DEPARTMENT OF HORTICULTURE
Bylaws of the Faculty Organization


STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

The major purposes of these Bylaws are to implement the requirements of the Bylaws of the Michigan State University Faculty Organization with reference to department structure and procedure.

Nothing in these Bylaws shall be construed as limiting or discouraging 1) the rights of groups or individuals of the staff from initiating actions or resolving problems through direct consultation with the Department Chairperson, and 2) the rights of the Chairperson to discuss and formulate programs of action with such individuals or groups as he/she may choose.

 

BYLAWS

1. THE FACULTY

1.1. Composition of the Faculty

1.1.1. The regular faculty of the Department of Horticulture shall be composed of all persons in the department who have been appointed under the rules of tenure and who hold the rank of Professor, Associate Professor, Assistant Professor or Instructor, except such persons as are on a part-time or temporary appointment.

1.1.2. The fixed-term faculty of the Department of Horticulture shall consist of all persons holding the rank of Professor, Associate Professor, Assistant Professor or Instructor, but not appointed under the rules of tenure.

1.1.3. Honorary faculty shall be those persons designated as Visiting Professors or Professors Emeritus.

1.2 Voting Faculty

1.2.1. The voting faculty in the election of University council and committees shall be all regular faculty and full time fixed-term faculty who have served at least three consecutive years and are engaged in the academic activities of the department on a regular basis.

1.2.2. The voting faculty for departmental committees shall be all regular faculty and full time fixed-term faculty who have served at least three consecutive years.

1.2.3 A faculty member jointly appointed in two or more units may vote only once in a given election. In elections voted upon by two or more units, the faculty member shall vote in that unit which has primary responsibility for initiating personnel action as indicated on the multiple appointment form filed in the Office of the Provost.

1.2.4. A faculty member may be elected to an academic governance body as a representative of any unit in which the person holds regular faculty status.

1.3. Modes of Participation
There are four modes of faculty and student participation identified for use in Academic Governance.

1.3.1. Consultation. A body of faculty and/or students who discuss with and inform the administrator with authority and responsibility for decision. Such a committee is not a deliberative body; there is no vote. Rather, the members express their views to inform an administrator's decision.

1.3.2. Advisory. A deliberative body of faculty and/or students recommends policies to an administrator who is authorized to make decisions. The administrator is not bound by the recommendation and accepts responsibility for the decision.

1.3.3. Shared Responsibility. A deliberative body of faculty and/or students makes recommendations to an administrator authorized to make decisions. If the administrator and deliberative body cannot agree and action must be taken, the recommendations of the administrator and the deliberative body will be submitted in writing to the next higher administrative level for resolution.

1.3.4. Delegated Authority. A deliberative body of faculty and/or students is authorized to make decisions on specified matters. Such decisions are subject to administrative review, but will be altered only in exceptional circumstances.

1.4. Faculty Meetings

1.4.1. Meetings of the voting faculty shall be designated as faculty meetings. The Department Chairperson will advise the faculty by memorandum of important items to be discussed.

1.4.2. Faculty meetings may be called at the pleasure of the Chairperson or by the Department Advisory Committee. Any three members of the voting faculty may petition to the Chairperson or the Department Advisory Committee for a meeting for the purpose of discussing any items of business or interest to the department. Faculty meetings shall be held at least once monthly unless cancelled by the Chairperson because of extenuating circumstances.

1.4.3. Department faculty meetings shall be generally open meetings. Speaking privileges shall be accorded student representatives on department committees. At the discretion of the Chair and Department Advisory Committee faculty meetings devoted to particular subjects may be closed to all except the voting faculty of the Department (as defined in 1.2). Other non-voting faculty, academic specialists, staff and students may be admitted to its sessions by invitation of the Department Chairperson and/or DAC.

1.4.4. The Chairperson or designee shall generally attend all meetings of a department academic governance body.

1.5. Conduct of Meetings

1.5.1. One-third of the voting faculty shall constitute a quorum.

1.5.2. Action on department business, which requires a vote, will be decided by a majority of those voting. A secret ballot may be called for by any member of the voting faculty present at the meeting.

1.5.3. Minutes of faculty meetings shall be recorded by the Department Chairperson's designate or the secretary of the Department Advisory Committee.

1.6. Communications

1.6.1. To ensure that the faculty is kept fully informed, the Department Chairperson will advise all faculty members, by memoranda, of significant decisions, policy changes, administrative procedures, announcements, and other items of importance. Such items may or may not have been discussed in faculty meetings.

1.7. Appointment of Joint and Adjunct Professors

1.7.1. Joint appointments - for faculty members at MSU with appointments in more than one department or unit.

1.7.1.1. Joint appointments in the Department of Horticulture will only be approved for faculty members who are directly involved in teaching, research, extension, or administration within the Department of Horticulture. Specific responsibilities and duties of the joint appointee will be defined at the time of appointment.

1.7.1.2. Joint appointments will cease upon completion of the duties specified at the time of appointment. Faculty members with primary appointments in other departments or units who have joint appointments in the Department of Horticulture will be reviewed annually by the Horticulture Chairperson in consultation with other appropriate faculty, based upon performance of the defined responsibilities in the Department of Horticulture. The joint appointment will be renewed or terminated on the basis of the evaluation and will be discussed with the chairperson of the primary department of the jointly appointed faculty member.

1.7.1.3. All requests for joint appointments in the Department of Horticulture must be submitted in writing to the Horticulture Chairperson, stating reasons for the appointment, qualifications of the individual, and objectives and responsibilities of the proposed appointment.

1.7.1.4. Joint appointment requests will be reviewed by the Department Advisory Committee and the appropriate faculty groups and approved by a majority of the voting faculty in the department.

1.7.1.5. The individual may be asked to meet with the Horticulture faculty and/or present a seminar on a relevant subject before the vote on approval of the appointment is taken.

1.7.2. Adjunct appointments - for persons not currently on the faculty at MSU, but whose expertise or knowledge may be of benefit to the Department of Horticulture.

1.7.2.1. Adjunct appointment will be approved only for individuals who will directly contribute to the mission and objectives of the department. Specific responsibilities and duties of adjunct appointees will be defined at the time of appointment.

1.7.2.2. Adjunct appointments are for one year or less, renewable annually, and only for duties specified at the time of appointment. Adjunct faculty will be reviewed annually by the Horticulture Chairperson in consultation with other appropriate faculty based upon performance of defined responsibilities in the Department of Horticulture. Adjunct appointments will be renewed or terminated on the basis of the evaluation.

1.7.2.3. Requests for adjunct appointments must be presented in writing to the Horticulture Chairperson, stating reasons for the appointment, qualifications of the individual, and objectives and responsibilities of the proposed appointment.

1.7.2.4. Adjunct appointment requests will be reviewed by the Department Advisory Committee and the appropriate faculty groups and approved by a majority of the voting faculty in the department.

