NOVEL CORONAVIRUS UPDATES AND RESOURCES

CSUS Bylaws

Last amended August 2019

Table of Contents

  1. Statement of Purpose
  2. Unit Vision, Mission, and Values
  3. Faculty and Staff
  4. Committees
  5. Department Chairperson
  6. Associate Chairperson, Graduate Program Coordinator and Undergraduate Program Coordinator
  7. Terms and Conditions of Employment and Tenure
  8. Position Priority, Appointments, Promotions, Tenure, Reappointments, and Program Reductions
  9. Grievance and Hearing Procedure
  10. Amendments and Effect Date
  11. Supplement 1: Scholarship & Evaluation of Faculty Activity

1. Statement of Purpose

The Bylaws for Academic Governance, Michigan State University [MSU Bylaws], which were approved in 1968 by the Board of Trustees and which have been updated often (most recently, December 1999) specify certain responsibilities and require actions of the faculty of each academic unit.

The Bylaws for Academic Governance, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources [CANR Bylaws] (adopted December 22, 1976, revised and updated May 15, 2001) also specify certain actions of the faculty of the college and each academic unit. The primary purpose of the Bylaws for the Department of Community Sustainability is to outline the procedures for implementing the actions at the Department level as specified in the University and College Bylaws.

Nothing in these Bylaws shall be construed as (1) limiting or discouraging the rights of groups or individuals in the Department from initiating actions or resolving problems through direct consultation with the Department Chairperson, (2) limiting the rights of the Department Chairperson to discuss and formulate programs of action with such individuals or groups as he or she may choose, acting within the general framework of these Bylaws, or (3) limiting any member of the Department from making his or her best contribution, in his or her own work as well as in the general operation of the Department.

Approved by the Regular faculty of the Department, [August, 2013].


2. Unit Vision, Mission, and Values

The Department of Community Sustainability engages with colleagues, students, stakeholders and communities to address social choices within specific environmental, economic and cultural contexts that advance or conflict with sustainability goals.

Sustainability is about choices made within specific environmental, economic, social, and cultural contexts. Sustainability scholarship involves creating, integrating and harnessing new knowledge to protect and improve social and natural systems and their interactions. The Department of Community Sustainability (CSUS) is an interdisciplinary department that addresses contemporary issues of sustainability in agriculture, food, recreation, natural resources, and the environment.

The Department of CSUS engages with colleagues, students, stakeholders and communities to address social choices within specific environmental, economic and cultural contexts that advance or conflict with sustainability goals. We do this by:

  • Focusing on sustainability engagement that embraces the human decisions inherent in moves to a more sustainable future;
  • Creating and supporting a dedicated faculty working on sustainability-related issues;
  • Incorporating a systems-thinking view of sustainability into curricula at the undergraduate level, graduate level, and lifelong learner levels; and
  • Conducting sustainability scholarship that is international in scope while attending to regional and local contexts.

The work of the students, staff, and faculty of CSUS supports the mission of the University to advance knowledge and transform lives by preparing students who contribute to society as globally engaged citizen leaders; conducting research that expands human understanding and makes a positive difference; and advancing outreach activities that lead to better quality of life for individuals and communities, at home and abroad. CSUS also supports the mission of the Department of Community Sustainability to enhance the quality of life for the people of Michigan and the world by advancing knowledge for the management of communities and agricultural, natural resource and food systems to meet diverse human needs in a sustainable manner.

Our Vision

Our vision is to lead and aid in the development and revitalization of sustainable communities, thus enhancing the capacity of current and future generations to reach their potential.

Our Mission

Our mission is to assist the development of sustainable communities by conducting excellent scholarly research, teaching and outreach in the following areas:

  1. education and civic engagement,
  2. community, food, and agriculture,
  3. natural resources and environment, and
  4. recreation and tourism systems

3. Faculty and Staff

3.1. Composition of the Faculty

3.1.1. The regular faculty of the Department shall consist of all persons appointed under the rules of tenure to the Department and who hold the rank of Professor, Associate Professor, Assistant Professor, or Instructor, except persons on a part-time or temporary appointment.

3.1.2. The temporary faculty of the Department shall consist of all persons appointed to the Department but not appointed under the rules of tenure, including, but not limited to, specialists, lecturers, research associates, postdoctoral fellows, assistant instructors, fixed-term, and adjunct faculty.

3.1.3. The honorary faculty of the Department shall consist of professors’ emeriti, specialist emeriti, visiting professors, and other honorary faculty. The rank of visiting professor is typically reserved for individuals who will return to their home university, agency, firm, or other institution after a limited appointment period at Michigan State University.

3.2. Voting Faculty

3.2.1. The voting faculty in the election of department, school, or college councils and committees and in elections pertaining to department, school, or college policies and decisions shall include all regular faculty engaged in the academic activities of that unit and may, if so provided by unit bylaws, also include health professions faculty, FRIB/NSCL faculty, fixed-term faculty, honorary faculty, specialists, lecturers, research associates, assistant instructors, and adjunct faculty (MSU Bylaws 1.1.2.2.). The CSUS voting faculty is defined, in accordance with the MSU Bylaws 1.1.2 and College of Agriculture and Natural Resources Bylaws (CANR Bylaws 1.1., 1.2.) as regular faculty and specialists in the continuing appointment system. The addition of non-regular faculty to the department’s voting faculty for some matters shall be governed by procedures specified in Section 3.2.3 and in accord with MSU Bylaws 1.1.2.2.

3.2.1.1. For University and College-wide elections, the voting faculty of the Department will vote through the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources.

3.2.1.2. A faculty member jointly appointed to two or more units may vote only once in university and college elections. In elections concerning matters outside of the Department in which a jointly appointed faculty member is asked to vote, the jointly appointed faculty member shall only vote in the unit that has primary responsibility for initiating that faculty member’s personnel actions (MSU Bylaws 1.1.2.3.).

3.2.1.3. A voting faculty member may be elected to serve on a university or college academic governance body as a representative of this unit only if that person has 50% or greater appointment to this unit.

3.2.2. On matters concerning activities entirely within the department, such as electing Department committees, Department votes on policies, and other Department decisions, the faculty entitled to vote shall be the CSUS voting faculty (Section 3.1.1.) and those individuals in positions with specified voting privileges entitling them to vote in such matters (Section 3.2.3.).

3.2.2.1. Regular faculty must have an appointment in the department of >= 0% in order to be the primary advisor of graduate students in the department’s graduate program. Faculty with a 0% appointment shall not have voting privileges within the department except on matters pertaining to graduate student committees they are chairing or serving on.

3.2.3. The regular faculty of the Department may extend specified voting privileges on departmental matters to temporary, continuing, or honorary faculty of the Department on a case-by-case basis in the following manner:

3.2.3.1. First, there must be i) a determination by the Department Chairperson, and ii) a determination by the Faculty Affairs Committee (FAC) of the department that a particular temporary or honorary faculty position be recommended to be designated a "faculty position with voting privileges.” These separate determinations shall be based on, among other things, the particular position, its position description, and job responsibilities.

3.2.3.2. Upon the recommendations of the Chairperson and FAC under Section 3.2.3.1. the regular faculty may consider extending voting privileges to a particular temporary or honorary faculty position.

3.2.3.3. Procedure for the Regular Faculty to extend voting privileges.

3.2.3.3.1. An ad hoc committee of two or three regular faculty shall be appointed by the Chairperson to draft a position description including the definition and limitations of voting privileges for the proposed faculty position with voting privileges.

3.2.3.3.2. The position description for the faculty position with voting privileges (Section 3.2.3.3.1.) shall be presented to and subsequently voted on by the Regular Faculty at a regularly scheduled and properly noticed faculty meeting.

3.2.3.3.3. Following the position description (Section 3.2.3.3.1.) and the regular faculty’s approval of the position description (Section 3.2.3.3.2.), there shall be a public seminar by the candidate for the faculty position with voting privileges.

3.2.3.3.4. After all the procedures for the selection and review of faculty have been followed, including but not limited to Sections 3.2.3.3.1-3., the regular faculty shall vote on whether to approve the extension of the specified voting privileges to the proposed faculty position.

3.2.3.3.5. In the event that a non-tenure system, faculty position with voting privileges position becomes vacant, a new candidate for said position will not have voting privileges unless all of the procedures set forth in Section 3.2.3.3. are followed. That is, voting privileges are extended by the regular faculty to specific individuals on a case by case basis.

3.3. Staff

3.3.1. The Department staff consist of all administrative-professional, clerical-technical and supervisory personnel in the unit.

3.3.2. The staff shall be responsible to - and shall be supervised by - the Department Chairperson or his/her delegate.

3.4. Modes of Participation

3.4.1. There are four modes of faculty and student participation for use in Academic Governance: Consultation, Advisory, Shared Responsibility, and Delegated Authority. Definitions of the four modes may be found in the CANR Bylaws (MSU Bylaws Sections 1.3.1-1.3.4.).

