chair(s) should arrange with the candidate a date for making appropriate materials available for review by department members.

It is the responsibility of every tenured member of the department conscientiously to submit to the committee a signed evaluation of the candidate for inclusion in File B by the deadline. The chair, as a member of the department, may submit a separate letter to File B but is not required to do so. However, in light of the candidate’s responsibility to submit in File A sufficient evidence to warrant positive action by the committee, any departmental colleague may choose to have the candidate include in File A his or her signed evaluation. Any non-tenured member who wished not to submit a written evaluation may abstain. In the spirit of open dialogue, faculty members are encouraged to share their written evaluations with the candidate, but only the chair is required to do so.

2.6.5.3 Committee Deliberation for Third-year and Tenure Review

After the review files have been completed, the Rank and Tenure Committee will conduct its review.

1. The committee will examine file materials and determine the degree to which each candidate has successfully met the various criteria.
2. The committee may send clarifying questions in writing to the appropriate departmental chair [and the dean of the faculty [and/or dean of the School of Theology] and/or to the dean of the faculty (and/or dean of the School of Theology] for each faculty member being reviewed. If additional information about the candidate’s performance is obtained, the candidate will be invited to respond.
   1. Chairs [and/or dean of the School of Theology] respond to the questions in writing. These responses to the questions will become part of the confidential minutes of the committee. After receiving the chair’s (and/or dean of the School of Theology] written responses, the committee may also solicit a meeting with the chair [ and/or dean of the School of Theology], if needed.
   2. The dean of the faculty will respond orally to the committee’s questions
   3. Any additional new information obtained in response to the committee’s questions will be shared with the candidate, who will be invited to respond in writing, which will also become part of the confidential minutes.
   4. The committee also has the right to consult additional experts, either from within or outside of the college [university] (e.g., program directors) for clarifications about matters of fact which might aid them in their evaluation. If additional information about the candidate’s performance is obtained, the candidate will be invited to respond.

2.6.5.4 Action on Third-year Review

1. After completion of its review, the committee will come to its decision and submit to the candidate and the provost an evaluation of the candidate, a recommendation of either a probationary or a terminal contact for the following year, and, in the case of an endorsement of continued probationary status, the committee’s recommendations for improvement prior to the tenure review. A copy of this evaluation, with recommendations, is also sent to the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] the dean of the faculty, and academic dean.
2. The provost then transmits the recommendation of the committee to the president along with the provost’s own evaluation and recommendation for continuation or termination of the candidate’s probationary contract. The provost sends a copy of the evaluation and recommendation to the candidate, department chair, [and/or dean of the School of Theology,] dean of the faculty, academic dean, and the chair of the Rank and Tenure Committee.
3. The president makes the final decision. Any decision to end a probationary appointment as an outcome of this review process must follow the procedures in Section 2.13.3, “Non-reappointment of Probationary Faculty.”
   
   The provost notifies the candidate of the president’s decision on or before May 1. A copy of the formal notification is also sent to the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology], Human Resources, the dean of the faculty, the academic dean and the chair of the Rank and Tenure Committee.

2.6.5.4.1 Meeting with the Candidate

On completion of its review, the committee schedules a mandatory meeting among one of its members, the candidate, the dean of the faculty [the dean of the School of Theology as appropriate], and the department chair to clarify for the candidate its evaluation and, for those candidates endorsed for continuation toward tenure, the committee’s expectation prior to sixth-year review. If new or clarifying information is discussed during the meeting the candidate may submit a written response to the meeting regarding this new information. The candidate’s response will be reviewed and endorsed by the dean of the faculty acting as ex-officio member of the committee. This endorsed response will be an addendum to the third-year review letter and included in the tenure file.

2.6.5.5 Action on Tenure Review

1. After completion of its review, the committee will come to its decision and submit to the candidate and the provost an evaluation of the candidate and a recommendation either for or against the granting of tenure. A copy of this evaluation, with recommendations, is also sent to the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] and the dean of the faculty and academic dean.
2. The provost transmits to the president the committee’s recommendation along with the provost’s own evaluation and recommendation. The provost sends a copy of the evaluation and recommendation to the candidate, department chair, [and/or dean of the School of Theology], Human Resources, the dean of the faculty, the academic dean, and chair of the Rank and Tenure Committee.
3. The president reviews these materials and then forwards the file and the recommendations of the committee and the provost, along with the president’s own recommendation, to the college’s Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees for the final decision in the case of candidates holding CSB contracts and to the university’s Board of Trustees, in the case of candidates holding SJU contracts. Any decision to end a probationary appointment as an outcome of this review process must follow the procedures in Section 2.13.3, “Non-reappointment of Probationary Faculty.” The president will notify the candidate and the department chair in writing whether his or her recommendation to the Executive Committee was positive or negative and, in the case of a negative recommendation, will indicate the grounds on which the recommendation was made.
4. The provost informs the candidate of the Board’s decision as soon as possible.
5. A copy of the formal notification is also sent to the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] and the dean of the faculty, and academic dean.

2.7 Promotion Policies and Procedures

The college [university] seeks to sustain and improve its academic quality by maintaining and improving the quality of the faculty. Promotion in academic rank assists in this process by encouraging, recognizing, and rewarding faculty members for excellent performance of their roles and responsibilities.

Faculty members are promoted on the basis of the fulfillment of the criteria discussed in this section, in Section 2.1.3, “Tenured/Tenure-track Faculty: Criteria for Appointment,” and in Section 2.5, “Faculty Evaluation: Policy, Criteria, and Evidence.” The criteria in Section 2.5 are applied more rigorously as rank advances.

2.7.1 Eligibility to Apply for Promotion

Individual faculty members are eligible to apply for advancement in rank only if they expect to complete the minimum length of full-time service in current rank by the end of the academic year in which application for promotion is made. In addition, applicants for promotion to the rank of associate professor must already have tenure or must be simultaneously applying for tenure and promotion.

In rare cases, the provost, in consultation with the dean of the faculty and academic dean and the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology], may recognize extraordinary circumstances or performance by authorizing a review for promotion prior to the usual deadline.

Sabbatical leaves and leaves with pay count toward the satisfaction of years in rank needed for eligibility to apply for promotion. Leaves without pay do not count toward promotion unless the faculty member and the college [university] agree in writing to the contrary at the time the leave is granted. (For initial appointment at the rank of associate professor or professor, see Sections 2.1.3 and 2.3.6.)

2.7.2 Procedures for Promotion Review

Formal reviews of all faculty members who apply for promotion in rank are conducted by the Rank and Tenure Committee.

2.7.2.1 Deadlines

The responsibility for applying for promotion in rank rests with the individual faculty member. The Rank and Tenure Committee issues specific deadlines and procedures for implementing the Faculty Handbook provisions.

1. A faculty member applying for promotion in rank must inform the Rank and Tenure Committee of his or her intention to apply by the notification deadline announced by the committee.
2. Application materials must be complete and on file in the office of the dean of the faculty no later than the application deadline announced by the committee.

2.7.2.2 Simultaneous Application for Tenure and Promotion

If the candidate for promotion is simultaneously applying for tenure and promotion to the rank of associate professor, the committee will use the materials for the tenure review as the basis for its recommendation concerning promotion. Candidates should, therefore, take care in their application materials to request both tenure and promotion and to provide ample evidence for advancement in rank as well as for the granting of tenure.

2.7.2.3 Promotion-review Files

The burden of proof to warrant promotion in rank rests with the individual faculty member and must be provided in the promotion file. Criteria for appointment to each rank are stipulated in Section 2.1.3. Evaluation criteria and forms of evidence are described in Section 2.5. Candidates should consult guidelines issued by the committee as they prepare their application for review. Materials considered in the candidate’s promotion review may include materials from the last six years or the time since tenure review, whichever is longer.

The Rank and Tenure Committee will apply the criteria to the evidence contained in two review files for each candidate reviewed.

File A: The candidate prepares a promotion-review file that must contain:

1. a current curriculum vitae;
2. a self-evaluative essay that includes a reflective statement describing personal teaching philosophy, strategies and objectives;
3. evidence of teaching effectiveness: the teaching portfolio, as described in Section 2.5.1;
4. a current program of professional development (see Section 2.9.1) (including one or two earlier programs and a description of progress made on earlier goals);
5. letters of recommendation solicited by the candidate from peers familiar with the candidate’s performance; such letters may come from within and/or outside the college [university]; note that department members are required to submit letters to File B, below; and
6. The memorandum of understanding, in those instances where a faculty member has a joint appointment, if it included any agreements pertinent to promotion review; and
7. any other evidence that the candidate has met the various criteria necessary for the promotion being requested.

No material may be placed in File A without the faculty member’s knowledge. It is the responsibility of the faculty member to make sure that this review file is complete. The candidate may add no materials to File A after the deadline.

In the event that a department chair is applying for promotion, the dean of the faculty, in consultation with the senior members of the department, will designate someone to prepare the departmental evaluation.

File B: Materials solicited by the Rank and Tenure Committee as described below:

The Rank and Tenure Committee solicits an evaluation of each candidate from all members of that person’s department(s) [and/or the School of Theology].

1. a letter of evaluation from the appropriate department chair(s) [and/or the Dean of the School of Theology]. The candidate will have the opportunity to respond to the contents of the letter(s) as described in the last paragraph of section 2.6.5.2.1. For faculty members with joint appointments, the department chairs [and/or School of Theology] in addition to their individual chairs’ letters, will submit a joint chairs’ letter addressing the function and status of the memorandum of understanding.
2. a departmental letter composed as follows: The department chair [and/or dean of the School of Theology] will schedule a meeting of all tenured, tenure track and full-time term contract members of the department [School] for the purpose of evaluating a candidate using the criteria set forth in section 2.5. Tenured members not on sabbatical, leave or external appointment (e.g. study abroad) are required to attend. Tenure track and full-time term contract members are invited, but not required to attend. (see also section 2.6.5.2.2). In reviews involving faculty members with joint appointments, each department [and/or the School of Theology] will schedule separate meetings for the purpose of evaluating the candidate.
   
   One person chosen by those present at the meeting will act as the secretary at the meeting. Ordinarily, the department chair cannot serve as secretary; however, if no non-chair tenured member of the department is available or present to serve as secretary, the chair (or chair-designate) will serve as secretary. The secretary will draft a departmental letter preserving the anonymity of persons making comments.
   
   This letter will be circulated among those who attended the meeting. If a department member feels that his/her comments are not accurately represented, that member and the secretary will work together to resolve the discrepancy. After the final draft has been distributed, all faculty members in the department who attended the meeting will indicate their agreement with the accuracy of the letter’s representation of the department meeting by signing it. Tenured members who are not present at the meeting because of sabbatical, leave, study abroad appointment or for other reasons have the right to review the letter but do not sign it. The candidate will have the opportunity to respond to the contents of the letter as specified in section 2.6.5.2.1. In reviews involving faculty members with joint appointments, the candidate will have the opportunity to respond to the contents of both departmental letters.
3. all tenured faculty in the candidate’s department must submit letters to File B. In reviews involving faculty members with joint appointments, all tenured faculty in both of the candidate’s departments must submit letters to File B;
4. the chair, as a member of the department, may submit a separate letter to File B but is not required to do so;
5. non-tenured faculty are not required to submit letters, but if they choose to do so, the letters will be placed in File B;
6. departmental members writing letters of recommendation solicited by the candidate may choose to write a separate letter for File B or may submit the same letter.

All letters of evaluation should specifically address the degree to which the candidate meets or fails to meet the appropriate criteria in Sections 2.1 and 2.5. In the spirit of open dialogue, faculty members are encouraged to share their written evaluation with the candidate, but only the chair is required to do so.

No unsolicited materials will be accepted for File B, and materials in File B will be unavailable to the candidate.

At no time will the material in File B be available to anyone other than the Rank and Tenure Committee, the dean of the faculty, and academic dean [the dean of the School of Theology if appropriate], the provost, the president, legal counsel, and the college’s [university’s] Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees.

Upon completion of the review process, the review files will be closed. Materials of a personal nature provided by the candidate (for example, manuscripts, reprints, student course surveys) are to be returned to the candidate.

Other material and all of the material solicited for File B will remain in a closed file in the Office of Academic Affairs. Where appropriate, these materials may be considered in subsequent formal reviews of the faculty member by the Rank and Tenure Committee.

The materials in the files are not to be used for any other purpose, except as may be required by law.

2.7.2.4 Action on Promotion

In addition to the above materials in the promotion-review file, the committee also has the right to consult additional experts, either from within or outside of the college [university], for clarifications on matters of fact which might aid them in their evaluation. If additional information about the candidate’s performance is obtained, the candidate will be invited to respond.

1. The Rank and Tenure Committee examines the evidence on light of the criteria for appointment in Section 2.1.2 and the criteria for evaluation in Section 2.5.
2. After completion of the review, the committee will come to a decision and submit to the candidate and the provost an evaluation of the candidate and a recommendation either for or against the promotion. A copy of this evaluation, with recommendations, is also sent to the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology], Human Resources, the dean of the faculty, the academic dean, and the chair of the Rank and Tenure Committee.
3. The provost transmits the committee’s recommendation along with the provost’s own evaluation and recommendation. The provost sends a copy of the evaluation and recommendation to the candidate, department chair, [and/or dean of the School of Theology] Human Resources, the dean of the faculty, the academic dean, and the chair of the Rank and Tenure Committee.
4. The president reviews these materials and then forwards the file and the recommendations of the committee and the provost, along with the president’s own recommendation, to the college’s [university’s] Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees for the final decision.
5. The provost informs the candidate of the Board’s decision as soon as possible.
6. A copy of the formal notification is also sent to the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] the dean of the faculty, and academic dean.

2.7.2.5 Date of Actual Change in Rank

Promotion in rank takes effect with the beginning of the next contract period.