1.7.2.5 The individual may be asked to meet with the Horticulture faculty and/or present a seminar on a relevant subject before the vote on approval of the appointment is taken.

1.7.2.6. Visiting Professors may be given an adjunct appointment upon request to the Horticulture Chairperson and fulfillment of other criteria stated above.

2. THE STUDENTS

2.1 Student Constituency of the Department

2.1.1. The student constituency of the Department for the purpose of selecting student representatives for College or University committees, shall be all students who have declared with the Registrar a major or major preference in an academic program administered in the Department including students enrolled in the Institute of Agricultural Technology.

2.1.2. Those students who are enrolled in graduate non-degree programs, as candidates for graduate degrees, or as candidates for graduate-professional degrees shall be deemed graduate students.

2.1.3. All other students shall be deemed undergraduate students.

2.2. Student Participation in Academic Governance

2.2.1. Student participation in department academic governance bodies, shall in all cases be in the same mode as faculty participation, except as reserved. The matters reserved to the faculty are:

2.2.1.1. Policy concerning tenure and promotion, salary, leaves, insurance, retirement, and fringe benefits of faculty.

2.2.1.2. Evidence from students regarding the teaching performance of faculty shall be considered in decisions concerning the above matters.

2.2.1.3. Matters affecting the professional responsibility of the faculty to establish and maintain the intellectual authority of the University.

2.3. Student Representation on Committees

2.3.1. One graduate student from the department selected by the graduate students by their own procedures shall serve on the Graduate Programs Committee and any other committees deemed appropriate by the Chairperson and/or the Department Advisory Committee. Each committee may invite other students to meet with it in an advisory capacity.

2.3.2. One B.S. candidate undergraduate student from the department selected by the students by their own procedures shall serve on the Undergraduate Programs Committee and any other committees as deemed appropriate by the Chairperson and/or the Department Advisory Committee. Each committee may invite other students to meet with it in an advisory capacity.

2.3.3. Membership on a committee shall in all cases carry with it, for student representatives, the right to vote on all matters that fall within the committee's purview, except for matters that are of exclusive concern to the faculty.

2.3.4. Student terms of membership on a committee shall be of one year, beginning 1 October of each year; a student may serve no more than two consecutive terms on a given committee.

3. DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION

3.1. Chairperson

3.1.1. The chief executive officer of the Department shall be designated Chairperson.

3.1.2. The Chairperson shall be appointed by the Board of Trustees upon recommendation of the President upon nomination by the Dean of the College.

3.1.3. The voting faculty of the department shall have shared responsibility with the Dean to determine procedures for the selection of the Chairperson.

3.1.3.1. Selection of a Department Chairperson
Upon a vacancy in the position of Department Chairperson, the Department Advisory Committee will serve as the liaison between the faculty and the Dean to fill the position. Together, procedures will be worked out consistent with the University Bylaws which will include, but will not be limited to the following: 1) individual faculty members along with the Department Advisory Committee and the Dean will have the opportunity to suggest criteria and nominees for the position; and 2) faculty members individually and/or collectively will participate in the screening process by arrangement with the Department Advisory Committee. The Department Advisory Committee will nominate a Search Committee that will consist of regular faculty, one of whom will serve as Chair of the Search Committee, a staff representative, a graduate student representative and a regular CANR faculty member outside of the department. These nominations will be submitted to the Dean for approval. Once the composition of the Search Committee is approved, it shall act as the department representatives for the Chair search. The role of the Search Committee will include, but not be limited to composing the job description for approval by the regular faculty and the Dean, advertise and recruit nominees for the position, screen applications, suggest nominees for interview, develop the nominees' itinerary in consultation with the Dean, and host each nominee who is invited to interview.

3.1.3.2. The nominees for the Chair position to be interviewed will be invited by the Dean and schedules arranged in consultation with the Department Search Committee. Reactions of faculty to the interviews will be solicited by the Search Committee and communicated to the Dean.

3.1.3.3. When the selection is made, the Dean will inform the faculty simultaneously with or prior to the time his/her recommendation is transmitted through the President for action by the Board of Trustees.

3.1.4 Appointment of a Temporary Chairperson. The Chairperson of the Department in consultation with the Dean will select a member of the regular faculty who will serve during temporary absences of the Chairperson (less than one month).

3.1.4.1. The Temporary Chairperson shall perform such duties and assume such responsibilities as may be delegated by the Chairperson or Acting Chairperson.

3.1.5 Appointment of Acting Chairperson. In the event of the prolonged absence of the Department Chairperson, an Acting Chairperson will be appointed by the Dean. The Acting Chairperson shall perform all duties of the Chairperson. Nominees for consideration by the Dean will be made by the Department Advisory Committee after consultation with the regular faculty of the department.

3.1.6. At intervals not to exceed five years, the Dean shall review the desirability of continuing the appointment of the Chairperson. At the same time, the Chairperson shall be consulted by the Dean concerning his/her interest and willingness to continue.

3.1.6.1. Review of Department Chairperson by Dean. The Department Advisory Committee will obtain review comments from all faculty and relay them to the Dean. The Dean may act on the basis of this review or he/she may consult privately with any of the faculty in order to augment this review. The Dean shall make a decision in compliance with University Bylaws.

3.1.7. There is no limit, other than the limit imposed by the University rules on retirement from administrative positions, on the number of times an individual may be continued in the position of Chairperson.

3.1.8. The Chairperson shall be responsible for education, research and service programs, budgetary matters, physical facilities, and personnel matters in his/her jurisdiction.

3.1.9. The Chairperson shall seek the counsel of the voting members of the department in formulating major policy decisions affecting the personnel and the program of the unit, especially in matters pertaining to appointments, promotions, tenure, research and curriculum.

3.2. Associate Chair

3.2.1. The Associate Chair shall be a Regular Faculty member selected by the Chair after consultation with the Department Advisory Committee, for approval by the Dean of the College. The need for appointment of an Associate Chair will be made at the discretion of the Chair/Acting Chair, in consultation with the Department Advisory Committee. In the event that an Associate Chair is deemed to be unnecessary, the Chair of the Departmental Advisory Committee will represent the Chair/Acting Chair in his/her absence.

3.2.2. The duties of the Associate Chair shall be:

3.2.2.1. Act in absence of the Chair and when requested by the Chair as Chief Officer of the Department.

3.2.2.2. Represent the Department and the University where appropriate.

3.2.2.3. Act as signing officer for Departmental business.

3.2.2.4. In consultation with the Chair, accept other specific administrative responsibilities to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the Department. These duties might include one or more of the following:

3.2.2.4.1. Oversee continued development of undergraduate and graduate curriculum.

3.2.2.4.2. Develop and oversee disciplinary and interdisciplinary research groups to develop proposals and pursue research funding initiatives.

