SFSU Faculty Manual--1997-98 Appendix (cont'd)

Leaves with Pay Policy

Academic Senate Policy S81-18

The following policy was approved by the Academic Senate on March 11, 1981, and by the President on May 21, 1981.

Purposes of Sabbatical [and Difference in Pay] Leaves. The purpose of the leave with pay is to enable a faculty member to undertake professionally related activities which cannot be undertaken in the course of the person's full-time university responsibilities. Such leaves should result in developing the skills, the understanding, and professional satisfactions of the individual, thereby benefiting the university.

The leave with pay shall be granted for the purpose of research, creative activity, general study, and/or travel in connection with any of the above. Other purposes with potential for service to the university are equally appropriate. No one of the above mentioned purposes for a leave should be given priority.

Deadlines. The leave application is to be completed by the applicant, notarized and filed in the appropriate college office by the last working day in October for submission to the college or library Leaves with Pay Committee. The original copy of the application shall be forwarded to the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs who will certify eligibility of the applicant and inform the college committee.

Types of Leaves Available. There are two types of leave available.

Filing of Bond or Waiver of Bond. Final approval of leave of absence with pay will not be granted until the applicant has filed with the university a suitable bond indemnifying the State of California against loss in the event the faculty member fails to render one semester of service for each semester of leave in The California State University following the leave of absence. The bond shall be in the amount of the total salary computed to become due the faculty member during the leave of absence. The bond will be exonerated if the failure of the faculty member to return and render the requisite service is caused by death, physical or mental disability, or dismissal for cause. The obligation to file a bond may be waived by the President after determining that the interest of the State will be protected by a written agreement of the faculty member to return to the service of The California State University as required. Such agreement must be accompanied by a statement of attachable assets showing, to the satisfaction of the President, the faculty member's capacity to indemnify the State against loss in the event of failure, through personal fault, to fulfill the agreement. The statement of attachable assets will be filed in the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs with the original applications. Copies of this statement will not be distributed to the college or department committees.

Guidelines and Procedures for Awarding Leaves with Pay

Criteria. The intellectual or creative significance of the proposed endeavor. No proposal shall be considered to be of lesser merit because the proposed activities bridge disciplinary lines as they are defined by the departmental/college structure of this university.

The importance and effectiveness of the proposed endeavor in furthering the applicant's professional development. This criterion may be satisfied in many ways including, but not limited to, producing benefits for instructional programs, enhancing the applicant's teaching competence, improving the intellectual and/or creative reputation of the university, and expanding the university's ability to serve the community.

The applicant's background relevant to determining the applicant's ability to carry out the proposed project. This may include consideration of the applicant's professional background, of the applicant's prior interest and experience in the subject to which the project is devoted, and of the applicant's overall ability and reliability in planning and carrying out projects. Since professional development, as referred to in the above paragraph, is not to be restricted to development through research/publication activities, this criterion shall not be applied in such a way that applicants who have had prior opportunity for research/publication necessarily enjoy an advantage because of their greater experience.

The relative importance of the above criteria may be expected to differ from college to college. Therefore, when this policy is initially applied, each college or library Leave with Pay Committee, in conjunction with the college dean/director, shall specify the relative weighting of each criterion in the decision process. This information should be available in writing to all members of the college/library. The relative weightings of criteria for the college/library shall remain in place unless changed by the college Leave with Pay Committee in conjunction with the college dean/director or by a majority vote of those faculty members in the college/library who are eligible to vote for representatives to the Academic Senate. In case the relative weightings of criteria are changed, faculty members must be so notified in writing at least thirty days prior to the date on which application for leaves with pay are due.

Principles of Distribution Within the University. The number of leaves with pay allocated to the university will be distributed on an equitable basis among the colleges and the library. The ratio for distribution of leaves will be determined by the numbers of eligible faculty members in the respective colleges in relation to the total of eligible faculty in the university. In case there are not enough eligibles in a college to warrant at least one leave with pay, each eligible faculty member in that college will specify another college to which he/she is willing to apply for a sabbatical leave. Such faculty will be included in the number of eligibles which determines the allocation for the host college. In evaluating the application of such a candidate, the Leave with Pay Committee of the host college must consult with a representative designated by the candidate's college. Candidates who do not have a regular appointment in a college or who hold joint appointments in more than one college will apply to, and be counted in the number of eligibles of, the college in which they have served the majority of the instructional time which makes them eligible for a leave with pay. Candidates who have half-time appointments in two colleges will choose the college to which they will apply and will be counted in the number of eligibles of that college.

Not later than the date on which applications for sabbatical leaves are due in the college and library offices, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will determine the projected number of sabbatical leaves for the following year. The projected leaves will be allocated to the respective colleges and the library under the guidelines. The Vice President for Academic Affairs will report the projected allocations to the college deans/directors and to the college leave committees. The college deans/directors shall provide the eligible members of their colleges with the projection figures and with copies of the procedures.

In the event that sufficient applications are not received by a college, there will be an equitable redistribution of the needed leaves to the other colleges based on the relative number of eligibles in each of the other colleges. In the event that a college Leave with Pay Committee, together with the college dean/director, decides that the college does not have a sufficient number of meritorious applications to exhaust its allocation, there will be an equitable redistribution of the remaining leaves to the other colleges, based on the relative number of eligibles in each of the other colleges.

The School Committees. Each college and the library shall elect a Leave with Pay Committee composed of five tenured faculty members who are elected by majority vote of the college. No more than one faculty member shall come from one department or program, unless there are less than five departments or programs in the college or division. Initially three members shall serve for two years and two for one year to stagger the terms. Thereafter, each member shall be elected for a term of two years. The members of the college committee will elect a chair that will serve for one year.

Procedures for Granting Sabbatical Leaves. The college or library committee and the college deans/director shall receive from the department both the recommendations and the rationale for the recommendations on each of the candidates for a leave with pay. Department committee rankings may be included but are not mandatory. However, the policy on whether to use rankings must be uniform through the college. In determining college policy on use of rankings, a vote shall be taken by the faculty within each department. Each department's decision shall represent one vote on the question.

Each department shall develop its own processes for such recommendations and file them in the office of the college dean/director. Processes must include a mechanism for giving feedback to candidates who do not, ultimately, receive leaves.

The college or library committee and the college dean/director each shall draw up a ranked list of all candidates for leaves with pay. The college committee and the college dean/director shall prepare rationales for each ranking. These rationales shall be preserved as information for the candidates, as evidence of the basis on which the college awards sabbatical leaves, and for purposes of appeals, adjudication, and grievances.

If the college committee and the college dean/director disagree in their rankings, they will attempt to work out their differences. The college committee and the dean/director must initially meet to discuss their rankings no later than the last day of the fall semester final examinations. If agreement is not reached by the last working day in the following month (January), the matter will go to adjudication as specified below.

In case there is a need for adjudication, a committee consisting of three faculty members selected randomly from the current list of tenured faculty members will be formed by the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Chair of the Academic Senate. No member of this committee may be a member of a college or library Leave with Pay Committee or a member of any department to which any applicant whose ranking is in question belongs. The sole responsibility of the adjudication committee is to resolve the differences by presenting to the Vice President for Academic Affairs an independent ranking of the candidates. In arriving at the independent ranking, the adjudication committee shall use the relative weights of the criteria that have been specified by the candidate's college or library Leave with Pay Committee. The adjudication committee's judgment is binding.

The ranked list of applicants which is agreed to by the college or library Leave with Pay Committees and the college deans/directors will be forwarded to the Vice President for Academic Affairs for the final awarding of Leaves with Pay. Leaves will be granted in conformity with the allocation distribution specified above. In case the Vice President for Academic Affairs disagrees with the rankings of a college, the disagreement shall be resolved in a manner similar to the procedures for resolving disagreements between college or library Leave with Pay Committees and college deans/directors, with the provision that no one who has served on an adjudication committee to resolve a disagreement between a college or library Leave with Pay Committee and a college dean/director shall, in the same year, also serve on an adjudication committee to resolve a disagreement between that college and the Vice President for Academic Affairs. The Vice President for Academic Affairs under normal circumstances shall make the final award. The only exception shall be a situation in which disagreement between the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the college has been decided in favor of the college. At that point, the adjudication committee recommendation shall go forward to the President, who shall make all final awards.

No one who has applied for a leave with pay may serve on any committee which makes recommendations for awarding paid professional leaves.

Guidelines and Procedures for Awarding Difference in Pay Leaves. Difference in pay leaves may be awarded to qualified faculty upon certification by the department chair (or equivalent) and the dean of the availability of funding and of the capability of the department to maintain a quality program in the absence of the candidate for the Difference in Pay Leave. With the exception of the guidelines and procedures enumerated under the section entitled "Guidelines and Procedures for Awarding Sabbatical Leaves" above, applicants for Difference in Pay Leaves shall follow all of the guidelines and procedures in this document including the procedures described below for the faculty members after the award of the leave.

Procedures for Faculty Members After Award of Leave with Pay

Once a leave with pay has been awarded, faculty members shall be obligated to honor the following procedures and requirements:

Service Required Following Leave with Pay. Articles 27.17 and 28.16 of the Agreement specify that an individual awarded a leave with pay must return to the service of The California State University to render one term of service for each term of leave granted.

Compensation to the State in the Event of Incomplete Service to the University Following Leave. Faculty members must understand that failure to return to the university to honor the above obligation will result in forfeiture of bond or in a legal action on the part of the university to recover appropriate compensation. Such action will be waived, however, if failure of the employee to return and render the requisite services is caused by the death or physical or mental disability of the employee.