3.5. Faculty Meetings

3.5.1. Faculty meetings may be called by the Department Chairperson or his/her designee. The Faculty Advisory Committee (Section 4.4.) also may call a faculty meeting, if the Department Chairperson fails to call a meeting after the Faculty Advisory Committee gives written notification to the Department Chairperson outlining the need for a meeting. The Department Chairperson shall generally be present at meetings of the voting faculty (MSU Bylaws 2.2.4.).

3.5.2. At least one faculty meeting shall be held during each semester. Regular faculty meetings may occur more frequently on a fixed schedule upon the mutual agreement of the Department Chairperson and the faculty (e.g., the second Monday of each month). The decision as to how often and when the faculty shall meet will be made at the beginning of each academic year. The Department Chairperson or the Faculty Advisory Committee may call additional meetings.

3.5.3. The Department Chairperson shall make available to all faculty members a written agenda of matters to come before the faculty at faculty meetings at least two working days prior to the scheduled meeting time. The chairperson, faculty committees, and faculty members may place items on the agenda for the meeting by submitting them to the Department Chairperson at least three working days prior to the meeting. The Department Chairperson shall determine the order of consideration. Agenda items not reached during the meeting before adjournment shall be included as unfinished business on the agenda of the next faculty meeting.

3.5.4. Items of urgency that arise after the agenda has been prepared and distributed may be added to the agenda only upon approval by a two-thirds majority of the faculty present and voting at a properly convened faculty meeting (See Section 3.6.10.). “Urgent items” are defined as items, circumstances and matters so urgent that faculty action cannot be wisely delayed to a subsequent faculty meeting.

3.5.5. Faculty Meetings are generally open to the public except in those instances when personnel or other Department matters with valid privacy concerns will be discussed.

3.6. Conduct of Faculty Meetings

3.6.1. The Department Chairperson shall preside at faculty meetings. In the absence of the Department Chairperson, the Associate Chairperson, if any, shall preside. In the absence of the Department Chairperson and/or Associate Chairperson, the Chairperson of the Faculty Advisory Committee shall preside or in his/her absence the Faculty Advisory Committee member of highest seniority shall preside.

3.6.2. Minutes shall be kept for all faculty meetings and such minutes will be promptly distributed to the voting and temporary faculty. The Department Chairperson may ask a department staff member to be the recorder of the minutes of the meeting.

3.6.3. All Department Faculty and Staff (Sections 3.1. and 3.3.) shall be able to attend, speak, and participate at Faculty Meetings. However voting privileges reside in the Voting Faculty (Section 3.2.).

3.6.4. The graduate student representative from the Department Graduate Student Organization (Section 10.3.2.) shall have attendance and speaking privileges at faculty meetings on matters which are not exclusively of faculty concern as outlined in the University Bylaws for Academic Governance.

3.6.5. The undergraduate student representative from the Department Undergraduate Executive Committee (Section 10.3.1.) shall have attendance and speaking privileges at faculty meetings on matters which are not exclusively of faculty concern.

3.6.6. A quorum of 40 percent of the voting faculty is necessary for faculty action at a faculty meeting.

3.6.7. A simple majority vote (i.e., >50%) of the voting faculty present and voting at a faculty meeting is needed for a motion to carry.

3.6.8. Faculty votes shall be restricted to those items that are on the agenda calling for such action, if said agenda has been properly distributed to the Department faculty. This does not intend to imply that voting to determine consensus cannot be called for by the Department Chairperson.

3.6.9. Voting at faculty meetings shall be by show of hands of the eligible voters unless three members of the voting faculty present request that the vote be taken by written ballot. If there is a request for a written ballot, the voting faculty present may elect to conduct the written ballot with the voting faculty present or of the entire voting faculty.

3.6.10. In general, voting by proxy is not permitted. However, if a ballot question or nomination is presented on a properly published agenda, a voting faculty member who will not attend the scheduled faculty meeting may mark a ballot and present it to the Department Chairperson for inclusion as a ballot voted at the meeting. However, the prior marked ballot will not be considered on any question that has been changed at the meeting. Neither shall the ballot be considered beyond the first round of voting on a nomination.

3.6.11. Except as provided in these bylaws, faculty action may be taken only at proper convened faculty meetings. A proper meeting of the faculty is one for which (a) the agenda was distributed in a timely manner [See 3.5.3.], (b) a quorum of the voting faculty is present [See 3.6.6.], and (c) one for which minutes are kept (Section 3.6.2.).


4. Committees

4.1. Establishment of Committees

4.1.1. A committee may be formed by vote of the voting faculty.

4.1.2. The Department Chairperson may appoint such advisory or service committees as he/she deems necessary.

4.1.3 Graduate program-related task forces or sub-committees, with a time-limited existence, may be formed by the Graduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee Chairperson in consultation with the Department Chairperson.

4.1.4 Undergraduate program related task forces or sub-committees, with a time-limited existence, may be formed by the Undergraduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee Chairperson in consultation with the Department Chairperson.

4.1.5. Any committee whose function is deemed important and essential to the effective operation of the Department can be designated a standing committee of the Department by vote of the voting faculty.

4.1.6. The following shall be standing committees of the Department:

Faculty Advisory Committee (Section 4.4.),
Graduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee (Section 4.5.),
Undergraduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee (Section 4.6), and
Promotion and Tenure Committee (Section 4.7.)

4.1.6. Committees are advisory to the Departmental Chairperson. The Departmental Chairperson is the Chief Executive Officer (Section 5.1.1) and has primary responsibility for educational and scholarly activities, service, and international programs of the Department (Section 5.1.2).

4.2. General Procedures and Organization for Committees

4.2.1. The committee chairperson for the Faculty Advisory Committee (Section 4.4.) shall be elected by the members of the Faculty Advisory Committee (see Section 4.4.3.1.). Other committee chairpersons shall be selected by the members of the particular committees subject to approval by the Department Chair.

4.2.2. Each committee shall develop its own operating procedures and shall meet as necessary to perform its functions. The Faculty Advisory Committee, the Graduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee, the Undergraduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee, and the Graduate Admissions Committee shall meet at least once each semester.

4.2.3 Ad-hoc committees, task forces, or subcommittees formed by either the Graduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee [Section 4.1.3] or the Undergraduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee [Section 4.1.4] shall report to the faculty through their respective parent committees.

4.2.4. Meetings of each committee shall be called by its chairperson as directed by the committee procedural requirements.

4.2.5. A quorum to conduct official business shall consist of two-thirds or more of the voting members of the committee.

4.2.6. Each committee chairperson is responsible for the maintenance of official minutes or records of all meetings of this committee and their transmission in good order to his or her successor. A committee recorder may be appointed by the committee chairperson.

4.2.7. Committee membership is open to all members of the voting faculty.

4.2.8. All department faculty and staff (Sections 3.1-3.) shall be able to attend, speak, and participate in committee meetings in accordance with these Bylaws, MSU Bylaws, CANR Bylaws, the operating procedures of the committee, and subject to appropriate privacy concerns. However, voting privileges reside in the Voting Faculty (Section 3.2.).

4.2.9. For committees that require election of members, the election of members to the committee by the voting faculty shall be conducted by the Faculty Advisory Committee in consultation with the Department Chairperson and in accordance with procedures outlined for each committee. (e.g., Section 4.4. for Faculty Advisory Committee)

4.2.10. Appointment of faculty, staff, and student members to committees shall be made by the Department Chairperson in accordance with these Bylaws, MSU Bylaws, CANR Bylaws, the operating procedures of the committee, and subject to appropriate privacy concerns.

4.2.11. New committee members will be elected during Spring Semester and shall take office at the beginning of the academic year.

4.2.12. Faculty members on leave of absence or sabbatical leave shall be permitted to serve on committees of the faculty provided they are available and so desire.

4.2.13. If a committee determines that a member is no longer able to carry out the functions of the committee, the secretary or chairperson of the Committee will take appropriate action for the election of a replacement.

4.2.14. Each committee shall prepare and submit an annual written report to the faculty prior to June 1 of each year.

4.2.15. Each committee shall report regularly to the Department faculty and staff, including, but not limited to, making reports at faculty meeting and distributing electronic updates to faculty and staff.

4.2.16. Each standing committee shall provide faculty, staff, and students with an opportunity for a hearing upon a timely and appropriate request.

4.3. Nomination and Election of Committee Members

4.3.1. Faculty Advisory Committee (see Section 4.4.)

4.3.2. Promotion and Tenure Committee (see Section 4.6.)

4.3.3. General procedures for College and University committee elections.

4.3.3.1. College committees include such committees as College Advisory Committee (CAC), College Curriculum Committee (CCC), and others.