3.2.2.4.3. Act as liaison for the Department with interest and commodity groups.

3.2.2.4.4. Coordinate department fundraising and development.

3.3. Department Advisory Committee

3.3.1. Functions

3.3.1.1. To serve in a counseling and advisory capacity to the Department Chairperson and to bring to his/her attention such practices, policies and procedures as may need reviewing.

3.3.1.2. To study and report on policies of the University and College as they may affect the welfare of the Department.

3.3.1.3. To provide a means through which the faculty may bring problems concerning the welfare of the department to the attention of the Department Chairperson or faculty as appropriate.

3.3.1.4. To conduct required department nominations and elections.

3.3.2. Composition

3.3.2.1. The committee shall consist of four members of the voting faculty.

3.3.2.2. Members shall serve for two-year term. Committee members cannot serve consecutive terms. The term of office shall start on 1 July. During their first regular meeting, the Committee shall elect a Chairperson and a Secretary from its membership under the direction of the previous Chairperson of the Committee, or in his/her absence, the previous Secretary.

3.3.3. Nominations and Elections

3.3.3.1. Voting faculty members may nominate two persons by mail ballot. The names of the four persons receiving the highest number of votes, and agreeing to serve, will be presented for election by mail ballot. Each member must vote for two nominees. The two persons receiving the highest number of votes will be elected.

3.3.3.2. Any member of the committee who expects to be absent from the Department more than four months shall be replaced by election as early as practical. This election shall follow the established procedure except that each person shall vote for one of two nominees presented and one shall be elected.

3.3.3.3. In the case of a tie, the votes for either nominations or elections shall be decided by a runoff mail ballot listing tied nominees.

3.3.4. Meetings, Record and Reports

3.3.4.1. The committee shall:

3.3.4.1.1. Meet once each month. Interim meetings may be held on request of the Chairperson or at the request of three or more faculty members.

3.3.4.1.2. Keep records of its activities and transfer its records and files at the end of the year to the new committee.

3.3.4.1.3. Make periodic reports to the faculty.

3.4. Other Department Committees

3.4.1. The Department Chairperson in consultation with the Department Advisory Committee, shall appoint members to the following committees: 1) Graduate Programs, 2) Undergraduate Programs, and 3) Seminar, and establish such other procedures as he/she deems appropriate in obtaining advice on the conduct of department matters. The Tenure and Promotion Committee will consist of all regular faculty with the rank of Associate Professor or Professor who have attained tenure.

3.4.2. Additional committees, either elected or appointed, may be established at the discretion of the Chairperson.

3.4.3. The procedures for appointment or election to committees and terms of membership on a committee will be determined by the Department Advisory Committee.

3.4.4. Committees shall keep records or minutes of activities and be prepared to report to the faculty at a staff meeting if a faculty member requests it.

3.5. Representatives to College and University Committees

3.5.1. Nomination and Election. Whenever the department is required to submit nominations to or to elect representatives for College or University committees, the same shall be done by mail ballot at the initiative of the Departmental Advisory Committee Chairperson following initial nominations made to the secretary of the Department Advisory Committee by the voting faculty. The procedures for nomination and election will be determined by the Department Advisory Committee.

4. TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT AND EVALUATION PROCEDURES FOR FACULTY AND ACADEMIC SPECIALISTS

4.1. The Department Chairperson will consult with the faculty through the Department Advisory Committee and with other individual faculty members regarding initial appointments to the faculty.

4.2. The terms and conditions of employment and tenure shall be those of the College according to article 4.1.5. of the College Bylaws (May 2008). In accordance with University policy, as presented in the MSU Faculty Handbook, every new faculty member will receive written information from the Department Chairperson about duties and responsibilities, general performance expectations given the appointment distribution of the Faculty member, evaluation procedures and schedules, documentation and other factors which might eventually bear on reappointment, tenure, or promotion decisions.

4.3 Recommendation for reappointment, tenure and promotion shall be made by the Department Chairperson after consultation with the Department Promotion and Tenure Committee. The Chairperson of the Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion (RTP) Committee, who must be tenured and hold the rank of Professor, will be the Department's elected representative to the college's RTP Committee. The term of service will be three years, coinciding with their elected term on the CANR-RTP Committee. The criteria to be used are principally those listed in section 4.3.10 of this article. Each faculty member being considered for reappointment or tenure will be given an opportunity to appear before the Department Promotion and Tenure Committee before a final decision is reached in each case. In the event a decision is made not to recommend the individual, then the faculty member will be informed in writing before the final recommendation of the Department Chairperson is forwarded to the Dean. The affected faculty member may request, by letter, to meet with the Department Promotion and Tenure Committee and learn of the reason(s) for this decision.

4.3.1. A Mentor committee for Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion (RT&P) Advisory Committee (hereafter "Mentor Committee") will be appointed by the Department Chairperson for each regular and fixed-term faculty with the rank of Assistant and Associate Professor, and Academic Specialists who are appointed in the Continuing System but who have not yet earned Continuing Status (hereafter "Mentee"), in consultation with the Mentee. The Mentor Committee (consisting of a chairperson and at least two additional members, and not including the Department Chairperson) should be appointed within the first year of the arrival of an Assistant or Associate Professor or Academic Specialist. The suitability of the mentor committee to meet the mentee's needs will be evaluated annually by the mentee in consultation with the Department Chair, and changes implemented by the Chair as appropriate. Selection of mentors is not limited to faculty from the Department of Horticulture. For Mentees with joint appointments, there will be a single mentoring plan coordinated across units-with leadership provided by the lead unit. While it is expected that junior Faculty and Academic Specialists select a mentor committee, they may choose not to have formally appointed mentors, but must sign a written declaration of their intent to not have a Mentor Committee appointed on their behalf. A Mentor Committee can be appointed at a later time by informing the Department Chairperson in writing.

4.3.2. The mentee will meet at least once a year with the mentor committee by mid-October to allow time for preparation of the report for the annual departmental RT&P meeting. It is the responsibility of the mentee to schedule the meeting. However, it is expected that the mentor committee chair maintain frequent contact with the mentee. Following the meeting, the mentor committee chair will prepare a written mentor committee meeting report and this will be shared with the mentee for additional input prior to the annual RT&P meeting. A final written copy of the mentor committee report will be provided to the mentee at the time it is submitted to the Department RT&P committee.

4.3.3. The content of the mentor committee meeting is assumed to be confidential. However, as the mentor committee report is shared with the Departmental RT&P committee it is not considered a confidential document.

4.3.4. Following the Departmental RT&P committee meeting, the chair of the mentor committee and the Departmental Chair will provide feedback to the mentee on their progress together with any general concerns that were raised.