Additional Income While on Leave with Pay. The following regulations apply to permissible earned income while on Leave with Pay.

a. Full pay, one semester leaves. Individuals on full pay, one semester leaves are informed that during their periods of leave, only incidental outside earnings are permissible (incidental earnings which are incidental on the Leave with Pay project itself).
Difference in pay and half-pay academic year leaves. Individuals on difference in pay or half-pay leaves for a full academic year should not accept other employment elsewhere, although they may receive a research grant or a Fullbright (etc.) or may accept payment for expenses connected with the Leave with Pay project. However, the burden of proof should be on the individual to defend the exceptional circumstances and to demonstrate the worth of such employment. Individuals are not precluded from accepting any employment, but any such employment should be minimal and purely incidental to the Leave with Pay project. Those intending to earn additional income while on leave under this section must receive prior permission in writing from the Vice President for Academic Affairs. No time or dollar values have been or will be established, but employment unrelated to the project and designed primarily to increase income is contrary to policy.

Faculty members who are interested in working rather than carrying out the provisions of the Leave with Pay requirements should request to go on leave without pay.

Check Out Procedures for Faculty Members Going on Leave. Under normal circumstances, faculty members going on leave shall vacate their university office prior to departure. However, faculty members will be permitted to retain their keys. They shall also retain their faculty cards. Library privileges will also remain with the faculty member while he/she is on leave with pay.

Faculty members shall give written instructions to the departmental secretary concerning the disposition of mail.

In the event the faculty member's leave with pay is to be taken in the immediate vicinity of the university, the faculty member may petition for access to his/her office during the time of the leave. Permission to use the office will be given only if the candidate can demonstrate that such use does not inconvenience the regular programs of the university.

Submission of the Leave With Pay Report upon Return. The faculty members must submit to the university President the final report on his/her leave which should:

In addition to the final report, the faculty member must submit a 100 word abstract of his/her project for possible use in various university publications. Normally, this report is due in the sixth week of the semester following the leave. It should be submitted to the department chair, the college dean/director, and the Vice President for Academic Affairs to the President.

Liberal Studies Council

Academic Senate Policy S86-96

The following Academic Senate policy was approved by the President on April 30, 1986.

The Liberal Studies Council has the following functions:

Membership. The plan for membership of the Liberal Studies Council is intended to assure that both the colleges involved in the program and the four Liberal Studies Areas are represented by at least two individuals. In addition, it is intended that liaison with the committee of the Academic Senate be accomplished by having a non-voting representative from the Educational Policies Council (EPC). The Dean of Undergraduate Studies is expected to serve as an ex officio, non-voting member. The voting faculty members should be chosen from among the Liberal Studies faculty; that is, those faculty who have demonstrated and are willing to continue a commitment to the program by serving as advisors, teachers, and in other important service roles. The area coordinators should receive special consideration as potential council members. The selection method should be determined by the relevant college or colleges for the area or department involved.

The term of the college representatives is to be two years. Those colleges with more than one representative are expected to review for continuance or replacement at least one of their representatives each spring for service in the following two academic years. The EPC representative is to be selected at the pleasure of that council with the expectation that the appointment will be reviewed in the spring for service in the following academic year.

Given the complexities of the Liberal Studies Program, representatives to the council are expected to devote considerable time and effort in making the program work well. Schools and departments should include assessment of Liberal Studies Council membership in retention, tenure, and promotion considerations and all other personnel evaluations.

Membership of the Liberal Studies Council

Voting Members	Schools or Departments
	2	Humanities (English, Comp. Lit. & Speech Communication)
	2	Science and Engineering
	2	Behavioral and Social Sciences
	3	Humanities & Creative Arts (1 from Humanities, Philosophy, & Foreign Languages and 2 from Art, 
Music, Theatre & Inter-Arts Center)
	1	School of Ethnic Studies
	1	HHS
	2	School of Education (at least one member from Elem. Educ.)
	13	Total Number of Voting Members
Non-Voting Members
	1	Educational Policies Council (liaison representative)
	1	Dean of Undergraduate Studies (ex-officio)
	1	Advising Center
	3	Total Number Non-Voting Members
Selection and Role of Chair. The Chair of the Liberal Studies Council is to be elected by the membership of the council in the spring of each year for service in the following academic year. The chair, in consultation with the Dean of Undergraduate Studies, schedules meetings of the council, prepares agendas, and provides follow-up on actions taken.

Actions of the Council. The Liberal Studies Council is to serve much in the same manner as departmental and/or college curricular committees. Actions by the council are to be normally directed to the Dean of Undergraduate Studies for implementation as may be appropriate, or for review through normal approval channels and, when appropriate, for forwarding to the standing review committees of the Academic Senate (i.e., CRAC or APC).

A quorum consists of eight members present at a duly called meeting of the council. If all thirteen voting members are present at a meeting, at least seven members must vote to approve an action item. While these are minimal guidelines, it would be hoped that on most issues extraordinary efforts would be made to obtain support for an item which is well in excess of the minimal indicated.

Role of Vice President for Academic Affairs' Representative. The Dean of Undergraduate Studies is the Vice President for Academic Affairs' representative charged with the general overall coordination of the Liberal Studies Program. In this capacity, the Dean is a facilitator responsible for making the day-to-day decisions necessary for the smooth operation of the program. In addition, the Dean of Undergraduate Studies is expected to provide secretarial support for meetings of the council.

Memorandum of Understanding

Intellectual Property Rights

The CSU and the CFA recognize both that mutual benefits derive from the ongoing development and dissemination of intellectual properties in the CSU, and that to maximize these mutual benefits this Memorandum of Understanding encourages the allocation of intellectual property rights so as to optimally support the mutual interests of the university, faculty, staff, and students. In keeping with this principle, the parties agree as follows.

1. All understandings contained herein are entered into both (a) notwithstanding the legal designation of ownership rights to such work of faculty bargaining unit employees, and (b) without prejudice to the future position of either the CSU or the CFA on the subject of whether works created by faculty bargaining unit employees in the course of normal faculty bargaining unit work pursuant to Article 20 of the Agreement constitute ``works made for hire.'' In addition, nothing contained herein shall be interpreted to be a waiver of the right of either party to assert use rights to, or to assert ownership rights of, any materials created without extraordinary university support by faculty unit employees in the course of normal bargaining unit work pursuant to Article 20 of the Agreement, regardless of whether that party has ever asserted a right of use or ownership in the past.
2. Faculty bargaining unit employees may use for non-CSU purposes materials created by them without extraordinary university support, if in the past the CSU has never disputed the use of such materials by faculty bargaining unit employees for non-CSU purposes. Such works may include, but shall not necessarily be limited to, lecture notes and materials, course syllabi, instructional text and manuscripts, software, or plans, patterns, and works of art or design. Unless there is a separate individual agreement or past practice at a campus to the contrary, faculty bargaining unit employees shall be entitled to grant licenses or make assignments with respect to such materials to publishers and publishing agents, or any other third part.
3. By acknowledging in paragraph 2 above the historical faculty use of certain works and materials, neither the CSU nor the CFA (on behalf of any individual faculty bargaining unit employee) is waiving the right to assert use rights to, or to assert ownership rights of, materials created or used in existing or new and emerging media of expression, regardless of whether either party has ever asserted a right of ownership in the past.
4. Except as specified in paragraph 5 below, this Memorandum of Understanding applies only to those materials created by faculty unit employees in the course of normal faculty bargaining unit work pursuant to Article 20 of the Agreement, and which is created without extraordinary university support, and covers both any materials created prior to the date of this Memorandum of Understanding and any new materials created hereafter.
5. This Memorandum of Understanding does not apply to those materials created with extraordinary university support, which may be addressed by separate individual agreements at the campus. Such separate individual agreements shall not be subject to Article 10, Grievance Procedure, of the CSU/CFA Collective Bargaining Agreement. The CSU and CFA jointly will meet during spring semester 1997 in an attempt to agree upon a standard license agreement form which may serve as the basis for any separate individual agreements.
6. This Memorandum of Understanding does not apply to materials created while employed in any non-faculty bargaining unit capacity, such as in the employ of any CSU auxiliary organization, even if the materials are created by an individual who is additionally employed in a faculty bargaining unit classification.
7. This Memorandum of Understanding does not apply to, and therefore cannot supersede, ownership agreements defined in the context of any sponsored grants or contracts.
8. This Memorandum of Understanding is subject to Article 10, Grievance Procedure, of the CSU/CFA Collective Bargaining Agreement.
9. Once any separate individual agreement between the university and an individual faculty unit employee has been concluded, it may be examined by the appropriate CFA chapter representative on any campus, provided that such agreement is examined in the presence of the appropriate administrator or designee, that no copies of the agreement are made, and that the CFA not disclose any information contained in the agreement.
This Memorandum of Understanding is hereby agreed-upon by the parties on this 17th day of January 1997. It shall continue in effect unless and until changed by the parties arrived at after meet and confer sessions pursuant to Government Code \xa4 3560 et. seq.

Policy on Graduation With Honors

Academic Senate Policy S96-198

At its meeting of March 5, 1996, the Academic Senate unanimously approved the following policy on Graduation with Honors. It was approved by the President on April 16, 1996.

Based on cumulative grade point average (GPA) at the time of graduation (across all units attempted, whether in residence or transferred from other institutions):

Promotions Policy

Academic Senate Policy S94-28
(Formerly S90-28)

This Promotions Policy is a revision of the Promotions Policy approved by the Academic Senate on March 4, 1986, and by the President on March 12, 1986, (S86-28) and complies with the following articles from the Agreement Between the Board of Trustees of The California State University and the California Faculty Association, 1987-91: Articles 11, 14, 15, 22.13, and 29.17. The revised policy (S90-28) was approved by the Academic Senate on May 15, 1990, and by the President on November 15, 1990.

Advancement in rank is based on merit as demonstrated by teaching performance, professional achievement and growth, and contributions to the campus and community.