4.3.3.2. The Department’s Faculty Advisory Committee (FAC) shall accept nominees from the voting faculty and assemble a list of nominees willing to serve for each College and University committee vacancy.

4.3.3.3. The list of nominees assembled by the FAC shall be submitted to the voting faculty at least five working days before the election. 4.3.3.4. The election shall be by secret written or electronic ballot.

4.3.3.5. Tie votes for a vacant position shall be decided by a run-off ballot listing the tied nominees. If a vote remains tied after a run-off ballot, the tie will be resolved by the Faculty Advisory Committee.

4.3.3.6. In the event that more than one position on a committee is being filled, the nominee receiving the most votes will fill the vacant position on that committee with the longest term of office, the recipient of the second most votes will fill the position with the second longest term of office, etc.

4.3.4. General procedures for Department committees, not including Faculty Advisory Committee (Section 4.4.), Promotion and Tenure Committee (Section 4.6.), and University or College committees (Section 4.3.3.) are addressed in Section 4.2.

4.4. Faculty Advisory Committee

4.4.1. The Faculty Advisory Committee (FAC) shall be composed of three elected regular faculty members (elected by the faculty) plus the Associate Chair, Graduate Program Coordinator, and the Undergraduate Program Coordinator who serve as ex officio members (See Section 6).

4.4.2. Functions:

4.4.2.1. The FAC will serve as the “Unit Advisory Committee” as defined in CANR Bylaws 4.1.2.1.

4.4.2.2. To serve in an advisory capacity to the Departmental Chairperson.

4.4.2.3. To serve as an open channel of communication between the Department and the Chairperson (See also Section 5.3.3.).

4.4.2.4. To bring to the attention of the Department Chairperson and/or the faculty practices, policies, procedures, problems, or issues that require review or consideration.

4.4.2.5. To provide a channel through which faculty members may raise and address issues concerning the welfare of the Department.

4.4.2.6. To serve as a channel of communication between the Department’s faculty and the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources (See also Section 5.3.3.).

4.4.2.7. To conduct required elections and nominations as specified in these Bylaws (e.g., Section 4.3.) and the Bylaws of the College and University.

4.4.2.8. To assist the Department Chairperson in planning important events (e.g., faculty retreats, internal/external reviews, etc.).

4.4.2.9. To assist the Department Chairperson in advancing the reputation of the department.

4.4.2.10. To provide liaison with the College Advisory Council (CANR Bylaws 4.1.2.1.).

4.4.3. Procedures

4.4.3.1. The Faculty Advisory Committee shall be elected by the voting faculty. The chairperson of the Faculty Advisory Committee shall be elected by the members of the Faculty Advisory Committee each year, following the election of members to the Faculty Advisory Committee.

4.4.3.2. The committee shall meet at least twice per semester and/or on the request of 3 or more voting faculty members, the Department Chairperson, or the chairperson of the committee.

4.4.4. Election and Term of Office

4.4.4.1. All members of the regular faculty (Section 3.1.1.) who have appointments of 50 percent or more, except the Department Chairperson, Associate Chairperson, Undergraduate Program Coordinator, and Graduate Program Coordinator, are eligible for election to FAC.

4.4.4.2. Regular faculty members shall be elected each year to serve on the Faculty Advisory Committee for a three-year term. The nominee gaining a plurality of the votes cast is elected. The terms of service of members on the Faculty Advisory Committee shall be staggered so that typically one member shall be elected each year and that members will have overlapping terms.

4.4.4.3. A vacancy on the FAC occurs when a member resigns or is absent for four months. If the vacancy occurs with more than six months remaining on the term of office, a new FAC member is elected to serve the remainder of the old term. If the vacancy occurs with less than six months remaining on the old term, the new FAC member is elected to serve the remainder of the old term and an entire new term of office.

4.5. Graduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee (GACC)

4.5.1. The Graduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee shall consist of the following members:

4.5.1.1. Three voting faculty members appointed by the Department Chairperson in consultation with the Faculty Advisory Committee and with the consent of the Voting Faculty. In addition, the Graduate Program Coordinator shall be an ex officio member of the committee. Additional temporary and honorary faculty may be appointed as committee members with committee voting privileges by the Department Chairperson in consultation with the Faculty Advisory Committee and with the consent of the voting faculty.

4.5.1.1.1. Faculty members shall be appointed for a three-year term. Terms shall be staggered so that one member is replaced each year.

4.5.1.1.2. The Department Chairperson shall solicit nominations from the Faculty Advisory Committee and the Department Faculty for vacancies on the Graduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee.

4.5.1.1.3. The Department Chairperson shall review his/her proposed committee appointees with the Faculty Advisory Committee before presenting the proposed committee appointees to the Department Faculty for their advisory vote of approval.

4.5.1.1.4. After the advisory vote and consultation with FAC, the Chairperson may appoint committee members.

4.5.1.1.5. The Department Chairperson retains primary responsibility and authority for appointing committee members.

4.5.1.2. A graduate student member (without vote) shall be nominated by the Graduate Student Organization and appointed by the Department Chairperson to serve a one-year or two-year term.

4.5.1.2.1. The graduate student member of the committee shall not participate in the evaluation and acceptance process of student applicants in the Department’s programs.

4.5.1.3. A Department Staff Person (without vote) will be assigned by the Department Chairperson to help with administrative tasks.

4.5.1.4. The Graduate Program Coordinator shall be an ex officio member of the committee.

4.5.2. The Graduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee shall be responsible for advising on matters involving decisions regarding the graduate program of the department including:

4.5.2.1. Recruiting applicants for graduate study

4.5.2.2. Criteria and procedures for admitting students to the graduate program

4.5.2.3. Identifying and awarding scholarships and fellowships

4.5.2.4. Reviewing requests for substitutions of required courses and other deviations from department, college, and university requirements

4.5.2.5. Reviewing the operation and suitability of the graduate program, its requirements, curricula, and offerings.

4.5.3. The Graduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee shall present recommendations and reports on curriculum, teaching, and graduate matters to the Department Chair and voting faculty for discussion and appropriate action.

4.5.4. The Graduate Admissions Subcommittee

4.5.4.1 The Department Chairperson shall appoint three regular faculty members to serve on the Graduate Admissions Subcommittee. They should not be members of GACC.

4.5.4.2. The Department Chairperson shall review his/her proposed committee appointees for the Graduate Admissions Subcommittee with the Faculty Advisory Committee before presenting the proposed committee appointees to the Department Faculty for their advisory vote of approval.

4.5.4.3. The Graduate Admissions Subcommittee will be responsible for reviewing graduate student applications; making graduate student admission recommendations and decisions; as well as undertaking other tasks related to the admissions of graduate students to the department as agreed to by GACC and the Departmental Chairperson.

4.6. Undergraduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee

4.6.1. The Undergraduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee shall consist of the following members:

4.6.1.1. Three voting faculty members appointed by the Department Chairperson in consultation with the Faculty Advisory Committee and with the consent of the voting faculty. At least one undergraduate advisor will also be appointed as a voting member of the committee. Additional temporary and honorary faculty may be appointed as committee members with committee voting privileges by the Department Chairperson in consultation with the Faculty Advisory Committee and with the consent of the voting faculty.

4.6.1.1.1. Faculty members shall be appointed for a three-year term. Terms shall be staggered so that one member is replaced each year.

4.6.1.1.2. The Department Chairperson shall solicit nominations from the Faculty Advisory Committee and the Department Faculty for vacancies on the Undergraduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee.

4.6.1.1.3. The Department Chairperson shall review his/her proposed committee appointees with the Faculty Advisory Committee before presenting the proposed committee appointees to the Department Faculty for their advisory vote of approval.

4.6.1.1.4. The Department Chairperson retains primary responsibility and authority for appointing committee members.

4.6.1.2. An undergraduate student member (without vote) nominated by the Undergraduate Student Organization and appointed by the Department Chairperson to serve a one-year term.

4.6.1.3. A Department Staff Person (without vote) will be assigned by the Department Chairperson to help with administrative tasks.

4.6.1.4. The Undergraduate Program Coordinator shall be an ex officio member of the committee. 4.6.1.5. The undergraduate advisor(s) appointed as voting member(s) of the committee shall be for a one year renewable term.

4.6.2. The Department Chairperson will appoint an advisor to the Department’s Undergraduate Student Organization (Section 10).

4.6.3. The Undergraduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee shall be responsible advising on for matters involving decisions regarding the Undergraduate program of the department including:

4.6.3.1. Recruiting applicants for undergraduate study

4.6.3.2. Identifying and awarding scholarships and fellowships

4.6.3.3. Reviewing requests for substitutions of required courses and other deviations from department, college, and university requirements

4.6.3.4. Reviewing the operation and quality of the undergraduate program, its requirements, curricula, and offerings.

4.6.4. The Undergraduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee shall present recommendations and reports on curriculum, teaching, and undergraduate matters to the chair and voting faculty for discussion and appropriate action.

