The Chair is responsible for the operation of the Department, including oversight and leadership of all Departmental units and activities.  Among other responsibilities and activities, the Chair

 

 

 

Subject to actual appointment by the Dean of the College, the Department Chair shall be elected to a three- or five-year term.  Normally the term shall end with the fiscal year.  Before a search or reappointment process begins, the Voting Department may adjust the length of the coming term to normalize its ending date.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Voting Department consists of

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Senior Staff consists of:

 

 

 

 

 

This elective body advises the Chair on all matters brought to its attention, whether by the Chair, standing committees, ad hoc committees, or individuals.  The Advisory Committee shall make recommendations to the Chair regarding action by the Voting Department (or, if applicable, by the Senior Staff) on proposals for amendment to any requirements of the several degrees offered by the Department, amendments to the Department By-Laws, and any other matters brought to its attention by the Chair.

 

 

The Advisory Committee includes both elected and ex-officio members.  

 

 

 

 

Faculty may opt out of Faculty Evaluation Committee elections (if they wish) if they fall into one of the following categories: 

 

A. Faculty who hold an administrative position 

B. Faculty who are untenured.  

C. Faculty who have served within the last 3 years.  

D. Faculty who know they will be on leave in the Spring of the following year.

 

In addition to the list above, faculty who feel they have legitimate, serious reasons, aside from normal work load duties, for why they should be allowed to opt out of Faculty Evaluation Committee elections in a particular year (e.g. a particularly heavy service year in terms of work-intensive college or university committees or task forces, heavy national service, etc.) must negotiate with the Chair. 

 

In the Fall of each semester, the Chair shall appoint elected members of Advisory Committee, supplemented if necessary by elected members of Faculty Evaluation Committee, to serve as an “Advisory” Sabbatical Committee to help draft evaluative and summary materials for the departmental endorsement of sabbatical applications.  The Chair can revise such materials as s/he deems necessary in order to ensure fair and consistent standards among candidates, and shall have sole control over final recommendations and ratings of candidates.  No faculty member can serve on Sabbatical Committee if he/she is applying for a sabbatical in that year, or if he/she has a clear conflict of interest (e.g. a spouse or partner applying for a sabbatical in that year).

 

 

All tenured and tenure-track faculty are expected to serve in at least two, and normally three, significant forms of departmental service each year, including department administrative roles, standing committees, and/or search committees, except in the case of especially heavy service elsewhere or exceptional circumstances, which shall be approved by the Chair. Course remissions for administrator roles, as well as joint appointments, should be considered in the assigning of service.  Non-tenure-line faculty also serve on committees related to their contracted duties. 

 

 

The formation and duties of the Standing Committees will be approved by a simple majority of the Voting Department.

 

 

 

The Chair may appoint committees or panels with terms of limited duration to assist in specific matters or to serve as fact-finding bodies.

 

S.A.G.E., or Student Association for Graduates in English, is the organization that represents the graduate students in the Department.  All graduate students are automatically members of S.A.G.E. when they enroll.  S.A.G.E. conducts its own elections and appoints representatives to serve on Departmental Standing Committees.  Its chair, or co-chairs, are members of the Voting Department, as are all graduate students appointed to serve on Standing Committees.

 

The entire budget of the Department of English is administered by the Chair, who is accountable, both to their colleagues and to the central administration, for using its resources efficaciously and efficiently.  The Chair is aided significantly in that regard by:

 

A. the College budget analyst and SSC financial contact, who are responsible for handling all the forms that govern the disbursing, depositing, and transferring of Departmental moneys and for the bookkeeping thereby necessitated 

B. the Director of First- and Second-Year English, who oversees the budget for staffing courses taught by GTAs and lecturers

C. the Administrative associate, who helps prioritize expenditures for supplies and equipment.

 

Performance expectations for tenured and tenure-track faculty, as well as unclassified academic staff members, are outlined in the Faculty Evaluation Plan. The procedures outlined here apply to non-tenure-line faculty.

 

Unclassified staff members’ allocation of effort is determined by their individual contracts and is not normally subject to change.  Teaching professors’ allocation of effort will be comprised of 60% teaching and generally 20% research and 20% service, as negotiated with the chair in response to departmental need and reflected in the position description. Full-time lecturers who are not academic program assistants (APA) generally allocate their effort 100% teaching; service and research directly relevant to their teaching will be counted as part of the assessment of teaching.  Multi-term lecturers/academic program assistants (APA) generally allocate 75% to teaching and 25% to service; this again is negotiated with the chair in response to departmental need and is reflected in the position description.

