1 / 8

FA-012-910

FA-012-910. Minority Reports in the RTP Process. Resources. Proponent CFA Representative Academic Affair Representative. Background. Minority report was issued, as allowed by University Policy (Appendix 16), and was added to the RTP package of a candidate during the evaluation process.

dale-dickson
Télécharger la présentation

FA-012-910

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. FA-012-910 Minority Reports in the RTP Process

  2. Resources • Proponent • CFA Representative • Academic Affair Representative

  3. Background • Minority report was issued, as allowed by University Policy (Appendix 16), and was added to the RTP package of a candidate during the evaluation process. • The candidate complained to CFA and filed a grievance. • The report was removed from the RTP document. The lower levels were not informed of the decision.

  4. Why Did it Happen? • CFA Position: • The minority report lacked objectivity, contained hearsay, was not based on facts and evidence in PAF. • Administration Position • Reviewed the grievance and agreed with the assessment • URTP was informed.

  5. Does it Happen Frequently? • No. This case was an exception.

  6. Was it Justifiable? • Contractual Issues take precedence over Appendix 16. • Both CFA and Administration assured the committee that there was no intention to silence the voice of dissent. • Lower RTP evaluation levels were not informed to protect faculty member’s reputation and rights.

  7. Are There Sufficient Safe Guards? • Section 305.105 of Appendix 16 states that: “A specific deadline shall be established by campus policy at which time the RTP package is declared complete with respect to documentation of performance for the purpose of evaluation. Insertion or deletion of material other than responses and/or rebuttals to official evaluations after the date of this declaration must have the approval of the University RTP Committee (“URTPC”) and shall be limited to items that became accessible after this declaration”.

  8. Recommendation • CFA acted to preserve the faculty rights • Academic Affairs acted in the best interest of the University and integrity of the process • There are sufficient contractual and policy safeguards to address normal circumstance • No change to policy is necessary.

More Related