THE STRUCTURE AND MEMBERSHIP OF PROMOTIONS COMMITTEES

Department promotions committees shall be elected by secret ballot by probationary and tenured faculty in the department from among the tenured full-time faculty.

Faculty being considered for promotion and faculty on the Early Retirement Program are ineligible to serve on department committees.

Faculty on leave are eligible to serve only if they are willing to serve throughout an academic year.

Department promotions committee members must have a higher rank than those faculty being considered for promotion. University Promotions Committee members must be tenured Professors.

Department Promotions Committee Structure

Departments shall have committees which consist of at least three members. Promotions committee members shall serve a three-year term of office and may be elected for subsequent terms. Provision shall be made to ensure continuity of membership so that in any year there will be carryover of at least one person on a three-member committee and at least two persons on a five-or-more-member committee. In the event a committee member cannot fulfill the term of office, a substitute shall be selected through the standard election procedures to fill out the remainder of the unfilled term.

When there are too few eligible faculty to serve on the Promotions Committee within the department, the department shall elect members from among the tenured full-time faculty in related academic disciplines.

Faculty holding joint appointments shall be reviewed by tenured faculty from each department in which the individual holds an appointment. The review may be conducted by each department separately or by one committee with representatives from each department.

The department chair is ineligible to serve as a member of the Promotions Committee, or to participate in committee deliberations. He/she shall make a separate and independent recommendation on each promotion case under consideration.

The University Promotions Committee

The University Promotions Committee shall consist of five members, elected according to the following procedures. During the spring semester, one tenured Professor from each unit (college or library) which does not have a member continuing on the University Promotions Committee shall be nominated according to the procedures for electing college representatives to the Academic Senate. An all-university election shall be held by the end of April to elect the members of the University Promotions Committee from the pool of nominees. Each faculty person may vote for as many persons as there are vacant seats in this election. Those receiving the highest vote tally shall be elected to the committee. In case of a tie vote for the last seat, a run-off election between the tied candidates shall be conducted.

College deans, university and college administrators, department chairs, and members of department promotions committees, members of the Academic Senate and Academic Freedom Committee are not eligible to serve.

In the event a college or the library does not have at least two eligible tenured Professors or Librarians, the unit shall have the option of recommending its nominee to the university election from the pool of eligible tenured Professors university-wide. The college or library shall decide upon its nominee through a unit election process.

If a vacancy occurs on the University Promotions Committee after the university election, the person with the next highest number of votes in the university election shall be appointed.

Each member of the University Promotions Committee serves a term of two years. Members may succeed themselves in office, with the exception that no one may serve for more than four consecutive years.

The members of the University Promotions Committee shall elect one of their number to serve as chair. The chair's term is one year.

The University Promotions Committee may participate in meetings having to do with general promotions policies and processes where such meetings or communication sessions do not involve discussion of individual cases.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES FOR PROMOTION PROCEDURES

These promotion principles and procedures apply to all eligible faculty unit employees, who are referred to as "faculty members" in this document. In this document, the term "dean" includes the eight college deans and the University Librarian.

All eligible faculty shall be evaluated according to the criteria and procedures contained in this university policy and the Agreement. Each year, prior to commencement of the annual evaluation, eligible faculty shall be informed in writing of any special procedures developed by department promotions committees for use in promotion consideration. Special procedures, if any, developed by departments shall also be reviewed annually by each college dean and the Dean of Faculty Affairs to ensure that they are consistent with university policy and the Agreement. Departmental policies and the membership of the current year's promotions committees shall be forwarded to the Academic Senate, the University Promotions Committee, the Dean of Faculty Affairs, and the college dean according to the deadline on the Executive Calendar.

All promotions committee deliberations are confidential.

Recommendations regarding promotion are confidential except that the affected faculty member, department promotions committee, department chair, appropriate administrators, and the University Promotions Committee shall have access to the written reviews and recommendations for all levels of review.

The faculty member being reviewed is responsible for the preparation and submission of an up-to-date curriculum vitae and all materials he/she wishes to have considered prior to the date the file is closed. An index of all materials submitted shall be prepared by the faculty member and submitted with the materials. Materials for evaluation submitted by the faculty member are returned to the faculty member after the promotion decision has been made by the President and are deemed incorporated into the Personnel Action File (PAF) by reference in the index.

It is the obligation of every person involved in the evaluation process to make a diligent effort to obtain factual evidence, to verify the accuracy of data offered, and to evaluate the performance of the faculty member under consideration. Department promotions committees, department chairs, and administrators are responsible for identifying materials related to the evaluation not provided by the faculty member and for placing these materials in the Working Personnel Action File (WPAF) prior to the date the file is closed. Reviews and recommendations for the purpose of decisions relating to promotion shall be based solely on material contained in the WPAF and the PAF. Faculty members shall have access to materials to be placed in the WPAF at least five days prior to such placement.

The WPAF shall be defined as that portion of the PAF specifically generated for use in an evaluation cycle. When sent to the University Promotions Committee and the Vice President for Academic Affairs, it contains the following:

All information provided by faculty, students, academic administrators, and others must be identified by the name of the source. Routine student evaluations, however, remain anonymous and are identified only by their course, section, and semester. Any student communications other than these routine evaluations must be identified by name.

The chair of the department promotions committee is responsible for the generation and maintenance of the WPAF until the file is forwarded to the department chair. The chair of the department promotions committee shall complete the appropriate sections of the RTP Cover Sheet and attach it to the WPAF prior to forwarding the file to the next level of review. Thereafter, responsibility for the WPAF resides with the department chair, the dean, and the designated custodian at the university level, respectively. At each level of review, the RTP Cover Sheet shall be completed for that level of review.

The WPAF shall be considered complete with respect to documentation of performance for the current cycle of review on the date published in the Executive Calendar. After this date, the insertion of new material into the WPAF shall be limited to those items which became accessible only after this deadline and which have been approved for inclusion by the University Promotions Committee. Any material inserted after the deadline shall be returned to all earlier levels of review for evaluation and comment beginning with the department promotions committee.

Examples of new material requiring the approval of the University Promotions Committee are: student classroom evaluations from fall semester of the year of the promotion review, receipt of an award or appointment to a prestigious board or agency which was not anticipated in the WPAF, or resolution of a pending disciplinary action after the deadline. Examples of materials which are not new are: materials already in the WPAF or PAF, evidence to support rebuttal statements, and items which verify statements made in the department committee's report; e.g., verification of completion of a degree or acceptance or publication of an article.

The candidate is responsible for the identification of materials he/she wishes to be considered and for the submission of such materials as may be accessible to him/her. Promotions committees and administrators are responsible for identifying and providing materials relating to evaluation which are not provided by the candidate. When an absence of required evaluation documents is discovered by the dean, Vice President for Academic Affairs, or University Promotions Committee, the Working Personnel Action File must be returned to the level at which the requisite documentation should have been provided. Such material shall be provided in a timely manner.

If, during the time when WPAF's are being reviewed by the University Promotions Committee and the Vice President for Academic Affairs, questions arise as to whether both parties have identical WPAF's, the extra copy kept on file with the designated custodian at the university level shall be used to reconcile the WPAF of the Vice President for Academic Affairs with those of the University Promotions Committee members.

A request for an external review of materials submitted by a faculty member may be initiated at any level of review by any party to the review. External review is defined as off-campus impartial evaluation of materials in the WPAF. Such a request shall document the special circumstances which necessitate an outside reviewer and the nature of the materials needing the evaluation of an external reviewer. The request must be approved by the President or designee with the concurrence of the candidate.

In the event the President makes a decision regarding promotion for reasons other than the professional qualifications, work performance, or personal attributes of the faculty member as documented in the WPAF, then these written reasons must be given to the faculty member immediately and placed in the PAF.

Department and College Level Review Procedures

The main responsibility for evaluating and interpreting the significance of a candidate's endeavors and performance must reside with the department promotions committee, department chair, and college dean. These three parties to the promotions process must meet this responsibility in order for the promotions process to function at an acceptable professional level.

At the beginning of the fall semester, the Dean of Faculty Affairs shall notify the deans and the University Promotions Committee in writing about faculty eligible for promotion. The college deans shall notify in writing eligible faculty, department promotions committees, and department chairs. Faculty members who are eligible for review but decline to be considered must notify the department chair, department promotions committee, college dean, University Promotions Committee and Vice President for Academic Affairs in writing that they do not wish to be considered. Candidates for promotion may withdraw without prejudice from consideration at any level of review.

The department promotions committee shall notify all eligible faculty of the evaluation criteria and procedures (including due dates) prior to the beginning of each annual evaluation process. These criteria and procedures must be adhered to throughout the process.

The department promotions committee shall assemble all information relevant to the evaluation by the closing date published in the Executive Calendar, as described in the section titled General Principles for Promotion Procedures. All information considered by the department promotions committee, except routine student evaluations, must be identified by the name of the source.

Written student questionnaire evaluations shall be required for all faculty members who teach. A minimum of two classes annually for each faculty member shall have such written student evaluations. Student evaluation shall be conducted in classes representative of the faculty member's teaching assignment. The results of these evaluations shall be placed in the faculty member's PAF. Unless consultation with an academic unit has resulted in an agreement by the administration and faculty to evaluate all classes, the classes to be evaluated shall be jointly determined in consultation between the faculty member being evaluated and his/her department chair. In the event of disagreement, each party shall select 50% of the total courses to be evaluated.

The department promotions committee may receive written reports or hear testimony from other faculty members, from students, and others as deemed appropriate, but such statements shall be taken in the presence of the committee alone to ensure confidentiality. Only members of the department promotions committee may be present during its deliberations. Oral statements used by the committee must be summarized in writing, identified by name, and placed in the report.

Promotion evaluation reports and recommendations shall be approved by a simple majority of the membership of the committee. Abstentions shall be counted as a no vote.

