By-laws

ARTICLE II.

DEPARTMENT STAFFING

Leadership and Membership

1. Leadership. A Dean shall lead the College. When there is a vacancy in the Dean position, the Dean’s Council shall establish a mechanism for providing input to the Provost regarding the selection of a new Dean.
2. Departmental and Program Leadership. The Dean shall appoint the chair of each department and director of each stand-alone academic program with input from the members of the faculty of that department or program.
3. Faculty Recruitment. The Dean shall instruct each department and program to develop a process for faculty recruitment. When faculty vacancies occur, the Dean shall define positions with faculty consultation, seek approval to hire a faculty member with those qualifications, and create a search committee for purposes of recruitment and hiring recommendations. Department chairs and program directors shall make faculty hiring recommendations to the Dean for final approval.

ARTICLE III.

DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF VOTING MEMBERS

I. Legislative Powers

The voting faculty of the College of Community and Public Affairs shall have the power to legislate as necessary to meet its responsibilities to initiate, develop and implement the curriculum and educational policies of the College of Community and Public Affairs in accordance with the policies of the Board of Trustees.

The voting members of the College of Community and Public Affairs shall have the power to legislate as necessary to meet its responsibilities to initiate, develop and implement all other activities of the College in accordance with the policies of the Board of Trustees.

• Maintenance of academic requirements, including requirements for admission subject to Binghamton University’s obligation to SUNY
• Recommendations for granting degrees
• Development and implementation of the educational programs of the College
• Conduct of the instructional, research and service programs of Binghamton University

The voting members of the College of Community and Public Affairs may participate significantly in, individually and collectively, the initiation, development and implementation of all other activities of the College in accordance with the policies of the Board of Trustees, including:

• Activities related to the recruitment and retention of students
• Establishment and maintenance of strong relationships with the community
• Recommendations regarding the governing structure of the College

ARTICLE IV. ORGANIZATION AND PROCEDURES

I. Organization

1. Organizational Structure. The College of Community and Public Affairs is organized into departments and stand-alone academic programs with an Office of the Dean, Dean’s Council, a student advisory board and various community advisory boards.
2. Component Descriptions.

• Office of the Dean. The Office of the Dean is comprised of the Dean, the Associate Dean, and associated staff. The Dean represents the College to the Provost and University administration and carries out University-level policies as directed. The Dean is responsible for establishing vision and strategy for the College, recommending hires to the Provost and President, and for the College’s administration, including annual and long-term budget plans. The Dean coordinates the administration of the College with input from the Dean’s Council and the advisory boards.
• Dean’s Council. The Dean's Council is comprised of the Dean, Associate Dean, appropriate Dean’s office staff, the chairs of the departments, and program directors as defined in Article I. Definitions 2 and 3(above). The council will advise the Dean and facilitate the development and implementation of the programs of the College.
• Advisory Boards. The Dean, in consultation with the Dean’s Council, shall establish and appoint community advisory boards. The purpose of these boards shall be to facilitate input from relevant communities (local, state, national, international) to advise the Dean and faculty in identifying ways in which the College’s instruction, research, service and fund raising goals can be supported.
• Student Advisory Board. The Dean shall establish a Student Advisory Board. The purpose of the Student Advisory Board shall be to establish and maintain communication between students and administration. The Student Advisory

• Board may consider a wide range of matters pertinent to the development and support of students and make recommendations for action to the Dean.
• The Student Advisory Board will have membership dependent upon the number of undergraduate and graduate programs in the College. Each undergraduate and graduate program will have two members appointed by its representative student organization. One of the two members appointed should be the president of the student organization. If no student organization exists, the Department Chair or Program Director, in consultation with the students, will appoint the student representatives. The term of office to the Student Advisory Board will be one academic year.

Procedures

1. Regular and Special Meetings. The Dean or her/his designee shall call a meeting of the voting members once a semester and, at her/his discretion, may call other meetings. The Dean shall call special meetings of the voting members if petitioned to do so in writing by at least 30% of the voting members in residence.
2. Agenda. The agenda for regular or special meetings must be announced, and proposal for action be distributed to the voting members at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting. Waiver of the forty-eight hour rule requires the affirmative vote of at least 2/3 of the voting members in residence.
3. Quorum. A quorum for regular or special meetings requires a majority of the voting members of the College in residence. A voting member on leave and unavailable to vote shall be excluded from the calculation of quorum.
4. Voting and Decision Making. Decision-making responsibilities of voting members are defined in Article III. Decisions shall be based on the choice of the majority of those voting provided that a quorum is present. Members who abstain shall be treated (for purposes of decision making) as not voting.
5. College Secretary. A College administrative support staff member shall attend regular and special meetings and draft minutes.
6. College Minutes. Minutes of each meeting shall be edited, amended from the floor at the next meeting, and if approved by the voting members, signed by the College Secretary and distributed to the voting members. The Dean or her/his designee and the College Secretary will maintain permanent files of these minutes.
7. Meeting Procedure. Meetings will be conducted informally except those meetings of the Academic Ethics and Integrity Committee. A motion to move to formal procedures may be made at any time by a voting member. Such a motion shall require a simple majority for passage. When faculty meetings are in formal procedures, such meetings shall conform to Robert’s Rules of Order