4.7. Promotion and Tenure Committee

4.7.1. Primary responsibility for evaluating all faculty members shall rest with the Department Chairperson. However, during promotion and tenure considerations, all faculty of a rank higher than the candidate will vote on the candidate’s promotion and tenure decision (Section 4.7.7.2.).

4.7.2. Composition

4.7.2.1. The Promotion and Tenure Committee (P&T Committee) shall consist of all Regular Faculty that have been awarded tenure in the Department.

4.7.2.2. The chairperson and the secretary of the P&T Committee shall be full professors in the Department and shall be elected by the Regular Faculty.

4.7.2.2.1. A new secretary of the P&T Committee shall be elected to a two-year term of office each year by the Regular Faculty. The secretary shall succeed to the chairpersonship of the P&T Committee in the second year of her/his elected term

4.7.2.2.2. In the first year of the Department, the faculty shall elect two officers of the P&T Committee-a chairperson and a secretary. The initial chairperson of the P&T Committee will serve a one-year term and the initial secretary of the P&T Committee will serve a two-year term and succeed to the chairpersonship of the committee in the second year of his/her term of office.

4.7.2.3. Working sub-committees appointed by the chairperson of the P&T Committee may include any Faculty member.

4.7.2.4. In advisory matters affecting appointments or reappointment, only those members of the P&T Committee holding a rank equal to or higher than the position under consideration shall participate in the final decision of the committee.

4.7.3. Functions:

4.7.3.1. To advise the Department Chairperson on general matters regarding tenure and reappointments of regular faculty members appointed under the rules of tenure.

4.7.3.2. To advise the Department Chairperson and assist her/him in documenting judgments of the professional competence, academic potential, and compatibility of candidates for reappointment or promotion.

4.7.3.3. To, in like manner, advise and assist the Chairperson and Faculty in circumstances leading to recommendation for not reappointing or dismissal of a tenured or non-tenured Faculty member.

4.7.4. Procedures

4.7.4.1. In matters affecting appointment, reappointment, tenure or dismissal of a Faculty member, the governing authority shall be the provisions and operating principles of the Michigan State University tenure system as specified in policy statements of the Broad of Trustees.

4.7.4.2. Final interpretation of tenure rules is the jurisdiction of the University Committee on Faculty Tenure (MSU Bylaws Section 4.7).

4.7.4.3. Criteria (Section 4.7.5.) and the Peer Advisory Group (Section 4.7.6.) shall be used to assist the Promotion and Tenure Committee in advising and assisting the Department Chairperson.

4.7.4.4. The Promotion and Tenure Committee shall have no authority in tenure matters beyond advising and assisting the Department Chairperson, and shall make no rules or conduct affairs that subverts the academic rights or privileges of any Faculty member, as provided by the Bylaws of the Board of Trustees, 1984, and affirmed in Chapter IV of the Faculty Handbook, Michigan State University.

4.7.4.5. Working and ad hoc sub-committees may be appointed by the chairperson of the P&T Committee after consultation with the P&T Committee, the Department Chairperson, and if appropriate, the Undergraduate and Graduate Student Organizations.

4.7.4.6. Sub-committee assignments shall clearly state the nature of the assignment and the nature and frequency of reporting to the committee. The committee chairperson shall take appropriate measures to assure that such schedules are met and that the appropriate recommendations or reports are transmitted to the committee, the Department Chairperson and the Faculty.

4.7.4.7. Student participation in the work of sub-committees or in meetings of the committee shall be by invitation or request transmitted through the Department Chairperson.

4.7.4.8. The committee shall meet upon the call of its chairperson, the Department Chairperson, or on request for audience by a candidate under consideration.

4.7.5. Criteria by which faculty members will be evaluated for appointment, tenure, and/or promotion.

4.7.5.1. Supplement 1 – Scholarship and Evaluation of Faculty Activity – defines scholarship and scholarly activities for CSUS faculty

4.7.5.2. Credentials File. To insure an objective and complete review of each candidate for promotion and tenure, candidates shall assemble a credentials file. This file should contain any and all information upon which decisions regarding granting of tenure and/or promotion may be based such as:

4.7.5.2.1. Activities in research, teaching, outreach, service, including international activities in these areas.

4.7.5.2.2. Reprints of publications.

4.7.5.2.3. Student evaluation of teaching abilities (SIRs forms and other evidence as available and relevant).

4.7.5.2.4. Records of participation in professional organizations, meetings, papers presented, offices held, etc.

4.7.5.2.5. Activities within the Department, College, and University (e.g. responsibilities, committees, etc.).

4.7.5.2.6. Letters of commendation, awards, etc.

4.7.5.2.7. Completed drafts of official promotion and tenure paperwork for the College and University, including the “Recommendation for Reappointment, Promotion or Tenure Action Form D (RRPT0993)”.

4.7.5.3. Testimony of other faculty members. If opinions from persons at other institutions are desired, they will be solicited by the Department Chairperson.

4.7.5.4. Candidate’s evaluation shall be based on a variety of considerations including the present and future needs of the Department, mutuality of interest between the candidate and the Department, and the professional competence of the candidate. Professional competence of faculty shall be judged on the basis of performance in teaching, research, outreach/engagement, and leadership/service in accordance with the context of their appointment. International activities in teaching, scholarly activities, and service are to be considered important contributions. Faculty members shall be evaluated on the basis of their appointment, proportional assignments, and direction from the chair.

4.7.6. Peer Advisory Group

4.7.6.1. The Peer Advisory Group shall assist a candidate for reappointment, tenure, or promotion and help maintain continuity.

4.7.6.2. The Department Chairperson shall appoint a Peer Advisory Group of two or more persons from the Department Faculty to advise, to assist, and to counsel each candidate.

4.7.6.2.1. Members of the Peer Advisory Group shall include: one individual nominated by the candidate, one individual nominated by the by the Departmental Chairperson in consultation with Faculty Advisory Committee (FAC).

4.7.6.2.2. Members of the Peer Advisory Group shall hold a rank equal to or higher than the position under consideration.

4.7.6.2.3. The Peer Advisory Group shall be chaired by the individual selected by the Departmental Chairperson. Their operational procedures shall conform with these Bylaws, MSU Bylaws, CANR Bylaws, and the Faculty Handbook.

4.7.6.3. Upon request of the Peer Advisory Group Chairperson, the candidate will provide the Peer Advisory Group with his/her credentials file (Section 4.7.5.2.) in a timely manner.

4.7.6.4. The Peer Advisory Group will supplement the candidate’s credentials file with information acquired independently by the Peer Advisory Group and, as appropriate, testimony solicited from faculty in the Department, other departments, and persons at other institutions.

4.7.6.5. At the candidate’s request or that of the Peer Advisory Group, the candidate may be interviewed by the Peer Advisory Group.

4.7.6.6. The Undergraduate Student Organization, Graduate Student Organization, and/or other appropriate students shall be consulted formally for student opinion about a faculty member’s performance before the final recommendation to reappoint or not to reappoint, to tenure or not to tenure, or to promote or not to promote.

4.7.6.7. Upon the request of the Department Chairperson, and after consideration of the information described above, the Peer Advisory Group will make its recommendation to the Department Chairperson for or against the granting of reappointment, tenure, and/or promotion for a candidate. The Department Chairperson shall be provided with a statement, citing specific items of testimony and record, together with the committee’s recommendation regarding promotion, granting of tenure or consultative advisement of the faculty member.

4.7.7. Evaluation of faculty under consideration for reappointment, tenure, and/or promotion

4.7.7.1. In the fall semester of each academic year and at the other times as appropriate, the Promotion and Tenure Committee will meet for review of non-tenured and junior faculty members under consideration for reappointment, promotion, and tenure.

4.7.7.1.1. The credentials files (Section 4.7.5.2.) of faculty under review should be up-to-date by October 15 and available for such meetings.

4.7.7.1.2. The Peer Advisory Group (Section 4.7.6.) of each candidate under review should have a final recommendation to the Department Chairperson (Section 4.7.6.7.) by November 15 and available for such meetings.

4.7.7.2. The Promotion and Tenure Committee shall vote, by secret written ballot, on whether or not to recommend reappointment, promotion, granting of tenure or consultative advisement of each of the faculty member candidates under consideration. See Section 4.7.2.4.

4.7.7.3. The Promotion and Tenure Committee shall provide the Department Chairperson with a brief statement of each faculty member’s progress, citing specific items of testimony and record, together with the committee’s recommendation regarding reappointment, promotion, granting of tenure, or consultative advisement of the faculty member.

