1. Organization and Governance
BRIEF HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSITY
Indiana University grew from the State Seminary, which was established by an act of the General Assembly in 1820. The Bloomington campus is the oldest and largest in the university, and is also the primary residential campus. There are now seven other campuses. All except for Indiana University Northwest (IUN) in Gary offer both IU and Purdue degree programs: Indiana University East (IUE) in Richmond, Indiana University Kokomo (IUK), Indiana University South Bend (IUSB), Indiana University Southeast (IUS) in New Albany, Indiana University Purdue University Fort Wayne (IPFW), and Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI). IUPUI is a comprehensive metropolitan campus and home base to most of the University’s professional schools in health sciences. IU administers the IUPUI campus as well as its satellite IUPU–Columbus, while Purdue administers IPFW.
|Schools||Est.||Fall ’07 Enroll.||Auth. Degree Programs|
Note: The enrollments and programs exclude those of Purdue University.
THE UNIVERSITY’S OBJECTIVES AND IDEALS
The primary objective of Indiana University was well expressed in the statute of 1837–38 by which the already established Indiana College was transformed into a university. This statute provided that “there shall be established and hereby is created a university—for the education of youth in the American, learned, and foreign languages, the useful arts, sciences, and literature, to be known by the name and style of the Indiana University.”
(Acts 1838, Local Laws, Chapter 102, Section 1)
The faculty of the University, in keeping faith with the founders of the institution, has always accepted as a primary responsibility the effective teaching of the men and women who enroll as students in the institution. The members of the faculty have always prided themselves upon the quality of their teaching. While faculty members may, on occasion, have had to curtail other services and activities, they have always insisted on assuming individual responsibility for the best teaching possible in their classes. The faculty's attitude has been to set forth the material of their course thoroughly, clearly, and with enthusiasm; to stimulate and encourage their students to exert the effort required for successful work; and to feel, when students fail, that, at least sometimes and in some measure, failure is the fault of the teacher as well as of the student. Because of this attitude, teachers continuously study the effectiveness of teaching methods and devices with a view to increasing the effectiveness of their effort. A university without students is unthinkable. So long as it exists, therefore, an institution of this kind depends upon its students, and the teaching of these students remains the primary reason for its continued existence.
There are, of course, other objectives which, in the course of the development of institutions of higher education in America and elsewhere, have become matters of increasing concern and interest on the part of the faculties of universities. Chief among these is the contribution of the faculty outside the classroom to the general welfare of society and its institutions. This contribution involves research, creative activities, publication and presentation. These serve to provide information and to advance our understanding of the world of nature and of man and of man’s role in nature and in society. Indiana University prides itself upon the contributions of its faculty along these lines and looks forward to the contributions that will be made by each new appointee. Through the years of the institution’s history, those who have guided the destinies of the University have accepted as their philosophy the basic principle that a university is not merely an association of teachers but, rather, that the faculty of a university must be composed of scholars who are effective teachers.
Indiana University is committed to the principle of equal educational and occupational opportunities for all persons and to positive action toward elimination of discrimination in all phases of University life, as set forth in the Indiana University Affirmative Action Plan.
(Board of Trustees, June 29, 1974)
THE TRUSTEES OF INDIANA UNIVERSITY
The Board of Trustees (also referred to as “the Trustees” or “the Board”) comprises nine persons, with eight selected for a term of three years. Five of the eight are selected by the Govern-or of Indiana; three are elected by degree-holding alumni of the University; one student is appointed for a two-year term by the Governor following a search and screen procedure. The terms are so arranged that one member is elected each year by the alumni; the number to be selected by the Governor varies from year to year. The board is required by statute to meet once annually on the occasion of Commencement, but actually meets a number of times per year in public on one of the several campuses of the University, which provides an opportunity for direct contact with the University’s several communities of faculty and students. The Board of Trustees is charged by statutes of the state of Indiana with duties and responsibilities including but not limited to the following:
- 1. To govern the disposition and method and purpose of use of the property owned, used, or occupied by the institution, including the governance of travel over and the assembly upon such property;
- 2. To govern, by specific regulation and other lawful means, the conduct of students, faculty, employees, and others while upon the property owned by or used or occupied by the institution;
- 3. To govern, by lawful means, the conduct of its students, faculty, and employees, wherever such conduct might occur, to the end of preventing unlawful or objectionable acts which seriously threaten the ability of the institution to maintain its facilities available for performance of its educational activities or which are in violation of the responsible rules and standards of the institution designed to protect the academic community from unlawful conduct or conduct which presents a serious threat to persons or property of the academic community;
- 4. To dismiss, suspend, or otherwise punish any student, faculty member, or employee of the institution who violates the institution’s rules or standards of conduct, after determination of guilt by lawful proceedings;
- 5. To prescribe the fees, tuition, and charges necessary or convenient to the furthering of the purposes of the institution and to collect the same;
- 6. To prescribe the conditions and standards of admission of students upon such bases as are in its opinion in the best interests of the state and the institution;
- 7. To prescribe the curricula and courses of study offered by the institution and to define the standards of proficiency and satisfaction within such curricula and courses;
- 8. To award financial aid to needy students and award scholarships in encouragement of excellence of achievement out of the available resources of the institution as shall seem desirable and in the best interests of the institution and its students;
- 9. To cooperate with other institutions to the end of better assuring the availability and utilization of its total resources and opportunities to provide excellent educational opportunity for all persons.
(As in State Statute, I.C. 20-12-1k 1995)
As is evidenced by the listing of duties and responsibilities, the Board is the corporate body charged with a wide range of policy-making and decisional authority by the General Assembly of the State, which grants the powers executed by the Trustees. Other statutes provide that certain actions may be taken by the Trustees only after approval of the Commission for Higher Education of the State of Indiana.
A Secretary is appointed by the Board. The Secretary’s office stands ready to receive items of business appropriate for Board consideration.
FACULTY REPRESENTATION AT INDIANA UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEE MEETINGS
A. Faculty Participation in the Open Sessions of the Board of Trustees Meetings
The Co-Secretaries of the University Faculty Council present a report as a regular feature of the Board of Trustees agenda. The Board of Trustees may also hear from the leaders of faculty governance on the campus at which the meeting is held. The Co-Secretaries of the University Faculty Council also participate in the Board’s discussions, where appropriate, to insure that the Board be aware of the Faculty’s position on such issues as may be of direct concern to the Faculty.
(University Faculty Council, April 11, 1995)
B. Faculty Participation in the Executive Sessions of the Board of Trustees Meetings
To: The Board of Trustees
From: Myles Brand
Date: April 29, 2002
Re: Faculty Representation in Executive Sessions
I am convinced that the participation of faculty leadership in certain Trustee executive sessions is important to the functioning of the University. Since I have assumed the presidency, I have attempted to encourage that participation. At this time, I believe it is important that the Trustees affirm the need for this participation. As you are aware, the Trustees of Indiana University meet from time to time in executive session as defined by Indiana Code 5-14-1.5-6.1. Pursuant to Indiana Code 5-14-1.5-2(f), the public is excluded from executive sessions, except that the Trustees may admit those persons necessary to carry out its purpose. I strongly believe that in order for the Trustees to carry out its purpose on a variety of matters, it is necessary to include faculty representation in certain executive sessions and that the appropriate faculty representative should be the senior co-secretary of the University Faculty Council or both co-secretaries, if the circumstances dictate.
I propose that the senior co-secretary of the University Faculty Council attend Trustee executive sessions. If the senior co-secretary is unavailable to attend a session, the junior co-secretary shall attend the session in place of the senior co-secretary. Should there be an executive session or portion of executive session in which faculty participation is inappropriate, the president of the University will consult with the senior co-secretary to identify those sessions. Examples of such sessions include those in which discussions occur regarding personnel matters, litigation, and collective bargaining. I recommend that after the University Faculty Council has reviewed this proposal, the Board take action to implement this policy. Unanimously endorsed on a motion duly made and seconded.
(Board of Trustees, May 3, 2002)
C. Nothing in this practice is designed to discourage, displace, or prevent such informal contacts between members of the Board of Trustees and the Faculty as now exist. Formal representation is intended to serve as the basis for expanded informal, as well as formal, conversations between members of the Board of Trustees and the Faculty.
(University Faculty Council, April 23, 2002)
ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNIVERSITY
Indiana University is a major multi-campus public research institution, grounded in the liberal arts and sciences, and a world leader in professional, medical and technological education. Indiana University strives for excellence in teaching and research, its fundamental missions. Indiana University provides broad access to undergraduate, graduate, and continuing education for students throughout Indiana, the United States, and the world, as well as outstanding academic and cultural programs and student services. Indiana University seeks to create dynamic partnerships with the state and local communities in economic, social, and cultural development and to offer leadership in creative solutions for 21st century problems. Indiana University strives to achieve full diversity, and to maintain friendly, collegial, and humane environments, with a strong commitment to academic freedom.
(University Faculty Council, October 25, 2005)
The organization of Indiana University is a result of evolving educational opportunities and services to the state, nation, and world. As a multi-campus university it operates under a single Board of Trustees and is administered through the Office of the President.
Many academic units have geographic-specific responsibilities on their respective campuses. Several professional schools and the Graduate School have responsibilities for programs on two or more campuses of the University. Still a third group—largely in the health sciences—has programmatic responsibilities on campuses of other public and private institutions as well.
Many of the professional and graduate programs on the two largest campuses—Bloomington and Indianapolis—are consolidated administratively in an effort to maximize program effectiveness. Other schools and colleges are working toward more effective coordination of their programs across campuses. The Offices of the Provost for Bloomington (IUB) and Chancellor for Indianapolis (IUPUI) have responsibility for (1) administering those programs and activities which are unique to their respective campuses, (2) assuming primary administrative direction for those programs and activities which are conducted on both campuses but, because of their nature, are best administered by only one chancellor’s office, and (3) assuming primary administrative direction for those programs and activities that are common to several or all campuses of the University, but which because of their nature, are best administered by only one chancellor’s office; e.g., the School of Public and Environmental Affairs by IUPUI or the School of Continuing Studies by IUB. Indiana University also administers five other campuses, geographically distributed in the state so as to provide educational programs and services to all major population centers. Each of these campuses is organized with its own administration. The chief administrative officer, the Chancellor, reports to the President. In addition, a campus in Fort Wayne, Indiana (Indiana University Purdue University Fort Wayne) offers Indiana University academic programs but is administratively managed by Purdue University. Some of these campuses, in turn, have nearby centers to extend additional access to Hoosiers throughout the state.
Office of the President
The Office of the President consists of the President, the Vice Presidents, the Treasurer, and their respective staffs. The Office of the President is designed to provide certain important services to all seven campuses of Indiana University. These services include budgetary planning and analysis, legal services, information and computer services, international programs, research and development, alumni relations, learning resources, and public and governmental relations as well as several other major functions enumerated below under the respective office descriptions.
The President is the chief officer of the University, and is responsible for the operation of the entire University within the framework of general policies provided by its Board of Trustees in keeping with the laws of the state.