2.8 Post-Tenure Faculty Development Program

The Post-Tenure Faculty Development Program is proposed within the context of the tenure system and in no way jeopardizes a faculty member’s tenured status. It provides a systematic opportunity for tenured faculty to reflect on teaching, scholarship and creative work, and/or service activities. The program assists the faculty in planning a course of professional development for the future in an atmosphere of collegial and institutional support. With the advice and assistance of the Post-Tenure Faculty Development Program coordinator, faculty design development programs to fit their particular fields, activities, interests, and career goals.

Procedures for the implementation of the Post-Tenure Faculty Development Program are found in Section 4.2.

2.9 Faculty Development

The professional development of faculty members is essential to the curriculum and the vitality of both the individual and the college [university]. Faculty members are expected to engage themselves in planning and documenting that development.

The college [university] promotes excellent teaching. Teaching effectiveness (described in Section 2.5.1) should be the first and foremost concern of each faculty member and a critical element in each faculty member’s plan for professional development. Scholarship and creative work (described in Section 2.5.2) provide essential support to both good teaching and a strong academic program, and they contribute to one’s discipline and to society at large. As a result, ongoing professional development focused on scholarship and creative work is also important for each member of the faculty. Advising and service (described in Sections 2.5.3 and 2.5.4) are also important but for most faculty members play a smaller role in plans for professional development.

2.9.1 Planning for Professional Development

Each faculty member creates and regularly updates a Program of Professional Development (PPD). Preparation of the PPD, in consultation with the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] as well as appropriate program directors, allows the faculty member to integrate professional development plans with the missions and goals of the college, university and department. Faculty members must be familiar with the mission and goals and curricular plans of the college [university] and be able to demonstrate how their individual directions for professional development are related to the needs of the department and the college [university]. Departmental guidelines for evaluation (see Section 2.5.2) can be helpful in the planning process. In addition, the plans within the Program of Professional Development should be drawn up in accordance with the relevant guidelines of the Faculty Development and Research Committee.

Probationary faculty members are expected to meet annually with the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] to conduct a planning session concerning the faculty member’s PPD. Senior faculty members should consult periodically with the department chair to review and update the PPD. At times of such review, intermediate goals may be set. The faculty member may amend the individual program at any time, in consultation with the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology]. A copy of the faculty member’s current PPD should be maintained on file in the department’s office and in the Office of Academic Affairs. The provost, the dean of the faculty, or the academic dean may interview faculty members periodically in regard to their professional growth plans.

The faculty member’s Program of Professional Development is submitted to the Rank and Tenure Committee at the time of third-year, sixth-year, and promotion review and is part of the evidence evaluated (see Section 2.5.5.2, “Professional Development”). Quality of a development plan is assessed on the strength of its connections to evaluation criteria described in Section 2.5. Progress achieved in attaining the goals outlined in earlier plans is deemed to be a measure of academic seriousness. The PPD is also employed during reviews for sabbatical leave by the Committee on Faculty Development and during post-tenure review.

2.9.2 Sabbatical Leaves

The many roles and responsibilities of faculty members require that periodically a sustained and uninterrupted time be set aside to acquire new experiences to enrich teaching or to focus on scholarship, creative work, or other accomplishment related to faculty responsibilities. The college [university] endorses the importance of this dimension of faculty development by committing itself to funding sabbatical leaves, professional leaves with pay, ordinarily extending for one semester or for a full academic year.

Sabbatical leaves are not granted for work which is not directly related to faculty responsibilities at the college [university]. Time spent on sabbatical leaves will count toward promotion in rank.

2.9.2.1 Eligibility to Apply for Sabbatical Leave

Eligibility for sabbatical leave entails fulfilling obligations for both teaching and service. Tenured faculty or faculty currently being reviewed for tenure are eligible to apply for their first sabbatical leave only if they expect to have completed, by the end of the current academic year, six years of full-time faculty employment, defined here as teaching, or its equivalent in reassigned time, as part of a faculty contract. Subsequent sabbaticals may be applied for at six-year intervals of full-time faculty employment. The six-year period may be fulfilled by an equivalent amount of faculty employment by reduced-load faculty (described in Section 2.1.2.2). Upon the completion of a sabbatical leave, time toward eligibility for the next sabbatical begins on the first day of the following fall semester.

Because each faculty member has an “obligation to participate in governance and in other forms of service to the college [university]” (Section 2.5.4.1), faculty members are eligible to apply for a sabbatical leave only if they have fulfilled their obligations in both service to the department and service to the college [university] outside the department, as specified in Section 2.5.4.1.

2.9.2.2 Salaries for Sabbatical Leave

Faculty members on sabbatical for one semester receive the full salary provided in the contract during the sabbatical period and full employment benefits. Faculty members who are on sabbatical for a full academic year receive three-sixths of the salary provided in the contract in the sabbatical year and full employment benefits. Annual raises are not withheld due to sabbatical leave, and both the faculty member and the college [university] continue to pay their normal share toward retirement contributions (proportionate to the salary paid), and other employee benefits.

A faculty member on sabbatical may also receive other forms of faculty development funding from the college [university].

2.9.2.3 Application Policies and Procedures for Sabbatical Leaves

Sabbatical leaves are not granted automatically upon the completion of the necessary period of service. Faculty members must demonstrate in writing, as part of their application, evidence of sound research, creative activity, or other academic achievement to support the program of work which they plan for the sabbatical period. They must also show that their proposed programs will accomplish one or more of the general purposes set forth in the opening paragraph of Section 2.9.2, “Sabbatical Leaves.” Applications which do not meet the criteria for sabbaticals are rejected by the committee.

A faculty member intending to apply for sabbatical leave must provide advance notice of that intention. Because the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology], in consultation with members of the department and the administration, must make plans to cover the responsibilities of faculty on sabbatical leave, a faculty member anticipating a sabbatical should inform the chair [and/or dean of the School of Theology] as early as possible. In addition, a faculty member applying for sabbatical leave must inform the Faculty Development and Research Committee of his or her intention to apply by the notification deadline announced by the committee.

The application for sabbatical leave is made using the forms and guidelines developed by the Faculty Development and Research Committee, available in the Office of Academic Affairs. The application and the other materials must be submitted to the committee by the committee’s established deadline.

A faculty member is expected to consult with the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] on the sabbatical proposal. Because the department chair, in consultation with the members of the department and the administration, must make plans to cover the responsibilities of faculty on sabbatical leave, a faculty member anticipating a sabbatical should inform the chair as early as possible. The chair should receive the sabbatical proposal a minimum of two weeks prior to the application deadline. A letter from the chair addressing the following issues must be submitted to the committee, with a copy provided to the applicant:

1. the professional quality of the sabbatical proposal and the applicant’s capacity to accomplish the goals indicated;
2. how the leave will affect the applicant’s professional growth, as well as the department and its offerings; and
3. the department’s staffing during the faculty member’s sabbatical, as well as extra-departmental effects, if any.

A request for replacement of faculty, if necessary, is made by the department chair to the dean of the faculty.

2.9.2.4 Criteria and Procedures for Evaluation of Proposals

The Faculty Development and Research Committee evaluates all sabbatical proposals using the following criteria:

1. the likelihood that the proposed project will:
   1. produce a significant contribution to research or creative work in the applicant’s field of expertise (through publication, performance, exhibition, etc.); and/or,
   2. promote significant improvement in courses, programs, curricula, or some other area of faculty responsibility;
2. the likelihood that the project will make a significant contribution to the applicant’s professional development in accomplishing one or more of the following:
   1. enhancing the applicant’s mastery of their field of expertise;
   2. improving the applicant’s capabilities as a teacher;
   3. increasing the applicant’s ability to fulfill faculty responsibilities in areas other than teaching and research/creative work;
3. the appropriateness of the project to the applicant’s plan of professional development and to the mission and goals of the department and the college [university]; and
4. the promise that the project will be successfully completed, considering the design of the project in light of the applicant’s abilities and previous accomplishments.

To assist in these judgments, the committee may ask applicants to submit other relevant information. This may include, for example, letters from colleagues both within and outside the college [university] addressing the above criteria, quality of the proposal and the applicant’s capacity to accomplish the goals outlined, a description of how the sabbatical project fits into the individual’s Program of Professional Development (see Section 2.9.1), and evidence concerning the results of the applicant’s previous sabbatical. At the committee’s discretion, an applicant may be invited to provide a clarification of or additional support for a proposed project before it is considered further.

Assessing differences in the quality of proposals arising from different disciplines is difficult, and a precise ranking based only on the overall quality of each proposal is normally impossible. The committee ordinarily sorts the applications into groups based on perceptible differences in overall quality and forms a final ranking of proposals based on that estimate of quality. In those years when not all sabbatical proposals can be funded, the committee may give preference to proposals from those applicants who have never had a sabbatical at CSB/SJU and are deemed worthy of a sabbatical leave based on the above criteria. At its discretion, the committee may also break ties within any one group in favor of persons who have more years of faculty service at the college [university] since their last sabbatical.

2.9.2.5 Action on Sabbatical Applications

1. After evaluating all applications, the Faculty Development and Research Committee ranks the proposals and sends its evaluations and ranking to the provost. The committee also sends a brief assessment of the proposed project to the applicant.
2. The provost submits a recommendation to the president in light of the total needs and fiscal capabilities of the college [university].
3. The president makes a recommendation and presents it to the appropriate committee of the Board.
4. The final decision on a sabbatical application rests with the Executive Committee of the Board.
5. Following action by the Executive Committee of the Board, the provost gives written notice to the applicant, the department chair, the dean of the faculty and academic dean [the dean of the School of Theology], and the chair of the Faculty Development and Research Committee of the approval or disapproval, for stated cause, of the application. Applicants being reviewed for tenure are informed that their sabbatical is contingent upon the granting of tenure.

2.9.2.6 Obligations of Sabbatical Recipients

The recipient of a sabbatical leave incurs these obligations:

1. to make every reasonable effort to fulfill the terms of the sabbatical;
2. to return to the college [university] for the complete academic year following the academic year in which the sabbatical leave occurred; and
3. to file a report on the results of his or her project with the provost within 30 days after the beginning of the semester following the sabbatical leave.
4. Any faculty member who does not return to the college [university] for the subsequent academic year after completing a sabbatical thereby assumes the obligation of repaying the compensation paid by the college [university] during the time of the leave.

2.9.2.7 Support During Leaves

Whenever possible the college [university] will provide the services to faculty on sabbatical or leave as outlined in Section 2.9.4. Requests for such assistance should be directed to the Committee on Faculty Development.

2.9.3 Other Professional Leaves

A professional leave is a negotiated agreement whereby a member of the faculty for reasons related to his or her professional life is absent from regular duties of appointment for more than 10 working days. Such a leave may be with or without pay. Short-term absences (for no longer than 10 working days) with pay for legitimate cause may be arranged at the discretion of the dean of the faculty [and/or the dean of the School of Theology].

A member of the faculty on professional leave is allowed to return to the same or a substantially similar position; previously earned tenure, rank, and benefits are not lost. A professional leave with pay for less than one academic year ordinarily counts toward promotion and tenure but will do so only if both the college [university] and the individual agree to this in writing at the time the leave is granted. Whenever possible, the college [university] will provide the services to faculty members on professional leave as outlined in Section 2.9.4. Requests for such assistance should be directed to the appropriate committee or administrative officer.

The policies and procedures for nonprofessional leaves (e.g., medical or compassionate leaves) are described in Section 2.11.

2.9.3.1 Professional Leaves Without Pay

Fiscal constraints require that, other than sabbatical leaves, extended professional leaves occur without pay. Any full-time member of the faculty may request a full-time or part-time professional leave of absence without pay for one of the following reasons:

1. fellowship award;
2. completion of research;
3. formal study; and/or
4. other specific reasons in the best interests of the college [university].

Time on such leave will not count toward the eligibility periods for tenure, promotion, or sabbatical leave unless the individual and the college [university] so agree in writing prior to the beginning of the leave. However, the faculty member on professional leave for up to two years will ordinarily receive the annual raises in salary and benefits he or she would have received as a result of uninterrupted service.

While faculty are on leave without pay, the college [university] ordinarily does not provide fringe benefits unless an arrangement to the contrary has been mutually agreed upon in writing by the faculty member and the college [university]. Faculty members have the option to continue their fringe benefits to the extent permitted by the applicable benefit plans by paying for them through the college [university] Human Resources Office.

Faculty members planning a professional leave may also apply for other forms of faculty development funding from the college [university] as described in Section 2.9.4 below.

2.9.3.2 Time Limit and Procedures for Professional Leaves

Professional leaves extend for a definite period. Because they almost always make orderly planning more difficult, they impose a hardship on the college [university] and are normally granted only for a single term or an academic year. Only under unusual circumstances will a leave be granted for as much as two years. A faculty member on a one-year leave of absence may apply for a second one-year leave by following these same procedures. Two-year leaves are not renewable.

The request for a professional leave of absence with or without pay should be made, if possible, in time to allow for adequate administrative planning. A written request for a leave must specify its purpose, plans, and length. The faculty member requesting the leave consults with the department chair, who prepares a letter to the dean of the faculty and academic dean describing the impact of the leave on staffing and giving the chair’s own recommendation. The request, along with the chair’s letter, is submitted to the dean of the faculty and academic dean [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] who then forwards it along with their recommendations to the dean of the faculty and provost. The provost then confers with the Faculty Development and Research Committee and requests its recommendation.

When evaluating leave requests, the provost and the Faculty Development and Research Committee will take into consideration the length of service since the faculty member’s last absence (whether sabbatical or other professional leave or nonprofessional leave) before making recommendations. Ordinarily, a faculty member will be expected to teach at the college [university] for at least two years between non- emergency leaves.

The provost transmits the recommendations of the committee to the president along with his or her own evaluation. The president will forward these recommendations along with the president’s own to the Executive Committee of the Board for a final decision. The decision of the Executive Committee will be reported in writing by the provost to the faculty member requesting the leave.

Ordinarily the college [university] will grant leaves of all kinds in any given academic year to no more than 10 percent of the total full-time teaching faculty in each term.

2.9.4 Other College [University] Support for Faculty Development

The college [university] provides support for faculty development in a number of ways other than sabbaticals and other professional leaves described above.

