On page 46: Add II.E.8.a., below, and renumber the present II.E.8 to "II.E.8.b." (reprinted further below for continuity).
There are a number of general procedures that should be followed when a department closing is contemplated.
Most, if not all, schools, and the University as a whole, have faculty committees charged with the responsibility of reviewing planning and budgetary decisions. Such committees should be involved in decisions to limit the resources of departments or close them. However, such reviews are not substitutes for early and frequent consultation with the faculty of the affected departments themselves or with the faculty as a whole. The dean should take seriously the advice received in such consultations and, in most circumstances, should act in accordance with the advice.
Given that department closings typically follow a protracted period during which the department in question receives limited resources, school administrations have ample time to explain the implications of such actions for the future. If a department is deprived of resources because its performance is found wanting or its viability is otherwise questioned, administrators need to make the reasons clear and to avoid the temptation to attribute the decision to "hard times" or "scarcity of resources." Resources are always scarce, and schools allocate them according to what they perceive as their best interests. Departments should be informed that they are at risk and given the reasons.
2. Departmental Review
All schools should have regular review of departments.
Departmental reviews should be used to provide the department with timely notice of its shortcomings and the need for improvement and to provide the school decision-makers with information essential to a sound evaluation of the department. Such reviews also provide formal and informal opportunities to alert the department to the school's plans. Departmental reviews should not be triggered by specific proposals for closing or making other adverse changes to a department. However, when a closing is being considered, the lack of a timely external review should prompt a more intense internal evaluation of the department.
3. Informing the Department of the Decision to Close
Faculty members of a department facing closure must be informed well before the formal recommendation of a closure is publicly announced. At that time, they must be given information regarding their future at the University and the procedures the school has initiated to find a new University affiliation for them.
When informing the department of its decision, the school should provide a detailed and frank explanation. If the school's administrators are confident they are acting on the basis of sound information, they should have little reason to withhold the reasons for these actions. If they are not confident, they should recognize the need for further deliberation before taking action.
4. Academic Freedom
Department closure is typically predicated upon academic grounds such as the lack of fit with the mission of the school, which would not justify similar action against an individual tenured faculty member. A proposed closing alone does not give rise to an academic freedom violation. However, even if all the appropriate review and consultation procedures have been followed, the closure, or threatened closure, of a department may present delicate and difficult questions of academic freedom.
There may also be a danger that a small, and therefore vulnerable, group of faculty members may be relocated, marginalized, or have their academic freedom impaired as a result of the dean's personal hostility, or distaste for their political or philosophical views. Both administrators and faculties must be on guard against this.
In cases where academic freedom issues appear to be raised, the dean should seek the advice of the Committee on Academic Freedom and Responsibility (CAFR) of the school or the Faculty Senate at a sufficiently early stage for that advice to be factored into the decision. Aggrieved faculty members always have the right to complain of the dean's action to the appropriate Committee on Academic Freedom and Responsibility.
Where a program or department within a faculty is discontinued for valid academic or financial considerations, in accordance with University procedures, the faculty concerned, and its dean, will attempt to relocate members of the Standing Faculty and Associated Faculty in other programs or departments within the faculty. If suitable intra- faculty transfer cannot be effected, the possibility of transfer to another faculty will be pursued in accordance with the above paragraph.
If, after full exploration of the opportunities for transfer, no suitable appointment within the University can be found for faculty members affected by the discontinuation of a school, department or program, and if the continuation of their salaries would become an undue burden on the University, proceedings to terminate academic tenure under the financial exigency provisions may be implemented.
The Statutes of the Corporation (9.4) state that a Dean shall be appointed or removed by the Trustees, upon recommendation by the President and the Provost, and according to policies and procedures promulgated by the President and the Provost.
On page 9, before heading "Appointments of Acting Administrators" add a new heading: "Removal of a Dean"
The procedure for the removal of a Dean prior to the expiration of his or her term may be initiated by the President and the Provost. It may also be initiated by a faculty vote of no confidence taken at a meeting in accordance with the bylaws of the school. The vote of no confidence must be confirmed by a majority of the standing faculty in a subsequent mail ballot. In either case, the Provost shall appoint, in consultation with the Senate Committee on Consultation, an Advisory Committee of at least five faculty members, a majority of whom shall be from outside of the school. The Committee shall be charged by the Provost and the President to gather information relevant to the issues specified in the charge, including interviews with the faculty land Dean. The Committee shall forward its recommendations, with supporting documents, to the Provost, the President, and the Dean, within four weeks of its appointment. The Committee shall report its recommendations to the faculty of the school.
Members of the Research Faculty do not normally move to positions on the Standing Faculty and, they may do so only in conjunction with a national search. If a Research Assistant Professor moves to an untenured position on the Standing Faculty the beginning of the tenure-probationary period in the Standing Faculty will be set at the date at which the probationary period for promotion to Research Associate Professor had begun. If the move occurs within a school the tenure-probationary period may not be extended. If the move involves a change of schools, a maximum of two additional years in the tenure- probationary period may be granted with the Provost's approval. Under no circumstances may appointment to the Associated Faculty be used to extend the tenure-probationary period.