The President is directly accountable to the Board of Trustees for accomplishing the objectives of Indiana University, for determining missions and priorities for its several elements, and for the effective and economical planning, utilization, and management of its resources. The President is also charged with responsibility for keeping the Indiana Higher Education Commission, as well as the Indiana University Board of Trustees, informed of current and long-range plans and developments. The President recommends to the Board of Trustees policies and decisions that will enable the University to cope with its many publics and a rapidly changing environment. The President is responsible for the external relations of the University with governmental and private agencies at all levels and represents the University at major functions.
Authority of the President
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of Indiana University (the “University”) has the authority, duty and responsibility to establish, and amend from time to time, the policies of the University and the President of the University has the duty, responsibility and authority to manage and administer the University in accordance with such Board policies, the authority delegated to the President by the Board and all applicable law,
WHEREAS, the President, as the educational leader of the University, has the further responsibility of presenting to the Board recommended policies of the University for consideration and action by the Board and at all times attempts to keep the Board appropriately advised,
WHEREAS, the Board has determined it should focus its primary attention on substantial policy issues of the University, presented to the Board by the President, members of the Board and others,
WHEREAS, for the Board to give full consideration to policies that are of a substantial and continuing value to the University, it is desirable that the President should be delegated explicit authority by the Board to manage, and administer the University and establish routine administrative procedures of the University, and
WHEREAS, it is desirable that such authority be formally delegated to the President:
- 1. RESOLVED that the Board hereby delegates to the President the authority of the Board, as permitted by Indiana Code 20-12-1-4. The Authority so delegated shall include that conferred by the Indiana Code 20-12-23-2 (general powers of the Board conferred by the 1852 statute as amended), Indiana Code 20-12-1 (powers and duties of the Board as enumerated in the 1969 statute) and other authority granted to the Board by other statutes or implied thereby, but subject to the exceptions and conditions stated in this Resolution.
- 2. FURTHER RESOLVED that the following exceptions limit the delegation of authority hereby granted the President and will continue to be accomplished by Board action:
- A. The organization of the Board and selection of its officers and committees;
- B. Appointment to membership upon corporate boards specifically providing for Indiana University representation, or to boards of advisors or visitors;
- C. Adoption of any Resolution of the Board specifically required by statute (such as upon the sale of surplus real property), and of bond Resolutions;
- D. Appointment of positions as University officers, deans of schools, and titled professors; appointment and promotion to tenured faculty positions;
- E. Approval of programs and other transactions of the University that require approval of the Higher Education Commission, Governor, or State Budget Agency;
- F. Adoption of a budget for the University, or of an appropriation request;
- G. Statutory processing of conflict of interest disclosure statements; and
- H. Such other matters as the board may from time to time adopt.
- 3. FURTHER RESOLVED, that the President is granted such authority by the Board to develop documents, execute contracts and agreements on behalf of the University or authorize others to do so in his stead, and promulgate and distribute notification of policies and to perform such other acts reasonably necessary and convenient to fulfill the purposes of this Resolution.
- 4. FURTHER RESOLVED, that the President shall, and cause others to, manage and administer the University in accordance with the policies and resolutions adopted by the Board and all applicable laws and keep the Board appropriately advised.
- 5. FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Resolution may be amended from time to time by the Board.
(Board of Trustees, September 11, 1987)
The Vice-Presidents all have executive responsibilities as members of the Office of the President, where they function with the President as a team. In addition, they have functional authority over the work assigned directly to their units as it relates to policy-making and coordination for their respective functional areas on a university-wide basis. Where operating authority is involved, as in the case of a university-wide program operating from their respective units, they exercise ultimate line authority.
The Chancellors at Indiana University Northwest, Indiana University South Bend, Indiana University Kokomo, Indiana University East, and Indiana University Southeast are the chief administrative officers of those campuses and report to the President. The Provost at Bloomington and Chancellor at IUPUI also have university-wide responsibilities, serving as Executive Vice Presidents in addition to their campus based titles. The Chancellor at Indiana University Purdue University Fort Wayne reports to the President of Purdue University.
Search and Screen Procedures for Administrators
The Trustees of Indiana University authorize the President of the University to inform the University Faculty Council that the Trustees of the University, in the eventuality of a vacancy in the Presidency, accept the desirability of consultation with the faculty, staff, and students of the University as well as with other university constituencies in the course of determining the selection of a President. Furthermore, the Trustees acknowledge the “Search and Screen” approach as a useful method of consultation in the case of identifying candidates and making a selection of a President. Furthermore, the Trustees understand that the Affirmation Action Plan and Policy which they have earlier adopted will apply fully in the case of the appointment of a President.
(Board of Trustees, December 18, 1976)
- Administrative officers holding positions which bear directly on the teaching/research mission of the university shall be chosen through a formal process referred to as search and screen. These procedures shall apply to the offices of the President, the Executive Vice Presidents for the Indianapolis and Bloomington Campuses, the chief administrative officers of the regional campuses, the Vice President of International Affairs, and any other system-wide university officers serving with comparable responsibilities under different titles. Any question regarding which officers fall under these guidelines shall be resolved by consultation between the appointing officer and a committee composed of the members of the University Faculty Council’s Agenda Committee and Nomination Committee.
- Administrative officers with university-wide authority and responsibilities, who are not included in Section 1, shall be chosen by the President or the appointing officer in collaboration with faculty representatives designated by the University Faculty Council’s Nomination Committee. During this collaborative process, the President or appointing officer will be expected to review with the faculty representatives the circumstances and needs of the position, consult with them about the selection procedures, and keep them informed of the progress of the search. The President or appointing officer will give the faculty representatives the opportunity to interview the final candidates and to offer their advice before the final selection is made.
- When the position to be filled bears on the teaching/research mission of the University, a majority of the members of the search and screen committee shall be from the faculty. Further, in searching for the chief administrative officer for a particular campus, a majority of members shall be chosen by the appointing officer from a list of faculty on that campus recommended by an appropriate campus faculty body. In the case of system-wide officers, including the Bloomington and Indianapolis Executive Vice Presidents, the number of faculty recommended from among the Bloomington, Indianapolis, and regional campuses shall be in rough proportion to the degree these campuses fall under the jurisdiction of the administrative position being filled. The University Faculty Council’s Nomination Committee will be charged with submitting a list of prospective search and screen committees for approval by the University Faculty Council for submission to the appointing officer. The lists should contain roughly one-third more names than requested by the appointing officer so as to provide him or her some choice in appointing faculty to the committee.
- Appointing officers shall make their requests for the creation of search and screen committees in such a manner that ample time is available for the process, so that “acting” appointments are minimized in number and duration. Whenever possible, the search and screen committee should be appointed at least a semester before the position is available, and no more than 30 days after the vacancy appears.
- The appointing officer is the President of the University, unless he or she delegates that authority, except in the case where a search and screen committee is being appointed for the office of the President, in which case the President of the Board of Trustees is the appointing officer. In addition to receiving nominees for search and screen committees from the University Faculty Council, the appointing officer is expected to solicit nominees from appropriate representative student bodies as well as nominees drawn from other appropriate constituencies. He or she will also arrange for adequate staff and financial support for the activities of the search and screen committee.
- The search and screen committee shall establish its own operating procedures including the responsibility, with the assistance of the University Affirmative Action Officer, of insuring that recruiting procedures are in compliance with the University’s affirmative action directives.
- The search and screen committee shall make its recommendations in writing to the appointing officer. In the event that the appointing officer is unable or unwilling to appoint any of the nominees from those recommended by the search and screen committee, he or she shall communicate this result of the committee with a statement of the reasons why and shall request further recommendations.
(University Faculty Council, March 9, 1976, October 27, 1987)
Review Procedures for Administrators
- 1. Administrative officers holding positions that bear directly on the system-wide teaching/research mission of the university shall have their performance and the performance of their office evaluated regularly by a process referred to as Review. The Review shall apply to those officers/offices reporting directly to the President and Executive Vice Presidents of Indiana University.
- 2. The Review shall be conducted early in the fifth year in office and in recurring intervals of five years thereafter.
- 3. At the last meeting of each year of the University Faculty Council, the President shall announce the list of all those officers who will be subject to Review the following year as well as the respective appointing officer(s). When an administrator’s duration of service necessitates Review, the official to whom that administrator most directly reports shall be the appointing officer of a Review Committee selected according to the following provisions:
- A. Because the positions to be reviewed bear directly on the teaching and research mission of the university, a majority of the members of the Review Committee shall be from the faculty.
- B. In reviewing a chief administrative officer for a particular campus, a majority of members of the Review Committee shall be chosen by the appointing officer from a list of faculty on that campus recommended by an appropriate faculty body.
- C. The number of faculty recommended from among the Bloomington, Indianapolis, and regional campuses shall be in rough proportion to the degree these campuses fall under the jurisdiction of the administrative position being reviewed.
- D. The University Faculty Council’s Nomination Committee shall be charged with submitting a list of prospective Review Committee members for approval by the University Faculty Council for submission to the appointing officer. The list should contain roughly one-third more names than the total to be selected by the appointing officer, so as to provide the appointing officer some choice in appointing faculty to the committee.
- E. In addition to receiving nominations for the Review Committee from the University Faculty Council, the appointing officer should solicit nominations from representative student bodies as well as other constituencies, as appropriate.
- F. The appointing officer shall appoint the Review Committee Chair.
- 4. Appointing officers shall make their requests for the creation of Review Committees in such a manner that at least one semester is available for completion of the Review process.
- 5. The appointing officer and the Secretary/Co-Secretaries of the University Faculty Council shall convene the Review Committees. The appointing officer shall cooperate with the Review Committee to assure that the administrator under Review meets reasonable requests by the Review Committee for information. The appointing officer shall provide the Review Committee with a description of the duties and responsibilities of the administrator under Review and any existing reports of previous reviews as well as arrange for reasonable and adequate staff and financial support for the activities of the Review Committee. The administrator under review shall provide the Committee with a statement of his or her administrative goals and objectives. The Review Committee shall be free to establish its own procedures, provided that it consults with all university constituencies affected by the administrator under review and responds with data to the following questions as a minimum:
- A. Has the administrator set clear goals and objectives for the unit? Are these appropriate for the unit?
- B. To what extent does the administrator facilitate the achievement of these goals?
- C. How effectively does the administrator represent the unit to persons outside the unit?
- D. How successful has the administrator been in managing the unit in the face of pressures?
- E. How is the unit perceived on a campus, system, state, and national level?
- F. How effectively has the administrator implemented the University’s policies, including the Affirmative Action Plan?
- In reviewing academic administrators, the Review Committee shall consult faculty in faculty-governance positions as well as a representative sample of the appropriate faculty body.