2.9.4.1 Funding from the Faculty Development and Research Committee

The Faculty Development and Research Committee is charged with developing the policies for and overseeing the distribution of college [university] funds for faculty development. Support for improvement in teaching and/or scholarship and creative work is available. Faculty members are encouraged to contact the committee for information on available grants and application procedures.

2.9.4.2 Funding for Travel to Professional Conferences

College [university] recognizes the importance of faculty members’ participation in professional conferences and is committed to supporting the activity through funding for such travel. Disbursement of travel funds occurs through the departmental budget and faculty members should contact the department chair for procedures.

2.9.4.3 Other Support

The college [university] provides other forms of support for faculty development, such as the following:

1. The Learning Enhancement Service and other personnel provide a variety of opportunities for faculty members to improve the effectiveness of their teaching.
2. Private library study rooms are available to faculty members engaged in research and writing. Faculty members should apply to the director of the libraries for such a room.
3. A networked computer and a printer are ordinarily made available to each faculty member. Requests about needed hardware and software are ordinarily made by the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] to the director of Information Technology Services during the annual budgetary process.
4. Secretarial services and photocopying are provided by the college [university] within the constraints of departmental budgets and secretaries’ other departmental responsibilities.
5. Laboratories are available to faculty members engaged in scientific research.
   
   Faculty members should apply to their department chair.
6. Outside grants are often available from agencies and foundations related to a faculty member’s research and study. The college’s Office of Foundation and Corporate Relations [university’s Office of Foundation Relations] offers assistance to faculty applying for such grants. The college [university may choose to provide funding and fringe benefits from internal sources with the authorization of the Executive Committee of the Board. Members of the administration who are tenured/tenure-track faculty are also eligible for such support.

2.10 Faculty Rights and Obligations

Persons with faculty appointments are both members of the college [university] and of the academic profession more broadly. As a result of this dual membership, faculty members have correlative rights and obligations, rooted in both the general standards of one’s profession and the particular character and standards of the college [university].

2.10.1 Academic Freedom

It is fundamental to the health of an academic institution and ultimately to the health of society at large that faculty members exercise their responsibility and freedom to search for truth and to speak truthfully. A truly Catholic institution of higher learning is “animated by a spirit of freedom and charity; it is characterized by mutual respect, sincere dialogue and protection of the rights of individuals” (John Paul II, Ex Corde Ecclesiae, 21).

Both the college [university] and each faculty member shall respect the rights and fulfill the responsibilities implicit in the 1940 “Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom” (from the American Association of University Professors and the Association of American Colleges and Universities), adapted here:

1. In research and in publication of the results, faculty members are entitled to full freedom, subject to the adequate performance of their other academic duties.
   Research for pecuniary returns should be based upon an understanding with the academic officers of the college [university].
2. In the classroom, faculty members are entitled to freedom in discussing their subject. Ideas that are germane to a subject under discussion in a classroom cannot be censored because a student with particular religious or political beliefs might be offended. This would create a classroom environment inimical to the free and vigorous exchange of ideas necessary for teaching and learning in higher education. CSB and SJU are committed to the principles of free inquiry and free expression within the context f the Catholic intellectual tradition, our Catholic and Benedictine character and the principles of human rights and dignity.
   Whatever the boundaries of free inquiry and expression, every member of the community should be attentive to the feelings and sensibilities of others and should practice mutual respect, understanding and sensitivity. Due to faculty members’ special role and position of authority with respect to students, they should treat students with respect and dignity and should be particularly sensitive to the impact of their words and opinions.
3. When faculty members speak or write as citizens, they should be free from college [university] censorship or discipline. Nevertheless, their special position in the community imposes special obligations because they are not only citizens but also members of a learned profession and officers of the college [university]. As scholars and educational officers, they should remember that the public may judge their profession and the college [university] from their utterances. Hence, they should at all times be accurate, exercise appropriate restraint, show respect for the opinions of others, and make every effort to indicate that they are not speaking for the college [university].

2.10.2 Code of Professional Ethics

Although no set rules or professional conduct can either guarantee or take the place of a faculty member’s personal integrity, the college [university] endorses the 1987 “Statement on Professional Ethics” promulgated by the American Association of University Professors, adapted here:

1. Faculty members, guided by a deep conviction of the worth and dignity of the advancement of knowledge, recognize the special responsibilities placed upon them. Their primary responsibility to their subject is to seek and to state the truth as they see it. To this end, faculty members devote their energies to developing and improving their scholarly competence. They accept the obligation to exercise critical self-discipline and judgment in using, extending and transmitting knowledge. They practice intellectual honesty although they may follow subsidiary interests, these interests must never seriously impair or compromise their freedom of inquiry.
2. As teachers, faculty members encourage the free pursuit of learning in their students. They hold before their students the best scholarly and ethical standards of their disciplines. Faculty members demonstrate respect for students as individuals and adhere to proper roles as intellectual guides and counselors. They make every reasonable effort to foster honest academic conduct and to ensure that the evaluation of students reflects each student’s true merit. They respect the confidential nature of the relationship between professor and student and avoid any exploitation, harassment, or discriminatory treatment of students. They acknowledge significant academic or scholarly assistance from students and protect students’ academic freedom.
3. As colleagues, faculty members have obligations that derive from common membership in the community as scholars. They do not discriminate against or harass colleagues. They respect and defend the free inquiry of associates. In the exchange of criticism and ideas, faculty members show due respect for the opinions of others. They acknowledge academic debt and strive to be objective in the professional judgment of colleagues. They accept their share of faculty responsibilities for the governance of their institution.
4. As members of an academic institution, faculty members seek above all to be effective teachers and scholars. Although they observe the stated regulations of the college [university] provided the regulations do not contravene academic freedom, they maintain their right to criticize and seek revision. Faculty members give due regard to their paramount responsibilities within the college [university] in determining the amount and character of work done outside it. When considering the interruption or termination of their service, faculty members recognize the effect of their decision upon the program of the college [university] and give due notice of their intentions.
5. As members of their community, faculty members have the rights and obligations of other citizens. They measure the urgency of these obligations in light of their responsibilities to their subject, to their students, to their profession, and to the college [university]. When they speak or act as private persons, they avoid creating the impression of speaking or acting for the college [university]. As citizens engaged in a profession that depends upon freedom for its health and integrity, faculty members have a particular obligation to promote conditions of free inquiry and to further public understanding of academic freedom.

2.10.3 Faculty Responsibilities

Membership in the academic profession carries with it responsibilities for the advancement of knowledge, the intellectual growth of students, and the improvement of society. Faculty members should order and evaluate their activities in relation to these goals, as well as in relation to their own personal and professional development. Moreover, faculty members of the college [university] have a special obligation to understand the nature of this institution of higher learning and to appreciate its unique characteristics and its philosophy, mission and goals. They should strive to improve the intellectual and practical effectiveness of the college [university] and should bear their share of the faculty’s responsibilities for the various curricula of the college [university].

A faculty member’s overall responsibilities include: effective teaching, which is paramount; scholarship and creative work as appropriate to their field; academic advising; service; and the development of professional identity, as described in Section 2.5, “Faculty Evaluation: Policy, Criteria, and Evidence.”

A faculty member is responsible for carrying out satisfactorily the duties agreed to in the individual faculty assignment.

2.10.3.1 Faculty Assignment

Each faculty member’s assignment of responsibilities is determined annually by the department chair in consultation with the faculty member and with the approval of the academic dean. [Graduate faculty assignments are determined by the dean of the School of Theology in consultation with the faculty member.]

2.10.3.1.1 Faculty Assignment: Factors to be Considered

The actual faculty assignment will vary from person to person considering the following factors:

1. the department curriculum, the number of courses and preparations required, the number of students in the assigned courses;
2. use of teaching methods and resources consistent with quality education;
3. number of student contact hours in laboratory sections, methods, courses, private lessons, etc.;
4. number of individual learning projects or internships;
5. committee assignments;
6. extraordinary circumstances within a department;
7. number of advisees; and/or
8. administrative work.

2.10.3.1.2 Faculty Assignment: Guidelines

The following guidelines are used in the determination of faculty assignments:

1. Faculty members should be occupied chiefly with the academic growth and development of students.
2. Individual learning projects and internships are an important part of the education process. In addition to normal course assignments, faculty members are expected to be responsible for such teaching from time to time. However, no faculty member need be responsible for more than three concurrent individual learning projects and/or internships without a corresponding reduction of other duties.
3. A faculty member will neither be assigned more than three 4-credit courses, nor more than 100 students in a given semester unless the college [university] provides assistance to make working with a larger number of students feasible.
4. The vitality of the general curriculum depends on the active involvement of faculty members. Faculty members are expected to teach general curriculum courses. While departmental needs may sometimes prevent faculty members from teaching extra-departmental courses in the general curriculum, faculty members are strongly encouraged to do so periodically.
5. Faculty members in the School of Theology face explicit expectations for scholarship that should be taken into account in a determination of their annual faculty assignment.

2.10.3.2 Other Faculty Responsibilities

1. Faculty members are expected to conduct classes in a manner appropriate to the type and level of the course assigned; to establish and inform students of course objectives, requirements, and schedules in writing, electronically or on paper, and in a timely manner; and to deal with student papers and examinations in a timely manner.
2. Faculty members are expected to hold office hours for consultation on course work and the advising of students.
3. A faculty member who must be absent from a class due to illness of self or family member or other due cause is expected to try to make arrangements for alternative instruction. The faculty member should inform the department chair and departmental coordinator of the alternative arrangements and arrange for timely notification to students, especially in the event the class must be cancelled. Graduate faculty should notify the dean of the School of Theology·Seminary. If a chair must be absent, notification should be sent to the departmental coordinator and the academic dean. Most absences can be addressed within the department, but chairs and program directors are encouraged to communicate any concerns regarding faculty absences to the academic dean (dean of the School of Theology·Seminary).
4. Faculty members are expected to take up other responsibilities as the situation may call for: moderating senior theses or research projects, assisting in the recruitment of prospective students, teaching for a colleague in an emergency, assisting in summer registration, etc. Faculty members are expected to participate in the decision-making, curriculum development, and assessment processes of the department and the college [university]. Faculty members are not expected to serve on a college [university] standing or ad hoc committee before the year in which they apply for third-year review.
5. Although faculty members have a primary responsibility to their own department, they are also members of a larger collegial community and should make every effort to work cooperatively with members of other departments and with the administrators of the college [university], respecting appropriate deadlines established by various administrative officers.
6. Faculty members are required to attend the fall faculty workshop and spring commencement exercises. If faculty are unable to attend, they should notify the Office of Academic Affairs in advance. Faculty members are also expected to attend other major academic convocations.
7. In addition, each faculty member has a responsibility to be familiar with his or her roles and responsibilities as described in the Faculty Handbook. If questions of interpretation arise, clarifications should be sought from the president, the provost, the dean of the faculty, the academic dean, the department chair [the dean of the School of Theology], or the Faculty Handbook Committee. Any exceptions mutually agreed upon should be in writing and signed by all parties concerned.
8. Faculty are expected to participate in annual programming on excellence in inclusive teaching. Academic Affairs will consult with the Joint Faculty Senate Executive committee and the Joint Faculty Senate Committee on Inclusion, Equity and Justice regarding the content and delivery of the annual programs.

2.10.3.3 Outside Activities

Full-time faculty members are expected to devote their full working time to this employment. Nonetheless, consulting and other outside activities of a professional nature are encouraged by the college [university] where such activities give the faculty member experience and knowledge valuable to professional growth while making a positive contribution in society. In order to keep a balance in this matter, no outside service or enterprise, professional or other, should be undertaken by a faculty member that might interfere with his or her primary responsibility to the college [university] as defined in Section 2.10.3, “Faculty Responsibilities.”

The following procedures apply:

1. Although a faculty member need not obtain prior authorization before engaging in outside professional activities, the faculty member should consult with the chair and the academic dean prior to any instance where a conflict between his or her contractual responsibilities to the college [university] and the outside activity may arise.
2. If outside activities harm a faculty member’s performance of professional responsibilities, the chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] should speak directly to the faculty member about the matter. If the situation does not improve sufficiently, additional assistance will be available from the dean of the faculty, academic dean and/or the provost. See Section 2.13.6, “Discipline and/or Dismissal for Cause.”
3. Faculty members may use their offices, library services, and, to a limited extent, secretarial staff (if available after completion of official work) to assist in the preparation of professional manuscripts, creative work, or other outside professional activity.
4. Except for incidental use of office equipment (e.g., word processing, local phone calls), faculty members may use college [university] facilities for nonprofessional outside activities only with written approval of the department chair, academic dean, [and/or the dean of the School of Theology], and the person responsible for operating that facility or equipment. In such cases, the faculty member or his or her outside employer or sponsor will pay the reimbursement rate established by the college [university] for such use.
5. Faculty members may employ official college [university] stationery in outside professional activities. They should not use official stationery or the college’s [university’s] name or seal in any offer of goods or services by any outside organization without prior permission of the academic dean [and/or the dean of the School of Theology]. The college [university] assumes no responsibility for the competence or performance of the outside activities (either professional or nonprofessional) of any faculty member. Faculty members must be careful not to represent themselves as acting on behalf of the college [university].
6. Faculty members uncertain about their responsibilities with regard to a conflict between their work as a faculty member and their outside activities should consult with their chair and their academic dean [and/or the dean of the School of Theology], concerning their compliance with college [university] policies.

2.10.4 Facilities and Services

In order to assist faculty members in the performance of their duties, the college [university] provides the facilities and services listed below. Further information is outlined in section 3.3.

1. Faculty Offices
2. Instructional Technology
3. Information technology Services
4. Library Services
5. Office keys
6. Identification Cards
7. Administrative Support Services
8. Duplicating and Mail Services
9. Health Services
10. Employee Assistance Services
11. On-Campus Parking
12. Academic Regalia
13. Notary Public

2.10.5 Related College [University] Policies

Faculty members are responsible for following college [university] policies. Policies are grouped in the Faculty Handbook not by their subject matter or function but according to the procedures employed to amend them.