Upon completion of its deliberations, the department promotions committee shall prepare a written report summarizing the data sources used, the nature of its evidence, its evaluation of the evidence, and its concluding recommendations. The department promotions committee shall sign and give its report and recommendations to the faculty member prior to forwarding it to the next level of review. Whenever a candidate is not recommended for promotion by the department promotions committee, the committee must provide the candidate, in writing, with its reasons for recommending against promotion and its specification of ways in which the candidate must improve in order to merit promotion. The faculty member shall sign and date receipt of his/her copy.

The department chair shall prepare a separate recommendation. It shall be his/her duty to give a copy of this recommendation to the faculty member before forwarding it and the WPAF to the dean.

Differences of opinion and problems of communication should be resolved to the extent possible at the level of origin before being forwarded to the next level of review. In the event of disagreement between the department promotions committee and the department chair recommendations or between the dean and the promotions committee or the chair, the dean shall attempt to secure resolution through consultation with the department promotions committee and the department chair.

The dean shall prepare a separate recommendation, and shall give a copy of the recommendation to the faculty member prior to forwarding the WPAF and recommendation to the Vice President and the University Promotions Committee.

At all levels of review, before recommendations are forwarded to a subsequent review level, faculty members shall be given a copy of the recommendation and the written reasons therefor. The faculty member may submit a rebuttal statement or response in writing and/or request a meeting be held to discuss the recommendation within seven days following receipt of the recommendation. A copy of the response or rebuttal statement shall accompany the WPAF and also be sent to all previous levels of review. This shall not require that evaluation timelines be extended.

The University Level Review Procedures

Upon completion of the dean's review, five copies of the WPAF shall be sent to the University Promotions Committee, one copy shall be sent to the designated custodian at the university level, and one copy shall be sent to the Vice President for Academic Affairs according to the deadlines in the Executive Calendar. One set of indexed materials shall accompany the five copies of the WPAF sent to the University Promotions Committee.

Promotions are made by the university President. At the university level, the WPAF is reviewed by the University Promotions Committee and by the Vice President for Academic Affairs. The University Promotions Committee and the Vice President for Academic Affairs shall independently review the WPAF and prepare their recommendations for the President. Copies of their separate recommendations and reasons therefor shall be sent to the candidate seven days prior to forwarding the WPAF to the President, according to deadlines published in the Executive Calendar. Recommendations shall be made as early in the year as possible and shall be forwarded to the President no later than May 15.

The University Promotions Committee and the Vice President for Academic Affairs shall meet to discuss their recommendations prior to forwarding their final recommendations to the candidate and the President. The President shall meet together with the University Promotions Committee and the Vice President for Academic Affairs to discuss their recommendations prior to making his/her final decision.

All proceedings of the University Promotions Committee are conducted in strict confidence. No member of the Committee is authorized to divulge any information with regard to Committee deliberations or meetings with the Vice President for Academic Affairs or the President to any person outside the Committee. Promotion evaluation reports and recommendations shall be approved by a simple majority of the committee. Abstentions shall be counted as a no vote.

The President shall state his/her reasons for approval or denial in his/her letter of decision.

At the end of the promotions process, after promotions decisions have been announced, the complete WPAF and copies of the President's letter informing faculty of his/her decision shall be sent to the official Personnel Action File in the Faculty Affairs Office. Indexed materials shall be returned to the faculty member by the designated custodian at the university level.

Following the final promotions announcement by the President, the University Promotions Committee shall report to the Senate the number of its positive and negative recommendations. This report may also call attention to ways in which the promotions operations may be improved. The report must be signed by all Committee members.

Operational Calendar for Promotion Recommendations

Dates for the closing of the WPAF and the submission of reviews and recommendations to the next level of review shall be determined annually and published in the Executive Calendar. There shall be a minimum of two weeks for review at successive levels. All evaluations shall be conducted and completed within the period of time specified by the Executive Calendar. The WPAF shall be forwarded in a timely manner to the next level of review.

The President shall notify faculty reviewed for promotion in writing of the final decision on the promotion no later than June 15. If promotion is awarded, this letter shall indicate the effective date.

Eligibility for Promotion

All faculty must have achieved the appropriate level of academic training for promotion. For promotion to the rank of Associate Professor or Professor, possession of a doctoral degree or appropriate terminal degree is a normal prerequisite; exception may be made in those instances where faculty members may be uniquely qualified. (See Policy on Educational Qualifications for Tenure-track Hire.)

Promotion of a tenured faculty member shall normally be considered after he/she has been granted four merit salary adjustments (MSA's) on the appropriate salary schedule or has reached the maximum salary for a given rank. This provision shall not apply if the faculty member requests in writing that he/she not be considered for promotion. Tenured faculty who are currently employed part-time become eligible for promotion after serving an aggregate time in rank equal to that of eligible full-time faculty. (See Provision 14.3 of the Agreement.)

A probationary faculty member shall not normally be promoted during probation. A probationary faculty member shall normally be considered for promotion at the same time he/she is considered for tenure. However, a faculty member in the rank of Instructor or Librarian equivalent may be considered for promotion after completing one year of service in rank.

In some circumstances, a faculty member may, upon application and with a positive recommendation from his/her department or equivalent unit, be considered for promotion to Professor or Librarian equivalent prior to having been granted four MSA's. Faculty requesting consideration for promotion in advance of receiving four MSA's shall be judged according to the same criteria and standards in effect for faculty being considered after receiving four MSA's.

Promotions may be granted to faculty who have been engaged in administrative activities outside the department. Such promotions must be made according to the procedures in this policy.

PROMOTION CRITERIA

The following criteria are to be employed at all levels of decision-making in respect to promotions.

The criteria for promotion are (a) teaching performance, (b) professional achievement and growth, and (c) contributions to campus and community. Candidates for promotion shall be evaluated on all criteria. To merit promotion, a candidate must demonstrate one of the following profiles of significant and/or superior achievement (with superior as a higher rating than significant):

		Professional Achievement	Contributions to
Teaching Performance and Growth Campus and Community
a.	significant	AND	significant	AND	significant
b.	significant 	AND	superior 	OR	superior
c.	superior 	AND	significant 	OR	significant
The primary emphasis is on teaching performance; candidates must demonstrate at least a significant rating on this criterion. There is no order of priority between the non-teaching criteria. Faculty members need not exhibit achievement in both of the non-teaching criteria. Indeed, to provide for a variety of meritorious activities and flexibility, comprehensiveness, and vigor in the university faculty, it is hoped that faculty members will exhibit highly varied profiles of achievement. Judgments about what is significant and superior within each criterion will vary with differences in disciplines, professional expectations within a discipline, and departmental, college and university objectives and goals. It is the responsibility of the department promotions committee to establish clearly the department's expectations for promotion consistent with the university criteria. The department is also responsible for making clear its requirements for documenting the quality and relevance of the work accomplished. This shall be done in consultation with the candidate at the time of hire and during the first year in rank.

Activities while in current rank are of primary relevance to promotion considerations. Verifiable accomplishments while in the same rank at other institutions or equivalent accomplishments in a non-academic setting may be included in the WPAF. When former lecturers have performed academic work comparable to that of faculty at the rank to which they have been appointed, that work may be used toward promotion. Activities engaged in while in former ranks are relevant when they form part of a process which occurs, in part, while the candidate is in current rank.

Achievements in current rank should demonstrate promise of meritorious activities comparable to the achievements and services expected of faculty who serve at the rank to which the individual is to be promoted. The intensity of the evaluation process will vary in accordance with the academic position of the faculty member; thus, promotion to Professor requires more rigorous application of standards than promotion to Associate Professor.

Teaching Performance

A faculty member should maintain a scholarly level of instruction, show commitment to high academic and pedagogic standards, be effective in instructing and advising students, guide and motivate students, and apply evaluative standards fairly and appropriately with respect to all students.

Assessment of teaching performance must be based on evidence obtained systematically from students and colleagues as well as from the candidate. This evidence may be provided in a variety of ways:

The department, in making its evaluation of teaching performance, must indicate the qualitative bases on which that judgment was made. A list of all courses taught, and those courses evaluated, should be included. If the data used to evaluate teaching performance include student comments, a representative sample of this material shall be included. Data which have been summarized statistically (e.g., overall mean ratings) should be accompanied by the more detailed data (e.g., time means, course means, etc.) on which they were based. Comparative data may also be used, but should indicate the basis for comparison (e.g., department as a whole, faculty at the same rank, faculty teaching same or similar courses, candidate's ratings over time, etc.). This evaluation should also reflect the department's need for instruction at different levels, individualized and specialized instruction, and student advising.

For faculty whose primary assignment is other than teaching (e.g., audio-visual, department chairs, library) and who do not have a separate promotion policy approved by the Academic Senate, primary emphasis shall be on effectiveness in assignment. Evidence of effectiveness in assignment must be based on systematically gathered data. The candidate's assignment must be clearly explained and documentation provided on the quality of performance. In addition, teaching performance shall be evaluated in courses taught by the candidate.

Professional Achievement and Growth

Professional achievement and growth, disciplinary or interdisciplinary, may be exhibited in a variety of ways, including research, publications, clinics and workshops, presentations to professional societies, leadership in professional societies, development of new areas of expertise, attainment of new professional licenses or certification, creative work, curricular and/or programmatic innovation, unpublished manuscripts, or similar work in progress. Although in general, no single category of professional achievement and growth is viewed as more important than others, individual departments may emphasize one category as more important than another within the framework of the department's needs and service to the students, and this emphasis shall be considered in the evaluations.

Research and Publication. Descriptions of publications, presentations to professional societies, research projects or unpublished manuscripts, or copies of said works, shall be included in the WPAF. Scholarly evaluations of such works may also be included. If such evaluations are not available, and if the department promotions committee determines that such evaluations are desirable, it may obtain such evaluations after reaching agreement with the candidate about the appropriateness of the referees. (Also see General Principles for Promotion Procedures regarding external review of materials in the WPAF.) The department promotions committee should include in its report assessment of the quality of the candidate's work.