- 6. Prior to submitting a final report to the appointing officer, the Review Committee should meet separately with the official being reviewed and then with the appointing officer to discuss the findings of the report. The Review Committee then shall make the report in writing to the appointing officer. The appointing officer shall respond to the Review Committee, discussing actions to be taken as a result of the Committee’s findings and recommendations. The appointing officer is encouraged to provide the official reviewed with a copy. The report shall consist of a narrative and critique, a summary of the committee’s findings, and recommendations. After the review is complete and the final report has been written, a copy of this report should be sent confidentially to the UFC Agenda Committee. This will usually be the same report sent to the President. On rare occasions a committee might send an abridged report to the Agenda Committee. The chairperson of the Review Committee should of course feel free to consult with the co chairs of the UFC as he/she prepares the report. After receiving the report, the UFC Agenda Committee will invite the Review Committee chairperson to present an oral summary report to the UFC in Executive Session as required by Academic Handbook procedures.
- 7. The Trustees of Indiana University are urged to accept regular review as desirable for the offices of President and Treasurer and to acknowledge that consultation with faculty, staff, and students of the University as well as other University constituencies is an important part of these Reviews. Furthermore, the Trustees are urged to take advantage of the process outlined herein for the creation of faculty membership of a Review Committee for these offices. In these cases, the President of the Board of Trustees would act as the appointing officer and the recipient of the Review Committee’s report.
- 8. The University Faculty Council recommends that local campus faculty councils/bodies consider promulgating procedures for the review of their campus-wide administrative offices/officers.
- 9. At the time the final report is sent to the President, a copy of this same report should be sent confidentially to the Agenda Committee/Executive Committee of the faculty council/body of the campus of the chancellor/provost being reviewed. That Agenda Committee/Executive Committee will decide how the summary of the report is to be made available to their faculty. As recommendations contained in the review of the chancellor/provost are implemented, the chancellor/provost should report them to the Agenda Committee/ Executive Committee of the local campus faculty council/body which should report them to the University Faculty Council Agenda Committee.
(University Faculty Council, March 28, 1978; March 26, 1985; April 13, 1993)
Review Procedures for Core School Deans
Review provides a formal, systematic mechanism for faculty to have input into assessment of administrators. Well-designed reviews at regular intervals also provide opportunities for input and feedback for the improvement of administration, provide opportunities to acknowledge successful administration, and encourage both the administration generally and the individual administrator to set appropriate goals for the unit in question and to assess the administrator’s success in reaching those goals.
Review extends beyond the review of the individual administrator because, in general, it stimulates internal review of the units for which the administrator is responsible, and it allows those most directly affected (i.e., the faculty, students, and staff) to study the administrator's responsibilities.
Formally detailing separate review procedures for Deans of Core Schools is desirable due to the inevitable complexities of administration in these multi-campus programs.
- 1. Core School Deans who report to the Provost, Bloomington, shall have their performance and that of their offices evaluated on a regular basis. As of the effective date of this policy, those Deans include:
- A. Dean of the School of Education
- B. Dean of the School of Informatics and Computing
- C. Dean of the School of Journalism
- D. Dean of the Kelley School of Business
- E. Dean of the School of Library and Information Science
- 2. Core School Deans who report to the Chancellor, IUPUI, shall have their performance and that of their offices evaluated on a regular basis. As of the effective date of this policy, those Deans include:
- A. Dean of the School of Public and Environmental Affairs
- B. Dean of the School of Nursing
- 3. For each of these Deans, a comprehensive review (hereafter referred to as review) shall be conducted early in the fifth year in office and at recurring intervals of four years or more frequently if desired by the Provost/Chancellor. In addition, independent of these comprehensive reviews, each Dean shall be evaluated by a survey distributed to the faculty of the Dean's unit at the beginning of the Dean’s third year in office (see section 11). The Provost or Chancellor will provide reasonable and adequate staff and financial support for these review activities.
- 4. In the spring semester of each academic year, the Provost and/or Chancellor shall provide the University Faculty Council with a list of all Core School Deans subject to review the following year. The Provost/Chancellor shall request the creation of Review Committees simultaneously with the announcement of the Deans to be reviewed in order to allow at least one semester for completion of the Review process. Review committees will normally be established early in the fall semester and each review process will normally be completed early in the succeeding spring semester, or before. Each review committee will be assured of enough time to complete its work in a manner consistent with its charge.
- The Provost/Chancellor shall have responsibility for selecting the members of the Review Committees according to the following procedures:
- A. The Executive Committee of the Indianapolis Faculty Council and the Nomination Committee of the Bloomington Faculty Council shall seek names from the Advisory Committee, Policy Committee, or similar faculty-elected committee (whichever is appropriate) of the unit being reviewed, and from other relevant groups, to be considered for inclusion in the list to be provided by the University Faculty Council Agenda Committee. The majority of the members of each Review Committee shall be full-time faculty from the unit whose Dean is being reviewed. Relevant members of the community may be nominated for membership on the review committee.
- B. The University Faculty Council Agenda Committee shall submit a list of prospective Review Committee members to the Provost/Chancellor. The UFC Agenda Committee’s list shall contain approximately one-third more names than the number of committee members anticipated by the Chancellor/Provost to be on the Review Committee, so as to provide him or her with some choice in the selection of members for the committee. Only those individuals nominated by the UFC Agenda committee shall be appointed to the Review Committee.
- C. The number of faculty selected from each campus in the Core School shall roughly mirror the proportion of faculty from each such campus.
- D. In addition to receiving nominations for the Review Committee from the University Faculty Council, the Provost/Chancellor shall solicit nominations from appropriate representative student and staff bodies as well as other constituencies, as appropriate, on both campuses.
- E. The Dean under review shall not provide any nominations for the Review Committee.
- F. Before being finalized, the composition of the Review Committee shall be reviewed by the Dean, who may object to any nominee for cause. The Provost/Chancellor shall give appropriate weight to these objections in forming the Review Committee.
- G. The Provost/Chancellor shall select a senior faculty member, preferably a current or former Dean, to chair the Review Committee.
- 5. The Provost/Chancellor and the co-Secretaries of the UFC shall convene the Review Committee. The Provost/Chancellor shall provide the Review Committee with a description of the duties and responsibilities of the Dean under Review, and the Dean to be reviewed will provide a statement of her or his own goals and objectives. The Review Committee shall respond with data to the following questions as a minimum:
- A. How has the Dean exercised leadership of the unit, including working with appropriate constituencies to establish, maintain, and facilitate clear goals and objectives?
- B. To what extent does the Dean facilitate the achievement of these goals and objectives?
- C. How effectively does the Dean represent and promote the school to constituencies outside the university, including state stakeholders, national peers, and international groups?
- D. How well has the Dean managed resources to maintain the integrity of the unit when faced with outside pressures?
- E. How is the unit perceived by its faculty and staff? How is the unit perceived on each campus of the Core School and throughout the university system?
- F. How effectively has the Dean led the unit in carrying out unit and campus policies on both campuses, including implementing affirmative action plans and aligning the campuses’ and school’s strategic plans?
- G. How effectively has the Dean worked with and implemented policies adopted by relevant faculty governance bodies?
- H. What are the Dean's strengths and weaknesses and their impact upon his or her effectiveness?
- 6. Review of Core Campus Deans is both important and complex. Therefore, it is important for Review Committees to consider the following guidelines:
- A. Opportunities for involvement should be provided to all stakeholder groups, including students, who can reasonably be assumed to have valuable input on the Dean’s effectiveness. This involvement should include opportunities to suggest questions in addition to those listed in Section 5 that may be important within the context of the Dean’s specific unit.
- B. Although surveys, as described in Section 11, are an important part of the review process, they should not be the only method through which data are collected. Interviews, focus groups, document analysis, and examination of extant data, among other methods, could all be used to gather information on the Dean’s effectiveness. Ideally, most findings – and all critical findings – should be checked using multiple methods.
- C. Multiple members of the committee, from both campuses, should be involved in the analysis of data to ensure that one person’s perspective does not dominate the summary and recommendations in the final report.
- 7. The report should consist of a description of processes, a narrative and critique, a summary of the committee's findings, supporting documentation, and recommendations. To ensure that the particular interests of each campus are represented, the report narrative should include a separate section summarizing the results for each relevant campus in addition to a general summary that cuts across all campuses for which a Dean is responsible.
- 8. Once a draft of the Committee's report is available, the Review Committee shall observe the following procedures:
- A. The Committee shall provide the reviewed Dean with a copy of the draft report.
- B. The Committee chair and a committee member of full faculty rank chosen by the Committee shall meet (not less than three days later) with the Dean being reviewed to discuss the draft report. The Dean should be given an opportunity to respond, in writing, to the committee's findings before the committee meets with the Provost/Chancellor.
- C. The Committee shall consider the Dean’s feedback, if any is offered, and prepare the final report.
- D. The Review Committee then shall meet with the Provost or Chancellor to submit and discuss its final report, including the Dean’s written response to the final report, if one is provided.
- E. The Provost/Chancellor shall meet with the Dean to discuss the final report.
- 9. Copies of the reports of the Reviews of the Deans listed in 1.A-F and 2.A-B above shall be conveyed to the Agenda Committee of the University Faculty Council, the Agenda Committee of the Bloomington Faculty Council, the Executive Committee of the Indianapolis Faculty Council, and to the Dean's elected Policy Committee or corresponding elected governing body. A final report may be made public at the discretion of the Dean reviewed.
- 10. The Provost/Chancellor, in consultation with the UFC Agenda Committee and Review Committee chair, shall determine what elements of the final report and the Provost/Chancellor’s response should be included in a public summary document. That document must include an accurate characterization of the results of any data collection activities conducted by the Review Committee, although stakeholders’ verbatim quotes should not be included. The summary report should be distributed to all faculty and staff in the applicable core school.
- 11. Surveys shall be conducted as follows:
- A. A survey shall be conducted at the beginning of a Dean's third year in office. Thereafter, a survey shall be conducted as part of each comprehensive review.
- B. The Provost/Chancellor shall appoint an independent agent (such as the IUB Center for Survey Research or the IUPUI Survey Research Center) to design and conduct the survey.
- C. The survey shall be in three parts:
- 1. A set of approximately 10 questions, the same for all Deans, drafted by the University Faculty Council Agenda Committee in consultation with the survey agent and approved by the University Faculty Council. These questions will address such issues as the Dean's leadership, administrative skills, encouragement of faculty, and program development.
- 2. A set of approximately 5 unit-specific questions prepared by the Review Committee in the case of a survey conducted in connection with a comprehensive Review, or by the Dean’s elected Policy Committee or corresponding elected governing body, in the case of a survey conducted at the beginning of the Dean’s third year in office.
- 3. Sufficient space for written comments.
- D. The survey agent shall send a copy of the survey to each faculty member of the Dean's unit and collect all faculty responses within a specified period of time. The agent shall make a tabulation of the responses to the questions and a compilation of the written comments, without reference to the originator. Surveys should be administered in accord with customary practices designed to ensure the integrity of the process and to protect the identity of respondents by removing the names of respondents before survey results are released to the Dean under review, the Provost/Chancellor, or others.
