Business, College of - Northern Michigan University

1. DEFINITIONS
 

1.1          See the Master Agreement for definitions related to faculty, department, calendar, and work of the unit.

1.2          The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) is the accrediting body of the College of Business.

1.2.1AACSB defines faculty members in one of four categories based on their most recent five years of activity: Scholarly Academic (SA), Practice Academic (PA), Scholarly Practitioner (SP), or Instructional Practitioner (IP).

1.2.1.1Scholarly Academics (SA) are faculty who have normally attained a terminal degree in a field related to the area of teaching and who sustain currency and relevance through scholarship and activities related to their field of teaching.

1.2.1.2   Practice Academics (PA) are faculty who have normally attained a terminal degree in a field related to their area of teaching and who sustain currency and relevance through professional engagement, interaction, and activities related to their field of teaching. 

1.2.1.3   Scholarly Practitioners (SP) are faculty who have normally obtained a master’s degree related to their field of teaching and have substantial professional experience in duration and responsibility at the time of hire.  Faculty must sustain currency and relevance through scholarship related to their professional background and experience in their field of teaching.

1.2.1.4   Instructional Practitioners (IP) are faculty who have normally obtained a master’s degree related to their field of teaching, have substantial professional experience in duration and responsibility at the time of hire.  Faculty must sustain currency and relevance through continued professional experience and engagement related to their professional background and experience in their field of teaching.
 

1.2.1.5   Additional Faculty (A) are faculty who do not meet the school’s criteria for SA, PA, SP, or IP.

1.2.1.6   Thought Leadership, as defined by AACSB, is evidenced when a business school is recognized as a highly respected authority in an area or areas of expertise, and is thus sought after by relevant stakeholders. Aligned with the College’s mission, these stakeholders should include learners, business, academics, government, nonprofits, non-governmental organizations, and/or broader society.

2.            MANAGEMENT OF FACULTY

2.1          Faculty Qualifications List

2.1.1       Organized by individual courses, the Faculty Qualifications List identifies all faculty members and the courses within the college they are qualified to teach.  Faculty members requesting to teach outside of their discipline must provide evidence of qualifications to teach the course. As new courses and faculty are added, or faculty acquire new competencies, the list will be updated. The Dean is responsible for maintaining the Faculty Qualifications List. Course assignments shall be determined by the Dean, subject to the Faculty Qualifications List and AACSB Standards. Faculty will be given the opportunity to make course-scheduling suggestions.

2.2          STAFFING ASSIGNMENTS 

2.2.1      Staffing assignments for courses beyond the normal load shall be made according to the Faculty Qualifications List,  AACSB Standards, and the Master Agreement.

2.3          TEACHING LOAD

2.3.1      The Departmental Teaching Load Guidelines document will be reviewed by the faculty at the end of each academic year and subsequently approved.  All updates are forwarded to the AAUP Office per the Master Agreement.

3.            PARTICIPATION IN ACADEMIC AFFAIRS

3.1          MEETINGS

3.1.1       College meetings will be called by the Faculty Chair or Department Head/Dean and held at least once per semester during the academic year. Faculty meetings will be called by the Faculty Chair and held once per semester or as necessary. The expectation is to hold monthly faculty meetings. Whenever possible, written notification of the meetings, including an agenda, should be communicated to faculty one workweek in advance.  Adjunct faculty, support staff, and other guests may be invited to meetings.  Meetings shall be governed by The Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure by Sturgis.

3.2          MEMBERSHIP

3.2.1       The voting membership of the college is defined as participating faculty members as described by the Master Agreement. The Dean is considered an ex-officio non-voting member. Faculty members on sabbatical or leave of absence are not prohibited from voting nor required to vote (voting is in person or digitally). All votes shall be of equal weight.

3.3          VOTING

3.3.1       Voting members can attend scheduled meetings in person or by electronic means and vote in accordance with the following guidelines.  If a member cannot attend a scheduled meeting in person, attendance and voting via digital means are acceptable.  

3.3.2       Bylaws Voting and Recall of College Leadership Committee Members. For a valid vote, matters relating to the approval or alteration of the Bylaws or the recall of College Leadership Committee Members will require a quorum of two-thirds of the voting membership of the College, (Bylaws Article 3.2.1). Greater than 50% of the quorum members must cast votes for the motion to pass. A faculty member who abstains from voting does not count as a “yes” or “no” vote or towards the 50% majority.