 

 

Unclassified staff members teach the number of courses specified in their contracts; this varies from one to four courses per semester.  Distribution of effort is likewise adjusted according to contracted number of courses. 

 

 

 

Unclassified staff and teaching professors will serve on committees in their area of responsibility as needed.   They may also be assigned as mentors to GTAs or other lecturers.  Unclassified staff members, MTL/APAs, and teaching professors are expected to attend department meetings and participate in department decision-making.

 

Unclassified academic staff expectations are determined by the staff member’s position description.

 

Full-time lecturers, multi-term lecturers/academic program assistants, teaching professors, and unclassified teaching and professional staff will generally be evaluated according to the same standards required of tenure-line faculty, as outlined in the Faculty Evaluation Plan, though the percentage of effort in each category will necessarily differ according to their different contracts. Service evaluations for unclassified staff will include professional activities as outlined in the Faculty Evaluation Plan. Service and research associated with teaching will count toward teaching for those lecturers for whom there is no contractual obligation for teaching or service.

 

Part-time lecturers should undergo a periodic review in the first semester of their teaching and every six semesters subsequently by the Director of FSE, the Director of Composition, or by a tenured member of the faculty.

 

The agreement between KU and its GTAs requires that all GTAs be evaluated each semester.  In order to give GTAs semesterly evaluation of their work as teachers in a way both helpful to the teachers and manageable for the Department, the Department has instituted a system of Teaching Advisors to supplement the existing academic advisors.

 

A. At the beginning of each year, the FSE Director, in consultation with the Chair, will assign each GTA a Teaching Advisor, a member of the tenured or tenure-track faculty who will become familiar with the work of the GTA, advise the GTA about teaching issues, and give the GTA feedback each semester about the quality of the GTA’s teaching.  In order to increase the contact between full-time faculty and GTAs and to give GTAs a range of response to their teaching, GTAs will be assigned a different Teaching Advisor each year.

 

B. The minimal requirements for teaching advising are:

 

 

At minimum, all instructors in the Department will:

 

A. Submit a course description and an order for books (when appropriate), in advance of each semester.

 

B. Distribute a syllabus which includes class and relevant department policies, a schedule of readings, and information about grading, including what major assignments will count and what weight they will have in the final grade.  The syllabus should adhere with reasonable fidelity to the content and objectives of each offering as it is described in the catalogs and other publications.  The syllabus serves as a contract between teacher and student, so it is important that expectations and policies be clearly outlined (a clear syllabus is the best defense in cases of grade appeals or other grievances, for example).

 

C. Attend all assigned classes on time or arrange a substitute. In case of emergency, the instructor should contact students by e-mail.

 

D. Maintain communication with the students outside of class by holding office hours and responding to e-mail messages and KU Learning Management System (LMS) posts. All instructors must maintain an active e-mail account:  this is the University’s key method of communicating important policies and information to faculty, staff, and students.

 

E. Mark and grade all major assignments and return to students in a timely manner so that students have some idea of their standing in their courses throughout the semester.

 

F. Encourage students to fill out the digital course evaluation distributed by the university, including by reserving class time for this. Teachers will not have access to student evaluations of their instruction in any given course until grades for that course have been turned in.  Student evaluations are tallied and recorded by Department staff and kept on file.  The evaluations themselves are returned to the faculty member, who must keep them for annual evaluations, preparation of dossiers for promotion and tenure, teaching awards, and other potential uses.  The English Department has voted to use student comments as part of faculty evaluation.

 

G. Calculate accurate grades based on a variety of assignments and submit to the Registrar’s Office using the appropriate online form.

 

H. Submit an annual portfolio including student evaluations and other materials.

 

Any member of the Senior Staff may propose new courses to be taught in the Department. These proposals will be submitted for consideration by the Undergraduate Committee or the Graduate Committee (or both), depending on the level of the course.  If approved by the appropriate committee, such proposals will then be submitted to the Voting Department for approval.  Once approved by the Voting Department, course proposals are submitted to either the Committee on Undergraduate Studies and Advising (CUSA) or the Committee on Graduate Studies (CGS).

 

A. Tenured and tenure-track faculty will be assigned courses by the Associate Chair/Scheduling Officer, under the direction of the Chair.  Course assignments are made, as much as possible, according to the requests of faculty members.  Faculty should remember, however, that all course assignments are ultimately the prerogative of the Dean.  The principal responsibility of the Scheduling Officer is to ensure an adequate and varied number of offerings at the graduate and majors level.

 

B. The standard teaching assignment for tenure-line professors at all ranks is four courses per year, normally two each semester.  Appropriate remissions will be given for Departmental administrators, editors of journals, those holding endowed research professorships, and others with especially heavy service (as approved by the Dean).  However, professors may request to teach a 3/1 or 1/3 load, which request must be approved by the Chair.  

 

C. Tenure-track assistant professors are eligible for one Research Intensive Semester prior to their promotion and tenure review.  During that semester, they are relieved from teaching any courses, though they still perform service duties and meet with graduate students as needed.  Eligible assistant professors must consult with the Chair to determine when the RIS will be taken.  The Department’s teaching commitments are uppermost in considering any request for course reduction.

 

D. While the Department will always seek to be supportive of teaching leaves due to external or internal fellowships or sabbaticals, the Department’s teaching commitments are uppermost in considering any request for course reduction. 

 

E. Tenured and tenure-track faculty are normally expected to teach at least one course a year that meets enrollment demands or program requirements on the Lawrence and Edwards campuses. Appropriate adjustments will be made for faculty with course remissions.

 

A. Senior Lecturers, Director of FSE, and non-FSE full-time multi-term contract lecturers will be assigned courses by the Associate Chair/Scheduling Officer.  Full-time FSE multi-term contract lecturers will be assigned by the Director of FSE, in consultation with the Scheduling Officer.  Courses will be assigned according to teacher preferences where possible, but Departmental need will be the primary criterion.  Instructors should remember that all course assignments are ultimately the prerogative of the Dean.

 

B. The number of courses assigned to full-time non-tenure-track instructors depends on their contracts

 

A. Requests for summer teaching assignments are made to the regular Scheduling Officers (Associate Chair and FSE Administrators), usually late in the Fall Semester.  In general, only basic courses in high demand will be offered during the summer.   For 300-level and above courses, the Scheduling Officer will attempt to rotate teaching assignments so that all those who wish to teach in the summer have the opportunity on a regular basis.  Thus priority will be given to those who have not taught recently.  Procedures for assigning summer teaching for FSE courses are outlined in MAT (Manual for Teachers).

 

B. Salary for teaching summer courses is in addition to academic year salary, or such teaching can be on-load.   Salaries for summer courses are allocated at a standard flat rate per course, not as a percentage of the academic year salary.

 

A. An ad hoc committee composed of several faculty members, a graduate student, and a faculty member from outside the Department, is appointed by the Chair.  Working with the Chair and the Office of Civil Rights and Title IX, the ad-hoc committee will draft a position description to be presented to the Senior Staff for approval. Following procedures formulated by the Office of Civil Rights and Title IX, the committee selects finalists are invited to Lawrence, often after an interview either at the MLA Convention or online.  Once finalists have been identified, their files are made available to the Department (with a separate file for letters of recommendation, available only to the Senior Staff).  When finalists visit Lawrence they are expected to give formal public presentations and to discuss their plans and interests informally with a large number of Department members, including graduate students.  Candidates are hired both for general excellence and for competence in one or more specific fields.  

 

B. When the visits are completed, a 90-minute meeting to consider the candidates is scheduled. In the first 30 minutes, the Department at large (not limited to the Voting Department) discusses in open forum the candidates’ potential for teaching, research, and service.  Prior to this open forum, the ad-hoc hiring committee and SAGE are invited to make written reports confidentially available to the Senior Staff no later than 24 hours prior to the hiring meeting. After the open forum, the Senior Staff convenes for further discussion including any discussion of candidate reference letters, and for a decision on the appointment.  The entire Senior Staff (with exceptions for conflicts of interest, as in domestic partner hires) participates no matter what the rank of the appointment. At this point, the Senior Staff may, if it wishes, reject all the candidates and request that the search be reopened or continued. Otherwise, first, the Senior Staff votes (secret ballot) on which candidate to rank highest. In the event no candidate receives a majority, a second ballot will be taken between the two candidates with the greatest number of votes. After the first-ranking candidate has been determined and the tally announced, the Senior Staff again votes on which candidate to rank second. This process is repeated until all candidates are ranked. (In a hire producing three “finalist” candidates, this would involve two actual votes, for example.) After all candidates have been ranked, faculty members can then make motions to exclude individual candidates from further consideration. (In this way, faculty can also express their dissatisfaction with those candidates.) These motions (if seconded) will be voted on one at a time.

 

C. Special-opportunity hires (e.g., hiring of targeted minority-group members and domestic partners of faculty members, hiring in tenure-track positions of persons who have held other positions in the University, and hiring to distinguished professorships) follow the procedures above as much as possible, except that discussion and an up-or-down vote are held after one candidate’s visit, and the next candidate, if there is one, is invited only if the position remains unfilled.