- E. A copy of the written comments shall be conveyed to the Dean and to the Provost/Chancellor and shall be treated as confidential. The tabulated results of the remainder of the survey shall be conveyed to the Chancellor/Provost, to the Dean, and to the Dean's elected Policy Committee or corresponding elected governing body. In the case of a survey conducted in connection with a comprehensive Review, the results also shall be made available to the Review Committee. The tabulated results shall be treated as confidential unless confidentiality is waived by the Dean.
- F. In the case of a survey conducted in connection with a comprehensive Review, the tabulated results of the survey shall be reflected in the draft and final reports as stipulated in Section 8 above. In the case of an initial survey of a Dean, the Provost/Chancellor shall prepare a summary report of the tabulated survey results, in conformity with the procedures of consultation stipulated in Section 9 above.
(University Faculty Council March 23, 2010)
Review Procedures for Chancellors/Provost
The president is responsible for the evaluation of his/her direct reports and for the organization of the process conducted to that end. In addition to the president’s annual assessment of chancellors/provost, the president, in collaboration with the University Faculty Council, will conduct a fifth-year review of chancellors/provost using the following review procedures, which shall be referred to as the “Review.”
The purpose of such reviews is to provide the president, the trustees, and the chancellor/provost with broadly gathered information concerning the quality of leadership provided by the chancellor/provost; to recognize and encourage success; to identify areas in need of improvement; and to provide appropriate constituencies with the opportunity to assess the chancellor’s/provost's leadership. Normally, the constituencies would include faculty, administration, staff, students, alumni and community leaders. Costs of the Review process shall be underwritten by the office of the president.
The president must have latitude in determining which issues to emphasize in reviewing the performance of a chancellor/provost, but the Board of Trustees encourages the president to consider, among other things, the following areas:
- Execution of the policies and strategies of the board and the president
- Administration of all academic, faculty, and student programs and issues
- Financial performance of the campus
- Academic progress of the campus
- Relationship of the campus to the geographic region served
- Staff and faculty development and all human resources issues
- The intangibles of creativity, growth, spirit, and vision
Principles for Chancellor/Provost Reviews
- 1. Baseline Data. The evaluation should be conducted on the basis of a job description provided by the president and reports of previous reviews. The chancellor/provost under review shall provide the Review Committee with a written assessment of his or her specific campus and personal performance goals, and shall meet with the Review Committee to provide an overview of the chancellor’s/provost's role and activities, to discuss campus issues of particular importance, to indicate the range of constituencies bearing on the chancellor’s/provost's activities, and to make suggestions concerning groups or individuals whose comments should be sought by the Review Committee.
- 2. Review Coordination. The process should be coordinated by the president or the president’s designee.
- 3. Fifth-Year Review Components. The fifth-year evaluation should include information from the following:
- a) The results of a faculty review process outlined in this document, and information gathered as the president deems appropriate;
- b) Information provided by the chancellor/provost under review describing her/his accomplishments.
- 4. The evaluation process should include input from one or more peer reviewers familiar with the responsibilities and duties of individuals who serve in similar positions at comparable institutions.
- 5. All reports and pertinent data should be submitted to the president and be utilized in accordance with his/her direction and this policy.
- 6. The evaluation process must be conducted with dignity, confidentiality as permitted, and respect for all parties involved.
- 7. The president reserves the right to vary these procedures as s/he deems appropriate and will inform the UFC of his/her reasons for doing so.
Chancellor/Provost Review Procedures
- 1. Frequency of Review. The Review shall be conducted early in the fifth year in office and in recurring intervals of five years thereafter.
- 2. Organization of Review. Early in the spring semester of the year preceding a chancellor’s/provost's review, the president of the university or his/her designee shall send notice to the faculty council on that campus, and other relevant constituencies, announcing the formation of a Review Committee. The Review Committee shall be selected according to the following provisions:
- a. Because the responsibilities of the chancellor/provost bear directly on the teaching and research mission of the campus, approximately half of the members of the Review Committee shall be from the faculty of the campus. The president shall seek nominations for these appointments from the appropriate elected campus nomination committee. That committee will submit one hundred percent more names than the total to be selected by the president, but the president shall be responsible for the final selection of all faculty appointments, which may include faculty other than those provided. The appointees should be broadly representative of campus faculty and should be predominately tenured faculty. The president shall retain the authority to appoint a limited number of non-tenured faculty when appropriate.
- b. The president shall also solicit nominations for non-faculty nominees from representative student and staff bodies, and from the chancellor/provost under review to ensure that there is appropriate representation of the campus and the community and other constituencies significantly involved with the chancellor/provost and campus.
- c. The president shall review the lists of nominees with the chancellor/provost, who may object to the appointment of individuals for good cause.
- d. The president shall appoint the Review Committee Chair, after consultation with the campus Faculty Council Agenda/Executive Committee.
- 3. Timing. The president shall convene the Review Committee before the close of the spring semester, or shortly before the beginning of the fall semester, in such a manner that at least one semester is available for completion of the Review process. The Review process is expected to be completed within one academic year. The faculty leader of the campus faculty council shall be present at the first meeting.
- 4. Peer Reviewers. One or more peer reviewers may be appointed by the president to assist the committee. The peer reviewer shall be an academic administrator knowledgeable about the role of the chancellor/provost at comparable institutions. The president, in consultation with both the chair of the Review Committee and the chancellor/provost, will select the peer reviewer. The peer reviewer shall compile a single report, to be submitted directly to the Review Committee chair and to the president. The chancellor/provost under review will have the opportunity to respond, in writing, to the peer review report at the time it is submitted. The Review Committee’s final report shall take note of the peer reviewer’s report.
- 5. Outside Advisor. An outside advisor(such as a higher education consultant) may be used to assist the Review Committee with its processes at the request of the president.
- 6. Basic Review Objectives. At a minimum, the review committee will address the following questions:
- a. Has the chancellor/provost provided leadership to the campus in setting clear goals and objectives? Are these appropriate for the campus?
- b. Has the chancellor/provost involved relevant constituencies in developing and adopting these goals?
- c. To what extent does the chancellor/provost facilitate the achievement of these goals?
- d. How effectively does the chancellor/provost represent the campus to persons outside the campus?
- e. How successful has the chancellor/provost been in managing the campus in the face of pressures?
- f. How is the campus perceived on a local, state, or national level?
- g. How effectively has the chancellor/provost implemented the university’s policies, including the Affirmative Action Plan?
- 7. Data Collection, Confidentiality, and Impartiality. The Review Committee shall gather data for the review. The committee may use documentary reviews, constituent surveys, and letters. The committee may also use interviews with campus and university-level administrators, chancellors/provost of other IU campuses, and representatives from a variety of constituencies, including staff, students, community members, and faculty of the chancellor’s/provost's campus, including members of faculty governance. The committee also shall seek information from groups and individuals identified by the chancellor/provost. Open meetings to gather information pertinent to the Review are discouraged. The Review Committee shall devise its procedures to ensure and convey to participants the openness of the review to all information and views.
- Individual comments must be submitted by identifiable individuals. Anonymous comments will not be included. While the Review Committee will attempt to keep comments and letters confidential, under Indiana State Law, the university cannot assure confidentiality.
- 8. Survey. The Review Committee may utilize a survey as part of the review.
- The survey shall be developed and administered by a professional survey agency. Questions shall be formulated by the agency in consultation with the Review Committee and the president or his/her designee. The survey shall not contain written comments.
- The survey will be administered to tenured, tenure-track, and non-tenure track faculty members. Data for different faculty appointment categories may be disaggregated in reporting. Summary survey results shall be reported confidentially to the president, the chancellor/provost under review, the Review Committee, and the agenda committee/executive committee of the campus faculty council. A summary of these survey results will be included in the final report of the Review Committee.
- The use of surveys to gather information from other constituencies (e.g., community members, staff, alumni) may be considered by the Review Committee. Should a decision be made to conduct such surveys, they shall be developed and administered in the same manner as the faculty survey.
- 9. Reporting. Prior to submitting a final report to the president, the Review Committee shall meet separately with the chancellor/provost being reviewed and then with the president to discuss the findings of the report. The chancellor/provost shall be given an opportunity to provide the Review Committee with a written response to its findings. The Review Committee then shall provide a final written report to the president containing a summary of its findings and recommendations and the response of the chancellor/provost.
- If there are serious disagreements within the Review Committee about the content of the report, a minority report may be submitted with the Review Committee report. The president will respond to the Review Committee, discussing actions to be taken as a result of the committee’s findings and recommendations.
- The committee’s final report, any minority reports, and the president’s response shall be made available to the chancellor/provost under review, the UFC Agenda Committee and the executive committee of the campus faculty council.
- After receiving the report, the UFC Agenda Committee and the executive committee of the campus faculty council will invite the Review Committee chair to present an oral summary report in executive session to their respective councils, following Academic Handbook procedures.
- The president shall consult with the leader of the campus faculty council and the chair of the Review Committee, and then the president and the chair shall determine what elements of the final report, minority reports, and the president’s response should be included in a public summary document; however, the summary document must include an accurate characterization of the results of any surveys conducted by the Review Committee. The Review Committee report, the minority report, and the public summary may not quote directly from documents.
- 10. Effective Date. This policy shall become effective upon approval of the Board of Trustees.
(Board of Trustees, November 3, 2006)
ORGANIZATION OF THE FACULTY
[Note: The term “faculty” has different meanings in the different functional contexts covered by this Handbook. Please refer to specific policies for clarification as to who is covered and on the rights and responsibilities implied therein.]
Constitution of the Indiana University Faculty
ARTICLE 1: THE FACULTY
Section 1.1: The Faculty
The President, professors, and instructors shall constitute the faculty of Indiana University.
Section 1.2: Voting Faculty Membership
- A. All faculty members and librarians on tenure or accumulating credit toward tenure shall be voting members of the faculty.
- B. The voting members of the faculty shall exercise the powers of this constitution. The voting members of individual campuses may extend voting privileges to others on matters of individual campus significance.
- C. Faculty members shall vote on the campus of their primary appointment and shall be counted there for purposes of representation.
Section 1.3: Certification of the Faculty
By February 1 and thereafter as appointments by the Trustees occur, an appropriate official designated by the President shall communicate to the Faculty Council Office the names, rank, tenure status, full-time or part-time status, and campus of primary appointment of all persons holding academic appointments, as certified by the vice president or chancellor of each campus.
ARTICLE 2: FACULTY AUTHORITY
Section 2.1: Faculty Authority
Subject to the Trustees of Indiana University, the laws of Indiana and the United States, and other provisions of this constitution, the Faculty of Indiana University has the legislative and consultative authority specified in this article.
Comment on Section 2.1
The Constitution of the Indiana University Faculty is the governing document which states the authority of the Indiana University Faculty and how that authority may be exercised. The University, through the Trustees, formally subscribes to principles of faculty government and relies on the University and campus faculty constitutions to meet that commitment; the University includes the Constitution of the Indiana University Faculty in the Academic Handbook which it distributes to new faculty as representing the structure of University government; and our University Presidents, Vice Presidents, and Chancellors have accepted the privilege of serving as presiding officers over the faculty councils in which the Constitution vests legislative authority. In these circumstances the Constitution of the Indiana University Faculty is authoritative until amended by its own terms or repudiated by the Trustees. The Constitution recognizes that the faculty's authority is subject to the powers of the Trustees and to state and federal law, but the Trustees defer to faculty authority in accordance with principles of academic freedom and faculty governance, generally recognized in the higher education community, to which the Trustees have subscribed.