Creative works. Creative works, such as musical compositions, choreography, art works, films, electronic media productions, literary or dramatic works, designs or inventions, exhibitions or performances shall be submitted to the department promotions committee in whatever form or forms typically are employed for evaluation in the relevant field. Such forms may include presenting the creative work itself, a reproduction or replica of the work, or a description of the work, together with whatever critical reviews may be available. The department promotions committee should include in its report assessment of the quality of the candidate's work. Procedures for securing referees and evaluations are those specified under Research and Publication.

Professional Leadership. Leadership must be at a level which demonstrates accomplishment or recognition within the relevant field. Evidence of leadership may include elections to or offices held in professional societies; awards, honors, and other forms of formal recognition by professional societies; attainment of new licenses or certificates; conducting clinics, workshops, and symposia; participation on editorial boards or as a referee; professional consulting, etc. Community involvement which both applies professional expertise and results in professionalinnovations may qualify as professional achievement and growth.

Curricular Innovations. Curricular and/or programmatic innovations in the discipline, across disciplines, or for the benefit of General Education may qualify as professional achievement and growth. Such activities may include the development of original academic programs, new courses or course content, disciplinary and/or pedagogical approaches, applications of technology, etc. Development of new areas of instructional expertise may also be considered in this category. Procedures for securing referees and evaluations are those specified under Research and Publication.

Contributions to Campus and Community

Activities included in this section should not be duplicated in other sections.

Contributions to Campus. These may include, but are not limited to, the following: administrative assignments (other than primary assignment), faculty governance, committee work, special advising assignments (e.g., General Education advising, Liberal Studies advising, Special Major advising, etc.), program development, sponsorship of student organizations, and direction of non-instructional activities and projects. Evidence supporting contributions to campus may include descriptions of the nature and extent of work accomplished, committee documents, letters from students and/or colleagues, project reports, etc. The department promotions committee should include in its report assessment of the nature and quality of the candidate's work in these activities.

Contributions to Community. Faculty members may use their academic expertise or university status to serve the community at the city, state, national, and/or international levels. Such contributions should clearly benefit both the community and the university.

Descriptions of contributions to community shall be submitted to the department promotions committee. If the department promotions committee determines that evaluation of these activities by outside experts is desirable, procedures for securing referees and evaluations are those specified under Research and Publication.

APPEAL OF PROMOTIONS DECISIONS

A faculty member who has not been promoted may request reconsideration of his/her case. The faculty member requests reconsideration by filing a notice of dispute according to the provisions of Article 10 of the Agreement. The faculty member or his/her representative must file the notice of dispute within 21 days of receiving the President's decision not to promote.

Reduced Worktime Act

The Rains Bill [SB 1859]

Faculty members have the opportunity to elect to reduce their worktime under the provisions of Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations, Part V, Chapter 1, Subchapter 7, Article 6.4. A synopsis of this act follows:

This program is made available to employees who are unable, or who do not desire, to work standard working hours on a full-time basis. All full-time academic teaching employees of The California State University may request and be considered for participation in the reduced worktime program.

Tenured faculty will derive the primary benefit from participation in this program since only tenured faculty retain tenure status when reducing their time base to less than full time. Full-time probationary faculty choosing to reduce their time base are, upon reduction of the time base, temporary employees. Thus, they lose the opportunity to gain credit toward tenure.

An employee who has been authorized to participate in the reduced worktime program shall receive the pro rata share of salary and benefits which were available to the employee while serving in a full-time position, except those benefits provided under the Public Employees' Retirement Act and under the Public Employees' Medical and Health Care Act. The pro rata share of salary and benefits shall be equal to the full-time salary and full-time level of benefits multiplied by the proportion that the reduced worktime bears to full-time employment. Benefits provided under the Public Employees' Retirement Law and the Public Employees' Medical and Health Care Act shall be provided as authorized in the Law and the Act.

Faculty members who elect to reduce their worktime will not be eligible nor will they earn credit towards a sabbatical or difference in pay leave. To be eligible for a sabbatical or difference in pay leave, the faculty member must hold a full-time position and serve in that position for six out of seven academic years.

Normally, reduced worktime shall be implemented for a minimum of one academic year. Under special circumstances, the President may grant participation for less than one academic year or approve commencement of participation at the beginning of any academic term within the academic year. Refusal by the President to grant participation for less than an academic year or allow participation to commence within the academic year shall not be grievable by the employee.

Any employee who has had worktime reduced against his or her will, contrary to the intent of this policy, or who has been unreasonably denied the right to participate in the worktime reduction program may file a grievance pursuant to the established employee grievance procedures.

Employees who reduce their worktime shall be subject to the same provisions governing layoff as before their reduction in time base. Seniority credits shall be earned in the proportion that the reduced workload bears to full-time employment.

Employees participating in the reduced worktime program shall be given first priority to return to full-time employment upon the written request of the employee to the extent that the President determines that full-time work is available. Employees who refuse an offer of full-time work after requesting to return to full-time work shall have waived their right to return to full-time employment. Temporary and probationary employees who reduce their time base shall not be given priority status nor have a right to return to full-time status.

Tenured employees participating in the reduced worktime program shall return to full-time employment at the request of the President if the President decides that it is no longer feasible to continue a position on a reduced worktime basis. The President shall notify the employee in writing no later than the end of the sixth week of the last academic term worked.

Research and Professional Development
Allocation Committee
(Statement of Responsibilities)

Academic Senate Policy S93-182

At its meeting of March 23, 1993, the Academic Senate approved the following policy creating the Research and Professional Development Allocation Committee. This committee totally replaces the Professional Research and Development Committee (Policy S77-22). This policy was approved by the President on August 2, 1993.

Charge

1. The Research and Professional Development Allocation Committee (RPDAC), an all-university committee, shall have primary responsibility for:
a. conducting university competitions for campus and CSU-funded support of faculty research, creative work, scholarship, and professional development.
b. recommending allocations to the President and/or his/her designee for campus and CSU-funded competitions for non-lottery funding.
2. The committee shall make recommendations to the Professional Development Council regarding priorities for current or future funding of the competitions which it conducts.
3. The Research and Professional Development Allocation Committee shall submit an annual report to the Academic Senate and to the Dean of Faculty Affairs and Professional Development. Clerical support for the committee's activities shall be furnished by the Office of Research and Sponsored Programs.

Membership

1. Six faculty members elected by the Academic Senate for two-year staggered terms.
2. One college dean selected by the Vice President for Academic Affairs.
3. The Associate Vice President for Research and Sponsored Programs (non-voting).

Resolution on Use of `U' Grade

Academic Senate Policy S83-109

At its meeting of December 5, 1995, the Academic Senate approved the termination of the following policy on the `U' Grade.

WHEREAS The Academic Senate recognizes that there is confusion about the use and effect of the `U' grade, and

WHEREAS It is not universally understood that a `U' grade counts as an `F' in computing grade points, and

WHEREAS Alternatives to the `U' grade are not fully utilized, therefore be it

RESOLVED That the following information be distributed periodically to the faculty:

Use of `U' Grade Symbol

1. Instructors should use two opportunities to drop students who are not in class:
a. A student may be ``bubbled out'' on the first-day enrollment list.
b. A student may be underlined on the 4th Week Verified Class List. (Such an administrative W requires dean or chair concurrence.)
2. A `U' grade is an Unauthorized Incomplete; it should be used for the student who comes to class and then disappears. In contrast, an `F' indicates unsatisfactory course work.
3. The `U' grade is equivalent to an `F' in computing grade point average.
4. An `I' (Incomplete) may be initiated by instructor or student. It should be given for students who have done a substantial portion of the course work. Instructor and students agree on conditions for removal of the Incomplete. `I' becomes an `F' if not completed within one calendar year.

Retention and Tenure Policy and Procedures

Academic Senate Policy S88-155

The following policy was approved by the Academic Senate on May 17, 1988, and by the President on August 12, 1988.

Policy and Procedures for Granting of Credit Towards Tenure

Coverage. This policy is in compliance with Article 13.4 of the Agreement.

Policy. Credit towards probation may be granted based upon previous service as a faculty member at another college or university, previous full-time CSU employment, or comparable experience.

The maximum credit allowable is two (2) years.

The awarding of service credit for probation will be approved by the department retention and tenure committee, the department chair, the dean, and the Dean of Faculty Affairs. Normally, this will occur at the time of tenure-track hire. The approved amount of service credit will be incorporated into the official offer of employment letter prepared in the Office of Faculty Affairs.

Criteria for the award of service credit towards probation:

a. For service as a lecturer at San Francisco State University: Written documentation of the evaluation of the faculty member which is equivalent to that required for probationary service, and which covers the year(s) for which credit is being requested.
b. For service elsewhere: Statement from the appropriate administrator at that institution that the prospective faculty member had been subject to evaluation during the year(s) for which service credit is being requested and that the results of the evaluation demonstrated the individual was performing competently, or written documentation of the performance of the faculty member which is equivalent to that required for probationary service and which covers the years for which credit is being requested.
c. All requests for service credit towards probation should include evidence of teaching effectiveness and scholarly accomplishments related to the discipline for which the individual is being hired; normally, this evidence will be post-doctoral.
Procedures. All requests for service credit towards probation must accompany the recommendation for appointment of a new tenure-track faculty member from the department to the dean, and subsequently, to the Dean of Faculty Affairs. Documentation supporting the request for credit should accompany the appointment documents.

If the request for service credit is approved, the official letter offering employment at San Francisco State University will state the agreed upon probationary period.

Upon acceptance of the offer of employment, the tenure eligibility year will be adjusted in the Faculty Affairs office by the data entry supervisor.