3.3.3       Regular business voting.

3.3.3.1    Quorum requirements: a majority of the voting membership of the College, (Bylaws Article 3.2.1).

3.3.3.2    Voting: A majority (> 50%) of the members present (for the vote itself).

3.3.3.3    Electronic ballot via Qualtrics, or an acceptable alternative, when necessary or as an alternative when attendance is not possible. The College Leadership Committee will build and administer the survey.

3.3.3.4    For electronic voting, a quorum is reached by 50% of the participating faculty having voted.  By voting, a faculty member is considered “present” and part of the quorum.

3.4         COLLEGE REPRESENTATIVES

3.4.1      The Faculty Chair and the Faculty Council Representative will be elected by the College.  Nominations for the Faculty Chair and Faculty Council representative are due to the College Leadership Committee by April 1.  Those interested should verify meeting participation requirements with their teaching schedule in advance of expressing interest to the College Leadership Committee. The formal ballot vote will close by the second Friday in April. Once installed, the Faculty Chair will select another College of Business faculty member from those who volunteered to work with them in their capacity as Faculty Chair.  It will be the responsibility of this selected faculty member to hold meetings if the Faculty Chair is unavailable.  In the case of the resignation of the Faculty Chair prior to the end of the term limit, this faculty member will be responsible for arranging a meeting and election of a new Chair. Timing for Academic Senate nominations should follow the Academic Senate Bylaws. Only dues-paying members of the AAUP may vote for the Faculty Council Representative, who shall serve a one-year term. 

3.4.2      Academic Senate representatives shall be elected according to the Academic Senate's Bylaws. Newly appointed Academic Senate representatives will attend the last Academic Senate meeting of the academic year before the start of their term.

3.5         COLLEGE COMMITTEES

3.5.1      The five (5) standing committees of the College of Business are: 1) College Leadership, 2) College Evaluation, 3) Continuous Improvement for Undergraduate Programs, 4) Strategic Planning, and 5) Continuous Improvement for Graduate Programs

3.5.2      COMMITTEE COMPLEMENT AND TERMS

3.5.2.1   Each standing committee will be composed of at least three participating faculty members unless otherwise stated in these Bylaws. Committee members will serve staggered two-year terms when possible. All efforts will be made for committee membership to be representative of each program. Faculty list and rank their preferred committee assignments once per year. The College Leadership Committee will review preferences and select committee members from those who volunteered. Each committee, with the exception of the College Leadership Committee, will be responsible for establishing its own operating procedures, with the provision that such procedures comply with these Bylaws and the Master Agreement.  All committees will make reports and recommendations to the College.

3.5.3      College Leadership Committee

3.5.3.1   Membership. The membership of the College Leadership Committee will consist of the College of Business Dean, Assistant Department Heads, the Faculty Chair, an Academic Senator, the Faculty Council Representative, and other faculty members needed to ensure representation from most of the college’s academic programs. The Faculty Chair will serve as the College Leadership Committee Chair. The Chair will administer meetings. All faculty members are welcome to attend and participate in College Leadership Committee meetings.

3.5.3.2   Special elections will be called to fill vacancies, temporary or permanent, on the College Leadership Committee that would exist for longer than two months.  If the vacancy is temporary, the replacement will serve for the temporary replacement period.

3.5.3.3   The College Leadership Committee advises the Dean on all issues related to shared governance in the College. The College Leadership Committee is also responsible for the continuous and systematic oversight of the AACSB Standards. In doing so, the Committee will evaluate and report on faculty qualifications.  The College Leadership Committee will review submissions and rank candidates for endowed professorships. The College Leadership Committee also facilitates ad hoc committees as needed and the annual selection of student scholarship recipients.

3.5.3.4   Following an AACSB five- (5) year review, the College Leadership Committee shall prepare an informal progress report for the College of Business and/or the College of Business Dean that outlines achievements, areas for improvement, and/or faculty members' concerns. The informal progress report will be forwarded to the College of Business Dean. The purpose of this report is to provide additional direction to the College of Business Dean on how best the College can move forward and continuously improve.

3.5.4      College Evaluation Committee

3.5.4.1   According to the Master Agreement, the College of Business is considered a department. The College of Business Evaluation Committee acts as a Departmental Evaluation Committee and not a College Advisory Committee (CAC).