Section 2.2: Legislative Authority
The faculty has legislative authority to establish policy and determine procedures for its implementation governing the teaching, research, and service aspects of the University's academic mission. Areas within the faculty's legislative authority include:
- A. Academic mission.
- B. Structure and standards for faculty governance.
- C. Standards and procedures for creation, reorganization, merger, and elimination of academic programs and units.
- D. Standards and procedures for determining the authority of academic units and the relationship between them.
- E. Curriculum.
- F. Class scheduling and academic calendar.
- G. Admission and retention of students.
- H. Student academic performance.
- I. Standards and procedures for student conduct and discipline.
- J. Athletics.
- K. Creation and definition of academic ranks.
- L. Standards and procedures for faculty appointments, promotion and tenure, compensation, conduct and discipline, and grievances.
- M. Standards and procedures for appointment and review of academic officers.
- N. Conferring degrees.
- O. Other authorities delegated to the faculty by the Trustees.
Comment on Section 2.2
Section 2.2 states the legislative authority of the faculty as a whole, which is allocated to University, campus, and school faculties in Section 2.4. Section 2.2 begins with the general principle that the faculty has authority over academic matters and then specifies a non-exhaustive list of included authorities. In some matters, such as admission of students, the faculty has authority to act in specific cases but sometimes delegates that authority to administrators. In some matters, the administration has authority to act in specific cases subject to standards and procedures enacted by the faculty. In legislating "standards and procedures" the faculty designs frameworks for collaboration with the administration so each can fulfill its appropriate role.
Section 2.3: Consultation of the Faculty
The Trustees and administration should consult the faculty concerning:
- A. Planning and decisions regarding physical resources.
- B. Budgets.
- C. Faculty compensation and benefits.
- D. Establishment of administrative offices affecting the academic mission and appointment and review of administrators filling those offices.
- E. Any other aspect of University operations having an impact on the academic mission.
Consultation of the faculty shall be through representatives authorized by faculty governance institutions. Consultation should occur sufficiently in advance of action to permit faculty deliberation.
Comment on Section 2.3
Consultation of the faculty involves consultation of representatives of the faculty authorized to exercise faculty authority. See Section 2.5, below. The consultative authority, as well as legislative authority, of the faculty is allocated to University, campus, and school faculties in Section 2.4.
Section. 2.4: Allocation of Faculty Authority
The legislative and consultative authorities delineated in Sections 2.2 and 2.3 of this article are allocated to the University faculty as a whole (University faculty), to campus faculties, and to school faculties as provided in this section. In matters in which campuses and schools have concurrent interests, conflicts of interest should be accommodated by negotiation. Any standards and procedures for determining the authority of academic units and the relationship between them enacted by the University Faculty Council pursuant to Section 2.2.D of this Constitution shall apply.
A. Authority of School Faculties
School faculties (and campus faculties with regard to academic programs not within the authority of a school faculty) have legislative and consultative authority pertaining to the school regarding:
- The school's academic mission.
- The school's structure of faculty governance, consistent with University faculty standards.
- Creation, reorganization, merger, and elimination of academic programs and units within the school.
- Authority of academic units within the school and the relation between them.
- Conferring of degrees.
- Academic calendar, with only such deviation from University and campus calendars made necessary by special curricular or accreditation requirements.
- Admission and retention of students in the school.
- Standards for student academic performance.
- Student conduct and discipline, consistent with University and campus faculty standards.
- Appointment, promotion and tenure, compensation, conduct and discipline, and grievances of school faculty, consistent with University and campus faculty standards.
- School facilities and budgets.
- Appointment and review of school academic officers (except the dean of the school) and administrative officers affecting the school's academic mission, consistent with campus and University standards.
- Other matters affecting the academic mission of the school, subject to the legislative authority of the University and campus faculties.
B. Authority of Campus Faculties
Campus faculties have legislative and consultative authority pertaining to the campus regarding:
- The campus' academic mission.
- The campus' structure of faculty governance, consistent with University faculty standards.
- Policy and allocation of authority for academic matters affecting more than one school on the campus.
- Academic calendar, with only such deviation from the University calendar made necessary by local circumstances.
- Creation, reorganization, merger, and elimination of programs and units affecting more than one school on the campus.
- Appointment, promotion and tenure, compensation, conduct and discipline, and grievances of campus faculty, consistent with University faculty standards.
- Appointment and review of campus academic officers and administrative officers affecting the academic mission, consistent with University standards.
- Campus facilities and budgets.
- Student conduct and discipline, consistent with University standards.
- Intercollegiate and intramural athletics.
- Other matters affecting the academic mission of the campus, subject to the legislative authority of the University and school faculties.
Campus faculties have the authorities listed in Section 2.4.A over academic programs not within the authority of a school faculty.
C. Authority of the University Faculty
- The University faculty has legislative and consultative authority in all areas of faculty authority not allocated to schools and campuses and in matters requiring consistent regulation on all campuses.
- Only the University faculty has authority to recommend conferring honorary degrees.
- In matters in which University, school, and campus faculties have concurrent authority, the University faculty has authority to determine how the faculty's authority shall be exercised.
- Actions by the University Faculty Council which limit the legislative authority of campus faculties shall require an affirmative vote of two-thirds of members present.
Comment on Section 2.4
This section articulates how faculty authority is allocated among University, campus, and school faculties. Whether the allocated authority is legislative or consultative and where legislative authority is limited to enacting "standards and procedures" is governed by Sections 2.2 and 2.3. The structure of academic units is distinctive on each campus. To cope with this, the constitution specifies (in Section 2.4.B) that in regard to academic programs that are not part of a school, campus faculties have the authority of a school faculty and authorizes faculties (in Section 2.5.C) to delegate authority to departments and divisions. The concept of "school" should be understood with appropriate flexibility. For example, the University Libraries should be treated as a school in appropriate ways.
Section 2.2.D articulates the faculty's authority regarding issues of University structure. Under Section 2.4.C, the University Faculty Council, with leadership of the Executive Committee, will allocate authority and coordinate action in matters in which more than one faculty have an interest. Since membership of the UFC and the Executive Committee includes faculty government leaders of all campuses, all interests should be well represented in this process. The faculty constitution cannot undertake to resolve all issues where there are conflicting interests among academic units, such as those between system schools and campuses, but it does provide a framework within which those conflicts of authority can be negotiated. In general, authority should be allocated to the faculty that must work with the consequences of its exercise.
Section 2.5: Exercise of Faculty Authority
A. The University faculty shall exercise its authority through the University Faculty Council. Resolutions adopted pursuant to Section 3.6 of this Constitution shall be advisory. Otherwise, a faculty may exercise its authority as a whole faculty or through institutions of representative faculty governance established pursuant to the faculty's constitution or bylaws.
B. Faculties may delegate their authority to faculties of departments, divisions, or other academic units. The faculty of any unit to which faculty authority is delegated shall have the right of self-governance over the unit's major functions and responsibilities, consistent with University, campus, and school faculty standards.
C. The Trustees and administration should inform the faculty of policies and circumstances adequately to permit the faculty to exercise its authority in a responsible and effective manner. The faculty shall inform the administration and Trustees regarding proposed faculty legislation.
Comment on Section 2.5
The University community as a whole has an interest in the maintenance of faculty governance and academic freedom throughout the University system. Collaboration between the Trustees, administration, and faculty in University governance requires timely provision of information and exchange of views to enable each to participate in the creation of goals and plans for their implementation. The administration has the responsibility to inform the faculty of matters relevant to the exercise of faculty authority. At the same time, the faculty recognizes its obligation to inform the administration in a timely manner regarding the exercise of faculty authority.
ARTICLE 3: OFFICERS AND MEETING OF THE UNIVERSITY FACULTY
Section 3.1: Presiding Officer
The President of the university shall be the presiding officer of the University Faculty. The Co-Secretaries and Parliamentarian of the University Faculty Council shall hold the corresponding offices for the faculty.
Section 3.2: President's State of the University Report
During each academic year the President will present to the faculty a report on the state of the university--summarizing the operation of the preceding academic year, making such recommendations to the faculty, and calling such problems to their attention as he or she deems pertinent.
Section 3.3: Meetings of the Faculty
Meetings of the faculty may be called by the President and shall be called by the Co-Secretaries of the University Faculty Council on request of the University Faculty Council or on petition signed by voting faculty members numbering no less than 5% of all voting faculty members.
Section 3.4: Notice of Meetings
Except in the case of an emergency declared by the President, the Co-Secretaries of the University Faculty Council shall notify by mail each voting member of the faculty at least three weeks in advance of the date of the meeting.
Section 3.5: Quorum
10% of all voting members of the faculty shall constitute a quorum for all meetings of the faculty.
Section 3.6: Resolutions of Faculty Meetings
Meetings of the faculty may adopt resolutions and recommendations. All resolutions adopted by meetings of the faculty will be submitted by mail to the voting members of the faculty by the Secretary of the University Faculty Council within the week following the date of the meeting. Such resolutions will come into force after approval by a majority of the votes cast.
Section 3.7: Record of Meetings
The Faculty Council Office shall prepare the minutes of all faculty action. It shall retain the original and file one copy with the University Archives.
ARTICLE 4: UNIVERSITY FACULTY COUNCIL
Section 4.1: Membership of University Faculty Council
A. The voting membership of the University Faculty Council shall be composed of elected faculty and librarians as well as ex-officio members and students.
B. The number of elected representatives from each campus shall be one representative for each 200 voting members on the campus. Major fractions thereof will entitle the campus to an additional representative. Each campus shall have at least one elected representative.
C. Ex-officio voting members of the University Faculty Council shall include:
- The President of the University.
- The faculty chairs of the Agenda or Executive Committee of the campus-wide institution of faculty governance on every campus. In instances where the campus faculty chair is unable to serve, the campus faculty governance institution may elect an alternate member of its Agenda or Executive Committee to serve.
- Such representatives of school faculty governance institutions as the bylaws of the University Faculty Council may designate.
- Such administrative officers as the bylaws of the University Faculty Council may designate to serve as ex-officio voting members of the Council.
D. Voting student membership on the University Faculty Council shall consist of two students selected in accordance with procedures adopted by their constituent bodies.
E. The bylaws may designate ex-officio, non-voting members of the University Faculty Council.
Comment on Section 4.1
The structure of the University Faculty Council should inspire confidence in the UFC as an institution that will represent FACULTY interests and views. At the same time the UFC is a significant forum at the system level for engagement between faculty and administration. Section 4.1.C.4 delegates the issue of administrative representation on the UFC to the bylaws so that changes in administrative structure may be reflected without amending the constitution. Similarly, the role of schools in University structure is evolving, and Section 4.1.C.3 allows the bylaws to provide for representation of schools if the representation of schools provided in campus representation, under Section 4.2.A, is insufficient.