4.3.4.1. The Mentor Committee will serve to increase communication between the faculty member and the unit as a whole by:

a) Assisting the Mentee in understanding the university, college, and unit performance expectations.

b) Facilitating understanding of the university and unit mission, policies and procedures in order to be effective and productive.

c) Monitoring the professional performance of the Mentee and working with the individual to excel professionally.

d) Assisting the Faculty and Academic Specialists at large to become familiar with the Mentee's program and progress.

e) Preparing and submitting the signed annual advisory report to the Department Chairperson, Departmental Tenure and Promotion Committee, and the Mentee. The Department Chairperson will maintain these reports in a file, with other relevant information, to support decisions on reappointment, tenure and promotion.

4.3.5. The Department Chairperson will perform an annual performance review of each faculty member, followed by a written summary or the individual's strengths and weaknesses with suggestions for improved performance. The Department Chairperson will annually solicit written comments from all faculty on the performance of all tenure-stream non-tenured faculty.

4.3.6. The CANR Time Line for Preparation-Submission, Reappointment and T&P Packages will be followed (Promotion and Tenure: Philosophy and Protocol, CANR, September 1, 2008). The Department Chairperson and Departmental Advisory Committee will initiate a faculty review the fall before each nomination for tenure and promotion is due. These reviews will be closed meetings for all tenure-stream faculty, in which the nominee gives an in-depth review of his/her teaching, research, extension, and public service programs.

4.3.7. Department Tenure and Promotion. Subsequent to faculty review, for consideration of reappointment, tenure and promotion, a Departmental Tenure and Promotion Committee will evaluate the candidate, using the procedures and criteria in the unit bylaws to determine if performance warrants promotion, granting of tenure, or reappointment. To encourage open and candid discussion, confidentiality shall be maintained after the meeting. The substance of the discussion will be summarized in writing by the Tenure and Promotion Committee Chairperson to relate a sense of the perceived strong and weak points. An anonymous faculty vote will be taken by those in attendance (no abstentions permitted) and the ballots will be counted by the Departmental Tenure and Promotion Committee Chair. Every faculty member of higher rank in the department not in attendance will be expected to submit a written statement about the progress and performance of the faculty member, along with a recommendation for or against promotion/tenure, to the Committee Chairperson. The written summary of the discussion, the ballots and the written statements by absent faculty will be maintained on file along with the materials submitted by the individual's Mentor Committee.

4.3.8. The Tenure and Promotion Committee for Associate Professors shall consist of all Professors, and for Assistant Professors all tenured Associate Professors and Professors. The person acting as chair of these committees will be elected for a 3-year period by the entire faculty from among Professors in the department. The Department Advisory Committee will conduct this election. The Tenure and Promotion Committee will meet annually, no later than early December, to review performance of Assistant and Associate Professors and to consider reappointment, tenure and promotion decisions.

4.3.9. The results of the Tenure and Promotion Committee discussions will be reviewed with the candidate by the Department Chairperson and the final recommendation, as prescribed by University policy, will be made by the Department Chairperson and transmitted in writing to the Dean, along with appropriate and relevant documentation.

4.3.10. The CANR Vice-Provost and Dean, and the relevant Associate Deans and Directors, will meet with the Department Chairperson to discuss the recommendation. After the meeting, the Dean and Directors may request additional information.

4.3.11. All these activities will be conducted in accordance with applicable University anti-discrimination laws and policies.

4.3.12. Specific deadlines for submission of tenure and/or promotion materials are set annually by the Dean and Provost (CANR Promotion and Tenure: Philosophy and Protocol, pg 53-55). Consequently, as general practice, the Department will use the following time lines.

4.3.12.1. Assistant Professors
First year - The Mentor Committee is appointed by Chairperson.
Annually - Meeting of the Assistant Professor with the Mentor Committee in mid-October. Reports are due prior to the annual Department Tenure and Promotion Committee meeting.
Third year - The Assistant Professor will meet with the Mentor
Committee, provide a packet to the faculty and present a review of activities and accomplishments to the Departmental faculty in the Fall prior to the Tenure and Promotion Committee meeting. The promotion packet should be provided to the Departmental Chairperson two weeks following the Tenure and Promotion Committee meeting.
Sixth year - Same schedule as third year reappointment.

4.3.12.2. Associate Professors
First year - The Mentor Committee is appointed by Chairperson.
Annually - Meeting of the Associate Professor with the T & P Advisory Committee by mid-October. Reports are due prior to the annual Department Tenure and Promotion Committee meeting.
Year of Advancement to Professor - The Associate Professor will meet with the T & P Advisory Committee, provide a packet to the faculty and present a review of activities and accomplishments to the Departmental faculty in the Fall prior to the Tenure and Promotion Committee meeting. The promotion packet should be provided to the Departmental Chairperson two weeks following the Tenure and Promotion Committee meeting.

4.3.13. General performance evaluation criteria for all faculty.
The following are criteria for tenure and promotion for faculty of the Department of Horticulture and are examples of evidence of contributions to the missions of the Department, College and University. There may be other areas of activity that are considered both for promotion and tenure and for merit increases which are not specifically identified in this document.

a) Faculty should be evaluated in relation to their appointment or assignment.

b) Faculty should demonstrate contributions to the mission of the Department of Horticulture, the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, and Michigan State University.

c) Faculty should demonstrate knowledge of subject matter, including a commitment to inquiry, scholarship, maintaining an ongoing effort to expand knowledge, and a capacity to synthesize, develop, interpret, and communicate new understanding and insights.

d) Faculty should demonstrate that they are interacting with other faculty, both within and outside the university environment, in a collegial manner.

e) Faculty should strive to achieve a national and/or international reputation in their area(s) of expertise.

f) Faculty should demonstrate participation in activities that are related to academic governance and other activities of service to the University, College and Department.

4.3.13.1. Criteria for teaching and advising activities.
The criteria for Tenure and Promotion for faculty who have teaching responsibility should include the following:

a) Course Development: Knowledge of subject matter; organization and development of teaching materials; development of new courses; use of teaching methods that demonstrate innovation and a variety of teaching methods; demonstration of effective feedback to students and appropriate evaluation methods; compatibility of course(s) with overall Horticulture, College and University programs and cooperation with other instructors; development of traditional campus courses as well as outreach teaching off-campus.

b) Course contact hours and enrollment (student numbers): Numbers of students enrolled relative to required courses and elective courses; student numbers relative to overall department enrollment; activities in student recruitment and retention.

c) Advising: Assisting students in course selection, program development and personal development; participation in advising students on internships; availability and accessibility to students; assisting students with employment and career development.

d) Teaching and advising-related committee activities: Demonstrated willingness to participate on committee activities related to teaching and advising, and curriculum development; participation in student-led organizations as advisor.

e) Student evaluations and performance: SIRS forms and other student evaluations; Department Chairperson's exit interview comments by students; success of students in courses and after graduation.

f) Professional Development: Participation in activities related to professional development of teaching, learning methods and approaches; demonstrated scholarly activity related to teaching; active participation in the teaching program in a collegial manner.

g) Peer recognition: Invited presentations at meeting or articles in books or other publications; society membership and participation in these societies; awards; service as reviewer of grants and publications and service as editors of publications.