2.10.5.1 Appendix to Part II

Policies included as appendices to Part II (itemized below) can be amended only through the full revision procedure for the rest of Part II, described in Section 2.16, requiring action of the faculty, the president, and the college’s [university’s] Board of Trustees. The provost coordinates and transmits to the president all of the Faculty Handbook amendments passed by the Joint Faculty Assembly.

1. “Joint Human Rights Policy”
2. “Policy on Consensual Romantic or Sexual Relationships Between Faculty Members”
3. “Policy on Consensual Romantic or Sexual Relationships Between Faculty and Students or Staff Members”                                              

2.10.5.2 Part III of the Faculty Handbook: Administrative Policies

Policies included in Part III are created by the appropriate college [university] administrator and are amended by administrative update from that administrative officer.

2.10.5.3 Policies in Part IV of the Faculty Handbook

Policies included in Part IV are created and amended through approval of the Faculty Senate and the president. The provost coordinates and transmits to the president all of the Faculty Handbook amendments passed by the Joint Faculty Assembly.

2.10.6 Violations of Faculty Rights, Academic Freedom and Professional Ethics

Disputes involving a charge that a faculty member’s rights or academic freedom have been abrogated or that professional ethics have not been maintained are to be settled through the established grievance procedures (see Section 2.15 and Section 4.1). While affirming academic freedom as a right, the college [university] recognizes that, in some circumstances, the questions of academic freedom become enmeshed in questions of professional irresponsibility. In the effort to distinguish between these sometimes confused issues, the guiding principle is that charges of professional irresponsibility shall not be used to limit academic freedom; nor shall appeals to academic freedom be acceptable as a shield for professional irresponsibility.

2.11 Nonprofessional Leaves

A faculty member may request a leave for a purpose unrelated to normal professional activity of the faculty. (Professional leaves are treated in Sections 2.9.2, “Sabbatical Leaves,” and 2.9.3, “Other Professional Leaves.”) Examples of leaves covered in this section include, but are not necessarily limited to, illness, disability, military training, jury duty, the birth or adoption of a child, critical illness or death in the immediate family, or other compassionate reasons. Leaves for illness or disability or due to the birth or adoption of a child are subject to policies within the college’s [university’s] faculty benefit program. See Section 2.12.2, “Employment Benefits,” applicable policies in Part III, and applicable state and federal laws, rules, and regulations concerning mandatory leaves.

2.11.1 Nonprofessional Leaves with Pay

The college [university] provides for short-term leaves with pay in some circumstances such as jury duty, mandatory military service, or medical or compassionate reasons. A short-term leave of absence is ordinarily not more than 10 working days but may be extended for a longer period. Short-term leaves for illness are subject to the provisions of the sick leave policy of the college [university].

Requests for leaves are submitted in writing to the dean of the faculty [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] along with a written recommendation on the leave from the department chair. In the case of emergency leaves for compassionate reasons, the requests may be made to the dean of the faculty [and/or the dean of the School of Theology], who may waive a written request in view of the circumstances.

2.11.2 Nonprofessional Leaves Without Pay

A faculty member wishing to have an extended leave without pay for any of the above reasons should make a written request to the dean of the faculty [and/or the dean of the School of Theology as appropriate], accompanied by an evaluation by the department chair. Ordinarily such leaves are not granted for more than one academic year. An effort should be made to arrange the leave to coincide with the academic terms.

2.11.3 Effects of Nonprofessional Leaves

The faculty member’s status or tenure will not be affected by nonprofessional leaves. Nonprofessional leaves with pay are counted toward tenure, promotion, and sabbatical, but nonprofessional leaves without pay do not count toward tenure, promotion, or sabbatical.

Fringe benefits are not provided during leaves without pay although the faculty member has the option to continue such benefits by paying the college [university] for them. Benefit arrangements are made with the Human Resources Office.

Faculty members on nonprofessional leave without pay for an academic year are nonetheless eligible to receive the normal annual salary increment upon their return.

2.11.4 Nonprofessional Leaves for Benedictines of Saint Benedict’s Monastery [Saint John’s Abbey]

Faculty members who are sisters of Saint Benedict’s Monastery [monks of Saint John’s Abbey] are subject to reassignment by the prioress [abbot] to duties outside of the college [university]. A tenured/tenure-track faculty member so reassigned may request a leave without pay which will be granted upon request. If the reassignment lasts longer than two years, the sister [monk] resigns but may be reappointed by the president at a later date in accord with Section 2.13.1.3.

2.12 Compensation

Compensation is a subject of agreement between the college [university] and a faculty member entering into or renewing a contract for faculty employment.

Wage disclosure: The College of Saint Benedict and Saint John’s University respect confidentiality in administering compensation. The Human Resources and Academic Affairs departments will not disclose wage information to others without a valid business reason to provide compensation data. A faculty member may choose to disclose his/her own wages or discuss another faculty member’s wage, which was voluntarily disclosed by that faculty member, without fear of reprisal. Faculty are encouraged to respect sensitivity of wage information and to exercise discretion with such information recognizing there are many factors which comprise compensation decisions.

The College of Saint Benedict and Saint John’s University will not require a faculty member to waive his/her rights to disclose compensation information as a condition of employment or take any type of adverse employment action against a faculty member for exercising his/her wage disclosure rights under Minnesota law (MN State Section 181.172). This law permits a civil cause of action for any violations and, in any such action, the court may, if deemed appropriate, order job reinstatement, back pay, restoration of lost service credit, and the expungement of adverse personnel records.

Questions about wage disclosure may be directed to the Human Resources department.

2.12.1 Salary

The compensation package proposed by the college [university] administration is normally reviewed on an annual basis by the Faculty Compensation and Benefits Committee and presented by the committee to the Faculty Senate for endorsement.

Among the factors receiving consideration in determining compensation, both at the time of initial appointment and in the annual determination of salary increases, are current market conditions, the characteristics of individual faculty members, and any inequities that may have arisen.

1. The salary of faculty members at the time of initial appointment is determined by the dean of the faculty. This offer is to be approved by the president.
2. Compensation for faculty members holding term contracts, whether full time or part time (as described in Section 2.1.4), is determined by the type of contract and the factors mentioned above. The salaries and benefits of term- contract faculty will be adjusted commensurate with that of tenured/tenure-track faculty on an annual basis.
3. Faculty members receive an increase in salary with promotion in rank.
4. The provost is responsible for recommending faculty compensation according to the compensation package formula approved each year by the Faculty Senate in accord with the annual budget as approved by the college’s [university’s] Board of Trustees.
5. An individual faculty member may appeal to the provost to request an adjustment in salary. If unsatisfied with the provost’s response, he or she may appeal to the president.
6. In order to establish a fair system of salary based on principles of equity, the administration and the faculty in collaboration will establish criteria for the selection of other institutions of higher learning for the purpose of comparing the salary packages afforded by such other institutions with that proposed by the college [university].

2.12.2 Employment Benefits

The program of employment benefits for the faculty has been mutually developed by the faculty and the administration and is an essential part of overall compensation. Descriptions of the benefits listed below are available in the Human Resources Office at both the College of Saint Benedict and Saint John’s University.

2.12.2.1 Governmentally-Mandated Benefits

Members of the faculty participate in the following governmental programs, which are not subject to negotiation:

1. Social Security
2. Workers’ Compensation Insurance
3. Unemployment Compensation Insurance
4. FMLA (Family Medical Leave Act)

2.12.2.2 Other Employment Benefits

Members of the faculty whose contracts are for greater than three-sixths time also receive other benefits attached to employment:

1. group health insurance
2. group dental insurance
3. group life insurance
4. group long-term disability insurance
5. sick leave
6. parental leave
7. tuition reduction/remission for faculty members, spouses, and their children
8. employee assistance program
9. flexible spending accounts
10. retirement program
11. supplemental retirement annuities
12. use of facilities
13. admission to campus events
14. discount on meals

2.12.2.3 Changes in Employment Benefits

Changes in employment benefits for faculty will generally be mutually agreed upon by the Joint Faculty Assembly and the administration, before being submitted to the Boards as part of the annual budget. A proposal of changes to be considered in the current year will be submitted to the Faculty Compensation and Benefits Committee by November 1. In collaboration with the provost, the Faculty Compensation and Benefits Committee will initiate a review process and complete its work by the following February 1.

When an agreement cannot be reached in time for the budget cycle (March), the administration, Joint Benefits Committee and Faculty Compensation and Benefits Committee may agree to an interim solution for one year only and continue consultations for the next budget cycle.

Should the Joint Faculty Assembly and the administration be unable to agree by February 1 on a change in faculty benefits or an interim solution for one year, then an impasse is automatically declared. The following collaborative process will be followed.

1. One or both of the presidents (or the provost, in their absence and at their direction) will convene a meeting(s) with the Joint Benefits Committee, the Faculty Compensation and Benefits Committee, the vice-president/s for finance, the director of Human Resources, and the officers of the Faculty Senate to discuss strategies to end the impasse and/or make changes in the proposed benefit change to reach a mutually acceptable proposal for action by the Boards.
2. If, by February 20, an acceptable agreement is not reached through the efforts of the convened meeting(s), the president/s may report the disagreement to the Board/s or the Coordinate Finance Committee for its guidance in the matter from the perspective of the Board's governance prerogatives.

The benefit revision process will be concluded by the definitive action of the Boards or of a delegated subcommittee of the Boards at the direction of the Boards.

2.12.2.4 Note on Members of Religious Orders

Faculty members who are also members of Saint Benedict's Monastery, of Saint John's Abbey, or of other religious orders do not receive most of the employment benefits listed in 2.12.2.2. As agents of their communities, they are technically not employees of the college [university]. Their religious communities receive cash payments in place of such benefits.

2.12.3 Status and Privileges of Retired Faculty Members

The college [university] is committed to promoting close ties with its retired faculty members. As a result, the following assistance and privileges are available to those who have retired from the faculty:

1. The college [university] will provide meeting facilities for former faculty members who may wish to gather as a group and will, to the extent financially feasible, facilitate communication among them.
2. Upon retirement, a faculty member will have available a college [university] identification card which provides access to recreational and athletic facilities, the library, bookstore, campus parking, and campus cultural, athletic, and educational events. Retired faculty members will be subject to the same policies, restrictions, and fees applicable to current full-time faculty.
3. A retired faculty member may take any course at the college [university] tuition free. (See the policy on tuition reduction/remission for details on eligibility of spouses and children of retired faculty members.)
4. Provided that retired faculty members keep their current addresses on file, the Office of Public Relations will assure that notices of major campus activities are sent to them.
5. Retired faculty members may attend the meetings and other activities of their former departments. However, only those who have active faculty status by current appointment may vote in these meetings.
6. Retired faculty members may participate in commencement exercises in appropriate academic dress if they so wish.
7. Retired Emerita/us faculty members may make use of the services of the departmental secretary on a low-priority basis.

2.13 Separation

The college [university] or individual faculty members may find it necessary to sever their contractual relationships. To protect the interests of both parties, categories of separation are here defined, and the policies and procedures related to each are set forth.

1. resignation (2.13.1)
2. retirement (2.13.2)
3. non-reappointment of probationary faculty (2.13.3)
4. separation due to prolonged mental or physical illness (2.13.4)
5. layoffs (2.13.5)
6. discipline and/or dismissal for cause (2.13.6)

2.13.1 Resignation

Resignation is an action by which faculty members announce their intention to sever their relationships with the college [university].

2.13.1.1 Resignation Effective at the End of a Contract Period

Ordinarily a resignation is an announcement by a faculty member that he or she will be leaving the college [university] at the end of the current contract year. Because of the importance of planning for a replacement, faculty members should provide written notice of resignation to the provost, with a copy to the department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology], at the earliest possible time, but no later than the deadline for the return of contracts for the following year (as described in Section 2.2.4).

2.13.1.2 Resignation Effective Before the End of a Contract Period

Although extremely rare, it is possible for a faculty member to seek to be released from a contract with the college [university] before its completion. A faculty member seeking release from contract should make a written request to the provost, with a copy to the department chair [and/or the Dean of the School of Theology] at the earliest possible date. All such resignations are subject to approval by the college [university]. In light of the extreme hardship such resignations cause, they are approved only in highly unusual circumstances.

2.13.1.3 Resignation of Benedictines of Saint Benedict’s Monastery [Saint John’s Abbey]

Faculty members who are sisters of Saint Benedict’s Monastery [monks of Saint John’s Abbey] are subject to reassignment by the prioress [abbot] to duties outside of the college [university]. A tenured/tenure-track faculty member so reassigned may request a leave from the college [university] in accord with Section 2.11.4. If the reassignment lasts longer than the maximum allowable time for such leaves, the sister [monk] resigns, but may be reappointed by the president at a later date, regaining previous faculty status. Such reappointment is subject to the usual procedures for preferential hiring, as described in Sections 2.3.3 and 3.1.

2.13.2 Retirement

CSB/SJU define retirement as a voluntary separation of employment at a minimum age of 55. (Please refer to the benefits section of this handbook for information on eligibility requirements to receive health insurance and tuition remission benefits upon retirement.)

In accord with federal law, retirement occurs at the option of the faculty member, who should give due notice to the provost. After retirement, any appointments to the faculty are on a term-appointment basis (see Sections 2.1.4 and 2.1.5) and are mutually agreed upon by the individual faculty member and the dean of the faculty in consultation with the appropriate department chair [and/or the dean of the School of Theology].

A description of the status and privileges of retired faculty members is contained in Section 2.12.3.

2.13.2.1 Early or Phased Retirement

The college [university] occasionally develops extraordinary procedures both for early retirement and for a gradual reduction in teaching obligations for faculty members nearing retirement. Interested faculty members should contact the provost or dean of the faculty for details.