4.7.8. Candidates being considered for reappointment, promotion, and/or tenure shall be notified by the Department Chairperson at least three weeks prior to the final date for submitting Department recommendations. If the advisory decision of the Promotion and Tenure Committee is to not recommend promotion, that information shall be transmitted to the faculty member at least three weeks prior to the final date for submitting Department recommendations and the individual will be given a copy of the Committee’s recommendations.

4.7.9. Any candidate for reappointment, promotion, and/or tenure must be granted a hearing before the Promotion and Tenure Committee if he or she so requests in writing to the Department Chairperson.

4.7.10. The written recommendation of the Promotion and Tenure Committee shall go forward together with the Department Chairperson’s recommendation concerning the candidate to the Dean.


5. Department Chairperson

5.1. Responsibilities

5.1.1. The Chairperson is the Chief Executive Officer of the Department (CANR Bylaws 4.1.1.1.).

5.1.2. The Chairperson is responsible for educational and scholarly activities, service, and international programs of the Department. This responsibility includes budgetary matters, physical facilities and personnel matters in his or her jurisdiction, taking into account the advice of the regular faculty (CANR Bylaws 4.1.1.3.).

5.1.3. Primary responsibility for evaluating regular faculty members shall rest with the Department Chairperson; evaluation of each individual’s professional performance, however, shall be based on criteria and methods approved by the regular faculty. The Departmental Chairperson shall provide faculty with annual written reviews.

5.1.4. The Chairperson shall present his or her proposed criteria and methods for evaluating members of the faculty to the regular faculty. These criteria and methods, as well as changes thereto, must be approved by the regular faculty before they may be used.

5.1.5. As mentioned elsewhere in these bylaws and CANR Bylaws (4.1.1.3.), the Department Chairperson shall seek and consider advice and counsel of the voting members of the unit in formulating policy and other decisions. The Department Chairperson shall seek advice from standing committees, other governance bodies, and voting faculty of the Department in matters pertaining to, among other things, appointments, promotions, tenure, teaching, research, and curriculum.

5.1.6. The Department Chairperson shall perform other duties stipulated in these bylaws and the bylaws of the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources and Michigan State University.

5.1.7. Certain duties, responsibilities, and entitlements of the Department Chairperson are described elsewhere in these Bylaws.

5.2. Selection

5.2.1. The voting faculty of the Department shall have shared responsibility with the Dean (CANR) to determine procedures for screening candidates for the position of Department Chairperson.

5.2.2. Regular faculty, temporary faculty, honorary faculty, staff, and students of the Department shall advise the Dean (CANR) in the appointment of a Department Chairperson. The regular and voting faculty will vote on candidates for department chair (See Section 3.2).

5.2.3. Search and Screening Committee

5.2.3.1. Composition

5.2.3.1.1. One tenured faculty member from the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, outside the Department, appointed by the Dean of the College of Agricultural and Natural Resources.

5.2.3.1.2. At least three members of the regular faculty of the Department, elected by the voting faculty of the Department.

5.2.3.1.3. Membership on the Search and Screening Committee must satisfy university and college requirements for minority and women representation. When minorities and/or women are not elected, the committee must consult with the Dean (CANR) for appointment of additional individuals to the committee.

5.2.3.2. Functions

5.2.3.2.1. To consult with the Dean of the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources (CANR) and the voting faculty of the Department with regard to all activities, including those listed below.

5.2.3.2.2. To establish basic qualifications for a new Department Chairperson.

5.2.3.2.3. To establish procedures for the screening of candidates

5.2.3.2.4. To conduct the screening of candidates in accordance with the established procedures, and to present a short list of candidates who are acceptable to the committee and the faculty to the Dean (CANR).

5.2.3.2.5. To establish procedures to determine a short list of candidates who are acceptable to the faculty, including a vote of regular faculty.

5.2.3.3. Procedures.

5.2.3.3.1. The committee shall, under the leadership of the CANR Dean, elect a chairperson and recording secretary from its membership.

5.2.3.3.2. If the Chairperson of the Faculty Advisory Committee is a candidate for the position, then he or she may not fulfill such leadership duties as to help elect the Search and Screening Committee chairperson (e.g., 5.2.3.3.1.). In such a case, the remaining Faculty Advisory Committee member with the highest seniority in the Department will fulfill those Search and Screening Committee tasks assigned to the chairperson of the Faculty Advisory Committee.

5.2.3.3.3. Any member of the duly elected Search and Screening Committee who is a candidate for the Department Chairperson shall immediately resign from the committee and be replaced by the next highest recipient of faculty votes under Section 5.2.3.4.

5.2.3.4. Election of Search and Screening Committee Members

5.2.3.4.1. The Faculty Advisory Committee shall conduct the election of at least three regular faculty members to serve on the Search and Screening Committee (Section 5.2.3.1.3.).

5.2.3.4.2. Each voting faculty member will vote by secret ballot for up to three members for the Search and Screening Committee from the list of regular faculty who have agreed to serve if elected.

5.2.3.4.3. The three regular faculty members with the highest number of votes will be elected to the Search and Screening Committee. The ballots shall be kept until the new Department Chairperson is appointed, in case Section 5.2.3.3.3. might be invoked or if there arises a need for additional committee members.

5.2.3.4.4. In case of a tie, a run-off ballot listing tied nominees shall be resubmitted to the voting faculty.

5.2.3.4.5. In case of a re-tie, the tie shall be broken by the chairperson of the Department’s Faculty Advisory Committee, if he or she is not a candidate for the position, in consultation with the Dean of CANR.

5.2.3.5. The judgment and evaluation by the regular faculty on recommending a chair will be sought by written ballot.

5.3. Review of Chairperson

5.3.1. At intervals not to exceed five years, the Dean shall review the performance of the Chair for consideration of reappointment (MSU Bylaws 2.1.4.2.).

5.3.2. The Department shall have shared responsibility with the Dean on procedures for review of the Chairperson (MSU Bylaws 2.1.4.3.).

5.3.3. The Faculty Advisory Committee shall serve as a mechanism to provide written faculty feedback to the Department Chairperson and/or the Dean to promote the progress of the Department and improve the Departmental Chairperson’s performance and effectiveness.


6. Associate Chairperson, Graduate Program Coordinator and Undergraduate Program Coordinator

6.1. Whenever the Department Chairperson determines that a position of Associate Chairperson, Graduate Program Coordinator, and/or Undergraduate Program Coordinator is needed, he/she shall so inform the faculty and solicit nominations and applications from the regular faculty. It is possible for one individual to be appointed to serve in more than one of these roles (e.g., Associate Chairperson and Undergraduate Program Coordinator).

6.2. The Chairperson will consult with the Faculty Advisory Committee before making a recommendation of Associate Chairperson, Graduate Program Coordinator, and/or Undergraduate Program Coordinator to the faculty. Thereafter, the Chairperson may recommend one or more of the candidates to the regular faculty for an advisory vote. After the advisory vote and consultation with FAC, the Chairperson may appoint a candidate as Associate Chairperson, Graduate Program Coordinator, and/or Undergraduate Program Coordinator.

6.3. The individual(s) holding the position of Associate Chairperson, Graduate Program Coordinator, and/or Undergraduate Program Coordinator serves at the pleasure of the Department Chairperson. However, the term of office for the Associate Chairperson, Graduate Program Coordinator, and/or Undergraduate Program Coordinator runs concurrently with that of the Department Chairperson. When a vacancy occurs in the Department Chairperson’s position, so too a vacancy occurs in the Associate Chairperson’s, Graduate Program Coordinator’s, and/or Undergraduate Program Coordinator’s position.

6.4. Procedures to fill a vacancy in the position of Associate Chairperson, Graduate Program Coordinator, and/or Undergraduate Program Coordinator shall comply with all the provisions of this Section (i.e., 6.1, 6.2., and 6.3).


 

7. Terms and Conditions of Employment and Tenure

The terms and conditions of employment and tenure for all faculty members are found in Section 4.1.5 of the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources Bylaws.


 

8. Position Priority, Appointments, Promotions, Tenure, Reappointments, and Program Reductions

8.1. Position Priority.

Before a vacant position may be filled or a new position may be created in the Department, the Department shall have an approved position priority plan that sets forth the priority of positions to be filled in the Department.

8.1.1. At least once every two years, the Department Chairperson, in consultation with FAC and other Departmental committees, shall develop a proposed list of possible positions for anticipated vacancies or new positions in the Department. This proposed position priority list shall be presented to the Department Faculty for discussion at a regularly scheduled Faculty meeting.

8.1.2. After the proposed position priority list has been presented at a Faculty Meeting (Section 8.1.1.), the FAC will conduct a vote of the Regular Faculty using a written ballot that (i) asks regular faculty to indicate the acceptability or unacceptability of each proposed position and (ii) asks regular faculty to rank their priority for the proposed positions that they find acceptable. The FAC will compile the results of this position priority vote and communicate its results to the Department Chairperson, the Faculty, and Staff.