4.3.13.2. Criteria for research activities
The criteria and evidence of accomplishments for those faculty with research responsibilities should include the following.

a) Knowledge of the subject area.

b) Commitment to inquiry: Development of an innovative research program with applicability and benefits to society; securing funding necessary to support the research program; use of sabbatical leave to develop professionally.

c) Communication of new knowledge: Publication(s); other communication methods such as oral presentations at professional meetings; patents.

d) Mentoring of new scientists: Participation in the education and training of graduate students; mentoring of visiting scientists and post-doctoral fellows; participation in the education of undergraduate students and high school students.

e) Peer recognition: Invited presentations at meetings or articles in books or other publications; society membership and participation in these societies; awards; service as reviewer of grants and publications and service as editors of publications.

f) Collegiality: Takes on challenges willingly; interacts and collaborates with colleagues; shares time, equipment, ideas; participates in professional meetings and organizations.

4.3.13.3. Criteria for extension and outreach activities
The following are the criteria and evidence of accomplishments to be used to evaluate faculty with extension appointments:

a) Knowledge of subject matter and expertise in one or more useful and scholarly areas.

b) Competence in dissemination of scholarly information and ideas to clientele user groups. Clientele may include the public in Michigan, the region, the nation or world wide. Development of publications, media presentations, videos, computer information dissemination, etc.; participation in workshops, and oral and written presentations at educational meetings at the local, state, regional, national or international level; evidence of consultant work.

c) Ability to develop extension and outreach programs that have an impact on the public served.

d) Ability to generate funds to support the extension and outreach programs.

e) Participation in extension commodity committees and agent training.

f) Interaction with other faculty in a collegial manner.

g) Peer recognition: Invited presentations at meetings or articles in books or publications; society membership and participation in these societies; awards; service as reviewer of grants and publications and service as editors of publications.

4.4. In the event a recommendation is made not to reappoint or offer tenure and the affected faculty member believes that review procedures have been violated, he or she may petition in writing the Department Advisory Committee, and they shall make a determination as soon as practicable as to whether or not the designated procedures have been violated.

4.5. If the non-tenured faculty member, after review by the Department Advisory Committee, still believes that the decision not to reappoint has been made in a manner inconsistent with designated procedures, the faculty member may submit a written petition to the University Tenure Committee for a review of his or her case.

4.6. Decisions of merit salary increases will be made by the Department Chairperson using the criteria outlined in 4.3.10.

4.7. The Department shall follow the standard faculty hiring procedure when filling an Academic Specialist Position (fixed-term, probationary, or continuous appointments).

4.7.1. Academic Specialists consist of individuals appointed to one of two ranked levels: Senior Academic Specialist or Academic Specialist. Appointments are made in units reporting directly or indirectly to the Provost or the Vice President for Research and Graduate Studies. Academic Specialist may be appointed on a fixed term (with an end date) or continuing basis, full-time or part-time, with either an academic year nine-month) or an annual (twelve-month) duty assignment. Repeated fixed-term appointments should not be used as a mechanism to by-pass the continuing appointment system. However, positions funded with grant or other non-general funds normally are fixed term in nature. The University will not dismiss the continuing status academic specialist due to capricious action nor will dismissal be used as a restraint of academic freedom or other civil rights.

4.7.2. Academic specialist positions should be established only if this is the best way for the academic unit to function at the highest possible level of effectiveness and efficiency. Assignments for academic specialists involve applicable assigned duties (academic advising/teaching/curriculum development, research, and service/outreach.

4.7.3. Academic specialist positions are established on the recommendation of the appropriate administrator of the academic unit, the concurrence of the appropriate dean/separately reporting director, and require approval by the Office of the Provost.

4.8. Evaluation of Academic Specialists
The evaluation of an academic specialist's performance shall be based on the duties and responsibilities specified in the job description for the specific position, general merit guidelines and the provisions of the Academic Specialist Appointment System (Academic Specialist Handbook, Section 5.0).

4.8.1. The academic specialist with a probationary appointment shall be evaluated annually by the Department Chair, who will seek input from other appropriate faculty to determine progress toward goals and/or the identification of goals. Units may also use the annual evaluation to assist in the assignment of merit and other salary adjustments. The academic specialist with a continuing appointment should also be evaluated. Units may schedule such evaluations to meet the needs and concerns of the individual unit; however, the unit must follow the established procedures.

4.8.2. The academic specialist shall be notified when the evaluation is to take place, what procedures are to be followed, and what criteria are to be used for the evaluation. This notification should be at the time of appointment and, subsequently, two months prior to the evaluation. A written summary of this evaluation shall be placed in the academic specialist's personnel file in the unit and given to the academic specialist within 30 calendar days of the evaluation. Unit administrators must review such evaluations personally with the academic specialist. An academic specialist with a fixed term appointment should be reviewed regardless of the probability of reappointment in order to assess progress toward goals and/or the identification of goals. The academic specialist appointed on a fixed term basis for six months or more shall be evaluated by the unit administrator no later than two months prior to the appointment ending date. A summary of this evaluation shall be placed in the personnel file in the unit and be given to the academic specialist.

4.8.3. Evaluations are based on the specifics of the individual's assignment and on the effectiveness in the appropriate functional area(s): advising/teaching/curriculum development, research, or service/outreach. The kinds of evidence to be considered must be established at the time of appointment. The academic specialist should have the opportunity to submit evidence supporting the proposed reappointment, promotion or award of continuing appointment status. Reappointment, award of continuing appointment status, or promotion must promote the objectives of improving academic strength and quality (see Appendix A: Functional Description of Specialist Duties, Advancement in the System and Administrative Responsibilities). A unit review committee will be established to advise the unit administrator about the reappointment, award of continuing appointment status, or promotion of the academic specialist. Every attempt should be made to ensure that the review committee is composed of individuals knowledgeable about the position under review and the Academic Specialist Appointment System and should include at least one academic specialist.

4.8.4. In the Department of Horticulture: A (mentor) review committee will be appointed by the Department Chair, consisting of two faculty members and one academic specialist with knowledge of the area in which the reviewed academic specialist is assigned. The committee may also include members of other academic personnel systems, or University support staff members. The academic specialist under review must be provided an opportunity to confer with the review committee at least once each year before it provides advice to the unit administrator regarding reappointment, promotion or award of continuing appointment status. Any changes in assignment or in responsibilities will be written into to a revised job description, according to established university policy, at the time the review committee meets with the academic specialist and before the changes are implemented. The review committee will present its report at the beginning of the annual departmental Tenure and Promotion meeting that will have Assistant, Associate, and Full Professors in attendance.

4.8.5. In addition to the review committee's advice, the Department Chair may also consult with administrative staff, faculty, students, and/or other qualified individuals inside or outside the unit regarding the reappointment or promotion review. The academic specialist should be informed of those individuals from whom the unit administrator is requesting advice; the academic specialist is not informed of those individuals who provide letters of evaluation, unless stipulated by unit policy. Reappointment and promotion recommendations must be submitted to the Office of the Provost for review and final action no later than November 15 of the calendar year prior to the end of the probationary appointment. The individual must be notified in writing by December 15 of the same year. Probationary appointment periods are calculated from August 16 of the calendar year in which the appointment is effective, irrespective of the actual date of appointment. In accordance with the Board of Trustees' delegation of academic personnel actions, the Office of the Provost approves all Academic Specialist Appointment System personnel actions; these actions are reported to the Michigan State University Board of Trustees as information items.

5. GRIEVANCE AND HEARING PROCEDURES

5.1. All faculty members and students shall have the right to due process in settling grievances which may arise.

5.2. Procedures for resolving faculty grievances are outlined in the revised Faculty Grievance Procedures approved by the Academic Council on March 5, 1991 and by the Board of Trustees on April 5, 1991 and revised on June 9, 1995.

5.3. Student/Academic Grievance Committee and Procedure
The Academic Freedom for Students at Michigan State University (AFR) and the Graduate Student Rights and Responsibilities (GSRR) documents establish the rights and responsibilities of MSU students and prescribe procedures for resolving allegations of violations of those rights (including grade appeals) through formal grievance hearings. In accordance with the AFR and the GSRR, the Department of Horticulture has established the following Academic Grievance Hearing Board procedures for adjudicating academic grievances and complaints. (See AFR Article 6 and 7; GSRR 5.4.1.)

5.3.1. Jurisdiction of the Department of Horticulture (HRT) Academic Grievance Hearing Board

5.3.1.1. The Horticulture Department's Academic Grievance Hearing Board serves as the initial Hearing Board for academic grievance hearings involving graduate and undergraduate students who allege violations of academic rights and graduate students seeking to contest an allegation of academic misconduct (academic dishonesty, violations of professional standards or falsifying admission and academic records). (See AFR 6.I.A and 7.I.B; GSRR 2.3.9 and 5.1.1.) N.B. undergraduate students will use the new University Academic Integrity Hearing Board to contest allegations of academic misconduct.

5.3.1.2. Students may not request an academic grievance hearing based on an allegation of incompetent instruction. (AFR 2.II.A-D; GSRR 2.2.2 and 2.2.4.)

5.3.1.3. The presiding officer shall be the Department Chairperson or his/her designee.

5.3.1.4. Alternate members. Faculty alternates to the chairperson/director of the Program Committees will include either the Coordinator of the Two-Year Program or the Graduate Enrollment Officer. The secretary of the Department Advisory Committee shall serve as alternate to the Chairperson. The student alternates will include either the vice-president of the Horticulture Club or the graduate student representative from the Horticulture Organization of Graduate Students (HOGS) to departmental faculty meetings. An alternate shall serve whenever the regular member is absent from the University on a permanent basis or on a temporary basis for a period in excess of three months, or the regular member is directly involve din the grievance.

5.3.2. Composition of the Academic Grievance Hearing Board

5.3.2.1. The Department of Horticulture shall constitute an Academic Grievance Hearing Board (AGHB) no later than the end of the tenth week of the spring semester. Academic Grievance Hearing Board members will be appointed by the department chairperson following consultation with the Department Advisory Committee (DAC), and the presidents of the Horticulture Club (HC) and the Horticulture Organization of Graduate Students (HOGS). The AGHB shall be composed of three (3) faculty members (at least two tenure stream), one of which (the chair) will be the department's representative to the College Grievance Committee, one of which will be the director of the department's Undergraduate Program Committee and the other will be the chairperson of the Graduate Program Committee; two (2) undergraduate students, one of which will be the president of the HC; and two (2) graduate students, one of which will be the president of HOGS. The faculty members shall serve 3-year terms, and are eligible for reappointment. The student organizations, which identify AGHB members, will determine their term length and reappointment eligibility. (See AFR 6.II.B, C, and D; GSRR 5.1.3 and 5.1.6.)

5.3.2.2. For hearings involving graduate students, the Academic Grievance Hearing Board shall include the Chair of the AGHB and an equal number of graduate students and faculty, including the chairperson of the Graduate Program Committee, or designee (see GSRR 5.1.2, 5.1.5 and 5.1.6.). For hearings involving undergraduate students, the Academic Grievance Hearing Board shall include the chair of the AGHB and an equal number of undergraduate students and faculty members, including the director of the Undergraduate Program Committee.

5.3.2.3. The Chair of the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board shall be a Hearing Board member with faculty rank. All members of the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board shall have a vote, except the Chair, who shall vote only in the event of a tie. (See AFR 6.II.C; GSRR 5.1.3, and 5.1.5.)

5.3.2.4. The Horticulture Department will train hearing board members about these procedures and the applicable sections of the AFR and GSRR. (See AFR 7.IV.C; GSRR 5.1.3.)

5.3.3. Referral to the Academic Grievance Hearing Board

5.3.3.1. After consulting with the instructor and appropriate unit administrator, undergraduate or graduate students whom remain dissatisfied with their attempt to resolve an allegation of violating student academic rights may request an academic grievance hearing. When appropriate, the Department chairperson, in consultation with the Dean, may waive jurisdiction and refer the request for a hearing to the College Hearing Board. At any time in the grievance process, students may consult with the University Ombudsperson. (See AFR 7.III.A, 7.IV.H; GSRR 5.3.)

5.3.3.2. After consulting with the instructor and appropriate unit administrator, graduate students who remain dissatisfied with their attempt to resolve an allegation of a violation of academic misconduct (academic dishonesty, violations of professional standards or falsifying admission and academic records) may request an academic grievance hearing. When appropriate, the Department chairperson, in consultation with the Dean, may waive jurisdiction and refer the request for a hearing to the College Hearing Board. At any time in the grievance process, students may consult with the University Ombudsperson. (See AFR 7.III.A, 7.IV.H; GSRR 5.3.)

5.3.3.3. In cases of ambiguous jurisdiction, the Associate Provost for Undergraduate Education will select the appropriate Hearing Board for hearings involving undergraduate students, and the Dean of The Graduate School will select the appropriate Hearing Board for cases involving graduate students. (See AFR 7.III.B; GSRR 5.3.)

5.3.3.4. The deadline for submitting the written request for a hearing is the middle of the semester following the alleged violation (excluding summer). If either the student (the complainant) or the respondent (usually, the instructor or an administrator) is absent from the university during that semester, or if other appropriate reasons emerge, the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board may grant an extension of this deadline. If the university no longer employs the respondent before the grievance hearing commences, the hearing may still proceed. (See AFR 7.III.C; GSRR 5.3.6.1.)

5.3.3.5. A written request for an academic grievance hearing must (i) specify the alleged violation(s) of academic rights in sufficient detail to justify a hearing, (ii) identify the individual against whom the grievance is filed (the respondent) and (iii) state the desired redress. Anonymous grievances will not be accepted. (See AFR 7.III.B and C, AFR footnote 35.)

5.3.4. Pre-Hearing Procedures

5.3.4.1. After receiving a student's written request for a hearing, the chairperson of the HRT Department will promptly refer the grievance to the Chair of the Hearing Board. (See AFR 7.IV.D.1; GSRR 5.3.2, 5.4.3.)

5.3.4.2. Within five (5) class days, the Chair of the Hearing Board will:

5.3.4.2.1. forward the request for a hearing to the respondent;

5.3.4.2.2. send the names of the pool of Hearing Board members to both parties and, to avoid conflicts of interest between the two parties and the Hearing Board members, request written challenges, if any, within three (3) class days of this notification;

5.3.4.2.3. rule promptly on any challenges, impanel a Hearing Board and send each party the names of the Hearing Board members. If the Chair of the Hearing Board is the subject of a challenge, the challenge shall be filed with the Department chairperson (See AFR 7.IV.D; GSRR 5.1.7.); and

5.3.4.2.4. send the Hearing Board members a copy of the request for a hearing (and try to send all parties a copy of these procedures at the same time).

5.3.4.3. Within five (5) class days of being established, the Hearing Board shall review the request, and after considering all submitted information, the Hearing Board will:

5.3.4.3.1. accept the request, in full or in part, and promptly schedule a hearing.

5.3.4.3.2. reject the request and provide a written explanation to appropriate parties; e.g., lack of jurisdiction. (The student may appeal this decision; Read GSRR 5.1.7 carefully; unlike the GSRR, the AFR does not allow for challenges without cause)

5.3.4.3.3. invite the two parties to meet with the Hearing Board in an informal session to try to resolve the matter. (Such a meeting does not preclude a later hearing.)
(See AFR 7.IV.D.4 and AFR footnote 35; GSRR 5.4.6.)

5.3.4.4. If the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board calls for a hearing, the Chair of the Hearing Board shall promptly negotiate a hearing date and schedule an additional meeting only for the Hearing Board should additional deliberations on the findings become necessary.

5.3.4.5. At least five (5) class days before the scheduled hearing, the Chair of the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board shall notify the respondent and the complainant in writing of the (i) time, date, and place of the hearing; (ii) the names of the parties to the grievance; (iii) a copy of the hearing request and the respondent's reply. (See AFR 7.IV.D.5; GSRR 5.4.7.)

5.3.4.6. At least three (3) class days before the scheduled hearing, the parties must notify the Chair of the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board the names of their witnesses and advisor, if any, and request permission for the advisor to have voice at the hearing. The Chair will promptly forward the names given by the complainant to the respondent and visa versa. (See AFR 7.IV.D.6; GSRR 5.4.7.1.)

5.3.4.7. The Chair of the Hearing Board may accept written statements from either party's witnesses at least three (3) class days before the hearing. (See AFR 7.IV.D.10.)

5.3.4.8. In unusual circumstances and in lieu of a personal appearance, either party may request permission to submit a written statement to the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board or request permission to participate in the hearing through an electronic communication channel. Written statements must be submitted to the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board at least three (3) class days before the scheduled hearing. (See AFR 7.IV.D.9; GSRR 5.4.9c.)

5.3.4.9. Either party to the grievance hearing may request a postponement of the hearing. The HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board may either grant or deny the request. (See AFR 7.IV.D.8; GSRR 5.4.8.)

5.3.4.10. At its discretion, the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board may set a reasonable time limit (e.g., not more than 20 minutes) for each party to present its case, and the Chair of the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board must inform the parties of such a time limit in the written notification of the hearing.

5.3.4.11. Hearings are closed unless the student requests an open hearing, which would be open to all members of the MSU community. The HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board may close an open hearing to protect the confidentiality of information or to maintain order. (See AFR 7.IV.D.13; GSRR 5.4.10.4.)

5.3.4.12. Members of the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board are expected to respect the confidentiality of the hearing process. (AFR 7.IV.D.13, 7.IV.F.)

5.3.5. Hearing Procedures

5.3.5.1. The Hearing will proceed as follows:

5.3.5.1.1. Introductory remarks by the Chair of the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board: The Chair of the Hearing Board introduces hearing panel members, the complainant, the respondent and advisors, if any. The Chair reviews the hearing procedures, including announced time restraints for presentations by each party and the witnesses, and informs the parties if their advisors may have a voice in the hearings and if the proceedings are being recorded. Witnesses shall be excluded from the proceedings except when testifying. The Chair also explains:
• In academic grievance hearings in which a student alleges a violation of academic rights, the student bears the burden of proof.
• In hearings involving graduate students seeking to contest allegations of academic misconduct, the instructor bears the burden of proof. Note: undergraduate students must go before the (new) University Academic Integrity Hearing Board to contest allegations of academic misconduct.
• All Hearing Board decisions must be reached by a majority of the Hearing Board, based on a "preponderance of the evidence."
(See AFR 7.IV.D.14, Footnote 37; GSRR 5.4.10.1. For various definitions, see AFR Article 11 and GSRR Article 8.)

5.3.5.1.2. If the complainant fails to appear in person or via an electronic channel at a scheduled hearing, the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board may either postpone the hearing or dismiss the case for demonstrated cause. (See AFR 7.IV.D.11; GSRR 5.4.9a.)

5.3.5.1.3. If the respondent fails to appear in person or via an electronic channel at a scheduled hearing, the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board may postpone the hearing, hear the case in the respondent's absence, or dismiss the case. (See AFR 7.IV.D.11; GSRR 5.4.9-b.)

5.3.5.1.4. If the respondent is absent from the University during the semester of the grievance hearing or no longer employed by the University before the grievance procedure concludes, the hearing process may still proceed. (See AFR 7.III.C; GSRR 5.3.6.1.)

5.3.5.1.5. To assure orderly questioning, the Chair of the Hearing Board will recognize individuals before they speak. All parties have a right to speak without interruption. Each party has a right to question the other party and to rebut any oral or written statements submitted to the Hearing Board. (See AFR 7.IV.D.16; GSRR 5.4.10.2.)

5.3.5.1.6. Presentation by the Complainant: The Chair recognizes the complainant to present without interruption any statements relevant to the complainant's case, including the redress sought. The Chair then recognizes questions directed at the complainant by the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board, the respondent and the respondent's advisor, if any.