2.13.3 Non-reappointment of Probationary Faculty

Even though probationary contracts are renewable annually (in accord with Sections 2.2.1.2 and 2.6.1), legitimate reasons for non-reappointment of a probationary faculty member may include but are not limited to the following:

1. unfavorable reviews of the faculty member’s performance based on the expectations identified in Sections 2.5 and/or 2.10,
2. cancellation of or change in a program (as defined in Section 2.13.5.1.1),
3. declining enrollment,
4. need for reduction in staff, and/or
5. incongruence between the teaching interests of the faculty member and the educational goals of the college [university].

Following completion of the evaluation process (described in Section 2.6) appropriate for the probationary faculty member that year, any decision not to reappoint such a faculty member is made by the president, following consultation with the provost, dean of the faculty, academic dean, department chair [the dean of the School of Theology if appropriate], and acting in accord with the college’s [university’s] policy on nondiscrimination (see Section 2.0.1).

2.13.3.1 Notice of Non-reappointment

Notice of non-reappointment of a probationary faculty member must be given in writing by the following dates:

1. in the first academic year of service, on or before March 1 (or at least 90 calendar days prior to the expiration of an initial, one-academic- year appointment, if it expires during an academic year);
2. in the second academic year of service, on or before December 15 (or at least 180 calendar days prior to the expiration of the appointment if it expires during an academic year); or
3. in the third or a subsequent year of service, on or before April 1 of the year prior to a final contract year, with the following exception: pending completion of a third-year review process, notice must be given by May 1.

In the event of a decision by the president not to renew a probationary appointment, the faculty member must be informed of the decision in writing. Upon subsequent written request to the provost within 30 days of the issuance of the president’s decision, the faculty member must be advised in writing of the reasons which contributed to that decision, with such reasons being given within 30 days of the faculty member’s written request.

2.13.3.2 Appeal of Non-reappointment

A probationary faculty member who has not been reappointed may initiate a grievance in accord with Sections 2.15 and 4.1. The grounds for such a grievance are limited to those identified in Section 2.15.3.

2.13.4 Separation Due to Prolonged Mental or Physical Illness

When a mental or physical illness becomes prolonged, the department chair, [and/or the dean of the School of Theology] the provost, dean of the faculty, and/or academic dean consult with the faculty member in an attempt to assist with the problem, including investigating the possibility of a formal leave. The college [university] may terminate a faculty contract in situations where a prolonged mental or physical illness or disability prevents the faculty member from fulfilling all or a substantial part of faculty responsibilities.

Upon request from the college [university], the faculty member shall present medical evidence of his or her state of health to the provost. Upon written request from the faculty member to the provost, the Rank and Tenure Committee will review the situation and send its recommendation concerning termination to the provost and the candidate. This recommendation becomes part of the provost’s eventual report to the president.

In all such cases, the college [university] will make every effort to work within the disability program to ease the burden of any such termination as far as is contractually possible.

2.13.4.1 Prolonged Illness of Non-tenured Faculty

In the event that a non-tenured faculty member is unable to perform all or a substantial part of faculty responsibilities for a period in excess of six months, the college [university] may terminate the appointment, ordinarily effective at the end of the contract period. During the period of the prolonged illness, the absence will be coordinated with the faculty member’s accrued sick leave, the provisions of the Family Medical Leave Act, and other applicable state or federal laws, rules, and regulations on leaves.

Termination of the contract of a non-tenured faculty member before the end of a contract period must be based upon medical evidence that the faculty member is and will be unable to perform the terms, conditions, and normal duties of the contract despite reasonable accommodation by the college [university]. The faculty member or his or her representative must be informed in writing of the reasons for the proposed action and must be afforded an opportunity to respond. After appropriate consultation, the president makes a final decision on the matter.

2.13.4.2 Prolonged Illness of Tenured Faculty

If a tenured faculty member is unable to perform all or a substantial part of his or her responsibilities for a period of more than six months, he or she may request a leave of absence without pay, following the regular procedures and time limits in Section 2.11. If sufficient recovery does not occur before the end of those time limits, the college [university] may terminate such a continuous contract at the end of a contract period. During the period of the prolonged illness the absence will be coordinated with the faculty member’s accrued sick leave, the provisions of the Family Medical Leave Act, and other applicable state or federal laws, rules, and regulations on leaves.

The decision to terminate is made by the Executive Committee of the Board upon recommendation of the president and following appropriate consultation during which the faculty member or his or her representative has been informed of the reasons for the proposed action and has been afforded an opportunity to respond. The president makes a recommendation on the matter to the Executive Committee of the college’s [university’s] Board of Trustees, which makes the final decision.

2.13.4.3 Appeal of Termination Due to Illness

A faculty member whose contract has been terminated by the college [university] due to prolonged mental or physical illness may initiate a grievance in accord with Sections 2.15 and 4.1. The grounds for such a grievance are limited to those identified in Section 2.15.3.

2.13.5 Layoffs

Layoff is a separation action by which the college [university] terminates the appointment of a tenured/tenure-track faculty member without prejudice as to his or her performance. Although probationary faculty members may face non-reappointment in accord with Section 2.13.4 for the same reasons cited in this section, the pervasive effects of the forces causing layoffs ordinarily call for the broader policy considerations in this section to govern the layoff of both tenured and probationary faculty.

2.13.5.1 Reasons for Layoff

2.13.5.1.1 Major Academic Changes

Layoffs of tenured or non-tenured faculty may occur as the result of a major academic change, including discontinuation of a curricular requirement, an academic program or a department in whole or in part. A program is a coherent sequence of courses and/or education activities which offers a student an in-depth study of a field, discipline, or interdisciplinary focus, e.g., the Honors Program. Decisions about such major changes are made by the president upon receiving recommendations from the provost and the Faculty-Staff [Faculty] Assembly in accordance to Section 2.14.

2.13.5.1.2 Financial Emergency

Financial emergency is a rare and serious institutional crisis that requires urgent action on the part of the college [university] to reduce expenditures in response to reduced revenues. The college’s [university’s] Board of Trustees establishes and reviews the criteria for determining a financial emergency. The Board, upon recommendation of the president, who will have consulted with the faculty assembly, formally declares a financial emergency if the Board judges a financial crisis meets the criteria. Because of the severity of the effects of financial emergency, the Board, president, and provost should make every effort to involve the faculty in the deliberation process leading up to such a declaration.

Subsequently, the faculty shall be represented in administrative processes relating to program reorganization and/or the curtailment or termination of instructional programs through the Coordinating Committee for Academic Policies and Standards and in other ways listed below. The president and the Board have final authority in all matters related to financial emergency.

2.13.5.2 General Procedures for Layoffs

All deliberations related to the major academic changes or financial emergency described above must consider the mission and goals of the college [university]. In order to protect the academic integrity of the curriculum, the decision-making process concerning layoffs should include tenure, rank, seniority, Benedictine preference, gender and racial composition, and a balance between the college and Saint John's University [the university and the College of Saint Benedict].

In situations requiring layoffs, the provost in consultation with the Coordinating Committee for Academic Policies and Standards and the Faculty-Staff [Faculty] Assembly shall recommend action to the president, who will recommend action to the Board for approval. Such action may be to eliminate departments or programs in whole or in part or to distribute layoffs throughout the faculty so as to prevent the elimination of any program or department.

The college [university] will make a good faith effort to assist any tenured/tenure-track faculty member who is laid off in finding employment either at the college [university] or elsewhere. No replacement for such a laid off faculty member will be hired within a period of three years unless the terminated faculty member has been offered reappointment under conditions comparable to those held at the time of layoff and has been given 60 days after written notice of an offer of reappointment within which to accept in writing. It shall be the duty of any laid off faculty member to keep the college [university] informed of his or her current address for purposes of this section. Notice sent to this address by the college [university] shall be presumed received if sent by certified mail.

2.13.5.3 Specific Procedures Concerning Layoffs

2.13.5.3.1 Notice of Layoff

In the case of layoffs due to major academic changes, probationary faculty must receive notice by the deadlines indicated in Section 2.13.3.1. Tenured faculty must be notified by April 1 of the year prior to their final contract year.

In the case of layoffs due to financial emergency, the appointment of a probationary faculty member may be terminated at the end of the current academic term in progress on the date of the decision of the Board to declare financial emergency. With the exception of the situation described in "Change in Contract Deadlines," Section below, tenured faculty must be notified by April 1 of the year prior to their final contract year.

2.13.5.3.2 Change in Contract Deadlines

In the event of an actual or likely financial emergency, where short notices and effective action are necessary, the president, after consultation with the provost and the Coordinating Committee for Academic Policies and Standards, may decide to postpone the issuance of contracts until May 31 and to serve notice by April 1 to non-tenured faculty of layoff after the current contract year pending a final decision on the severity of the financial problem. Such layoff of non-tenured faculty will become final only if a declaration of financial emergency is made by the Board by May 31. In the situation where the issuance of contracts is postponed, and the Board declares a financial emergency, tenured faculty members must receive notice of layoff from the president no later than May 31 of the year prior to their final contract year.

2.13.5.3.3 Decisions Concerning Layoffs

Decisions to lay off specific faculty are made by the president after receiving recommendations from the provost, who will have consulted with the dean of the faculty and academic dean, the Rank and Tenure Committee, and appropriate program directors and department chairs, and the prioress [abbot] concerning issues of Benedictine preference.

As a part of the deliberation process leading up to a final decision by the president, the provost shall provide the appropriate committees (and make available to other interested parties) documentation concerning program integrity and the quality of the curriculum, as well as concerning tenure, rank, degrees, and seniority, enrollment and credit hours, gender and racial diversity, Benedictine presence, the locus of faculty appointment (both departmental and institutional), and other relevant issues.

2.13.5.3.4 Order of Layoff Within a Department or Program

1. Prior to involuntary dismissals, the following voluntary measures should be investigated:
   1. If a department must get by with one fewer person, it should consider retaining all faculty members but with a reduced salary and workload for each. Such an alternative should not be implemented without the consent of all affected department members.
   2. The possibility of voluntary early or phased retirement should be investigated.
2. If necessary, involuntary reductions will occur in the following order:
   1. In the case of a layoff caused by a major academic change, the first to be laid off within an academic department or program should be any administrators teaching there, except as necessary to avoid serious distortion of program integrity.
   2. Term-appointment faculty members (i.e., those who are neither probationary nor tenured) will be terminated next, except as necessary to avoid serious distortion of program integrity.
   3. Faculty members with probationary contracts are ordinarily terminated next, employing the criteria in the “General Procedures for Layoffs,” Section 2.13.5.2 above.
   4. The appointment of a faculty member with tenure will not be terminated in favor of retaining a faculty member without tenure, except in extraordinary circumstances where serious distortion of the academic program would result, employing the criteria in the “General Procedures for Layoffs,” Section 2.13.5.2 above. The provost, in consultation with the dean of the faculty, and academic dean, department chairs, and the Rank and Tenure Committee, makes a recommendation concerning extraordinary circumstances to the president who makes the final decision.

2.13.5.4 Appeal of Layoff

A faculty member whose contract has been terminated due to layoff may initiate a grievance in accord with Sections 2.15 and 4.1. The grounds for such a grievance are limited to those identified in Section 2.15.3. A layoff will not be delayed if an ongoing grievance is not completed by the effective date of the layoff; nor will the grievance procedure be interrupted or denied because a layoff has already occurred.

2.13.6 Discipline and/or Dismissal for Cause

Dismissal for cause is a severance action by which the college [university] terminates its contract with a faculty member for just cause. Any faculty member is subject to action under this section.

Just cause for dismissal must be directly and substantially related to the fitness of a faculty member to continue in his or her professional capacity and shall be determined in each instance by the president in accordance with the procedures outlined below.

Dismissal for cause will not be used to restrain a faculty member's academic freedom. Although affirming academic freedom as a right, the college [university] recognizes that, in some circumstances, the questions of academic freedom become enmeshed in questions of professional incompetence and irresponsibility. In the effort to distinguish between the sometimes-confused issues, the guiding principle is that charges of professional incompetence or irresponsibility shall not be used to limit academic freedom; nor shall appeals to academic freedom be acceptable as a shield for professional incompetence or irresponsibility.

2.13.6.1 Grounds for Discipline and/or Dismissal

Discipline and/or Dismissal proceedings may be instituted on the basis of the following grounds:

1. professional incompetence;
2. continued neglect of academic responsibilities in spite of oral and written warnings;
3. serious personal misconduct;
4. deliberate and serious violation of the rights and freedom of other faculty members, administrators, or students;
5. conviction of a crime directly related to the faculty member's fitness to practice his or her profession;
6. serious failure to follow the canons and professional ethics of his or her discipline;
7. falsification of credentials and experience; or
8. failure to comply with professional or academic policy within the Faculty Handbook after oral and written warnings.
9. A violation of the Title IX and Sexual Misconduct Policy of the College of St. Benedict and St. John’s University (the “Sexual Misconduct Policy”) (in which case the Sexual Misconduct Policy, set forth in Section 3.5.1 of this Handbook, will be followed).

[Saint John’s University Handbook only: Faculty members who are monks of Saint John's Abbey or who are employed as agents of other religious institutes, or who are Catholic priests, may be dismissed for lack of canonical good standing.]

2.13.6.2 Progressive Discipline of Faculty Members

Ordinarily, dismissal for cause will be preceded by a written admonition from the appropriate administrative officer describing the alleged problem and warning that the faculty member's contract status is in jeopardy. (See Section 2.13.6.4, "Urgent Action," for the exception.) The warning must also stipulate a period of time within which the correction of the alleged problem is expected. If the faculty member does not contest the allegation and fulfills his or her duties, the matter is settled. If the faculty member fails to correct the problem, dismissal procedures or a lesser sanction may be applied.

2.13.6.3 Action Short of Dismissal

Depending on the circumstances and the past merits of the faculty member, the president, for one or more causes listed in Section 2.13.6.1, may elect to impose a disciplinary action short of dismissal, such as temporary suspension for up to a year (with total or partial discontinuance of all salaries and benefits), suspension of all promotion and salary increments, or the suspension or withdrawal of all faculty privileges. A violation of the Sexual Misconduct Policy may include a variety of institutional responses as described in F. 4., Sanctions and Remedies of the Sexual Misconduct Policy.