the date of appointment as Bartle Professor, shall do so.  (Approved by faculty in mail ballot in April 1997) In instances where five (Approved by faculty in mail ballot in October 2008) members of the Senior Personnel Committee cannot be drawn from within the academic subdivision, the committee shall be constituted to provide a majority of (Approved by faculty in mail ballot in October 2008) a combination of full and associate professors from within that academic subdivision who are on continuing appointment with at least two semesters of academic service at this University; the associate professors to be elected by the faculty of the academic subdivision; the remaining seats to be filled by full professors from other academic subdivisions at this University appointed by the Provost after consultation with the faculty of the academic subdivision in which the case is being heard and the appropriate UPC (see Title D). The Committee shall be formed by the Provost after consultation with the faculty of the academic subdivision in which the case is being heard when the inclusion of the sum of full and associate professors eligible to serve is fewer (Approved by faculty in mail ballot in October 2008) than three.” CCPA prefers to have SPCs consist only of Full Professors. Therefore, when associate professors are being considered for promotion and the initiating department consists of fewer than five full professors, the Dean will ask the Provost to appoint a minimum of five full professors to a Special Senior IPC. The Chair of the home department (or another associate professor when the Chair is the one going up for promotion) will serve as a non-voting ex-officio member of the SPC to provide information about discipline-specific norms.

Membership of Junior Personnel Committees. Per the University Faculty Bylaws, “All full professors and associate professors on continuing appointment shall serve on the Junior Personnel Committee to consider cases of those below the rank of associate professor. Bartle Professors holding the title of full professor or associate professor who agree to serve on the Committee during a given academic year, and within a 5-year limit from the date of appointment as Bartle Professor, shall do so. (Approved by faculty in mail ballot in April 1997) An academic subdivision which has fewer than five qualified members available shall notify the Provost, who shall then appoint (in consultation with the Dean per an agreement dated February 17, 2014), after consultation with the faculty of the academic subdivision in which the case is being heard and the appropriate UPC (see Title D), the number necessary to make up the minimum complement of five voting members. In cases where no member of an academic subdivision is eligible for service on a Junior Personnel Committee, the members of that subdivision shall elect from among themselves a person who shall serve as the chairperson-without-vote of the Junior Personnel Committee in question.”

Department Chairs are members of the IPC and are able to serve as IPC Chair, but shall not vote on personnel cases originating in their departments.

C. Officers.

The CCPA Assistant to the Dean shall schedule the first meeting of each IPC for the purpose of having the IPC elect a member of the committee to act as Chair.

1. IPC Chair

The chairperson shall be elected by secret ballot from the committee's membership and shall preside, with vote, at committee meetings. The chairperson of a departmentalized academic subdivision may be elected to chair an IPC, but shall serve without vote. The chairperson of an IPC shall not be present when his or her own case is being considered. The IPC Chair is responsible for scheduling subsequent meetings, and ensuring that deadlines are met for completion of tasks. The IPC Chair shall preside, with vote, at committee meetings except in cases where the chair of the candidate’s department is selected to serve as IPC Chair in which case that person shall serve without vote. The IPC Chair serves as a liaison between the IPC and the candidate. Duties include advising the candidate on processes and procedures involved in the preparation and organization of materials for their folder, the timeline for review, and their options for response to reports submitted at different stages in the review process. For each personnel case, the IPC Chair shall appoint a sub-committee of IPC members with the familiarity with the candidate’s research, teaching, and service records and assist the IPC in evaluating the candidate’s record and in preparing the Secretary’s report. The IPC chair may serve on this sub-committee.

II. Guidelines for Review and Recommendations

A. Overview.

CCPA is a departmentalized college composed of units that are closely aligned with a similar commitment to community engagement, critique and application of professional practice, and well-grounded research. Interdisciplinarity and different disciplines maintain particular expectations. In respect to the variety of standards, the Chair, the IPC and the Dean shall refer to the definitions and criteria of scholarship, teaching, and service as determined by the candidate’s department, CCPA and Binghamton University, unless these conflict with University standards. The IPC is expected to evaluate the quality, significance, and trajectory of scholarship, teaching and service based on the evidence presented. Departmental criteria and an explanation of the unique mission of CCPA shall be provided to all external reviewers.