The letter of acknowledgement from the dean to the new faculty member will constitute notification of the revised probationary period to the faculty member, department, college, and the official Personnel Action File.

In the initial year of employment on tenure-track status, the probationary faculty member will be evaluated for retention according to the time frames and procedures for the first, second, or third year of probation depending upon the amount of service credit awarded.

Retention and Tenure Committee Membership

Retention and tenure committees shall be elected by secret ballot by probationary and tenured faculty in the department from among the tenured full-time faculty.

Faculty being considered for promotion are ineligible to serve on tenure committees. Faculty on the Early Retirement Program are ineligible to serve on retention and tenure committees.

Faculty on leave are eligible to serve only if they are willing to serve throughout an academic year.

Retention and Tenure Committee Structure. Departments shall have committees which consist of at least three members. Retention and tenure committee members shall serve a three-year term of office and may be elected for subsequent terms. Provision shall be made to ensure continuity of membership so that in any year there will be carryover of at least one person on a three-member committee and at least two persons on a five-or-more-member committee. In the event a committee member cannot fulfill the term of office, a substitute shall be selected through the standard election procedures to fill out the remainder of the unfilled term.

When there are too few eligible faculty to serve on the retention and tenure committee within the department, the department shall elect members from among the tenured full-time faculty in related academic disciplines.

Faculty holding joint appointments shall be reviewed by tenured faculty from each department in which the individual holds an appointment. The review may be conducted by each department separately or by one committee with representation from each department.

The department chair is ineligible to serve as a member of the retention and tenure committee, or to participate in committee deliberations. He/she shall make a separate and independent recommendation on each retention or tenure case under consideration.

General Principles for Retention and Tenure Procedures

These retention and tenure principles and procedures apply to all probationary faculty unit employees who are referred to as "faculty members."

All probationary faculty shall be evaluated according to the criteria and procedures contained in this university policy and the Agreement. Each year, prior to commencement of the annual evaluation, probationary faculty shall be informed in writing of any special procedures developed by retention and tenure committees for use in retention and tenure consideration. Special procedures, if any, developed by departments shall also be reviewed annually by each college dean and the Dean of Faculty Affairs to ensure that they are consistent with university policy and the Agreement. Departmental policies and the roster of the current year's retention and tenure committees shall be forwarded to the Dean of Faculty Affairs and the college dean according to the deadline on the Executive Calendar.

All deliberations regarding retention and tenure are confidential.

Recommendations regarding retention and tenure are confidential except that the affected faculty member, retention and tenure committee, department chair, and appropriate administrators shall have access to the written reviews and recommendations for all levels of review.

The faculty member being reviewed is responsible for the preparation and submission of all materials he/she wishes to have considered by the deadline established by the retention and tenure committee. An index of all materials submitted shall be prepared by the faculty member and submitted with the materials. Materials for evaluation submitted by the faculty member are returned to the faculty member at the conclusion of the evaluation and are deemed incorporated into the Personnel Action File by reference to the index.

Retention and tenure committees, department chairs, and administrators are responsible for identifying materials related to the evaluation not provided by the faculty member and for placing these materials in the Working Personnel Action File prior to the date the file is closed. It is the obligation of every person involved in the evaluation process to make a diligent effort to obtain factual evidence, to verify the accuracy of data offered, and insofar as possible, to make a personal investigation and evaluation of the performance of the faculty under consideration. Class visitation, evaluation of publications or other creative works, gathering of relevant opinion data (including student and colleague opinions) are all parts of the data base from which evaluation should proceed.

The working portion of the Personnel Action File shall be defined as that portion of the Personnel Action File specifically generated for use in an evaluation cycle. It contains the faculty member's materials and index, student evaluations of teaching effectiveness, and all other information provided by faculty, students, academic administrators, and others who must be identified by name. The Working Personnel Action File also contains all faculty and administrative level evaluations and recommendations made during the current cycle and all rebuttal statements. Reviews and recommendations for the purpose of decisions relating to retention and tenure shall be based solely on material contained in the Working Personnel Action File. Copies of all materials placed in the Working Personnel Action File shall be made available to the faculty member.

The Working Personnel Action File shall be considered complete with respect to documentation of performance for the current cycle of review on the date published in the Executive Calendar. After this date, the insertion of new material into the Working Personnel Action File shall be limited to those items which became accessible only after this deadline and which have been approved for inclusion by the appropriate college Leave with Pay Committee. Any material inserted after the deadline shall be returned to all earlier levels of review for evaluation and comment beginning with the retention and tenure committee before consideration at subsequent levels of review.

A request for an external review of the Working Personnel Action File may be initiated at any level of review by any party to the review. External review is defined as off-campus impartial evaluation of materials in the Working Personnel Action File. An external review may be initiated in the event of an unresolvable conflict or other special circumstances regarding the assessment of materials in the file. A request for external review shall document both the nature of the unresolvable conflict or other special circumstances and the nature of the materials needing the evaluation of an external reviewer. The request must be approved by the President or designee with the concurrence of the candidate.

In the event the President or Vice President for Academic Affairs makes a decision regarding tenure or retention for reasons other than the professional qualifications, work performance, or personal attributes of the faculty member as documented in the Working Personnel Action File, then these written reasons must be given to the faculty member and placed in the Personnel Action File.

Operation, Forwarding, and Review Procedures for Retention and Tenure Recommendations

The retention and tenure committee shall specify evaluation criteria and procedures, and the deadline for submission of the faculty member's materials, prior to the beginning of each annual evaluation process. These criteria and procedures must be adhered to throughout the process.

The retention and tenure committee shall assemble all information relevant to the evaluation. This information shall include the faculty member's materials with index, student evaluations, and any other information deemed relevant. All information considered by the retention and tenure committee, except routine student evaluations, must be identified by the name of the source.

The retention and tenure committee may receive written reports or hear testimony from other faculty members, from students and others as deemed appropriate, but such statements shall be taken in the presence of the committee alone to ensure confidentiality. No one but members of the retention and tenure committee may be present during its deliberations. Verbal testimony used by the committee must be put in writing, identified by name, and placed in the report.

Upon completion of its deliberations, the retention and tenure committee will prepare a written report summarizing the data sources used, the nature of its evidence, and its concluding recommendations. Each retention and tenure committee report and recommendations shall be approved by a simple majority of the membership of the committee. The retention and tenure committee shall give its report and recommendations to the faculty member prior to forwarding it to the next level of review. The faculty member shall, whenever possible, sign and date receipt of his/her copy.

The department chair shall prepare a separate recommendation. It shall be his/her duty to give a copy of this recommendation to the faculty member before forwarding it and the Working Personnel Action File to the dean.

Differences of opinion and problems of communication should be resolved to the extent possible at the level of origin before being forwarded to the next level of review. In the event of disagreement between the retention and tenure committee and department chair recommendations or between the dean and the retention and tenure committee or the chair, the dean shall attempt to secure resolution through consultation with the retention and tenure committee and the department chair.

The dean shall give a copy of his/her recommendation to the faculty member prior to forwarding the Working Personnel Action File and recommendation to the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

At each level of review, the faculty member shall be given a copy of the recommendation prior to forwarding to the next level of review. At all levels of review, the faculty member shall have the right to respond or submit a rebuttal statement in writing no later than seven calendar days following receipt of the recommendation. A copy of the response or rebuttal statement shall become part of the Working Personnel Action File prior to being forwarded to the next level, and shall be sent to any previous levels of review. Upon request, the faculty member may be provided an opportunity to discuss the recommendation with the recommending party. The right to rebut or to request a meeting shall not require alteration of the timelines.

The decision for retention or tenure of candidates rests with the President, or designee. As the President's designee, the Vice President for Academic Affairs may authorize reappointments in consultation with the college dean and others as required in each instance, except for cases wherein the granting or denial of tenure is involved. In tenure cases, formal review by the President is required in consultation with the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the appropriate college dean. The President or Vice President for Academic Affairs will forward a copy of the decision and the reasons therefor to the probationary faculty member.

Operational Calendar for Retention and Tenure Recommendations

Dates for submission of reviews and recommendations to the next level of review will be determined annually and published in the Executive Calendar. There shall be a minimum of two weeks for review at successive levels except in tenure cases. All cases involving tenure must allow a minimum of one month total for consideration by both the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the President. All evaluations shall be conducted and completed within the period of time specified by the Executive Calendar.

Notification of Retention and Tenure Decision. Faculty in their first and second year of probation shall be notified of the final decision on retention by February 15. The decision shall be for retention or termination.

Faculty in their third, fourth, fifth, and sixth years of probation shall be notified of retention, appointment with tenure, or terminal year appointment by June 1.

Terminal year appointments are limited to probationary faculty who have served a minimum of three (3) years of probation.

Retention and Tenure Recommendations

There will be an annual review of each probationary faculty member by the retention and tenure committee, the department chair, and the dean/director for the purpose of recommending retention, termination, terminal year appointment, or tenure to the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

The purpose of retention and tenure review is to assess the probationer's performance against university criteria in order to make personnel recommendations, and to provide helpful information to the candidate about performance expectations. The quality of the review is dependent upon the retention and tenure committee and chair taking full responsibility for conducting the review at the departmental level and upon the candidate's understanding that he or she is an integral part of the evaluation process and must provide requested information on time and in the format specified.