2.13.6.4 Urgent Action

In unusual circumstances, the president may take disciplinary action without previous citation or warning. An immediate suspension of a faculty member may occur when it is determined by the president that there is a strong likelihood that the faculty member's continued presence poses an immediate threat of harm to the college [university], to its students, or to other individual members of the college [university] community. Such suspension shall be with pay and shall last only as long as the threat of harm continues or until dismissal for cause occurs.

2.13.6.5 Dismissal Procedures

Dismissal for cause will include the following steps, with the exception of dismissal for cause due to a violation of the Sexual Misconduct Policy.

1. Written notice is provided to the faculty member from the provost that a recommendation of a dismissal for cause will be made to the president. This notice shall contain a written statement of the grounds on which the recommendation is to be made and a brief summary of information supporting such grounds.
2. A reasonable opportunity is made available for the faculty member to meet with the provost to present his or her defense against the dismissal recommendation before the provost's recommendation is formally made.
3. A reasonable opportunity is made available for the faculty member to meet with the president to present his or her defense against the dismissal recommendation prior to the president's decision, unless the president has already decided against dismissal.

In any case involving dismissal for cause, with the exception of violations of the Sexual Misconduct Policy, the burden of proof that just cause exists shall be on the college [university], which proof shall be by clear and convincing evidence in the record considered as a whole. In cases involving dismissal for cause due to a violation of the Sexual Misconduct Policy, the preponderance of evidence standard shall apply. (Effective 7-12-20; Approved by CSB/SJU Boards of Trustees using the Emergency Procedure as described in the Joint Faculty Handbook 2.16.4.1).

The Rank and Tenure Committee shall serve in an advisory capacity to the president and will review cases at the request of the president or the faculty member being disciplined for cause, whether the threatened sanction is dismissal or some action short of dismissal. The president's decision after such a review shall be final.

2.13.6.6 Appeal of Dismissal for Cause

A faculty member subject to action short of dismissal or whose contract has been terminated for cause may initiate a grievance in accord with Sections 2.15 and 4.1. The grounds for such a grievance are limited to those identified in Section 2.15.3.

2.14 Academic Program Reduction, Impaction, Merger, and Closure

2.14.1 Overview

The implementation of the Board policy on “Academic Program Reduction, Impaction, Merger, and Closure” requires a process consistent with the faculty’s leadership role in the curriculum. This policy is focused on making changes in some parts of the academic program with a reallocation of resources to other parts of the academic program with the overall result of enhancing learning and sustaining more effectively the Academic Commitments to the Missions. The consultative process involves distinct steps and specific forms of review of evidence prior to the president’s/s’ making a recommendation to the Board/s regarding change in the academic program offered by Saint John’s University and the College of Saint Benedict.

This policy establishes the procedures, criteria and data sources to be used in any “major academic changes,” within the meaning of 2.13.5.1.1.

2.14.2 Definitions

For the purposes of this policy, the following terms are defined as follows:

1. “Academic program” refers to a coherent sequence of courses and/or educational activities which offers a student an in-depth study of a field, discipline, or interdisciplinary focus.
2. “Program reduction” refers to the elimination of part of an academic program; a "part" may be a sequence of courses, a track, a concentration, or a minor in a major field or program of studies offered to students in the catalog.
3. “Program impaction” refers to a very significant restriction of program investment beyond typical administrative management practice to minimize extraordinary negative programmatic investment/expenditure impacts on other academic programs and/or the faculty more generally.
4. “Program merger” refers to the combination, through administrative action, of the faculty of two or more academic programs and/or departments; one consequence of program merger could be program reduction.
5. “Program closure” refers to the elimination of an academic program (usually a major or concentration) offered to students in the catalog.

2.14.3 Process

The process leading to the reduction, impaction, merger or closure of academic programs may originate in either of the following ways:

1. Within the faculty committee system, Academic Budget and Planning Committee (ABPC) and Coordinating Committee for Academic Policies and Standards (CCAPS) may bring motions to the Joint Faculty Assembly to recommend the reduction, impaction, merger or closure of an academic program(s)
2. Through the provost

2.14.4 The Process When Policy is Initiated by the Provost

Implementation of this policy shall be initiated by the provost and must, before any recommended reduction, impaction, merger or closure is implemented, follow the following distinct steps:

1. Declaration of intent to activate the policy;
2. Announcement of specific recommendations;
3. Committee deliberation and action;
4. Joint Faculty Assembly deliberation and action;
5. Final action by presidents;
6. Final action by Boards.

2.14.4.1 Declaration

1. Declaration and Consultation
   
   The chair and vice-chair of the Joint Faculty Assembly and the Faculty Governance Coordinating Committee are informed of the administrative intent to activate the policy through the provost who will consult with the president/s, deans and finance officers about the appropriateness and necessity of implementing the policy in any given year. Any administrative declaration which seeks implementation during an academic year must be made on or before the first working day in September of that academic year. The declaration by the provost will specifically identify the program/s under review for potential policy action during the academic year.
   
   The academic administration is limited to using the procedures of this policy in unusual circumstances and in accordance with Board policy for the sake of academic quality and responsible investment in the range and depth of academic program and majors offered.
   
   The provost will consult with the Coordinating Committee for Academic Policies and Standards and the Academic Budget and Planning Committee. No ad hoc committees will be formed except as subcommittees or task forces from those committees at the action of the committee chairs or the leadership of the Joint Faculty Assembly.
   
   The provost is obligated to consult as defined by the review process with the academic deans and departmental or program chairs of academic units to be affected by the policy as applied to any specific academic program. Enrollment Management will be required to provide a specific limited enrollment impact comment on any programs or departments that would be affected by any proposed policy action.
2. Providing Evidence and Information Supporting Declaration
   
   At the time of the declaration, and to the extent feasible, the Provost will provide to the faculty information on academic programs under review, with comparisons to other College of Saint Benedict/Saint John’s University academic programs, including:
   
   An analysis of “program centrality” to the academic mission, including
   1. History of the program at these institutions;
   2. Program’s place within the coordinate and institutional mission statements;
   3. Program’s place within the current strategic plan;
   4. Relationship to the Catholic, Benedictine and liberal arts traditions of the institutions;
   5. Other aspects pertinent to the program’s fit within the academic mission.
      
      ​The following data on academic programs:
      1. Number of majors awarded or students completing the program;
      2. Number of majors or program students per FTE faculty member;
      3. Student credit hours per FTE faculty member;
      4. Faculty compensation program costs per student credit hour;
      5. Departmental non-compensation and support and administrative compensation costs per student credit hour;
      6. Capital or extraordinary program costs per student credit hour.
3. Data may be presented in a variety of ways chosen by the Provost; however, they also must be presented as three-year moving averages. The data will be provided for the previous six academic years, or if the program has existed for fewer than six years, for all available years.
4. The provost may also provide other data pertinent to the program to assess its institutional contribution.

2.14.4.2 Announcement of Specific Recommendations

The completion of the process from declaration of intent to activate this policy to the announcement of the provost’s specific recommendations on program reduction, impaction, merger, and closure shall be not less than 20 working days (with “working days” defined by Section 4.1.3). At the time of the announcement of the provost’s recommendations, the provost shall provide a written statement explaining which of the following reasons support the recommendation:

1. An academic program or major can be found to be not as central to the achievement of the Academic Commitments to the Missions, as other academic programs or majors because resources need to be reallocated to other higher priority academic programs and majors.
2. The level of academic quality expected of the liberal arts character of the institutions is not being consistently met by the program or major.
3. The academic set of programs and majors as a whole are beyond long- term institutional fiscal resources to support them all appropriately.
4. Student demand for the program or major has reached an unviable status in terms of cost of student learning.
5. Necessary investments to achieve or sustain acceptable levels of academic quality for the program or major cannot be supported.

2.14.4.3 Committee Deliberation and Action

Following the announcement of the provost’s recommendations, the Coordinating Committee for Academic Policies and Standards and Academic Budget and Planning Committee will formulate resolutions regarding the provost’s recommendations, during a period of time not to exceed 20 working days. During this time, faculty in affected programs are obligated to present whatever perspectives and evidence they may have, regarding the provost’s recommendations, to the committees. Within this time period, faculty committees in the consultative process are required to make recommendations to the Faculty Senate for proposed actions for each specific programmatic recommendation.

2.14.4.4 Joint Faculty Assembly Deliberation and Action

1. The Joint Faculty Assembly will receive and evaluate recommendations regarding the provost’s recommendations from the Coordinating Committee for Academic Policies and Standards and the Academic Budget and Planning Committee for Joint Faculty Assembly action.
2. Resolutions may be proposed, amended and voted on by the Joint Faculty Assembly in accordance with its usual procedures. Following the vote of the Joint Faculty Assembly, the Coordinating Committee for Academic Policies and Standards, will prepare a written report, to be delivered to the presidents, summarizing the faculty discussion and the reasons for the vote. The presidents shall consider such written report prior to making their recommendations to the Boards.
3. Joint Faculty Assembly action will occur in a timely manner, within 20 working days of the completion of the committee action phase.
4. Data to be used in review process by all parties:
   1. Trend data, particularly over the past 10 years (to the extent feasible) will be extensively used.
   2. Data for the review may come from many sources of information, including but not limited to:
      1. Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS)
      2. Program reviews,
      3. Academic assessment plans,
      4. Departmental annual reports,
      5. Registrar’s Office statistics,
      6. General education contribution information,
      7. Student and alumni achievement data,
      8. Accreditation reports where they are relevant,
      9. Board of Trustees approved Strategic Plan,
      10. Enrollment Management statistics.
5. Criteria to be used in assessing any recommended program action are:
   1. Centrality of program to academic mission
   2. Quality
   3. Cost
   4. Potential for growth and quality

2.14.4.5 Final Action by Presidents and Boards

Presidents will make a final recommendation to the Boards for their approval. The final results of Joint Faculty Assembly actions will be forwarded for full consideration by the Academic Affairs Committee of the Boards through the provost and the faculty representative to that committee. The recommendations of the provost and the recommendations of the presidents will also be forwarded to the Academic Affairs Committee at that time. Presentation of faculty actions and deliberations will take place at the meeting or meetings scheduled for final committee recommendation and action to the Boards. As the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board and the full Boards deliberate on programmatic recommendations under the Board policy, they will consider, among a number of other things, any written faculty votes, resolutions and reports. Opportunities will be provided in the meeting agenda of the Academic Affairs Committee and the Boards, at which final action on a proposed academic program reduction, impaction, merger or closure is scheduled to be taken, for the chair and vice- chair of the Joint Faculty Assembly to address the committee and the Boards prior to final determinative action.

The faculty’s advisory role is to be honored to the largest extent feasible given its leadership role in curriculum development and quality assurance relative to all academic programs and departments. The Board’s/s’ role is determinative related to its exercise of its governance responsibilities.

If any decision results in the involuntary layoff of any faculty member, all requirements of Faculty Handbook Section 2.13 will be followed.

In implementing this policy, all requirements of the North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools, that students admitted to a program be permitted to finish that program before it is eliminated, will be followed.

2.15 Grievance Procedure

2.15.1 Intent

The college [university] recognizes the importance of a process for attending to grievances properly, without fear of prejudice or reprisal on the part of anyone bringing a grievance or anyone being grieved against. Accordingly, the college [university] encourages the informal and prompt settlement of grievances and, if necessary, the use of the orderly processes set forth in this grievance procedure, designed to protect due process and academic freedom and to respect professional conduct.

With the exception of the “Joint Human Rights Policy" (Appendix A, Part ll) (for which the Joint Complaint Procedure for Human Rights violations applies) and the “Sexual Misconduct Policy” (Section 3.5), the college [university] intends that these procedures be the sole method for the resolution of all grievances.

When a grievance substantially similar to a grievance initiated under these procedures has been filed with an outside agency, the grievant shall agree to postpone it, if possible, until the college [university] grievance procedure has run its course. An exception may be made to this policy when a delay, caused by the time needed to complete the college [university] grievance procedure, interferes with the grievant's opportunity to pursue the outside claim. This exception applies only to claims with an outside agency, not to bringing suit in a court of law. In addition, any grievance which has been filed and resolved by an outside agency cannot then be presented as a grievance under these procedures.

2.15.2 Scope of the Grievance Procedure

The scope of this grievance procedure is limited.

1. The grounds for any grievance are limited to those identified in Section 2.15.3.
2. The objectionable action(s) being grieved must fall under policy, procedures, rights, and/or standards of conduct identified in Part II (including its appendices), Part III, or Part IV.
3. Allegations related to the Sexual Misconduct Policy are to be investigated employing the process set forth therein, and not this grievance procedure. Similarly, allegations related to the Joint Human Rights Policy are to be investigated employing the Joint Complaint Procedure for Human Rights Violations, and not this grievance procedure.
4. If a faculty member simultaneously alleges a grievable violation and a human rights or sexual misconduct violation, the allegations will be separated, if possible, and both types of allegations will be investigated through their respective processes. If they cannot be separated, they will be investigated pursuant to the Joint Complaint Procedure for Human Rights Violations or the Sexual Misconduct Policy, as appropriate.
   
   The College [university] strive to ensure that harassment and discrimination in violation of the Joint Human Rights Policy and Sexual Misconduct Policy do not occur. Faculty who have concerns about potential violations of either of these policies should bring those concerns to the attention of the Human Rights Officer as soon as possible. If a faculty member is grieving allegations that are separable from, but related to, an alleged violation of the Joint Human Rights Policy or the Sexual Misconduct Policy, the grievance process may be delayed, at the direction of the Provost, for a reasonable period not to exceed 60 days, pending the outcome of the Joint Complaint Procedure for Human Rights or the procedure under the Sexual Misconduct Policy.
5. In particular, Parts I and V do not come under this grievance procedure.

2.15.3 Grounds for Initiating a Grievance

A grievance procedure may be initiated when a faculty member or a group of faculty members makes either or both of two types of claims: an allegation of a violation of rights, policies, procedures, or standards; or an allegation of inadequate consideration of the evidence. Although both types of allegations would be investigated by a single ad hoc grievance committee (in accord with Section 4.1 below), these two are distinguished because of the somewhat different procedures entailed in the latter case.