Section 4.2: Election of Members
A. Elected members of the University Faculty Council shall be voting members of the University faculty and voting librarians from the several campuses of the University. They shall be elected by the voting members of the faculty and librarians of each campus or by the campus' faculty governing body established in accordance with the campus' faculty constitution or bylaws. To the extent feasible consistent with the principle of providing representation proportional to the number of faculty in units, each campus shall provide in its constitution or bylaws for representation on the University Faculty Council for the schools on the campus.
B. The chair of the Agenda or Executive Committee of each campus' institution of faculty governance shall certify the persons elected from that campus to serve on the University Faculty Council during the ensuing year. University Faculty Council bylaws may specify deadlines for this certification.
C. Members of the University Faculty Council may appoint alternates to serve in their places at any University Faculty Council meeting.
D. Any elected member of the University Faculty Council who is absent for a semester or longer shall be replaced, for the duration of the absence, by the campus faculty governance institution.
Comment on Section 4.2
Representation of schools in the UFC is important, but because each campus is organized differently and schools vary in size, providing representation of schools is left in first instance to campus governing documents. The provision requiring school representation "to the extent feasible" has practical effect only on campuses organized by schools. See also, Section 4.1.C.3. Because early organization of the UFC is essential for its effective operation, prompt election and reporting of campus elected representatives is important.
Section 4.3: Term of Office
A. The term of office of elected faculty members on the University Faculty Council shall be for one or two years in accordance with the campus' faculty constitution and bylaws. The term of office of student members shall be one year.
B. No elected member is eligible to commence a new term as member on the University Faculty Council immediately after serving four consecutive years.
Section 4.4: Officers
A. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
The composition of the University Faculty Council Executive Committee shall be the President of the University, the faculty chairs of the Agenda or Executive Committee of the campus-wide institution of faculty governance on every campus (or the alternate member elected to serve as a member of the University Faculty Council pursuant to Section 4.1.C.2, above) plus five members of the University Faculty Council selected in accordance with Council bylaws.
The University Faculty Council shall have two co-secretaries who must be from different campuses. The bylaws shall provide for election procedures and terms of office.
C. PRESIDING OFFICER
The President of the University shall preside at the meetings of the University Faculty Council and the Executive Committee. In the President's absence, the Executive Committee shall appoint a presiding officer.
The Executive Committee shall appoint a parliamentarian.
Comment on Section 4.4
The membership of the Executive Committee is central to the management of UFC business in a way that accounts for the interests of and circumstances on campuses. The co-secretaries are the political leaders of the University Faculty Council and of the University faculty. In presiding over the UFC, the President is in the best position to present UFC action to the Trustees. The parliamentarian fulfills the impartial role specified by the rules of order adopted by the UFC bylaws.
Section 4.5: Regular Meetings
The University Faculty Council shall hold at least one regular meeting during each semester of each academic year.
Section 4.6: Bylaws
The University Faculty Council shall adopt its own bylaws.
ARTICLE 5: FACULTY BOARDS OF REVIEW
Section 5.1: Faculty Boards of Review
A. Each campus faculty governing body shall establish a Faculty Board of Review. The University Faculty Council shall establish minimum standards for uniform hearing procedures.
B. The Faculty Boards of Review shall consider complaints of faculty members concerning academic freedom, reappointment, tenure, promotion, salary adjustment, and the nature or conditions of work. Any member of the faculty desiring a review of university action in these stated areas shall request in writing a review by the Faculty Board of Review at that campus.
C. The campus Faculty Board of Review shall consider the complaint and make recommendations for disposition of a case and furnish copies to the aggrieved faculty member and to the campus provost or chancellor. The campus provost or chancellor shall give the faculty member his or her written decision, with a copy to the Faculty Board of Review.
D. A further appeal may be made to the President of the university and the Board of Trustees, who shall review the record and notify in writing the concerned faculty member and the campus vice president or chancellor of their decision, with a copy to the Board of Review. ________________________________________ ARTICLE 6: AMENDMENTS Section 6.1: Amendment Procedure A. Amendments to the Constitution of the Indiana University Faculty may be initiated in three ways: 1. A majority of the University Faculty Council may propose an amendment or amendments to the constitution at a meeting of the University Faculty Council. 2. A majority of a meeting of the faculty of Indiana University may propose an amendment or amendments to the constitution, timely notice having been given as to the purpose of such a faculty meeting. 3. A petition signed by 15% of the voting members of the faculty may propose an amendment or amendments. B. If an amendment has been initiated in one of the ways listed in Section 6.1A, the Co-Secretaries of the University Faculty Council shall circulate the document and background information to the voting members of the faculty. C. At least one week and not later than three weeks after receipt of the document and background information, the President of each campus governing body shall hold a hearing on the proposed amendment or amendments, which hearing shall be open to all members of the faculty. D. At least one week and not later than three weeks subsequent to such hearings, the Co-Secretaries of the University Faculty Council shall mail a ballot on the proposed amendment or amendments to all voting members of the university faculty; such ballot shall be accompanied by a summation of arguments, both pro and con. E. A majority of those voting by mail as well as a majority of those voting on each of a majority of the campuses shall be necessary for the adoption of the amendment or amendments. The Co-Secretaries of the University Faculty Council shall count the ballots and circulate the results to the faculty.
(Adopted by the University Faculty Council: May 23, 1973; Ratified by the University Faculty: November 20, 1973; Amended by the University Faculty Council: April 16, 1974; Ratified by the University Faculty: January 31, 1975; Amended by the University Faculty Council: April 26, 1977; Ratified by the University Faculty: July 1, 1977; Amended by the University Faculty Council: April 14, 1992; Ratified by the University Faculty: September 1, 1992)
Bylaws of the University Faculty Council
- 1. The current edition of Robert’s Rules of Order shall govern the conduct of the meetings of the Council except insofar as the bylaws make express provision to the contrary.
- 2. The meetings of the Council shall begin at 1:30 P.M. and adjourn at 4:30 P.M. unless a later adjournment is agreed to unanimously. The Agenda Committee may fix a different time for a regular meeting or call a special meeting—providing due notice to the faculty.
- 3. The presence of a majority of members of the Council shall constitute a quorum.
- 4. The Co-Secretaries of the University Faculty Council shall determine for each campus the number of representatives to which it is entitled from the lists submitted by the President, as required in Section 1.3 of the Constitution of the Indiana University Faculty. The Co-Secretaries shall forward the lists with this determination to the faculty head of each campus legislative body by October 15, who shall certify to the Co-Secretaries of the University Faculty Council no later than the last day of February the names of those faculty members who will represent the campus on the University Faculty Council for the ensuing year. It shall be the responsibility of the faculty head of each campus legislative body to hold elections for campus representatives sufficiently early in the year so that this deadline can be met. The term of office of newly elected members of the University Faculty Council shall commence at the end of its last regularly scheduled meeting of the academic year.
- An affected faculty member or the Agenda/Executive Committee of the faculty organization of an affected campus may request the Council’s Agenda Committee to change a faculty member’s allocation to a campus for purposes of determining the number of representatives to which a campus is entitled. After giving affected campuses an opportunity to make submissions on the matter, the Agenda Committee will report its determination to the Council.
- A. Pursuant to Section 4.1.C.4 of the Constitution of the Indiana University Faculty, the Chancellors/Provost of each campus and the Vice President for Research are designated to serve as ex-officio voting members of the University Faculty Council.
- 5. Before the April meeting the voting members of the Council, as it will be constituted in the ensuing year, shall elect the Co-Secretaries and five elected members of the Agenda Committee by mail ballot. Of the five elected members of the Agenda Committee, two shall be from the Bloomington campus, two from the Indianapolis campus, and one from another campus. Nominations for these posts shall be submitted by the incumbent Agenda Committee from among the elected members who will constitute the Council in the ensuing year. To the extent feasible, nominations for Co-Secretaries should facilitate Co-Secretaries serving for two years on a staggered basis. The results of the election shall be announced at the April meeting of the Council. Thereafter, the new Agenda Committee shall serve as the Nominations Committee. The term of office of the Co-Secretaries and of members of the Agenda Committee shall be one year, commencing at the end of the Council’s last regularly scheduled meeting of the academic year.
- 6. The duties of the Co-Secretaries shall be as follows:
- A. To keep comprehensive minutes of the proceedings and actions of the Council. The taped recording of a meeting of the Council will be retained for 12 months by the Co-Secretaries for reference by any interested member of the faculty.
- B. To prepare a summary of the activities of the Council each year and to distribute it to the general faculty.
- C. To serve as Co-Chairpersons of the Agenda Committee.
- D. To report in the minutes the names of those present at a Council meeting. In addition to absences, names of alternates present shall be reported.
- E. To circulate—as soon as possible after each Council meeting—the minutes of the meeting; Council documents and circulars; and the agenda, time, and place of the next Council meeting. These are to be circulated to all Council members, members of the faculty and librarians who request them, academic administrators, the main library on each campus, the Director of the News Bureau (now Office of Communications), and the Secretary of the Trustees of Indiana University. All University Faculty Council minutes, documents, and circulars shall be made electronically available to the University community in a timely manner for three years.
- F. To serve as administrators of the University Faculty Council.
- G. To serve as Co-Secretaries of the Indiana University Faculty (Section 3.1, Constitution of the Indiana University Faculty).
- H. To call meetings of the faculty (Section 3.3, Constitution of the Indiana University Faculty).
- I. To represent the Indiana University faculty in meetings with the Trustees, the President, other officers of Indiana University, and their administrative committees, including the academic and administrative cabinets.
- J. To convene, together with the appointing officer (normally the President), the review commit-tees for Indiana University administrators.
- 7. The functions of the Agenda Committee shall be as follows:
- A. The Agenda Committee shall determine the Council’s agenda. All communications—including those from individual faculty members—requesting Council action, study, or advice shall be placed on the agenda or referred to an appropriate body or committee for consideration. In the latter case, the Agenda Committee shall report its action to the Council which may—with the concurrence of a simple majority vote—request the Agenda Committee to place a referred item on the agenda.
- B. The Agenda Committee shall prepare the final draft of any new legislation approved by the Council.
- C. Emergency items should be referred to the Agenda Committee before being given precedence on the agenda.
- D. The Agenda Committee at any time may request the Council to determine the implementation and the effect of any past legislation or action or to reconsider any past legislation.
- E. Any faculty member on request prior to a meeting shall be invited by the Agenda Committee to participate without vote in the meeting, subject—however—to the exercise by the Agenda Committee of its responsibility for taking varied points of view into account and for the efficient management of the Council’s time. On its own initiative, the Agenda Committee may invite any non-member to participate in the discussion of matters of particular interest. Faculty members, students, members of the university staff, and members of the press are welcome to attend meetings of the Council—subject to the adequacy of available space. The Agenda Committee may invite the general faculty to participate in special meetings of the Council to be governed by ad hoc rules adopted by the Agenda Committee.