8.1.3. After the position priority vote and consultation with FAC, the Chairperson shall finalize the Department’s Position Priority List. This ranked position priority list shall be advisory to the Department Chairperson and guide the Department in filling and creating positions in the Department until a new ranked position priority list is developed and approved by the Department.

8.2. Appointment procedures.

Appointment procedures for Department Faculty (Section 3.1., including 3.1.1., 3.1.2., and 3.1.3.) shall be consistent with guidelines of the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources. The Regular Faculty (Section 3.1.1.) shall advise the Department Chairperson on establishment or closure of positions in the Department, including tenure system, job-security system and teaching/student advising faculty (Academic Specialists).

8.2.1. When a faculty position is to be filled or a joint appointment is to be made, the regular faculty will review and evaluate the candidates.

8.2.1.1. The Chairperson shall appoint an ad hoc Committee of three members of the Regular Faculty to receive recommendations and specify the desired qualifications of applicants.

8.2.1.2. The Committee will, among other things, assist in the drafting of position descriptions, screening candidates, conducting visits and interviews, and collecting feedback for the faculty and other stakeholders.

8.2.1.3. The Committee will present its findings to the faculty and the Department Chairperson. After due consideration, the Department Chairperson will make a preliminary recommendation to the faculty.

8.2.1.4. Each candidate judged to have met the qualifications for the faculty position or for a joint appointment will be invited to present a seminar to the faculty.

8.2.1.5. The judgment and evaluation of the regular faculty will be sought by written ballot.

8.2.2. After the advisory vote of the regular faculty and consultation with FAC, the Department Chairperson may make a recommendation for appointment to the Dean. In the event that the Department Chairperson’s nomination is not supported by a majority of the regular faculty, the Chairperson will so inform the Dean and explain to the faculty and the Dean the reasons for the recommendation.

8.3. Mentoring Committees.

All tenure stream Assistant Professor shall have a mentoring committee established within three months of their appointment start date. Academic Specialists appointees can choose to have a mentoring committee – in which case, the same criteria of establishment and conduct will apply as to the tenure stream faculty outlined below. All Assistant Professors are required to maintain these committees through promotion and tenure to Associate Professor and are encouraged to maintain them through to Professor.

8.3.1. Each mentoring committee shall consist of two faculty from CSUS. An additional faculty from within MSU may be added if it is jointly deemed to contribute substantially to the mentoring of the faculty.

8.3.1.1. This mentoring committee is not evaluative, but rather is supportive. The mentoring committee is intended to provide a consistent source of support and guidance to the faculty member.

8.3.2. The chairperson shall consult with the faculty member to mutually agree upon two faculty to serve as the initial mentoring committee. FAC shall be consulted before the committee membership is finalized.

8.3.3. If at any time the faculty member feels that a change in mentoring committee membership is warranted this can be discussed with the Chairperson and a change made if both agree.

8.3.4. The mentoring committee and the faculty member shall meet at least yearly. Prior to annual evaluations the mentoring committee shall submit a report to the Chairperson outlining progress, concerns, strategies, and any other considerations deemed relevant.

8.3.4.1. This annual report shall be agreed to by the mentoring committee and the faculty candidate prior to submission to the chairperson.

8.3.4.2. This annual report is not evaluative. Rather it is intended to provide a supportive platform for the faculty member.

8.4. Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion procedures.

Peer Advisory Groups (Section 4.7.6.) and the Promotion and Tenure Committee (Section 4.7.) shall advise the Department Chairperson and will meet at his or her request to consider reappointments, promotions, and tenure according to the procedures outlined in Section 4.7. of this document and the Bylaws of the College and Michigan State University.

8.5. Evaluation.

Annual evaluation of faculty members for promotions, reappointments, and merit raises shall be consistent with evaluative criteria outlined in Sections 4.7.5. ,4.7.8., and Supplement 1 of this document. The Department Chairperson shall annually inform each faculty member in writing of her or his performance and progress as well as ways to improve their performance. The FAC, together with the Department Chairperson, will make a comparative assessment of the contributions of individual faculty members during the period being assessed. Such evaluation will be completed by July 31 of each year.

8.6. Personnel Files.

The written assessment of faculty members will be made part of each faculty member’s personnel file. A faculty member may review his/her personnel file at any time during regular office hours.

8.7. Program change/reduction.

When reduction or other plans call for curtailment of programs, the Department Chairperson must consult with the Faculty Advisory Committee about the identification of particular academic personnel, including tenure system faculty members, who may be affected by possible shifts from annual to academic year appointment basis or termination. The Department Chair will observe the usual Department governance procedures under the time constraints set for arriving at recommendations and to prevent conflict of interest by participants. (Curtailment of a program may require an evaluation of all academic personnel appointed in the Department. In these instances, conflicts of interest can be avoided by establishing multiple evaluation panels composed of all academic personnel, including tenure systems faculty, appointed in the Department. Each panel shall evaluate all academic personnel appointed in the Department except those serving as members of the panel. Panel evaluations shall be forwarded to the Department Chair. Alternatively, the Dean or Chair must consult with the Department and College Advisory Committee before establishing this special committee.) If the Department committee does not include women and/or minorities as regular members, a woman and/or minority should be selected to serve as a consultant. Individuals who are to be reviewed should be informed by the Department Chairperson and given opportunity to submit up-to-date information on their qualifications, achievements, and capabilities.


9. Grievance and Hearing Procedure

9.1. Preamble.

All faculty and students shall have the right to due process in settling grievances which may arise (CANR Bylaws 7.1.).

9.2. Procedures

9.2.1. Procedures for resolving faculty grievances may be found in Appendix D of the CANR Bylaws as well as in the Faculty Grievance Procedure in the Faculty Handbook. The practices followed by the Department will be those set forth in the document "Model Academic Unit Grievance Procedure", approved by the University Council for Faculty Affairs, 30 April 1991 (appended).

9.2.2. Procedures for resolving student grievances are outlined in the University documents Academic Freedom Report for Students at Michigan State University and Graduate Students Rights and Responsibilities, and in the Bylaws of the Student Senate. A student or students may take complaints relative to instruction directly to the Department Chairperson. If the Chairperson is unable to resolve the matter to the student's satisfaction, the Chairperson shall refer the unresolved complaints in writing to either the Undergraduate Affairs Committee or Graduate Affairs Committee who will conduct a hearing. A hearing shall be scheduled within 2 weeks involving the student(s), the involved faculty or staff member(s), and the Undergraduate/ Graduate Affairs Committee. A written report of the action or recommendations of the Undergraduate/Graduate Affairs Committee will be forwarded to the Dean, Department Chair, the involved faculty or staff member(s), student and university Ombudsman within ten working days of the receipt of the complaint. Students wishing to appeal the Department's action or recommendation may do so as outlined in provisions of the above referenced documents and guidelines for procedures for resolving student grievances.


10. Student Advisory Groups

10.1. Establishment of Advisory Groups.

In recognition of the importance of student involvement in academic governance, provision is made for both undergraduate and graduate student advisory groups. The Department Chairperson shall meet with each student advisory group at least one time per year.

10.2. Student Constituency of the Department

10.2.1. The student constituency of the Department for the purpose of selecting student representatives shall be all students who have declared with the registrar a major preference in the Department.

10.2.2. Other students enrolled in the College of Agricultural and Natural Resources may be included in the student constituency upon their written request to the Department Chairperson indicating their lack of affiliation with other units and their willingness to become active in the Department.

10.2.3. Those students who are enrolled in graduate non-degree programs and candidates for graduate degrees shall be deemed graduate students; all other students shall be deemed undergraduate students.

10.3. Recognized Student Advisory Groups

10.3.1. Department Undergraduate Student Organization

10.3.1.1. The Department Undergraduate Student Organization shall have an Executive Committee of not more that four members

10.3.1.2. The Department Undergraduate Student Organization Executive Committee shall be elected by undergraduate students in the Department.

10.3.1.3. The Bylaws for the Department Undergraduate Student Organization shall be formulated and approved by the undergraduate students in the Department.

10.3.2. Department Graduate Student Organization

10.3.2.1. The Department Graduate Student Organization shall have an Executive Committee of not more that four members.

10.3.2.2. The Department Graduate Student Organization Executive Committee shall be elected by graduate students in the Department.

10.3.2.3. The Bylaws for the Department Graduate Student Organization shall be formulated and approved by the graduate students in the Department.

10.4. Bylaws for Student Advisory Groups shall be appended to these Bylaws as Supplements.

10.5. Student Participation

10.5.1 Student participation in academic governance of the Department is valued.

10.5.2 The extent to which students participate in decision-making processes regarding policy formation includes:

10.5.2.1. Access to all staff meetings

10.5.2.2. Access to voting faculty meetings

10.5.2.3. Access to the following committees:

10.5.2.3.1. Undergraduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee

10.5.2.3.2. Graduate Affairs and Curriculum Committee

10.5.2.3.3. Other Ad Hoc committees as desired or requested.

10.5.3. This is not to imply that the formal committee structure is the only route for student participation. Informal individual or group action is encouraged by the Department Chairperson and faculty in matters of mutual concern to the Department and student constituency.