2.15.3.1 Violation of Rights, Policies, Procedures, or Standards

A grievance may be initiated when a faculty member or group of faculty members claims that there has been:

1. A violation of policy or procedure of these institutions as set forth in the Faculty Handbook other than a violation of the Joint Human Rights Policy or Sexual Misconduct Policy; or
2. an infringement of the rights of an employee or employees of these institutions as set forth in the Faculty Handbook which relates to compensation, appointment or reappointment, tenure, promotion, dismissal, suspension, reassignment, or layoff; or
3. unprofessional conduct or a violation of the academic freedom and integrity standards applicable to faculty (Section 2.10).

2.15.3.2 Inadequate Consideration

If a faculty member alleges that a decision by the college [university] concerning contract status, tenure, or promotion was based on inadequate consideration of the evidence, a grievance may be initiated. An allegation of inadequate consideration refers to a procedural rather than a substantive issue. The substance of a decision, i.e., the judgment as to what outcome is warranted by the evidence, is not grievable. Rather, the standard of adequate consideration suggests questions such as whether those named in a grievance sought out and conscientiously considered all relevant evidence and standards, whether they excluded irrelevant and improper evidence and standards, and whether they made a good faith exercise of professional academic judgment.

2.15.4 Grievance Procedures

The precise mechanism(s) for filing and dealing with a grievance are found in Section 4.1.

2.16 Procedures for Revision of the Faculty Handbook

The college [university] and the Faculty-Staff [Faculty] Assembly commit their good faith efforts to the following procedures for revision of the Faculty Handbook in order to achieve agreement on policy issues affecting faculty employment. That commitment shall not prejudice the responsibility and authority of the college’s [university’s] Board of [Trustees] to exercise its prerogatives to govern and administer the college [university].

2.16.1 Scope of this Policy

The complete revision procedure outlined below governs all substantive revisions to the Faculty Handbook. See section 2.16.3 for the specific procedures for each part.

Editorial changes to the Faculty Handbook, which are not deemed to be substantive in nature by the Faculty Handbook Committee, are not governed by this revision process. Editorial changes to the Faculty Handbook are implemented by the Faculty Handbook Committee on an ongoing basis. Proposed editorial changes will be announced and posted electronically to allow for a period of ten (10) working days for discussion prior to implementation.

2.16.2 Proposed Revisions

With exception of proposals to revise Part I and Section 5.4, proposals governed by the policy can be made by the Faculty Handbook Committee or any person or group (i.e., committee, board, council) connected with the college [university]. Regarding proposals to revise Part I, see section 2.16.3.1. Regarding proposals to revise Section 5.4, see section 2.16.3.5.2..Persons or groups wishing to propose revisions to parts II, III, IV or V of the Handbook must consult with the chair of the Faculty Handbook Committee to obtain the most current guidelines for making such a proposal.

2.16.3 Processing of Proposals to Revise the Faculty Handbook

The procedures for processing proposed revisions vary in accordance with the part to which the revision is proposed.

2.16.3.1 Procedures for Processing Proposals to Revise Part I of the Faculty Handbook

Proposals to revise Part I of the Faculty Handbook are made by the administration and approved by the appropriate President(s) of the college [university] in consultation with the Provost.

The Provost will notify the chair of the Faculty Handbook Committee of any revisions to Part I. The Committee will review the Handbook to determine the impact of the revision on other sections of the Faculty Handbook and will process revisions to other sections as needed, following the procedures of section 2.16.3. All revisions will be implemented and published as described in section 2.16.5.

2.16.3.2 Procedures for Processing Proposals to Revise Part II of the Faculty Handbook

Proposals for revision to Part II of the Faculty Handbook will be received by the Faculty Handbook Committee in accordance with published guidelines, which can also be obtained from the chair of the committee.

2.16.3.2.a Review of Proposals by the Faculty Handbook Committee

The Faculty Handbook Committee will work in collaboration with the proposer(s) to devise language that reflects the intent of the proposer(s). The Committee will also review the Handbook to determine the impact of the proposal on other sections. The Committee will ensure that the language of the proposal is in accord with the format and style of the Handbook; however, the Committee takes no position on the merits of the proposal.

Once the Faculty Handbook Committee and the proposers have finalized the language, the proposal will be transmitted to the Executive Committee of the Senate who will send it to the JFS for review.

2.16.3.2.b Review of Proposals by the Joint Faculty Senate

When the JFS considers the proposal, it will take one of the following actions:

1. Recommend the proposal to the JFA
2. Forward the proposal to the JFA without recommendation
3. Amend the proposal and forward the amended proposal to the JFA.
4. Return the proposal to the Faculty Handbook Committee with comments and/or instruction for further work.
5. Reject the proposal, subject to the appeals process described in section 5.4.2.2.e.

2.16.3.2.c. Review of Proposals by the Faculty Assemblies of the College and University

If the JFA considers the proposal, it will take one of the following actions:

1. Approve the proposal as submitted
2. Amend the proposal and approve the amended proposal.
3. Return the proposal to the Faculty Handbook Committee with comments and/or instruction for further work.
4. Reject the proposal

Action to approve any revision to Part II is taken by each assembly separately. In any case, the proposal will not go forward unless approved by both Assemblies.

2.16.3.2.d. Review of Proposals by the Presidents

If a proposal is approved by both Faculty Assemblies, then, within five [5] working days of approval, the Chair of the Faculty Handbook Committee will transmit the proposal to the Provost who will communicate the proposal to the Presidents. The JFA requests that upon receipt of the proposal from the Provost, the Presidents, acting jointly, will take one of the following actions and transmit their decision to the Provost:

1. Approve the proposal as presented
2. Return the proposal to the Executive Committee with comments and/or instruction for further work.
3. Reject the proposal
4. Delay the decision. In this case, the Presidents should provide a rationale for the delay and an expected date for the final decision.

The Provost will inform the chair of the JFA and the chair of the Faculty Handbook Committee of the Presidents’ decision within six calendar weeks of the Provost’s receipt of the proposal from the FHC.

Should the President(s) reject the proposed amendment, the Chair of the Faculty Handbook Committee, the Provost and the officers of the Joint Faculty Assembly shall meet to discuss the next steps. These steps may include further study, modification, and/or resubmission of the proposal to the Faculty Handbook Committee and the Joint Faculty Assembly (if necessary) and reconsideration by the Presidents. If in agreement with the proposed amendment to the Faculty Handbook, the President submits it to the Board.

2.16.3.2.e Review of Proposals by the Boards of Trustees

The Boards of Trustees will review the proposal according to their procedures.

2.16.3.2.f Actions after Board Consideration

If the Boards approve the proposal then within ten [10] working days of the action of the Boards, the Provost will communicate the decision of the Boards to the chair of the Faculty Handbook Committee. All approved changes will be implemented and published as described in section 2.16.5

If the Boards do not approve the proposal, it will be returned to the Faculty Handbook Committee for further consideration. If adjustments are made, the Faculty Handbook Committee, in consultation with the JFA officers, will determine if the adjustments are deemed substantive and should be formally reconsidered by the JFA, or, if not, may be submitted directly to the Presidents and the Boards for reconsideration.

The Faculty Handbook Committee notes that the Boards may act in concert to approve or reject a proposal, or either Board may approve explicitly a change in one Faculty Handbook that is not approved by the other. In any case, the Faculty Handbook Committee will not move the proposal forward unless approved by both Boards.

2.16.3.3 Procedures for Processing Proposals to Revise Part III of the Faculty Handbook

The procedures for processing proposals for revisions to Part III of the Faculty Handbook are described in sections 3.0 and 3.0.1.

2.16.3.4 Procedures for Processing Proposals to Revise Part IV of the Faculty Handbook

Proposals for revision to Part IV of the Faculty Handbook will be received by the Faculty Handbook Committee in accordance with published guidelines, which can also be obtained from the chair of the committee.

2.16.3.4.a. Review of Proposals by the Faculty Handbook Committee

The Faculty Handbook Committee will work in collaboration with the proposer(s) to devise language that reflects the intent of the proposer(s). The Committee will also review the Handbook to determine the impact of the proposal on other sections. The Committee will ensure that the language of the proposal is in accord with the format and style of the Handbook; however the Committee takes no position on the merits of the proposal.

Once the Faculty Handbook Committee and the proposers have finalized the language, the proposal will be transmitted to the Executive Committee of the Senate, who will send it to the JFS for review.

2.16.3.4.b. Review of Proposals by the Joint Faculty Senate

The Joint Faculty Senate will consider the proposal and will take one of the following actions:

1. Approve the proposal as submitted
2. Amend the proposal and approve the amended proposal
3. Return the proposal to the Faculty Handbook Committee with comments and/or instruction for further work.
4. Reject the proposal

If the proposal is approved, either as submitted, or as amended, the chair of the JFA will so inform the chair of the Faculty Handbook Committee. Note that proposals for revisions of Part IV do not require further review by the JFA.

2.16.3.4.c. Review of Proposals by the Presidents

If a proposal is approved by the JFS, then, within ten [10] working days of approval, the Chair of the Faculty Handbook Committee will transmit the proposal to the Provost. Within ten [10] working days of receipt of the proposal from the Chair, the Provost will initiate review of the proposal with the Presidents of the college [university]. The JFA requests that upon receipt of the proposal from the Provost, the Presidents, acting jointly, will take one of the following actions and transmit the decision to the Provost:

1. Approve the proposal as presented
2. Return the proposal to the Executive Committee with comments and/or instruction for further work.
3. Reject the proposal
4. Delay the decision. In this case, the Presidents should provide a rationale for the delay and an expected date for the final decision.

The Provost will inform the chair of the JFA and the chair o the faculty Handbook Committee of the Presidents’ decision within four calendar weeks of the provost’s receipt of the proposal from the FHC.

All approved changes will be implemented and published as described in section 2.16.5.

Should the President(s) reject the proposed amendment, the Chair of the Faculty Handbook Committee, the Provost and the officers of the Joint Faculty Assembly shall meet to discuss the next steps. These steps may include further study, modification, and/or resubmission of the proposal to the Faculty Handbook Committee and the Joint Faculty Assembly (if necessary) and reconsideration by the President(s).

2.16.3.5 Procedures for Processing Proposals to Revise Part V of the Faculty Handbook

Proposals for revision to Part V of the Faculty Handbook will be received by the Faculty Handbook Committee in accordance with published guidelines, which can also be obtained from the chair of the committee. Proposals for revision of all parts except part 5.4 are processed as described in section 2.16.3.5.1. Proposals for revision of part 5.4 are processed as described in section 2.16.3.5.2.

2.16.3.5.1 Procedures for Processing Proposals to Revise Sections 5.0 – 5.3 of the Faculty Handbook

2.16.3.5.1.a. Review of Proposals by the Faculty Handbook Committee

The Faculty Handbook Committee will work in collaboration with the proposer(s) to devise language that reflects the intent of the proposer(s). The Committee will also review the Handbook to determine the impact of the proposal on other sections. The Committee will ensure that the language of the proposal is in accord with the format and style of the Handbook; however the Committee takes no position on the merits of the proposal.

Once the Faculty Handbook Committee and the proposers have finalized the language, the proposal will be transmitted to the Executive Committee of the Senate who will either place the proposal on a future agenda of the JFS, or will return it to the Faculty Handbook Committee with comments and/or instruction for further work.

2.16.3.5.1.b. Review of Proposals by the Joint Faculty Senate

The Joint Faculty Senate will consider the proposal and will take one of the following actions:

1. Approve the proposal as submitted
2. Amend the proposal and approve the amended proposal.
3. Return the proposal to the Faculty Handbook Committee with comments and/or instruction for further work.
4. Reject the proposal

If the proposal is approved, either as submitted, or as amended, the chair of the JFA will so inform the chair of the Faculty Handbook Committee. Note that proposals for revisions of sections 5.0 – 5.3 do not require further review by the JFA.

2.16.3.5.1.c Review of Proposals by the Presidents

If a proposal is approved by the JFS, then, within ten [10] working days of approval, the Chair of the Faculty Handbook Committee will transmit the proposal to the Provost. Within ten [10] working days of receipt of the proposal from the Chair, the Provost will initiate review of the proposal with the Presidents of the college [university]. The JFA requests that upon receipt of the proposal from the Provost, the Presidents, acting jointly, will take one of the following actions and transmit the decision to the Provost:

1. Approve the proposal as presented
2. Return the proposal to the Executive Committee with comments and/or instruction for further work.
3. Reject the proposal
4. Delay the decision. In this case, the presidents should provide a rationale for the delay and an expected date for the final decision.

The Provost will then inform the chair of the Faculty Handbook Committee of the Presidents’ decision within four calendar weeks of the Provost’s receipt of the proposal from the FHC.

All approved changes will be implemented and published as described in section 2.16.6

Should the President(s) reject the proposed amendment, the Chair of the Faculty Handbook Committee, the Provost and the officers of the Joint Faculty Assembly shall meet to discuss the next steps. These steps may include further study, modification, and/or resubmission of the proposal to the Faculty Handbook Committee and the Joint Faculty Assembly (if necessary) and reconsideration by the President(s).

2.16.3.5.2 Procedures for Processing Proposals to Revise Section 5.4 of the Faculty Handbook

Section 5.4 is the Constitution of the Joint Faculty Senate, and, as such, proposals for revision of section 5.4 of the Faculty Handbook are amendments to the Constitution. Such amendments are proposed by the JFS or the JFA according to the provisions of section 5.4.2.2.f.1, that is, either by the JFS or petition of the faculty. In either case the chair of the JFS will transmit the proposal to the chair of the Faculty Handbook Committee.