- F. At the request of the President or of the Agenda Committee on its own motion, the Council may meet in Executive Session.
- G. The Agenda Committee shall serve as the University Faculty Council’s Nominations Committee.
- 8. Committees
- A. Council Standing Committees:
- 1.The Council’s standing committees and the subject matters expected to be in their purview are:
- Affirmative Action Committee: Affirmative Action policies programs; liaison with the University’s Affirmative Action Office.
- Educational Policy Committee: Operation and assessment of academic programs, admissions and retention in academic programs, assessment and evaluation of students’ academic performance; policies for conferring academic degrees; distance learning; programs to improve and evaluate teaching and learning; liaison with FACET.
- External Relations Committee: Legislative and governmental relations; marketing; fund raising; liaison with Vice President for Public Affairs and Government Relations.
- Faculty Affairs Committee: Academic ranks; appointments, promotion, and tenure; grievance and discipline standards and procedures; special faculty recognition and awards.
- Faculty Compensation and Benefits Committee: Faculty compensation and benefits, liaison with the Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (on benefits matters).
- Faculty Governance Committee: Standards, policies, and procedures concerning faculty governance; search and screen and review procedures for administrators; Constitution of the Indiana University Faculty and Bylaws of the University Faculty Council; oversight and consultation on publication of amendment of the Indiana University Academic Handbook.
- Finances and Facilities Committee: Periodic budgets and other financial affairs; consultation on tuition and charges policies and procedures; new buildings, modifications to existing structures, safety and security, machinery and other accommodations as they affect the delivery of academic programs; liaison with Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Vice President for Capital Projects and Facilities (on facilities matters), liaison with the Indiana University Foundation.
- Library Committee: Development of university library resources, including information and other technology resources, and policies governing their use.
- Research Affairs Committee: Development of University policy and practice related to research; address issues affecting university support for research activities.
- Student Affairs Committee: Student welfare; student employment and benefits; student rights, responsibilities, and discipline.
- Technologies Policy Committee: Development of information and other technology resources and policies governing their use; liaison with the Vice President for Information Technology.
- University Planning Committee: Development of the University’s missions; plans and procedures that implement the missions; authority and responsibility relationships of academic units; standards, policies, and procedures for the creation, change, assessment, and termination of academic units.
- 2. Following the Council’s April meeting and before June 1, the Agenda Committee shall appoint the members of standing committees for the following year and shall designate the committees’ chairs. Each committee shall have at least two members who are members of the Council. To the extent practicable each standing committee should include one member from each campus who is a member of the campus faculty organization committee with responsibilities for the same subject matter.
- 3. Each standing committee must meet in person at least once a year; other meetings may be held via telephone conferences or other electronic media.
- 4. A committee may create a subcommittee including members of the parent committee and other members as may be appropriate.
- 5. With the agreement of the Agenda Committee, two or more committees may create a task force composed of members from each of those committees, and other members as may be appropriate, to work on a matter relevant to the jurisdiction of those committees.
- 1.The Council’s standing committees and the subject matters expected to be in their purview are:
- B. Honorary Degrees Committee: The Honorary Degrees Committee and the standards and procedures for awarding honorary degrees are governed by the Indiana University Honorary Degree Policy adopted by the University Faculty Council on November 10, 1992 (with duly adopted amendments, if any).
- C. Other Committees: The Agenda Committee may create and appoint ad hoc committees and task forces and may make recommendations of faculty members to serve on administrative appointed committees.
- A. Council Standing Committees:
- 9. Elected Council members, faculty chairs of the Agenda or Executive Committee of the campus-wide institution of faculty governance on every campus (or their elected alternates), and student representatives may appoint alternates to serve in their place at any meeting. Any elected member of the Council who is to be absent for a semester or longer shall be replaced during that period in accordance with procedures specified in the election unit’s constitution or bylaws.
- 10. Retention and disposition of Faculty Council files
- A. Definition and principles:
- 1. All records and files created or received by the Co-Secretaries of the UFC as administrator of the Council and relating to Faculty Council business are defined as the official records of the UFC.
- 2. Records and files created or received by the chairpersons of UFC committees are defined as UFC committee files and are therefore excluded from the provisions of these rules.
- 3. The maintenance of official UFC records and files shall be in accordance with general Indiana University rules established by the Trustees, the Vice President for Administration, and the Indiana University Controller.
- 4. For records or files created or received by June 30, the period of maintenance shall commence on the following first of July.
- B. Maintenance of UFC records and files: Official UFC records and files shall be maintained in the Faculty Council Office for the minimum periods specified:
- 1. Incoming and outgoing correspondence relating to UFC business and incoming correspondence log: three years.
- 2. Tape recordings of UFC meetings: one year.
- 3. Election ballots or other data relating to elections and committee assignments: one year.
- 4. Tabulations by name of votes in Council meetings: one year.
- 5. File copy of agendas, minutes, circulars, and each year’s Summary of the Year: indefinitely.
- C. Disposition of UFC records and files:
- 1. Subject to space limitations, official UFC records and files may be retained in the UFC office for longer periods than those specified in Bylaw 10.B, at the discretion of the Co-Secretaries.
- 2. Tape recordings of minutes, ballots, and other election materials relating to elections and committee assignments may be erased/ discarded after one year, at the discretion of the Co-Secretaries.
- 3. Other official UFC records and files shall be offered to the University Archives upon expiration of the period specified in Bylaw 10.B.
- 4. Surplus copies of items listed under Bylaw 10.B. (5) shall be offered to the University Archives at the end of the Council year in which they have been created.
- D. Exceptions:
- 1. The records and files of UFC committees, while not subject to these rules, are an important resource for the efficient administration of Council activities and a potentially valuable historical record. Chairpersons are encouraged to pass UFC committee records and files on to their successors at the conclusion of the Council year and/or to offer them to the University Archives at an appropriate time.
- 2. Files maintained by the UFC staff for their own use and containing unofficial materials shall not be subject to the provisions of these rules.
- E. Effective date: These rules shall become effective as of July 1, 1984.
- A. Definition and principles:
(Adopted by the University Faculty Council: April 16, 1974; amended by the University Faculty Council: February 8, 1977; April 26, 1977; October 14, 1980; December 8, 1981; November 30, 1982; March 8, 1983; November 27, 1984; March 26, 1985; April 23, 1991; February 9, 1993; November 12, 1996; October 14, 2003)
University Faculty Committees
There is a wide range of faculty participation in the governance of the University through University-wide standing and ad hoc committees, the memberships of which are appointed by University administrative officers or by the University Faculty Council. Extensive use is also made of faculty committees at the campus, college, school, and division levels, and within individual departments. Specific information on committee composition can be obtained from the Office of the President or the Co-Secretaries of the University Faculty Council.
Faculty Boards of Review: Minimum Standards for Uniform Hearing Procedures
These minimum standards for uniform hearing procedures apply to all hearings conducted by Faculty Boards of Review established by campus governing bodies under Article V of the Constitution of the Indiana University Faculty.
These minimum standards are intended to ensure that consideration of faculty [In this document, the word “faculty” is generic and includes librarians] requests for review of university actions concerning academic freedom, reappointment, tenure, promotion, dismissal, salary adjustment, and the nature or conditions of work by Faculty Boards of Review are conducted fairly and reasonably.
- All the members of a Faculty Board of Review shall be members of the faculty, and a majority of those shall be tenured. Members shall be elected by the faculty at large or by the faculty members of the campus faculty governance organization.
- Complaints requesting a review of administrative action by Faculty Board of Review shall be submitted in writing. The complaint shall specify the action to be reviewed, the reasons for requesting the review, and a proposed remedy.
- Upon receiving a complaint, a Faculty Board of Review shall provide written notice of the complaint and its particulars to the administrators 1) who are named in the complaint and 2) who are believed to be responsible for representing the University in regard to the complaint.
- A Faculty Board of Review shall allow reasonable time for the preparation of cases to both parties, set deadlines in order to dispose of cases in a timely fashion, schedule meetings and hearings at times convenient to both parties and the Board, and provide written notice of meetings and hearings in due time to all concerned.
- A Faculty Board of Review, authorized to undertake informal efforts to resolve complaints, shall maintain a clear distinction between these efforts and its formal procedures and shall keep a written record of its informal efforts and the results these have produced.
- A Faculty Board of Review shall prepare a written summary and a taped record of its proceedings in both formal and informal hearings, and these shall be available to members of the Board and both parties.
- The faculty on each campus, through its governance system, shall establish the conditions under which the procedures for its Faculty Board of Review hearings will be open or closed.
- A Faculty Board of Review shall develop rules to ensure that the confidentiality of all its proceedings, excepting open hearings, is preserved and that its findings and recommendations are determined and communicated without undue publicity.
- Either or both parties to the complaint may be represented by an attorney or adviser at formal or informal hearings.
- Both parties and the Faculty Board of Review may call witnesses, cross-examine witnesses, and request information bearing on the complaint from the University and others believed to have relevant information.
- Members of a Faculty Board of Review shall recuse themselves from considering a complaint at any stage of the process if they are members of the complainant’s department (or school/college if that unit is not organized in departments) or if there is any other association with the complainant which will make (or create the appearance of making) them unable to serve impartially.
- Formal hearings shall be conducted before the full membership of a Board of Review. The document establishing a Faculty Board of Review shall include a provision for filling vacancies on the Board.
- Formal hearings shall be conducted so as to guarantee that both sides are present, are permitted to participate, and are able to examine and respond to all evidence presented to the Board, nor shall recommendations regarding any complaint be sent to the Chancellor/Provost or Vice President until both parties have been heard.
- A Faculty Board of Review shall prepare written recommendations regarding complaints and provide copies to both parties within a reasonable time following the conclusion of hearings.
(University Faculty Council, April 8, 1997; Amended, November 10, 1998)
Allocation of Faculty Governance Jurisdiction Regarding ROTC Programs
Responsibility to provide faculty consultation to and oversight of ROTC programs regarding issues of University-wide concern is assigned to the UFC Educational Policy Committee, with the recommendation that any such issues be studied by a subcommittee with representation of those campuses that have ROTC programs. The faculty governance organization on each campus should assign responsibility for ROTC consultation and oversight regarding local issues (including matters of curriculum and personnel) to a standing committee of the faculty organization or to a special committee created for those functions.
(University Faculty Council: February 11, 1997)
Guidelines for Academic Calendar
Calendars on all campuses of the University are to be constructed according to these guidelines:
- In order that students may transfer from one to another campus of Indiana University without loss of time in the pursuit of their educational goals, the beginning and ending dates for semesters and major summer sessions will be approximately the same on all campuses to minimize overlap between two sessions at the various campuses.
- The usual 3-credit lecture class shall meet for a minimum of approximately 2,000 minutes, excluding the final examination period.
- A standard semester shall contain at least 15 weeks of instruction, including final examinations.