3.5.4.2   Membership: The College of Business Evaluation Committee will consist of five (5) tenured College of Business faculty. Tenured faculty at Associate or Professor ranks are eligible to serve on the Evaluation Committee. However, other full-time faculty members of the College may be asked to serve if there are not enough tenured faculty at the rank of Associate or Professor to form a committee of five. The length of each term is typically two years. Term length exceptions may occur due to faculty retirements, resignations, or sabbaticals. New members are selected by the College Leadership Committee from faculty volunteers who are eligible to serve. New members will be prioritized based on the rotation list maintained by the College Leadership Committee. 

3.5.4.3   The Evaluation Committee shall make an evaluation of each faculty member of the College as specified in the Master Agreement. Activities evaluated shall include assigned professional responsibilities, scholarship and/or professional development, and service in accordance with their appointment letter.  The Evaluation Committee shall verify that the evaluation includes appropriate documentation. The Committee shall make recommendations for promotion, tenure, continuing contract status, termination, and sabbatical leave and forward them in accordance and compliance with the Master Agreement and these Bylaws. The Committee shall monitor and promote improvement of the evaluation process.

3.5.5      Continuous Improvement Undergraduate Committee 

3.5.5.1   The Continuous Improvement Undergraduate Committee is charged with the responsibility for assurance of learning and curriculum continuous improvement, review of course and program changes, and new program and course proposals. Recommended changes can be submitted by program areas, committees, or individual faculty members. Changes should follow the Committee on Undergraduate Programs, General Education Committee, or other relevant committees that evaluate curriculum proposals. The committee shall submit its recommendations to the College faculty for review, discussion, and approval. If approved, the recommendations will be reviewed by the Department Head/Dean and then forwarded to the Committee on Undergraduate Programs. The Continuous Improvement Undergraduate Committee is also responsible for determining appropriate strategies to assess and compile reports for learning and program outcomes of College of Business students in compliance with the University and accreditation objectives and standards.

3.5.6      The Strategic Planning Committee

3.5.6.1   The Strategic Planning Committee shall be responsible for the development, communication, and implementation of the strategic plan. In accordance with AACSB Standards, the Strategic Planning Committee collects and evaluates data to develop strategic objectives, initiatives, and the ongoing achievement of goals.  The Dean will serve as Co-Chair of the Strategic Planning Committee.

3.5.7      Continuous Improvement Graduate Committee

3.5.7.1   The Continuous Improvement Graduate Committee is charged with the responsibility for assurance of learning and curriculum continuous improvement, review of course and program changes, and new program and course proposals. Recommended changes can be submitted by program areas, committees, or individual faculty members. Changes should follow the Graduate Programs Committee or other relevant committees that evaluate curriculum proposals. The committee shall submit its recommendations to the College faculty for review, discussion, and approval. If approved, the recommendations will be reviewed by the Department Head/Dean and then forwarded to the Graduate Programs Committee. The Continuous Improvement Graduate Committee is also responsible for determining appropriate strategies to assess and compile reports for learning and program outcomes of College of Business students in compliance with the University and accreditation objectives and standards.

4.           GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES

4.1         See the Master Agreement.

5.           FACULTY PERSONNEL POLICIES

5.1         ACADEMIC APPOINTMENTS

5.1.1      Minimum Requirements for New Academic Appointments. All faculty appointments must comply with the Master Agreement, AACSB standards, and Higher Learning Commission accreditation standards. An earned doctorate from an accredited institution is considered a terminal degree in the College of Business.

5.1.2      Procedures for Making Recommendations on Academic Appointments College of Business will follow the faculty appointment procedures outlined in the Master Agreement.

5.1.2.1   A search committee will consist of a minimum of three (3) faculty members. The Department Head/Dean, in consultation with the College Leadership committee, will make appointments to the Committee from those who volunteered. The Search Committee will forward hiring recommendations to the Department Head/Dean.

5.1.2.2   Procedures for advertising, screening, interviews, and appointments will be in compliance with NMU Academic Affairs and University guidelines.

5.2         EVALUATION, PROMOTION, TENURE REVIEW, AND CONTINUING CONTRACT REVIEW

5.2.1       Faculty shall follow the procedures and processes outlined in the Master Agreement for evaluation, promotion, tenure review, and continuing contract review.

5.2.2      For evaluations other than promotion, tenure review, or continuing contract review, the evaluation period and timetable are outlined in the Master Agreement. 

5.2.3      For promotion, tenure, and continuing contract status review, the College Evaluation Committee will follow the Master Agreement timeline for department Evaluation Committees and the Department Head. Therefore, Parts V and VI will be considered one and the same and be submitted to the Dean along with Parts I - IV and the Appendix on this date. Part IV is submitted as a statement that there is no Part IV because of no Department Head. The applicant must also forward a final revised copy of Parts I, II, and the Appendix to frc@nmu.edu.