B. Integration of research, teaching and service.

Nationally recognized colleges and universities acknowledge increasingly that faculty research should not be evaluated in isolation. As a College committed to applied research, faculty’s scholarship, teaching and service are expected to be often (although not always) interwoven. Teaching and rigorous scholarship are essential. Service and research should be shared and integrated into one’s teaching; service activities and innovative teaching practices should generate research questions, grant activity, publications and presentations. In all cases, University Personnel Committee guidelines must be followed.

1. Scholarship

Scholarship is assessed by considering a number of different sources of evidence. Primary among them are an active research agenda, and publications (may include but is not limited to community-engaged scholarship) in inter/national, peer-reviewed journals. These journals can be interdisciplinary or discipline-specific. Whether they be interdisciplinary or discipline-specific, the journals should be ones that advance the reach and contribution of the faculty members’ research. For faculty from disciplines where books are the preferred scholarship, then books are viewed as a primary form of scholarship. Secondary evidence includes paper presentations, panel/symposium participation, invitations to speak, etc. at inter/national conferences, authoring/editing scholarly books and chapters, grant activity, community-engaged scholarship and other scholarly documents/materials/contributions pertinent to practice.

As outlined by the Provost's Procedures for Personnel Cases:
"Community-engaged scholarship is a mutually beneficial collaborative process between the scholar and community partner, grounded in the qualities of mutual respect, shared authority and co-creation of goals and outcomes. Community-engaged scholarship may be evaluated by outcomes such as peer-reviewed publications; reports to local, national, or international agencies; formal presentations or creative activites; or resource acquisition. Criteria of excellence, impact, and/or originality apply to all forms of community-engaged scholarship as determined by the person's academic unit."

Candidates are expected to demonstrate on-going participation in an active research program that follows a cohesive agenda. Evidence of the quality and significance of scholarship include publication in scholarly books and highly regarded journals, application of innovative conceptual/methodological approaches, and extension of the knowledge base in the candidate’s field or specialty.

2. Teaching

High quality teaching is expected of candidates for contract renewal and tenure and promotion in CCPA. Teaching is broadly defined, going beyond actual classroom instruction, to include field supervision, advising, supervision of student projects/research, and other activities. Faculty are expected to demonstrate a commitment to continual improvement of teaching. Evidence to support the quality, significance, and process of teaching could include peer observations, student surveys, mid- and end- of course student evaluations, self-assessments, as well as other forms of assessment documentation. Evidence of student learning outcomes should be gathered and systematically evaluated.

3. Service

As a College committed to community partnerships and/or engagement, it is expected that faculty will engage in service to the community, the university, and the profession. Each department defines community engagement broadly. While it is expected that faculty may engage in community service in the Southern Tier, they may also engage in service in other parts of the state, country and world. In addition to a broad definition of the location for service, faculty engage in a breadth of service activities. Appropriate departmental, college, and university service could include serving on/or chairing committees, serving on boards, consulting with community organizations, program development and/or evaluation, direct services, community based research efforts, and other related activities. Appropriate professional service could include review of papers for journals, professional conferences, and/or leadership in professional organizations.

Evidence to support quality, significance, and processes for service might include letters from groups relevant to the candidate’s scholarly focus, demonstrated impact on populations of interest, and the value of service activities as measured by changes at an individual, organizational, or community level.

Service may take many forms and may support a faculty member’s scholarship and be integrated into research and teaching. In documenting a record of service, CCPA faculty should be able to articulate the relevance of their service contribution to their scholarly focus.

III. The Process

A. Overview.

The process for review consists of a series of semi-independent and yet cumulative reviews of the candidate’s record.

B. Submission of Candidate’s Materials.

The candidate is required to submit his/her materials to the Department Chair and to CCPA Assistant to the Dean, who shall make the materials available to the members of the IPC. Materials must be submitted according to dates set in the Provost’s Guidelines. The following should be included:

• a vita (following the IPC Vita Guidelines)
• syllabi and evaluations for all courses (SOOTs are strongly recommended as part of course evaluation)
• statement on teaching philosophy including a self-assessment of teaching in relation to his or her teaching philosophy and goals, including how feedback from students (performance on tests, student evaluations of the course, and so forth) has been used to improve the candidate’s teaching and/or student learning
• statement on service including a description of the ways in which service contributes to teaching and research endeavors
• copies of all publications
• research agenda describing background and trajectory
• other supporting materials

The candidate’s statements should explicitly address how their research, teaching and service activities support the mission of the department, the College of Community and Public Affairs, and Binghamton University, and should provide evidence of the quality and significance of their professional activities.