An assessment of teaching effectiveness is required for every year of probation as follows:

a. The first year review will, of necessity, occur during the first semester of probation. The review shall be limited to a recommendation for retention or termination at each level of review with descriptive commentary as appropriate. Where they occur, problems should be identified and discussed with the probationary faculty member.
b. The second year review will be based upon performance during the first year of probation. It shall contain an evaluation of teaching effectiveness and any other descriptive materials or commentary relevant to the other retention criteria. The recommendation shall be for retention or termination.
c. The third year review shall be an update of the second year review. The recommendation shall be for retention or a terminal year appointment.
d. The fourth year review shall be a comprehensive evaluation of the first three and one-half years of probation addressing all criteria for retention. The recommendation shall be for retention or a terminal year appointment.
e. The fifth year review shall be an update of the fourth year review. This review will specify any problems which must be resolved prior to a tenure decision. The recommendation shall be for retention or a terminal year appointment.
f. The sixth year review shall be a comprehensive summative evaluation of the preceding six years of probation according to all criteria for tenure. The recommendation shall be for tenure or a terminal year appointment.
g. The department reserves the right to perform a comprehensive evaluation in years when a comprehensive review is not required by this policy. The probationary faculty member may request a comprehensive evaluation in any year.
Early Tenure. The President in special circumstances may award tenure earlier than the normal six-year probationary period. A recommendation for the award of early tenure shall be accompanied by a comprehensive summative evaluation of the entire probationary period according to all the criteria for tenure.

A probationary faculty member may request review for tenure in any probationary year.

When credit toward probation is awarded, the award is based upon a review of the faculty member's performance comparable to that required of probationary faculty at San Francisco State University. Therefore, the year(s) for which service credit is granted will be counted as probationary years.

A probationary faculty member on leave without pay for professional purposes shall, when otherwise eligible, accrue a maximum of one (1) year service credit towards probation. The granting of full or partial leaves without pay to probationary faculty is at the discretion of the department and dean.

If the maximum allowable credit towards probation has not been reached, probationary faculty on partial professional leave without pay shall be evaluated for retention and tenure according to the same procedures, criteria and time frames in effect for all probationary faculty. When probationary faculty request full-time professional leaves of absence without pay, approval of their request by the department and the dean shall constitute their recommendation that the year of full-time professional leave without pay shall count as a year of probation. No additional campus evaluation and recommendation for retention shall occur. However, if the professional leave occurs in a comprehensive review year, the review shall occur in the year following return from leave. If the faculty member does not perform the work for which the professional leave was approved, credit towards probation granted at the beginning of the full or partial leave may be revoked by the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

When probationary faculty have accumulated a total of one year's credit towards tenure for professional leave(s) without pay, all subsequent partial or full-time leaves (regardless of their purpose) shall not accrue credit towards tenure, and during the years in which they are taken no review for retention or tenure shall occur.

Tenure at Time of Appointment. The President in special circumstances may award tenure at the time of appointment. Appointments with tenure shall be made only after an evaluation and recommendation by the appropriate department and shall be based upon an assessment of performance prior to the time of appointment. The criteria to be used are the same as those for regular tenure and are described below.

Criteria for Retention and Tenure

An assessment of teaching effectiveness is required for every year of probation. The retention and tenure committee report for the third year review and the tenure year review must include, at a minimum, cumulative information and evaluation dealing with all of the following areas with specific headings and entries indicating that these areas of evaluation have been considered:

Teaching Effectiveness. Assessment of teaching effectiveness must be based on systematically gathered evidence. The department, in making its evaluation of teaching, must indicate the basis on which that judgment was made. Comparative data may be used but are not mandatory. To merit tenure, all candidates must meet that standard of excellence which is normally expected of faculty and which is required by the university. A faculty member must maintain an adequate scholarly level in providing instruction; must show commitment to high academic standards; must be successful in instructing students in the relevant disciplinary skills and subject matter; must be able, as a teacher, to guide and stimulate students; must be effective in advising; and must be willing to confer with students.

Evidence of teaching effectiveness is to be obtained systematically from students and colleagues. Such evidence should reflect variations in the department's need for the following: instruction at differing levels, individualized and specialized instruction as appropriate, and student advising. At a minimum, departments will provide for the gathering of written student opinion on teaching in two courses each semester. Unless all classes are to be evaluated, those classes where student evaluations occur shall be jointly determined by the faculty member and the department chair. In the event of disagreement, each party shall select 50% of the total courses to be evaluated. The faculty of each department shall have the authority to increase the frequency of the gathering of written student opinion in teaching should they wish to do so. Any faculty member may request that the teaching of additional classes be evaluated.

Continuous study of the individual discipline or related disciplines, and the infusion of current materials into the curriculum being taught, are minimal requirements of all faculty.

Primary Assignment. For those members of the faculty whose primary assignment is other than teaching; e.g., audio-visual or library, and who do not have a separate retention and tenure policy approved by the Senate, primary emphasis shall be on effectiveness in assignment. The candidate's assignment must be clearly explained and documented data provided on the quality of his/her performance.

Professional Achievement and Growth. Professional achievement and growth may be exhibited in a variety of ways including research, publications, creative work, curricular development, unpublished manuscripts, or work in progress. Although in general, no one of the following vehicles (below) for professional growth and achievement is viewed as more important than others, individual departments may emphasize one category as more important than another within the framework of the department's needs and service to the students, and this emphasis shall be considered in the evaluations.

Research and Publication. Descriptions of publications, research projects or unpublished manuscripts, or copies of said works shall be submitted to the department retention and tenure committee. If scholarly evaluations of the works are available, these shall be included.

Creative Work. Creative works, such as musical compositions, paintings, sculptures, films, video-tapes, literary or dramatic works, designs or inventions, exhibitions or performances shall be submitted to the department retention and tenure committee in whatever form or forms typically are employed for evaluation in the relevant field. Such forms may include presenting the creative work itself, a reproduction or replica of the work, or a description of the work together with whatever critical reviews may be available.

Research and Curricular Development. Research in the discipline, across disciplines, or for the benefit of general education may result in significant curricular developments. Such results should become part of the evidence supporting a candidate's retention or tenure.

The department retention and tenure committee should include in its report assessment of the quality of the candidate's work.

Community Service. Individuals may serve the university using their professional expertise to provide service at the community or city, state, or national levels. Such service must involve participation at a level which makes a contribution to community activities or projects, and which enhances relations between the university and the community. Emphasis should be placed on those community activities in which the academic expertise of the faculty member is directly applied. Descriptions of community service shall be submitted to the department retention and tenure committee.

Professional Societies or Other Professional Activities. Participation includes membership and offices held in professional societies, committee activities, participation on editorial boards or in refereeing, and services provided as a consultant.

University Non-Teaching Activities. These include, but are not limited to, the following: administrative assignments, committee work, special advising assignments, program/curriculum development, sponsorship of student organizations, and direction of non-instructional activities and projects.

Personal Collegial Relationships as a Member of the Faculty. The candidate demonstrates professional ethics and principles, and accepts responsibility for working effectively with colleagues to achieve department, college, and university goals.

How this Faculty Member Fits the Future Plans and Needs of the Department. How the candidate can contribute to the long-term goals of the department, including but not limited to teaching flexibility and curricular planning.

Professional Education and/or Equivalency and Experience. Normally, the doctoral degree is required for tenure. In those disciplines where the doctoral degree is not the appropriate terminal degree, and in very rare cases of exceptional education or experiential background, the doctoral equivalency may be substituted for the doctoral degree.

The committee is free to arrange these criteria as it chooses. The committee may add other criteria and commentary, and finally, its recommendations regarding retention or tenure.

Tenure

"Tenure" means the right of a faculty member to continue at San Francisco State University unless voluntarily terminated or terminated for cause, lack of funds, or lack of work.

Decisions with respect to the award or denial of tenure to a probationary academic employee shall be on the basis of full-time service in accordance with the procedures established.

For those denied tenure following the final probationary year, a terminal year shall be awarded if the probationary faculty has served a minimum of three years. A probationary academic employee shall not serve more than seven successive full-time years.

Tenure at this university shall be effective at the beginning of the academic year following the year in which tenure is awarded.

Retroactive Withdrawal

Academic Senate Policy S96-197
(Formerly S86-143)

At its meeting of February 6, 1996, the Academic Senate unanimously approved the following policy on Retroactive Withdrawal.

A student may petition for Retroactive Withdrawal from a course(s) or from the university (all courses taken during that semester), if circumstances of a serious and compelling nature prevented the completion of course work and extenuating circumstances prevented submission of a regular withdrawal petition by the deadline in the Class Schedule. A Petition for Retroactive Withdrawal should be completed during the first enrolled semester following the semester from which the student wishes to withdraw retroactively. In filing a Petition for Retroactive Withdrawal, withdrawal from the university is normally expected since `extenuating circumstances' are not course-specific. The petition must be submitted directly to the Admissions and Records Office (if withdrawing from the university) or to the course instructor (if withdrawing from a course). A retroactive withdrawal cannot be used as a way to remedy poor academic performance in a course(s). Approved course Petitions for Retroactive Withdrawal will be recorded as `W.' In the event that the instructor is not available, the department chair may approve the Petition for Retroactive Withdrawal and assign a grade of `W.' Retroactive withdrawal from an entire semester will also be recorded as `W.'

To withdraw retroactively from the university, the student must present supporting documents which demonstrate serious and compelling reasons (usually due to serious accident or illness) justifying the withdrawal and extenuating circumstances justifying its `retro' nature. The student collects supporting documentation; obtains a copy of a current, unofficial transcript from the Admissions and Records Office; completes the Petition for Retroactive Withdrawal; and submits the entire package to the Admissions and Records Office for approval by the Board of Appeals and Review.

To withdraw retroactively from a course requires very special circumstances. Documentation of serious and compelling reasons used to justify the action should accompany the petition. Reasons why these circumstances affected the student's work in only one/some rather than all courses, must be clearly explained. For retroactive withdrawal from a course, the student collects supporting documentation; obtains a copy of a current, unofficial transcript from the Admissions and Records Office; completes the Petition for Retroactive Withdrawal; and submits the entire package to the course instructor. The petition must be signed by the course instructor, department chair, and college dean. If the student is petitioning to withdraw retroactively from more than one course but not from all courses, the student must file one petition for each course from which he/she wishes to withdraw retroactively.