2.16.3.5.2.a. Review of Proposals by the Faculty Handbook Committee

The Faculty Handbook Committee will work in collaboration with the Executive committee of the JFS to devise language that reflects the intent of the proposer(s). The Faculty Handbook Committee will also review the Handbook to determine the impact of the proposal on other sections. The Faculty Handbook Committee will ensure that the language of the proposal is in accord with the format and style of the Handbook; however the Faculty Handbook Committee takes no position on the merits of the proposal.

Once the Faculty Handbook Committee and the Executive Committee have finalized the language, the chair of the JFS will submit the proposal for electronic vote by the JFA according to the provisions of section 5.4.2.2.f.2.

2.16.3.5.2.b Review of Proposals by the Presidents

If a proposal is approved by the JFA, then, within ten [10] working days of approval, the Chair of the Faculty Handbook Committee will transmit the proposal to the Provost. Within ten [10] working days of receipt of the proposal from the Chair, the Provost will initiate review of the proposal with the Presidents of the college [university]. The JFA requests that upon receipt of the proposal from the Provost, the Presidents, acting jointly, will take one of the following actions and transmit the decision to the Provost:

1. Approve the proposal as presented
2. Return the proposal to the Executive Committee with comments and/or instruction for further work.
3. Reject the proposal
4. Delay the decision. In this case, the presidents should provide a rationale for the delay and an expected date for the final decision.

The Provost will inform the chair of the JFA and the chair of the Faculty Handbook Committee of the President’s decision within four calendar weeks of the Provost’s receipt of the proposal from the FHC.

All approved changes will be implemented and published as described in section 2.16.5.

Should the President(s) reject the proposed amendment, the Chair of the Faculty Handbook Committee, the Provost and the officers of the Joint Faculty Assembly shall meet to discuss the next steps. These steps may include further study, modification, and/or resubmission of the proposal to the Faculty Handbook Committee and the Joint Faculty Assembly (if necessary) and reconsideration by the President(s).

2.16.4 Emergency Procedure

2.16.4.1 Amendments to Part II or Its Appendices

When the Faculty Handbook Committee, the President(s), and the chair of the Joint Faculty Assembly agree that in the best interests of the college [university] an immediate modification in Part II is necessary, they may petition, through the President(s), the provost, and the chair of the college’s [university’s] Board of Trustees, for a special Board review of a specific change at the next regular or an emergency meeting of the Board. It shall be fully at the discretion of the appropriate college’s [university’s] Board(s) of Trustees to accept or reject such a petition.

2.16.4.2 Amendments to Part IV or Part V

When the Faculty Handbook Committee, the President(s), the provost, and the chair of the Joint Faculty Assembly agree that in the best interests of the college [university] an immediate modification in Part IV or Part V is necessary, they may call a special meeting of the Joint Faculty Assembly in accord with Assembly procedure for the purpose of voting on the proposed modifications.

2.16.5 Rules of Implementation

2.16.5.1 Implementation of Revisions to Part II

Any amendments to the contractual portions of the Faculty Handbook (i.e., Part II or its appendices) that are approved in accord with this policy by the date of the issuance of faculty contracts (see Section 2.2.4) will take effect with the start of the next contract year. Any grand parenting provision will be specific to a given policy and so noted in specific language. Amendments to the contractual portions of the Faculty Handbook that are approved after the date of the issuance of faculty contracts may take effect prior to the start of the next contract year upon the mutual consent of the Joint Faculty-Assembly, the President(s), and the Board(s) of Trustees.

2.16.5.2 Implementation of Revisions to Parts I, III, IV and V

Amendments to all other parts of the Faculty Handbook (i.e., Parts I, III, IV, and V) may become effective at once or at a later time, as determined by those responsible for their approval.

2.16.5.3 Access to the Current Faculty Handbook

1. The Provost shall be responsible for keeping the official record of all revisions to the Faculty Handbook.
2. All new members of the faculty shall receive a link to the on-line Faculty Handbook by the time of their initial offer.
3. A current copy of the Faculty Handbook will be available on-line.

Appendix A

Policy on Consensual Romantic or Sexual Relationships Between Faculty Members

1. Purpose
   The College of Saint Benedict (CSB) and Saint John’s University (SJU) are committed to maintaining a campus environment characterized by fair, professional and ethical behavior. To this end, members of the faculty are expected to avoid apparent or actual conflicts of interest, favoritism, bias or exploitation. Thus, it is in the interest of the College and University to provide clear direction to the faculty about the risks associated with consensual romantic or sexual relationships with faculty colleagues.
   
   As the Sexual Misconduct Policy of the College and University states, consensual sexual or romantic relationships may become the basis for a claim of sexual harassment or sexual misconduct. A faculty colleague may feel that he or she is not free to discontinue a relationship or to say no to a particular act because of the faculty member’s power to make or influence decisions which reward or punish the colleague.
   
   In addition, such relationships can affect other members of the campus community adversely and give rise to conflict of interest concerns. A consensual romantic or sexual relationship may create a perception that the processes of evaluation, reward and discipline are unfairly biased and affected by favoritism. The relationship may make the workplace uncomfortable for other faculty colleagues, students, or staff.
2. Policy Statement
   It is the policy of CSB and SJU that a faculty member currently or previously involved in a consensual sexual or romantic relationship with a faculty colleague (i) who is in the same department as the faculty member, and/or (ii) who the faculty member supervises, and/or (iii) with whom the faculty member otherwise works in close collaboration on department activities and/or college/university committees must:
   1. Remove him or herself from any supervisory role and/or excuse him or herself from any decision involving the employment status of such colleague, the work-related benefits of the colleague (to the extent the benefits are not generally available to other faculty), and any other employment related decisions related to the colleague.
   2. Submit a letter to the Provost and Chair of the Rank and Tenure Committee noting the conflict of interest and the resultant inability to provide an evaluation. This applies in any case when the faculty member would ordinarily be required to provide an evaluation of the colleague to the Rank and Tenure Committee.
   3. Notify the Chair of the departmental and/or college/university committee of the need to be excused from the decision-making process. This applies in cases when the committee would be making recommendations that would impact the employment status or work related benefits of their faculty colleague. The committee Chair should consult with the Provost to determine if any other arrangements are necessary to eliminate the conflict of interest. If the Chair of the committee has the conflict of interest, he or she must notify the Provost and work with the Provost to eliminate the conflict.
      
      Any changes or arrangements made in response to the existence of a consensual romantic or sexual relationship will not be undertaken for the purpose of adversely affecting the rank, pay, benefits or professional opportunities of the faculty member or faculty colleague.
      
      In the event a consensual sexual or romantic relationship exists, the failure of a faculty member to remove him or herself from any supervisory role or to excuse him or herself from the evaluation of or decision-making process involving the employment status or work related benefits of the faculty colleague is a violation of this policy and the faculty member will be subject to disciplinary action as outlined in Section 2.13.6 of the Faculty Handbook.
      
      A faculty member who becomes involved in a consensual relationship with a faculty colleague and who has concerns about a power differential or the effect of ending the relationship is encouraged to consult with the Faculty/Staff Human Rights Officer or Provost.
      
      Any faculty member who has concern about a relationship among two faculty colleagues adversely affecting department or employment related decisions, and who is uncertain whether the potential conflict has been addressed in accordance with this policy, is encouraged to report a concern to the Provost or Faculty/Staff Human Rights Officer. There shall be no retaliation toward a faculty member who reports a concern in good faith. An individual who retaliates against a faculty member for reporting a concern will be subject to discipline in accordance with the Faculty Handbook.
      
      A faculty member who becomes involved in a consensual romantic relationship or sexual relationship with a student or staff member should consult the Policy on Consensual Romantic or Sexual Relationships Between Faculty and Students or Staff Members (located in Appendix C of Part II of the Faculty Handbook.)
3. Definitions
   For purposes of this policy:
   Romantic relationships include relationships in which amorous or romantic feelings exist without physical intimacy and which, when acted upon by the faculty member exceed the reasonable boundaries of an educational, professional or supervisory relationship.
   Sexual relationships include relationships involving intimate physical contact of a sexual nature.
   Consensual means involving or based on mutual consent. Consent is defined in the Sexual Misconduct Policy.
   Faculty refers to a person employed by CSB or SJU in a faculty appointment.

Policy Approved:

By JFA 02/14/2008
By Boards 3/2008

Policy re-approved by Saint John’s University in 2012 (corporate restructure) Policy Revisions:

Approved by JFA 4/08/2014
Endorsed by CSB Board of Trustees and Approved by President Mary Hinton 09/22/2014 Approved by SJU Board of Trustees 09/26/2014

Appendix B

Policy on Consensual Romantic or Sexual Relationships Between Faculty and Students or Staff Members

1. Purpose
   The College of Saint Benedict (CSB) and Saint John’s University (SJU) are committed to maintaining a campus environment characterized by fair, professional and ethical behavior. The integrity of the educational mission of the College and University is maintained by promoting appropriate standards of professional conduct among faculty in their dealings with students and staff. In these relationships, members of the faculty are expected to avoid apparent or actual conflicts of interest, favoritism, bias or exploitation. When a faculty member engages in a romantic or sexual relationship with a student or staff member, while he or she also has the authority to evaluate, advise, reward or discipline a student or staff member, a professional responsibility is violated, even if the relationship appears to be consensual.
   
   As the Sexual Misconduct Policy of CSB and SJU states, consensual sexual or romantic relationships may also become the basis for a claim of sexual harassment or sexual misconduct. These relationships are particularly complex when there is a power imbalance between the individuals involved in the relationship, because a power imbalance heightens the potential for exploitation and can diminish the subordinate’s freedom of choice. This is especially true in relationships involving students, because the respect and trust accorded a professor by a student, as well as the power exercised by the professor in an academic or evaluative role, makes voluntary consent by the student particularly suspect. The student or staff member may feel that the power imbalance makes it difficult for him or her to discontinue the relationship or to say no to a particular act. Such relationships also affect other members of the campus community adversely. By placing a faculty member in a position to favor or advance the interests of the student or staff member who is a party to the relationship, a perception may be created that obtaining favorable treatment is implicitly contingent on engaging in a consensual sexual or romantic relationship.
   
   For these reasons, CSB and SJU strongly discourage faculty involvement in a consensual sexual or romantic relationship with a student, and, in particular, for whom the faculty member has academic responsibility. CSB and SJU also strongly discourage faculty involvement with a staff member over whom the faculty member has supervisory responsibility. Recognizing that despite this discouragement by the College and University, consenting adults may become involved in a consensual sexual or romantic relationship, it is important that steps be taken to mitigate the real and/or apparent conflict of interest and other issues that are created.
2. Policy Statement
   It is the policy of CSB and SJU that a faculty member involved in a romantic or sexual relationship, either with a student for whom the faculty member has academic responsibility or with a staff member over whom the faculty member has supervisory responsibility, must promptly report the relationship to his or her department chair, who must, in turn, report the relationship to the Provost. If the faculty member involved in the relationship is the department chair, she/he must report the relationship to the Provost.
   
   Upon receiving notice from the faculty member, the department chair in consultation with the Provost, or the Provost if the department chair is the involved party, must make arrangements for an alternative evaluation mechanism and if necessary, such other additional arrangements as are prudent under the circumstances, for the faculty member and the student or staff member.
   
   The faculty member is obliged to fully cooperate with the department chair and Provost in making these mitigating arrangements. Such arrangements made in response to the existence of a consensual romantic or sexual relationship will not be undertaken for the purpose of adversely affecting the rank, pay, benefits or professional opportunities of the faculty member. The arrangements will be undertaken with the intent of minimizing or avoiding, to the extent reasonably possible, adverse effects on the educational opportunities of the student or the employment of a staff member.
   
   Failure to promptly report the existence of a romantic or sexual relationship described above is a violation of this policy, and the faculty member will be subject to disciplinary action as outlined in Section 2.13.6 of the Faculty Handbook.
   
   In addition to this policy, faculty members involved in a romantic and/or sexual relationship with a student or a staff member must fully comply with the Sexual Misconduct Policy.
   
   A staff member or student who becomes involved in a consensual relationship with a faculty member and who has concerns about a power differential or the effect of ending the relationship is encouraged to consult with the Faculty/Staff Human Rights Officer or Student Human Rights Officer. Faculty members with similar concerns may also consult with the Faculty/Staff Human Rights Officer or Student Human Rights Officer.
   
   A faculty member who becomes involved in a consensual romantic or sexual relationship with a faculty colleague should consult the Policy on Consensual Romantic or Sexual Relationships Between Faculty Members (located in Appendix B in Part II of the Faculty Handbook).
3. Definitions
   For purposes of this policy:
   Romantic relationships include relationships in which amorous or romantic feelings exist without physical intimacy and which, when acted upon by the faculty member exceed the reasonable boundaries of an educational, professional or supervisory relationship.
   Sexual relationships include relationships involving intimate physical contact of a sexual nature.
   Consensual means involving or based on mutual consent. Consent is defined in the Sexual Misconduct Policy.
   Academic responsibility for students includes any activity which results in academic or educational reward, opportunity, or penalty including but not limited to: teaching, grading, advising, coaching, supervising research, moderating an internship, supervising institutionally sponsored travel and making recommendations for College and/or University employment or awards.
   Supervisory responsibility for a staff member includes any activity which results in employment related rewards, opportunities, or penalties including, but is not limited to, the following activities: conducting or contributing to performance appraisals or rank and tenure reviews, determining or contributing to the determination of a person’s employment status, job description, rank, salary, fringe benefits, or recommending for or influencing the determination of institutional funding, distinguished service awards, or discipline for deficient service.
   Faculty refers to a person employed by CSB or SJU in a faculty appointment.
   Student refers to any person enrolled in CSB or SJU, undergraduate or graduate.
   Staff refers to a person employed by CSB or SJU in an administrative or support staff appointment.

Policy Approved:

By JFA 2/14/2008
By Boards

March, 2008
Amendment to Definitions:

Approved by JFA 4/3/2008

Policy re-approved by Saint John’s University in 2012 (corporate restructure): Policy Revisions:

Approved by JFA 4/08/2014
Endorsed by CSB Board of Trustees and Approved by President Mary Hinton 09/22/2014 Approved by SJU Board of Trustees 9/26/2014