 

11. Amendments and Effect Date

11.1. These bylaws may be amended by a majority vote of the Department voting regular faculty members.

11.2. Amendments may be initiated by the Department Chairperson, by the Faculty Advisory Committee, or by petition of any two or more members of the voting faculty.

11.3. The effective date of amendments to these bylaws will be immediately after adoption of the amendments.

11.4. Where these bylaws may be found to conflict with Bylaws for Academic Governance of the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources of the MSU Bylaws, these bylaws yield to the bylaws of the College or MSU. Where these bylaws may be found to conflict with the University’s Bylaws for Academic Governance, the latter shall prevail.


Supplement 1: Scholarship and Evaluation of Faculty Activity Department of Community Sustainability

1. Purposes of document

This document offers our faculty’s definitions of scholarship and scholarly activities. It addresses two key questions:

  1. What qualifies as scholarship by our faculty?
  2. How do we evaluate the quality and impact of faculty work?

We begin by introducing the Department of Community Sustainability (CSUS), its mission, and its unique characteristics. We briefly define scholarship and scholarly activities in the context of what is expected of faculty in CSUS. We then discuss these terms in the context of scholarship across the mission.

Through this document we present criteria for how the department will evaluate scholarship and scholarly activities. We also underscore that the assessment of faculty performance must be based on the faculty member’s assignment and appointment, and must take into account both quantity and quality of outputs, as well as their impacts on students, the communities we serve, and the professional and academic fields in which we work.

2. CSUS: Who are we, what is the unifying framework for our scholarship?

The Department of CSUS provides a welcoming platform for engaged, transdisciplinary scholarship that contributes to the theory, methods, and application of sustainability principles. Our work includes a focus on community and civic engagement across a wide array of activities addressing human-human and human-environment interactions. The current literature maintains that sustainability scholarship focuses on “the complex dynamics that arise from interactions between human and environmental systems.” Sustainability is about the intersections among and spaces between its environmental, economic and social components. The CSUS faculty focus their scholarship on precisely these intersections and spaces.

As a department, we aim to grow a unique and productive niche in sustainability scholarship. We plan to achieve this by:

  • creating a dedicated faculty that works on sustainability-related issues broadly;
  • focusing on engagement that embraces the human decisions inherent in a move to a more sustainable future;
  • incorporating a systems view of sustainability into curricula for undergraduates, graduates, and lifelong learners; and
  • conducting sustainability scholarship that is international in scope while attending to regional and local contexts.

Engagement is a core value in CSUS. In the American literature on higher education, engagement is a scholarly activity that involves partnerships “defined by mutual respect for what each brings to the table . . . characterized by problems defined together, goals and agendas that are shared, definitions of success that are meaningful to both the university and community and are developed together, and some pooling or leveraging of university and public and private funds. The collaboration is likely to be mutually beneficial and to build the competence and capacity of all parties.” (Kellogg Commission [1999], as cited in Peters et al. 2005).

Central to an engagement approach is a worldview that considers community members as full partners. Engaged scholarship aims to yield some of the same outputs as traditional applied research, but focuses on an agenda that addresses mutual needs, interests and benefits. In addition, the engagement model differs in its process and ethos, and has high transaction costs due to its emphasis on collaborative decision-making. In traditional applied research, a researcher may study a topic of importance to a partner, but will design and carry out the work according to the needs of the researcher. An engagement approach, however, will balance the desire for research outputs against the need to build partnerships, strengthen partner capacities, accommodate partners’ nonacademic needs, and provide educational outreach.

Faculty diversity. The faculty of CSUS is diverse and believes that this diversity provides strength in addressing transdisciplinary issues. The department’s intellectual domains span many disciplines and emphasize human-environment interactions in a wide array of contexts:

Areas of Application
Food and Agriculture
Natural Resources
Environmental Studies
Tourism and Recreation
Community Economic Development
International Development
Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources Education
Communities (of affinity or location)

Processes and Values
Engagement
Ethics

Furthermore, as a faculty we recognize that each individual brings unique talents to the collective work of our unit. Some colleagues contribute most through research, some through teaching, and some through their outreach/Extension/engagement work. We embrace these differences and maintain that we are a creative, productive, and vital social science unit of CANR, in part, because of this diversity.

3. Definitions of scholarship and scholarly activities

To define scholarship, we draw on the document prepared by AFRE: “Scholarship is the process of creating new and valuable knowledge in a disciplinary, professional, or multi-/ interdisciplinary field that is validated by peers and publicly disseminated.”

Essential attributes of scholarship are that they:

  • are creative and original;
  • are peer-reviewed;
  • draw on the most current knowledge and aim to further the dialogue of a community of scholars within or across literature(s);
  • are publicly available, published or communicated to the appropriate literature and/or intellectual community.

Examples of works of scholarship include new or improved:

  • theories, conceptual frameworks, or models;
  • empirical tests of theory or models, or empirically-based insights (regarding the subject under study);
  • research methods and materials, including those for data collection and analysis, and policy analysis;
  • methods and materials for communicating knowledge or facilitating learning, as used in teaching and extension/outreach; and
  • integration of knowledge in ways that leads to new insights or understanding.

Tangible evidence of scholarship (works/outputs of scholarship) can take many forms, including but not limited to:

  • peer-reviewed publications;
  • competitively selected or invited presentations;
  • proposals, if scholarship criteria are met (e.g., competitive, peer validated, new); and
  • other explicit recognition of achievement of scholarship.

Scholarly activity is not the same thing as scholarship, but it is central to the University’s mission and, thus, an important part of what is expected of all faculty. To elaborate, research, teaching, and Extension/outreach activities may be scholarly in nature (i.e. based on up-to-date knowledge and methods from recognized or emerging fields of inquiry) but they are not scholarship by themselves unless they result in works of scholarship.

Nevertheless, scholarly activities are vital to the department’s mission, which includes addressing the needs of students, specific groups, communities, and society in general, both domestic and international. As a result, not all research, teaching, and Extension/outreach activities will or should be expected to produce works/outputs of scholarship. (We must not develop evaluation criteria that encourage faculty to abandon scholarly activities that are essential to our mission as a center for higher education.) Balancing one’s time between scholarly outputs and scholarly activities is an important skill for faculty members, and it is important to recognize that at the margin there is a tradeoff between the extent to which any given faculty member can focus on one or the other. Thus, it is incumbent upon individual faculty to create balance between carrying out scholarly activities and achieving the outputs (e.g., peer-reviewed publications) that are tangible evidence of one’s scholarship. In addition, it is incumbent upon faculty to devise ways to document the impact of scholarly activities that do not result in works of scholarship.

4. Scholarship across the mission

Scholarship across the mission is an important principle at MSU. With the exception of purely administrative activities, almost all work we do as faculty, whether in teaching, research or outreach/Extension should be scholarly in nature. Scholarship across the mission, however, suggests that faculty are free to draw from any of these functions to develop our own scholarly identities and to develop a coherent body of scholarship. By acknowledging that scholarship may emanate from across the mission, this principle encourages the development of the whole, creative scholar. Furthermore, it recognizes as equally important the diverse forms of scholarship that are valued by a land grant university.

5. Scholarship and scholarly activities in research

Examples of evidence of scholarship in research include, but are not limited to, the following:

  1. Peer-reviewed publications (e.g., articles, books, chapters, monographs). Criteria for evaluation of publications can incorporate a number of measures, each of which has its strengths and weaknesses. The quantity of peer-reviewed publications is a straightforward but oversimplified measure of scholarship output. Comparisons among a diverse faculty are difficult, so the judgment of peers is essential in setting expectations. These expectations depend on percentage research appointment and on AN versus AY appointment. The Department chooses not to number these expectations, because the strength of a body of work depends as much upon quality as quantity. Any structured point system will invariably miss important novelty or contributions to particular communities of scholars/audiences. The quality of the journals in which publication occurs should be identified in consultation with internal peers and/or external referees for the faculty member. ISI impact factors are of some use to indicate journal strength within a discipline, but are less useful across disciplines. We recognize that impactful journals exist that are not included in some such measures, and that faculty may intentionally publish their works of scholarship in peer-reviewed venues to reach targeted communities of scholars, regardless of the ISI impact factor of the outlets. The number of authors and position of authorship are problematic, and generally we do not distinguish between single-authored and co-authored articles. Particularly when a faculty member publishes with students, we encourage joint authorship and do not expect first authorship by faculty members. Also, multi-authored work often will be the logical outcome of the kind of interdisciplinary work that the department encourages.
  2. Pursuit of research funding. Pursuit of funding can be considered scholarship if proposals are new, competitive, and peer validated. Proposals can be exposed to intense peer review, so competitive proposals can be evidence of creative, cutting-edge thinking.
  3. Presentations and posters in professional society meetings. These can be considered works of scholarship if they are peer-reviewed and selected on a competitive basis.