Sexual Harassment Policy and Procedures

University Executive Order #95-18
(Supersedes University Executive Order #85-09)

PREAMBLE

This policy provides a definition of sexual harassment. It specifies pre-disciplinary, pre-grievance procedures for reporting and resolving complaints of sexual harassment and recommends that an education program be initiated. Formal disciplinary and grievance procedures are already defined by existing policies, executive orders, codes, and collective bargaining contracts pertinent to university employees and students. (NOTE: If the physical safety of any university individual is in question, the President will act immediately, within the authority of Title 5, Section 41301, the Education Code Sec. 22505 or the Penal Code Sec. 626.4 to protect the threatened party. Formal proceedings may be initiated immediately by the President in consultation with the Sexual Harassment Officer(s), and the appropriate grievance/disciplinary action officer.)

This Sexual Harassment Policy and Procedures applies to complaints of sexual harassment filed against a faculty member, administrator, staff person, or student. Information regarding where and how to file complaints is available from any Sexual Harassment Adviser or Officer.

No individual shall be subject to reprisal for using this policy, nor shall its use preclude subsequent disciplinary or grievance measures. All units of the campus community are expected to comply with this policy.

Except as needed in processing the complaint, both the Sexual Harassment Advisers and Sexual Harassment Officers are required to maintain confidentiality in dealing with sexual harassment complaints.

DEFINITION OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT

Sexual Harassment is one person's distortion of a university relationship by unwelcome conduct which emphasizes another person's sexuality. Sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature are forms of sexual harassment when:

a. submission to such conduct is made an explicit or implicit condition of instruction, employment, or participation in any university activity; or
b. submission to or rejection of such conduct is used as the basis for employment or academic decisions affecting the individual; or
c. such conduct has the purpose or effect of hindering performance by creating or allowing sexually intimidating, hostile, or offensive behavior to occur in the university or in a university-related setting.

Sexual harassment is unethical and unprofessional conduct, illegal, and against San Francisco State University policy. It may occur in written, spoken, physical, and visual forms. The university will act to eliminate sexual harassment within its jurisdiction.

The university will evaluate each incident of alleged sexual harassment and apply appropriate remedies.

The university can dismiss employees or expel students for sexual harassment.

The university recognizes that any member of the campus community might be called upon to listen to a complaint of alleged sexual harassment. The listener should be objective and attentive, while discouraging use of names. No records should be kept, nor should promises for specific action or final decisions be made. The listener should refer the complainant to a Sexual Harassment Adviser or to a university Sexual Harassment Officer. Complainants may go to the Sexual Harassment Officer without first consulting a Sexual Harassment Adviser and may request an investigation at any time.

SEXUAL HARASSMENT ADVISERS (SHA)

All SHA's are volunteers. The Sexual Harassment Officers shall arrange for a course for training of advisers. People who have successfully completed the course may serve as SHA's. Advisers will be available to serve as sources of initial information to any individual who has a complaint or who needs information about sexual harassment.

The names of the advisers shall be published at the beginning of each semester and are available in the following offices: Dean of Students, Director of Affirmative Action, and the Office of Graduate Division. Advisers will have information about applicable laws, university policies and procedures, and options available for resolution of complaints. The Advisers shall:

1. Serve as resource persons to individuals with complaints or inquiries which may involve sexual harassment;
2. Advise the complainant regarding applicable university policies and procedures and outline various informal and formal options.
3. Inform the appropriate sexual harassment officer if a complaint is received which is deemed sufficiently serious to warrant further action.

Discussion between complainants and Sexual Harassment Advisers can occur without a written complaint and without identification of the person bringing the complaint and shall not imply guilt or innocence. No written record of specific complaints or actions taken to this point in the procedures shall be kept.

However, a simple tally of the number and type of complaints shall be kept and reported to the appropriate Sexual Harassment Officer at the end of each semester.

If further action is requested by the complainant, the SHA shall refer the complainant to a Sexual Harassment Officer (SHO) and explain the responsibilities and duties of those officers. In addition, SHA's have an obligation to notify SHO's when it appears the university should act, even if the complainant has not requested further action. The SHA is not authorized to notify either the accused or any supervisor of the accused.

SEXUAL HARASSMENT OFFICERS (SHO)

Sexual Harassment Officers are presidential designees and in that capacity are accountable directly to the President. The SHO's shall be the Dean of Students, Director of Affirmative Action, and the Associate Dean of Graduate Division. SHO's are empowered to hear and evaluate each complaint of alleged sexual harassment and to attempt resolution. SHO's shall observe basic standards of due process and confidentiality in all actions.

The Sexual Harassment Officers shall pursue complaints promptly through the stages outlined below.

Any discussion, investigation, or action taken under these procedures shall not conflict with student grievance procedures, regulations governing student affairs, collective bargaining contracts, and Executive Order 419.

PRE-FORMAL RESOLUTION OF COMPLAINTS

The complainant may choose to enter into a pre-formal discussion or to request that the SHO conduct an investigation immediately (see Item 2 below).

Pre-Formal Discussion

Pre-formal discussion or resolution does not require a written complaint. Any SHO will hear complaints, determine the remedy sought, and review options for resolution. The review shall include a discussion of applicable university policies and procedures as well as external options for resolution. The SHO(s) shall aid the complainant in identifying ways in which further harassment might be prevented. university policy requires that the SHO keep written records of all complaints. Such records need not identify complainant or alleged harasser by name nor shall they be part of any individual's official file at this stage of the procedure.

At the request of the complainant, the SHO(s) may attempt to resolve the situation by taking some or all of the following steps:

a. Informing the alleged harasser directly or through an appropriate administrator or supervisor that a problem has been raised concerning that person's conduct.
b. Informing the alleged harasser of university policy regarding sexual harassment.
c. Assisting the alleged harasser in identifying behaviors which might lead to complaints and ways in which that behavior might be changed to avoid further complaints.
d. Recommending that an oral or written warning or reprimand be issued to the alleged harasser.

Pre-Formal Investigation and Reporting

At the request of the complainant and upon receipt of a written and signed complaint, the appropriate SHO shall initiate an investigation. If the SHO determines that circumstances so warrant, the SHO shall initiate an investigation with or without the consent of the complainant. The SHO shall notify the President, all the appropriate grievance/disciplinary officers for faculty or staff or students and the alleged harasser that an investigation is underway, and give the names of the parties involved.

The appropriate SHO shall conduct a prompt, full, and impartial investigation. The complainant shall have an opportunity to present evidence and a list of relevant and material witnesses.

A complaint for sexual harassment shall be filed within 180 days (six months) from the conduct giving rise to the complaint. The investigation shall generally be completed within 120 days (four months) of the receipt of the complaint. The time period for investigation may be extended by mutual consent of the parties or for good cause, including the complexity of the issues under investigation and the unavailability of relevant witnesses due to semester recess. Both the complainant and the accused will be informed of any extension of the investigation.

At the conclusion of the investigation, the appropriate SHO shall submit a written report to the President. The report shall include a description of the facts, the remedy sought by the complainant, and recommendations for further action if deemed necessary by the SHO. These recommendations shall be based upon the strength of evidence against the accused, the seriousness of action(s) that led to the complaint, and the remedy sought by the complainant. If formal disciplinary action is initiated, copies of the report shall be sent to the appropriate grievance/disciplinary action officer for faculty or staff or students.

If harassment is found, the university will implement such action as is necessary to correct the situation and to prevent it from recurring.

The complainant and the accused will receive written notice of the university's proposed determination regarding whether or not harassment occurred, and of the disposition of the complaint. The complainant or the accused may request reconsideration of the university's proposed determination by submitting additional relevant evidence, identifying errors of fact or of standards applied in the investigation or determination, or showing that further investigation is necessary.

A request for reconsideration of the university's proposed determination must be made to the President in writing within 10 calendar days of receipt of the Notice of Proposed Determination. The request for reconsideration must clearly specify the basis for making the request. Within 5 calendar days of receiving a request for reconsideration from either the complainant or the accused, the university will provide written notice to the other party that such a request has been made.

In processing a request for reconsideration, the university will review the information submitted, consider additional relevant evidence, correct errors of fact or of standards applied in the investigation or determination, and/or conduct further investigation if pertinent to the final determination.

If a request for reconsideration has been made, the complainant and the accused shall receive written notice of the university's final determination within 15 calendar days of the request. If there is no request for reconsideration, the complainant and the accused shall receive written notice that the university's proposed determination has become final within 15 calendar days of the Notice of Proposed Determination.

FORMAL GRIEVANCE AND DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES

Formal complaint, reprimand, grievance, or disciplinary procedures are governed by the policies, codes, executive orders, or contracts applicable to the bargaining unit or employment category to which the alleged harasser belongs.

Should it become necessary to invoke formal reprimand or disciplinary procedures, sexual harassment will be viewed as unprofessional conduct.

Formal disciplinary procedures will be pursued by the appropriate grievance/disciplinary action officer.

University Interdisciplinary Council

Academic Senate Policy S85-74

The following policy was approved by the Academic Senate on April 30, 1985, and by the President on May 21, 1985.

The University Interdisciplinary Council has the following functions:

Membership. The Interdisciplinary Council shall consist of college representatives elected by the faculty of the colleges for a three-year term; the Chair of the Educational Policies Council of the Academic Senate or designee; the Vice President for Academic Affairs or designee; the university coordinator of Interdisciplinary Studies (Dean of Undergraduate Studies); and the Dean of the Graduate Division, or his designee.

University Coordinator. The Dean of Undergraduate Studies shall serve as the University Coordinator for Interdisciplinary Studies.

The functions of the university coordinator shall include but not be limited to: