Missouri State University

Faculty Handbook

Faculty at a Meeting

G3.03 Faculty Handbook

To view this policy in its entirety, see the Faculty Handbook.

(You will need Adobe Reader to view and print this document.)

Welcome to the Faculty Handbook Website

According to Section 15.2.3.2 of the Faculty Handbook, the Faculty Handbook Revision Committee (FHRC) considers suggested revisions to the Handbook that are deemed substantive and pressing. The FHRC consists of six members, plus the chair-elect of the Faculty Senate, who serves as an ex officio member. Three members are from the tenured faculty and three members are academic administrators. From the six voting members, the FHRC elects a chair at the beginning of each academic year. You can view current members of the FHRC via the link on the left of this page.

This website has been established as a mechanism for the FHRC to solicit campus feedback on revisions currently under consideration. We hope that you will take advantage of this site and share your thoughts with the committee. If you would like to suggest a revision to the Faculty Handbook, send an email to me with the suggested change and rationale.

Rich Biagioni
FHRC Chair 2012–2013

The FHRC expects to address a number of topics this year, and additionally, the septennial review will also be starting (with the next full edition to be approved in spring, 2014).  Among the topics that we expect to address are the following:

  1. Review of how the Darr School of Agriculture and Library fit into MSU’s governance and academic structures, particularly with regard to tenure and promotion policies and procedures.  
  2. Clarify language regarding the version of departmental guidelines that apply when an individual is applying for promotion from Associate Professor to Professor.
  3. Clarification of expectations for “exceptional” performance required for early tenure and/or promotion.
  4. Clarify the requirement that at each point of the tenure and promotion evaluation process, outcomes be relayed back to lower levels (e.g., from Dean to Head and departmental committee), with rationales provided when recommendations disagree.
  5. Clarify the role of Deans in certifying the credentials of external reviewers for tenure/promotion decisions.
  6. Revise Section 5 (Salary Policies) to reflect changes in annual reviews.  The current version references the performance ratings and compensation matrix that were part of the merit compensation plan.
  7. Issues regarding non-tenure track faculty, particularly clinical faculty, will be reviewed, particularly their roles in governance and their rights to appeals.
  8. The length of time faculty must maintain grading records (in case of grade appeals) should be clarified.
  9. A mechanism for the FHRC to revisit amendments once they have gone through Senate, allowing the FHRC a mechanism to officially endorse suggestions from the Senate (when appropriate) might be helpful.  This would allow the versions of amendments from the Senate and FHRC to be identical when the Senate has recommended changes.

For several of these topics, FHRC will solicit guidance from appropriate committees, e.g., for 1 – 3, from the Provost’s Committee on Tenure and Promotion, and for 6 from the Compensation Committee.

I would like to encourage faculty to provide feedback on any of these items, and also to alert FHRC about additional issues that should be addressed.

The FHRC welcomes input on proposed changes.

1000 characters remaining.