The candidate should consult with a mentor, department chair and/or current IPC Chair and review the Procedures for Personnel Cases, Faculty By-Laws, and criteria established by each department for more information on the types of materials to submit.

C. Student Input

In the semester before a formal review, the CCPA Student Advisory Board shall be notified of all faculty under consideration for contract renewal, promotion, and/or tenure. The Student Advisory Board shall solicit input from students and alumni who are familiar with the faculty member and shall prepare a report summarizing student input. This process may be assisted and supported by the CCPA Assistant to the Dean, and may be conducted through an electronic survey process. The summary report of student input shall be provided to the faculty member who shall have five days to prepare a written response. The student report and, if applicable, the faculty member’s response, shall be forwarded to the department chair and the chair of the IPC, and shall be appended to the IPC report.

D. External Reviews (applies only for Tenure and Promotion reviews; does not apply to contract renewal).

Selection of External Reviewers

In the semester before a formal review, the candidate is asked to submit the names of three individuals who could function as external reviewers; the IPC will select one person from the candidate’s list of external reviewers. The remaining external reviewers shall be selected from a list prepared by the IPC. Neutrality of these reviewers will be assured. The reviewers may not be co-authors, dissertation committee chairs or dissertation committee members. The Department Chair will request external review letters from a sufficient number of individuals to ensure that a minimum of six external reviews are received by the IPC.

In selecting external reviewers, the IPC shall identify individuals who are “noted scholars” from “comparable institutions,” usually based on Carnegie rankings and similar commitment to applied community-based research. A greater number of external reviews from individuals with scholarly prestige will provide the most support for a candidate’s file.

2. The Packet for External Review

In the semester before a candidate’s formal review for tenure and promotion, the candidate submits a packet of materials to the Department Chair that will be shared with external reviewers. This packet should include: a CV, a statement of philosophy on the intersection of the research, teaching and service activities, an explanation of the background and intended trajectory of their research, and samples of scholarly work.

3. The IPC shall adhere to University requirements regarding the confidentiality of external reviews as specified in the faculty by-laws and the Provost’s procedures.

E. Initiating Personnel Committee (IPC) Review & Report.

The IPC reviews the candidate’s materials, student association report, and, where applicable, external reviews. The IPC will also be guided by the faculty by-laws and Provost’s procedures with respect to additional materials submitted for review. The IPC then discusses the case, votes on it, and prepares a report. In promotion and tenure cases, separate votes are taken on promotion & tenure. IPC votes are taken by secret ballot. If a qualified faculty member does not attend any meeting of the IPC or SPC, does not review records and does not vote, in transmitting the vote, that action shall be recorded by the chair as a non-participatory abstention. The results of the vote shall become a part of the Committee’s report and recommendation.

The IPC Chair shall prepare a written report including the recommendation of the committee, the final vote, and all supporting documentation. The IPC report is drafted by the IPC Chair and reviewed by the members of the committee. In Promotion and Tenure cases, where the report may be considerably more detailed than those prepared for contract renewal, the IPC may decide to have separate members of the committee draft sections of the report; in such cases, the IPC Chair is responsible for compiling the sections into a single cohesive document. When the report reflects the assessment of the IPC, a hard copy and an electronic copy are provided by the IPC Chair to the CCPA Assistant to the Dean, who will arrange for all members of the IPC to sign the document.

The IPC report is sent by the CCPA Assistant to the Dean to the candidate first, who has 5 business days to respond, if desired. The IPC report, the candidate’s materials and response (if there is one) are then forwarded to the CCPA Dean.

F. Department Chair Review & Report.

The candidate’s materials (and in promotion and tenure cases, external reviewer letters) are part of the review by the Department Chair. The Chair submits a report with his/her recommendation to the Dean that shall be made available to the IPC, subsequent to the committee’s decision, and to the candidate.

G. CCPA Dean Review.

The Chair’s Report and IPC Report are submitted concurrently to the Dean for review. The CCPA Dean reviews the candidate’s materials, the Chair’s Report, and the IPC Report, and where applicable, external reviewer letters, and then prepares a report including recommendations.

H. Reviews Beyond CCPA.

Following the Dean’s Review, the candidate’s materials progress through appropriate University channels – including reviews by the All-University Personnel Committee