 

A. An ad hoc committee comprised of three or four Department faculty members is appointed by the Chair.  In the case of the Assistant or Associate Director of FSE, the Director of FSE serves as Chair.  The committee devises a position description and ensures that the position(s) are advertised on the Human Resources website and within the Department.

 

B. Applicants submit teaching portfolios to the Chair.  Applicants for Assistant or Associate Director of FSE submit materials demonstrating administrative experience and quality as well.  The committee also consults applicants’ FSE files, if available.  The committee chooses a group of finalists and conducts interviews with them.  The finalists’ portfolios and files are made available to the Senior Staff.

 

C. The finalists’ qualifications are discussed in an open meeting of the Department.  This is followed by a meeting of the Senior Staff, which votes in the same way it would for an external hire.

 

Advertising, interviewing, and hiring for these positions will be conducted by the appropriate Departmental administrators, under the direction of the Chair. 

 

Evaluations at the 3rd-year contract renewal stage are meant to assess whether the candidate is making adequate progress to the promotion review.

 

Each assistant teaching professor is assigned a teaching mentor by the chair of the department. This mentor aids the assistant teaching professor with teaching issues, observes one or more of the candidate’s classes, examines course materials, and has frequent discussions with the candidate about teaching goals and progress. As the person best informed about the assistant professor’s teaching, the mentor becomes a part of the contract renewal committee when the assistant teaching professor comes up for 3rd-year contract renewal and, eventually, for promotion.

 

For teaching professors at all ranks (assistant, associate, and full), teaching and advising are assessed through multiple sources of information including consideration of syllabi, course materials, and other information related to a faculty member’s courses; peer and student evaluations; a candidate’s own statement of teaching philosophy and goals; public representations of teaching; engagement in pedagogical workshops, seminars, or conferences; record of graduate advising where appropriate; record of advising undergraduate theses; and other accepted methods of evaluation, which may include external evaluations. Expectations and opportunities for graduate advising will be established in consultation with the teaching mentor, chair, and graduate director at the start of each 3-year contract period.

 

In the first semester of an assistant teaching professor’s appointment, the department chair assigns a more advanced scholar in the candidate’s field, or in one closely related, to serve as a research mentor; this scholar may also serve as the assistant teaching professor’s teaching mentor by mutual agreement. The mentor then becomes a member of the candidate’s 3rd-year contract renewal committee and, eventually, their promotion committee and assesses the candidate’s scholarship in each instance. This colleague synthesizes the information drawn from the candidate’s curriculum vitae, professional reviews and/or citations, the colleague’s own knowledge of the field and its expectations, and his/her assessment of the candidate’s research. Major publications in English can include books and peer-reviewed articles or book chapters (or the creative equivalent, e.g., plays, short stories, creative essays, poems, or other substantial creative work), and articles and book chapters on pedagogy, and minor publications generally include book reviews or encyclopedia entries. Given the relative weight of research in the teaching professor’s contract, conference presentations are also a potentially significant source of research/scholarly assessment.  

 

For renewals after the sixth year, the candidate may retain their research mentor from the previous promotion, or, in consultation and with the approval of the chair, may designate a different research mentor from among the senior faculty.

 

For teaching professors at all ranks, the factors that lead to a specific judgment about a renewal recommendation include the quality of the publications (extensiveness of research, innovative thinking, contribution to the field, effectiveness of the writing, etc.) and the status of the journal or press (based on scholarly reputation, appropriateness to a field, and rigor of review process). More weight is given to major publications.

 

The chair of the department serves as a member of the candidate’s 3rd-year contract renewal committee as well as the promotion committee. (In the case that the Chair is already serving on the candidate’s Promotion Committee as either research or teaching evaluator, the Associate Chair is asked to serve as service evaluator.) The Chair (or Associate Chair) evaluates the candidate’s service record based on examination of the candidate’s CV, annual evaluations, solicited and unsolicited letters regarding service, departmental records, and personal knowledge of service contributions. The Chair considers the workload and time-commitment of the service, the quality of the service contribution, the different levels of contribution (Department, Institution, and National / International), and the ways in which the service might enhance the Department’s and KU’s national reputation. The minimum requirement for English Department faculty is at least two, and normally three, significant forms of departmental service each year, including department administrative roles, standing committees, and/or search committees, except in the case of especially heavy service elsewhere or exceptional circumstances, which shall be approved by the Chair. 