5.3.5.1.7. Presentation by the Complainant's Witnesses: The Chair recognizes the complainant's witnesses, if any, to present, without interruption, any statement relevant to the complainant's case. The Chair then recognizes questions directed at the witnesses by the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board, the respondent, and the respondent's advisor, if any.

5.3.5.1.8. Presentation by the Respondent: The Chair recognizes the respondent to present without interruption any statements relevant to the respondent's case. The Chair then recognizes questions directed at the respondent by the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board, the complainant, and the complainant's advisor, if any.

5.3.5.1.9. Presentation by the Respondent's Witnesses: The Chair recognizes the respondent's witnesses, if any, to present, without interruption, and statement relevant to the respondent's case. The Chair then recognizes questions directed at the witnesses by the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board, the complainant, and the complainant's advisor, if any.

5.3.5.1.10. Rebuttal and Closing Statement by Complainant: The complainant refutes statements by the respondent, the respondent's witnesses and advisor, if any, and presents a final summary statement.

5.3.5.1.11. Rebuttal and Closing Statement by Respondent: The respondent refutes statements by the complainant, the complainant's witnesses and advisor, if any, and presents a final summary statement.

5.3.5.1.12. Final questions by the Hearing Board: The HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board asks questions of any of the participants in the hearing.

5.3.6. Post-Hearing Procedures

5.3.6.1. Deliberation:
After all evidence has been presented, with full opportunity for explanations, questions and rebuttal, the Chair of the Hearing Board shall excuse all parties to the grievance and convene the Hearing Board to determine its findings in executive session. When possible, deliberations should take place directly following the hearing and/or at the previously scheduled follow-up meeting. (See Section III.I above.)

5.3.6.2. Decision:

5.3.6.2.1. In grievance (non-disciplinary) hearings involving undergraduate and graduate students and a majority of the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board finds, based on a "preponderance of the evidence," that a violation of the student's academic rights has occurred and that redress is possible, it shall direct the chairperson of the Department to implement an appropriate remedy, in consultation with the Hearing Board. If the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board finds that no violation of academic rights has occurred, it shall so inform the Department chairperson. (See AFR 7.IV.D and E; GSRR 5.4.11.)

5.3.6.2.2. In grievance (non-disciplinary) hearings involving graduate students in which the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board serves as the initial hearing body to adjudicate an allegation of academic dishonesty and, based on a "preponderance of the evidence," the Hearing Board finds for the student, the Hearing Board shall recommend to the chairperson of the Department that the penalty grade be removed, the Academic Dishonesty Report be removed from the student's records and a "good faith judgment" of the student's academic performance in the course take place. If the Hearing Board finds for the complainant (instructor), the penalty grade shall stand and the Academic Dishonesty Report regarding the allegation will remain on file, pending an appeal, if any, within five (5) class days, of the Department Hearing Board's decision to the College Hearing Board. If an academic disciplinary hearing is pending, and the Hearing Board decides for the complainant, the graduate student's disciplinary hearing before either the College Hearing Board or the Dean of The Graduate School would promptly follow, pending an appeal, if any, within five (5) class days. (See GSRR 5.4.12.3; also see AFR 7.V and GSRR 5.5 for academic disciplinary hearings involving undergraduate and graduate students.)

5.3.6.3. Written Report:
The Chair of the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board shall prepare a written report of the Hearing Board's findings, including redress for the complainant, if applicable, or sanctions, if applicable, and forward a copy of the decision to the appropriate unit administrator within three (3) class days of the hearing. The report shall indicate the rationale for the decision and the major elements of evidence, or lack thereof, that support the Hearing Board's decision. The report also should inform the parties of the right to appeal within five (5) class days following notice of the decision. The Chair shall forward copies to the parties involved, the responsible administrators, the University Ombudsperson and, in hearings involving graduate students, the Dean of The Graduate School. All recipients must respect the confidentiality of the report and of the hearing board's deliberations resulting in a decision. (See AFR 7.IV.E and F; GSRR 5.4.11.)

5.3.7. Appeal of Academic Grievance Hearing Board Decision

5.3.7.1. In hearings involving undergraduate students, either party may appeal the decision of the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board to the University Academic Appeal Board in cases involving academic grievances alleging violations of student rights. (See AFR 6.IV.A and 7.VII.)

5.3.7.2. In hearings involving graduate students, either party may appeal a decision by the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board to the College Hearing Board for cases involving (1) academic grievances alleging violations of student rights heard initially by the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board and (2) alleged violations of regulations involving academic misconduct (academic dishonesty, professional standards or falsification of admission and academic records). (See GSRR 5.4.12.)

5.3.7.3. All appeals must be in writing, signed and submitted to the Chair of either the University Academic Appeal Board or the College Hearing Board within 5 class days following notification of the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board's decision. While under appeal, the original decision of the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board will be held in abeyance. (See AFR 7.VII.A; GSRR 5.4.12, 5.4.12.2 and 5.4.12.3.)

5.3.7.4. A request for an appeal of a HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board decision to either the University Academic Appeal Board or the College Hearing Board must allege, in sufficient particularity to justify a hearing, that the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board failed to follow applicable procedures for adjudicating the hearing or that findings of the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board were not supported by the "preponderance of the evidence." The request also must include the redress sought. Presentation of new evidence normally will be inappropriate. (See AFR 7.VII.A and B; GSRR 5.4.12.1, 5.4.12.2 and 5.4.12.4.)

5.3.8. Reconsideration
If new evidence should arise, either party to a hearing may request the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board to reconsider the case within 30 days upon receipt of the hearing outcome. The written request for reconsideration is to be sent to the Chair of the Hearing Board, who shall promptly convene the HRT Academic Grievance Hearing Board to review the new material and render a decision on a new hearing. (See AFR 7.IV.G; GSRR 5.4.13.)

5.3.9. File Copy
The Chair of the Department of Fisheries and Wildlife will forward a copy of these procedures to the Office of the Ombudsperson and The Graduate School. (See AFR 7.IV.A; GSRR 5.4.1.)

6. DEPARTMENT BYLAWS

6.1. The Bylaws and amendments to the bylaws shall be reviewed by the College Advisory Council and transmitted to the Dean.

6.2. The Bylaws and amendments to the bylaws shall be published and transmitted to all voting faculty members of the department.

6.3. The voting faculty members of the department shall review the Bylaws regularly at 5-year intervals or as deemed necessary by the Dean, Chairperson, Department Advisory Committee or the voting faculty.

6.4. Amendment Procedures

6.4.1. The department Bylaws may be amended by a majority of the voting faculty by write-in ballot at or following a department meeting at which such an item of business is on the agenda.

6.4.2. Amendments may be initiated by the Chairperson, by the Department Advisory Committee, or by petition of any three members of the voting faculty.

6.4.3. The effective date will be immediately after adoption of amendments to Bylaws.

 

*Revised 9/13/2012

Testing