Scholarly activities in research include work that is not peer-reviewed. Examples of evidence (outputs) of scholarly activities include:

  • authorship of published abstracts,
  • scientific talks and posters,
  • papers in agency reports, proceedings, and other non-peer reviewed literature.

Scholarly activities are important for building the visibility of a faculty member’s program, but they are complementary to (and not a substitute for) the works of scholarship listed above. Scholarly productivity (non-peer reviewed) provides evidence that the faculty member is active in disseminating the findings of her/his research to communities of scholars and practitioners. Research products that are not peer-reviewed may still be valued within a community of scholars or community of practice and may be offered as evidence of impact if one can document the nature of impact, e.g., widespread adoption of a new technique, curriculum, or framework. Evidence should be presented as to the impact of the work in terms of its breadth, duration, and/or persistence of influence, use or public and critical appreciation.

6. Scholarship and scholarly activities in teaching

CSUS values the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL). Some of our faculty members provide college-wide or campus-wide leadership in this realm. Although only some faculty members will make SoTL a focus or an element of their overall scholarship, all faculty members with teaching assignments are expected to engage in scholarly activities as part of their teaching and to document effective teaching.

We define SoTL as being original, creative works that are grounded in current research and theory, and contributing to theory, models/frameworks and best-practice through publicly-shared, peer-reviewed works. Scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) can be demonstrated through peer-reviewed outputs such as: pedagogical innovations or research on learning and assessment, public sharing and dissemination of learning outcomes and pedagogy (e.g., through professional organizations), publication, awards for teaching, competitive proposals prepared and/or accepted for advancing SoTL, publication of case studies, or other peer-validated outputs similar to those noted throughout this document.

Scholarly activities in teaching include (but are not limited to): emphasizing and documenting student learning, anchoring teaching in the literature of learning and pedagogy, contributing to curricular development, developing teaching materials/approaches, mentoring students (including undergraduate and graduate research projects). As evidence of scholarly activities in teaching and learning, faculty are encouraged to report on post-graduation career accomplishments of students. As another indicator of scholarly activity and/or effectiveness, CSUS faculty believe that the SIRS data are important in informing evaluation of the quality of teaching, and for RPT and annual review decisions, but these data, alone, do not indicate quality scholarly activities in teaching nor are these data sufficient to support evaluation of teaching/learning scholarship. It is also recognized that there is a gender bias in students’ course evaluations of teaching and instructors.

Increasingly, evaluation of scholarly activities or SoTL is based on review of a portfolio that includes materials such as teaching philosophy, course syllabi and teaching materials, student ratings or other forms of assessment, outputs demonstrating scholarship, and peer evaluations based on classroom observation and/or review of teaching materials.

7. Scholarship and scholarly activities in Extension and outreach

In CSUS, many faculty members have partial Extension appointments. For these faculty, not all outreach work is necessarily done through MSU Extension. On the other hand, all faculty members who do not have MSUE appointments are still expected to conduct scholarly outreach activities.

Traditionally, the Extension model focused on providing knowledge to people as opposed to generating it with them, as in an engagement approach. In CSUS we espouse an engagement model and adhere to the MSUE work group definition of scholarship of Extension.

The scholarship of Extension is “...the systematic generation, integration, and application of knowledge based on both concepts and practice with the intent of improving peoples’ lives. Scholarship of extension takes place through an interactive, dynamic, and expanding process in which both concepts and practice are advanced through a continuing process for improved knowledge that is validated by peers.”

Scholarship in Extension and outreach therefore shares many of the same attributes of scholarship within other domains. That is, works of scholarship generate new information, understandings, and insights; they are creative and original, publicly available, and peer reviewed. As such, evidence of scholarship in Extension/outreach includes (but is not limited to) traditional peer-reviewed outputs such as scientific or pedagogic journal articles, competitive proposals, and conference presentations.

In addition, the integration of the products of one’s research or teaching scholarship into outreach/Extension activities may also be considered evidence of the scholarship of outreach/Extension. For example, developing a presentation that is widely utilized by Extension educators based upon findings generated through research may meet the scholarship criteria of being new, peer validated and publicly available. As such, we also recognize outputs of scholarship that are intended for use in an outreach context as long as they are creative, peer reviewed, publicly available and add to the current body of generalizable knowledge. Here we note that “generalizable knowledge” may refer to the peer-reviewed practice literature that targets a community of scholar-practitioners other than academics. Examples of such work may include outreach bulletins, workshop curricula, practical techniques or tools, bibliographies, software, manuals, websites, DVDs, and other educational materials.

As mentioned earlier, engagement work has high transactions costs. As such, faculty who are heavily involved in outreach or engage in participatory or action research are likely to be involved in work that is scholarly in nature, but does not necessarily lead to products of scholarship. Under these circumstances it is essential for faculty members to work toward converting scholarly activities into products of scholarship. Faculty must strive to balance the time dedicated to scholarly activity within Extension/outreach with time dedicated to the development of scholarship products from these activities. As important as it is to serve our constituents, balance is the key, and faculty must be intentional and strategic in developing products of scholarship from these efforts. As mentioned above, integration of research and outreach functions can help faculty strive for this balance.

Not all Extension/outreach activities will result in products of scholarship. Examples of scholarly activities in Extension and outreach include: trainings, capacity building processes, collaborative work with non-profit organizations (e.g., contributing to proposal writing), and other non-peer-reviewed outputs that draw on the current literature, but do not add to a body of generalizable knowledge (e.g., are site-, organization-, or context-specific).

As stated above in the section on research, scholarly activity that results in products that are not peer-reviewed may still be offered as evidence of impact if one can document the nature of impact, e.g. widespread adoption of a new technique, curriculum, or framework within a community of practice. Evidence should be presented on the impact the work has had in terms of its breadth, duration, or persistence of influence or use.

Finally, we encourage faculty to develop portfolios that document their scholarly activity and scholarship within the realm of Extension and outreach. Portfolios should include annotated artifacts documenting Extension/outreach scholarship and scholarly activity. They may also provide documentation of adoption or public benefit/impact of one’s work.

8. Scholarship: additional considerations

Scholarship often requires teamwork and other collaborative relationships, particularly in interdisciplinary realms. When work that is a result of joint effort is presented as evidence of scholarship, clarification of the candidate's role in the joint effort must be provided.

Diverse forms of evidence can be presented as to the impact of scholarly activity in terms of its depth, duration and/or persistence of influence or use, as well as its public and critical appreciation. Examples of evidence of impact could include:

  • documentation of improvement in economic, social or environmental conditions of a community, region, agency, organization, industry, or other sector;
  • national, state, public or professional awards, especially when peer-validated; awards, honors, and career impacts of former students; • invitations to lecture, teach, or provide workshops;
  • invitations to serve on competitive grant review panels, editorial review boards, journal review panels, or policy-setting panels;
  • adoption of work by others (e.g., policy-setting bodies, other programs, practitioners);
  • leadership and duration/impacts of such leadership;
  • generation of gifts to one’s program;
  • requests for service on panels or to host international scholars (e.g., workshops, Humphries Fellows program).

9. Potential Components of a CSUS Faculty Portfolio

Annual Review Short Essay(s) and Form – as instructed by CSUS Chairperson and FAC

Reflective Essay – see CANR Faculty and Staff website on purposes and approaches for reflective essays, and other elements of successful RTP packages

Curriculum Vita, pdf file to Chair and FAC and posted on CSUS professional website (updated annually)

MSU Academic Profile (online and updated annually)

Form D

Research

  • Annotated artifacts documenting research scholarship and scholarly activity
  • Citation indices
  • ISI ratings for journals

Teaching

  • Statement of Teaching Philosophy
  • Annotated artifacts documenting teaching scholarship and scholarly activity
  • SIRS
  • Other evaluations

Outreach/Extension/Engagement/Service

  • Annotated artifacts documenting outreach/Extension/engagement/service scholarship and scholarly activity
  • Evaluations and statements from engaged partners, learners, Extension colleagues

Impacts of Scholarship and Scholarly Activity across the Mission

  • Annotated artifacts (e.g., awards, invitations, panel service)
  • Evaluation and statements from impacted engagement parties 

Document originally developed during 2011-12, by Departmental Ad-Hoc Committee: S. Dann, K. Chung, J. Kerr, R. Rosenbaum, G. Vander Stoep. Based on earlier drafts by L. Kalof, J. Arvai, G. Rowan, D. Wright.

Document revised and updated Spring 2018 by S. Dann and M.W. Hamm