 

According to the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences’ Student Academic Misconduct Policy, any student charged with any form of academic misconduct must be informed in writing and must be told of the right to appeal. It is absolutely essential that all instructors cooperate with departmental procedures and with the College procedures for notifying students of a misconduct charge. The regulations of the University Senate, of the University Judicial Board, and of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences explicitly require that instructors not deal unilaterally with academic offenses committed by their students. These regulations and procedures have been designed to protect the legitimate rights of both the student and the University. Students have the right to respond to any accusations of plagiarism and a right to due process. Any student whose instructor fails to adhere to these procedures may legitimately appeal to the University Judicial Board on the grounds that due process has been denied in their case. 

 

The following is the procedure for addressing Academic Misconduct that is a result of plagiarism in the Department. Note: If the teacher who is considering charges of academic misconduct is a faculty member, a Senior Lecturer or Multiterm lecturer, they will work with the Associate Chair. If the teacher is an Annual Contract Lecturer or a Graduate Teaching Assistant, they will work with the Director of FSE or the Director of Composition. For simplicity, Administrator is used below.

X.2. If there is strong evidence of Academic Misconduct, the teacher should first, if possible, discuss the evidence of misconduct with the student. If the instructor decides to continue with the charge of misconduct, they should 1) fill out the Academic Misconduct form; 2) submit the form and evidence to the Administrator who will discover whether the student has previous Academic Misconduct offenses. The Administrator will then route the form to the Chair for adjustment of penalty if needed and for signature, and then to the student with information about the process and their right to appeal. The instructor must complete the Charge of Academic Misconduct form to begin this process within 10 calendar days of the discovery of the misconduct.

 

X.3. The student will accept the charge, accept the charge but appeal the sanction, or deny the charge on the form, and in all three cases, the form returns to the Administrator for filing with the College, further mediation, or to arrange a hearing. Mediation consists of talking to the student and instructor separately to decide if they want to continue the process. The student and instructor must be informed that they may continue the process and request a departmental hearing.

 

X.4 If a hearing is held at the departmental level, the hearing panel will consist of a three-person faculty committee appointed by the Chair including the other Director (who has not tried to mediate the case) or Associate Chair. If the instructor is an annual contract lecturer or GTA, the other members will be the Associate Chair and a member of the FSE Committee. If the instructor is a faculty member, senior lecturer or multi-term lecturer, the other members will be the Chair and a member of the Advisory Committee on the Senior Staff. Present at the hearing will be the faculty panel, the instructor, and the student. All hearings must be audio recorded.

 

X.5 If the hearing finds the student committed misconduct, the student may appeal to the Judicial Board.

 

X.6. Depending on the number of Academic Misconduct offenses for which the student has been cited, the following minimal penalties are considered appropriate:

 

 

 

 

D. Third offense:

 

Note: If a faculty member wishes to enforce a more stringent policy than that described above, they may do so, but that policy must be outlined explicitly in the course syllabus.

 

University Senate Rules and Regulations allow students, under specifically limited circumstances, to appeal their semester grade in a course.

 

XI.1 Grounds for appeal.  The only ground for appeal of a grade is “improper application of the grading procedure announced for the course by the instructor” (USSR 2.4.5).  Grade appeals can only be made after the course grade has been assigned, based on the grounds articulated above. 

 

XI.2. Conference and Mediation. Students who feel that a teacher has not assigned a course grade fairly should first confer with him or her; if that conference ends in an impasse, they should appeal to the Director of First- and Second-Year English (for all GTAs and part-time lecturers) or the Associate Chair (for senior staff and full-time lecturers), who will mediate the case. Students may also appeal to the Director of Graduate or Undergraduate Studies to help mediate the case. The Associate Director of FSE and/or the Associate Chair can answer student questions about documentation and the process of the appeal.

 

XI.3. Departmental hearing.  If the student decides to go forward with the appeal after mediation, the Associate Chair will appoint a three-person committee to hear it. This committee will include the Associate Chair.  If the instructor is a part-time faculty member, the other members will be the Assistant/Associate Director of FSE and a member of the GTAL Committee.  If the instructor is a member of the Senior Staff, the other members will be two of the four elected Senior Staff members of Advisory Committee.  If the hearing sustains the instructor’s original grade, the student may then appeal to the Judicial Board.

 

XI.4. If the Judicial Board sustains the instructor’s original grade, the student has exhausted his or her remedies in the grade-appeals procedure.

 

XI.5. If the Departmental hearing sustains the student’s appeal, the three-person committee will review a student’s work, consult with the instructor, and assign the course grade. The instructor and the student will be informed of their right to appeal to the Judicial Board.

 

XI.6. If the Judicial Board sustains the student’s appeal, the three-person committee will, in accordance with U.S.R.R. 2.3.5.3, assign the course grade for the student.  If the Board sustains the instructor’s appeal, the instructor will assign the course grade.