- A campus calendar committee, with the approval of its respective faculty, will determine the number and arrangement of days needed for student orientation, counseling, registration, and final examinations.
- Thanksgiving Recess, consisting of at least Thanksgiving Day and the following Friday, will be observed on each campus.
- Following the ending of classes, an appropriate number of days may be reserved each semester for final examinations. At no time should the examination period for the first semester end later than December 23.
- The Spring Recess should be no more than one week in length.
- The University’s Founders Day ceremony will be observed on the third Wednesday of April. [NOTE: Current practice is that the date of Founders Day is set by the President’s Office and that it usually is observed in March. (Administrative Practice)]
- The University Commencement Committee will coordinate the dates for commencement ceremonies so that the President and other key officials will be able to attend these ceremonies on each campus.
- Independence Day is to be recognized as a recess day on each campus.
- In order to facilitate the coordination of calendars within the Indiana University system, the calendar committee for a specific campus will inform and consult with the University Calendar Committee and obtain its approval for any exceptions to these guidelines, prior to recommending a calendar to its Faculty Council (or equivalent approving body).
(University Faculty Council, April 29, 1976, and April 27, 1982)
Trustees’ Resolution Regarding Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
WHEREAS, Martin Luther King Day is set aside each year as a national holiday to celebrate the life and lessons of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.; and,
WHEREAS, communities throughout the State of Indiana converge on the Martin Luther King holiday at events which celebrate their diversity and at the same time promote their collective spirit; and,
WHEREAS, Indiana University has, for years, considered what action is the most appropriate way to recognize the life, accomplishments and inspiration of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.; and,
WHEREAS, it is appropriate and consistent with large segments of our community to set aside Martin Luther King Day as a holiday;
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED THAT:
- Martin Luther King Day, beginning in January, 1998, shall be observed as a holiday on all Indiana University campuses; and
- All appropriate efforts shall be made by the University to provide events which highlight the life and philosophy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. on and surrounding the holiday; and
- Efforts shall be made to adjust the University calendar so as to accommodate the observance of this holiday. [NOTE: Meaning that classes will not take place on that day.]
(Board of Trustees, January 24, 1997)
PROCEDURES FOR PROGRAM REVIEWS
The Educational Policies Committee has slightly revised and endorsed the following procedures for program review that were initially formulated by the Academic Cabinet. The purpose of the recommendations is to regularize the process of program review throughout the system while at the same time leaving to each unit sufficient latitude to define the parameters of the review in the light of its own particular mission. Accordingly, the EPC recommends:
- 1. that Indiana University implement a campus-based system of regular periodic (once every 5–7 years) program reviews of individual departments and schools [Regular accrediting and professional organization review may serve this purpose.];
- 2. that the reviews be conducted by the chancellor/provost or dean (for large units);
- 3. that the reviews make use of outside peer reviewers who are mutually agreeable to the faculty of the unit and the dean or chancellor/provost;
- 4. that the faculty of the unit under review prepare a mission statement for the unit and a statement of goals to be used by the appointing officer in charging the outside reviewers;
- 5. that there be within one year a follow-up to the report of the outside reviewers indicating the steps taken to address the report, with copies to the outside reviewers;
- 6. that all reviews address certain essential questions:
- a. What are the students learning? Is the curriculum of the unit consistent with the unit’s mission?
- b. Are the teaching, research, and service activities of the faculty consistent with the unit’s mission?
- c. Is the unit better than, the same as, or worse than it was five (seven) years ago?
- d. What changes are needed in the next five (seven) years?
- 7. that the unit under review and the outside reviewers have support services to provide certain items of information useful in assessing progress, such as the number of graduates, retention, external grants and contracts, the diversity of the faculty and student body;
- 8. that each chancellor/provost and dean submit to the Chair of the Academic Cabinet at the end of each year a list of programs that were reviewed that year.
(University Faculty Council, April 13, 1993)
Preservation of University Records
The University Faculty Council affirms the need to preserve documents of an historic and/or public nature generated by administrative units, offices, programs, departments, and committees—the components of Indiana University. Such materials should not be destroyed. Except for patient records, individual student records, certain personnel records, and other records as specified by law, all materials should be made available for deposit in the Indiana University Archives. Chairs and unit heads should work with their campus archivist to establish those items deemed pertinent for preservation. When materials are offered to the University Archives, it is to be understood by the donor or depositor that the archivist has the exclusive right to dispose of materials not of an appropriately historic nature. The donor or depositor may, in writing at the time of transfer of the material, condition the donation upon the agreement that no material will be eliminated without prior consultation with the donor or depositor. In addition, members of the University community are encouraged to leave their private papers and records to the University.
(University Faculty Council, April 26, 1983)
Note: Academic appointees may follow the following link to access the Academic Personnel Records Retention Schedule: http://www.libraries.iub.edu/index.php?pageId=3152
Most formal ceremonies and all commencements are now campus specific. An exception is the Indiana University Founders Day ceremony, which is held in Bloomington in the spring of each year. The President participates in Commencements, Founders Day, official dedications, and other formal ceremonies.
Faculty participation in Founders Day, Commencements, and official dedications is urgently desired. Notices detailing arrangements for such participation are sent out well in advance.
- The honorary doctorate is the highest academic recognition Indiana University can bestow. Candidates for these degrees should have demonstrated in their life and in their work high standards of excellence as evidenced by scholarship or creative activity; by professional development and achievement; by public service to the world, the nation, the state, or the community; in wholehearted commitment to the development of Indiana University; or through excellence in any calling or occupation which visibly contributed to the development of society and serves as a model for present and future generations. In all honorary degree candidates these scholarly, creative, professional, service or occupational achievements should be placed in a framework of high personal integrity and concern for the public good. By awarding honorary degrees to women and men of such outstanding qualities, the University seeks to present to its several constituencies veritable models worthy of emulation and respect. Students, faculty, alumni, and the people of the state as a whole should recognize in the honorary degree recipients qualities they consider particularly relevant to their own experiences, whether these be scholarship, creative activity, a profession, public service, University service, or a vocation.
- Candidates for the honorary degree generally should have significant ties to the State of Indiana or to Indiana University through birth, residence, education, service, or notable achievement.
- Honorary degrees are not normally awarded to candidates for political office or to elected officials currently in office or to faculty, staff, or administrators currently in service. Retired or former faculty members must meet the same high standards for nomination as all other honorary degree candidates.
- The honorary degree may not be awarded in absentia; but, if an approved nominee cannot be present at the convocation for which the degree was offered, the recommendation for the degree shall be reviewed annually by the Honorary Degrees Committee.
- All nominations are referred to the Honorary Degrees Committee, whose recommendations are transmitted by its chairperson to the University Faculty Council. After approval by the University Faculty Council, the nominations are transmitted to the President of the University for submission to the Board of Trustees for formal action.
- The Honorary Degrees Committee shall be a standing committee of the University Faculty Council, with its membership composed of four members of the University Faculty Council selected by the Nomination Committee and four members from outside the Council selected by the President. The chairperson shall be one of the four Council members and shall be selected by the Nomination Committee in consultation with the President.
- The Honorary Degrees Committee shall forward its list of nominees to the University Faculty Council approximately one month in advance of the meeting at which the nominees are to be discussed. The list shall be accompanied by the nominees’ curriculum vitae and a written justification from the committee for each selection based on the established criteria. A copy of the criteria shall be included in this mailing.
- The Honorary Degrees Committee shall identify resources within the University to assist in supplying input where appropriate to the selection of nominees for honorary degrees.
- In the event that an approved nominee cannot be present at the convocation for which the degree was approved, the recommendation for the degree shall be reviewed annually by the Honorary Degrees Committee.
- Nominees for honorary degrees shall not be voted upon by mail ballot except in circumstances judged to be emergencies by the Agenda Committee of the University Faculty Council.
- Except for dedications and other special occasions, the presentation of nominations for honorary degrees by the Honorary Degrees Committee to the University Faculty Council normally shall be made no later than the March meeting of each year (one year in advance of the commencement ceremonies).
- If a mail ballot becomes necessary, a candidate cannot be declared to have won unless the total of affirmative votes is greater than the total of both the negative and the further-study votes.
The conferral of honorary doctoral degrees provides a special opportunity for the university to recognize persons of outstanding accomplishment. Indiana University, as a leading public university in the State of Indiana, recognizes a particular responsibility to acknowledge and honor persons of outstanding achievement who have significant ties to the state or the university. As an institution particularly responsible for advanced teaching and research in the various academic and professional fields, Indiana University has an equally important responsibility to identify and honor persons of national and international eminence who are the leaders of their fields of creative or professional endeavor.
The honorary doctorate is the highest academic recognition Indiana University can bestow. Thus, candidates for the honorary degree must have demonstrated the highest levels of excellence as scholars, artists, professionals, or public servants. Equally high expectation is placed on their personal integrity and concern for the public good. In recognizing such persons, the university identifies women and men who can serve as role models for students, faculty, and alumni of Indiana University, indeed, for all persons of the state, to respect and emulate.
Candidates for an honorary doctorate can be nominated by any member of the university family. Nominations are submitted for the first stage of review to the Honorary Degrees Committee (HDC), which is a standing committee of the University Faculty Council. Some campuses have established faculty committees to initiate nominations and provide for preliminary review at the local level. Nomination materials need not be extensive but should indicate the extraordinary nature of the candidate’s life and contribution and should document the backing of the campus faculty and administration. The following initial documentation is suggested:
- A letter of nomination from the primary nominator.
- A short (one-page maximum) narrative explaining why the candidate is worthy of an honorary doctorate from our institution.
- A curriculum vitae.
- Several letters of recommendation from within the university, usually from senior professors, distinguished scholars, and/or administrators, and a letter from the dean of the sponsoring college [or appropriate head of the academic unit on the campus making the recommendation].
Nominators may be asked by the HDC to expand the dossier and to solicit statements of support from distinguished individuals outside the university.
Approved candidates are recommended by the HDC to the University Faculty Council for a second stage of review and approval. The president of the university then transmits the dossiers of approved candidates to the Board of Trustees for review and final, formal action.
It should be noted that the process of committee, council, and board review is a long one, often taking one to two years from inception to the actual awarding of the degree at a public ceremony. To assist university colleagues in their efforts, nominators should start the process early.
Since nominations for honorary degrees can be initiated by persons from any segment of the university family, the achievement of individuals which prompt nominations will reflect the broad spectrum of values expressed in contemporary U.S. culture. The faculty and Board of Trustees share the important and challenging task of selecting those nominees most appropriate for recognition as exemplary models for all of us. The award ceremony focuses attention at the interface between the university and society and the qualities of the persons honored reveal the values of academia.
The Honorary Degrees Committee invites the participation of all interested persons in this important process. We await the nomination of persons of truly outstanding achievement for conferral of honorary doctoral degrees at graduation and major academic ceremonies on all campuses of the University.
(University Faculty Council, March 13, 1979; April 4, 1980; February 8, 1983; March 26, 1985; April 23, 1985; January 26, 1988; November 10, 1992)