5.2.4      EVALUATION

5.2.4.1   The Evaluation Committee will evaluate each faculty member in each of the three areas: Teaching and Assigned Responsibilities, Scholarship and/or Professional Development and Service. The faculty member’s rank and the Master Agreement will determine as to which areas individual faculty members will be evaluated. Professional Responsibilities, as outlined in Section 6 of the Bylaws, will guide the evaluation process. The following evaluation scale will be used to assess each category.

1. Highly Effective – performs significantly above expectations.
2. Effective – meets expectations.
3. Needs Improvement – does not meet expectations; evaluation documents incomplete.

5.2.4.2   Teaching and Assigned Responsibilities. For faculty at all ranks, teaching and assigned responsibilities should be their primary focus.

Each evaluation must include a self-reflection narrative of teaching during the evaluation period. The reflection should identify strategies, activities, or experiences used to achieve learning objectives. Faculty should provide an explanation of how they have improved the facilitation of learning through the evaluation period. In the spirit of continuous improvement, the narrative should reflect on areas, topics, etc., that the faculty member would like to work toward improving in the future. For faculty with teaching responsibilities, a reflection on teaching effectiveness is based upon the Master Agreement, the Professional Responsibilities listed in Section 6 of the Bylaws, and the following:

1. An appraisal of student learning for at least one course in each semester (including achievement of learning objectives). For online courses, faculty should reflect on the ways in which “instructional contact and methods are equivalent in scope to comparable face-to-face courses” per the Master Agreement.

2. Student ratings. For evaluation purposes, student ratings and the number of responses will be considered, as will any other relevant information provided by the faculty member. Emphasis will be placed on using student ratings to improve instruction and student learning outcomes.

3. Colleague Assessment. For evaluation, promotion, tenure review, and continuing contract review purposes, a colleague assessment may be one or more of the following: peer evaluation of course materials or peer observation of classroom instruction. According to the Master Agreement, one colleague assessment is required for each evaluation. A colleague is defined as a full-time faculty member at instructor rank or above at an AACSB-accredited institution.

4. Advising Responsibilities. A description and reflection on advising responsibilities. The College of Business has embedded academic advising. This statement may reflect on both academic and career advising.

5. A description and reflection on additional responsibilities (e.g., curriculum coordination, assessment activities (per the Master Agreement), and AACSB-relevant responsibilities.

5.2.4.3   Scholarship and/or Professional Development. Each evaluation must include a statement of goals for the future and a review of accomplishments. The Professional Responsibilities, Section 6 of the Bylaws, lists acceptable forms of intellectual contributions.  Faculty must maintain appropriate AACSB faculty qualification status and provide evidence of how they are meeting these standards. The College of Business and AACSB uses a five-year rolling window to evaluate faculty qualification status.  For AACSB purposes, faculty are required to submit evidence of their scholarship and/or professional development impact. ResearchGate and Google Scholar are preferred sources of impact evidence, and faculty are encouraged to maintain a public profile.  Faculty must include accepted or published peer-reviewed journal articles and evidence of other scholarly and professional development activities.

5.2.4.4    Service. The Evaluation Committee will consider the quantity, quality, and extent of work involved based on the evidence provided by the faculty member in their evaluation report.  In completing their evaluation reports, faculty shall indicate how they exceeded the standards for minimum acceptable contributions to service. The Master Agreement and the Professional Responsibilities, Section 6 of the Bylaws, identifies the minimum levels of performance and examples of acceptable service. Faculty should provide a brief analysis of their specific activities and accomplishments in each service capacity. Simply listing appointments to positions and memberships on committees is generally not adequate documentation of service contribution for purposes of a faculty evaluation. Specifically, faculty shall indicate their individual responsibility, participation, and outcome. Faculty should also detail contributions to community and professional service, including an assessment of how the activities are relevant to the faculty member’s teaching, scholarship, specific College initiatives or the central mission of the University.

5.2.5      PROMOTION

5.2.5.1   Eligibility Criteria for Promotion.  An earned doctorate from an accredited institution and meet the other requirements set forth in the Master Agreement.  Exceptions may be made because of unusual scholarly and/or professional achievements.

5.2.5.2    Judgment Criteria for Promotion.  Collectively, the Master Agreement, and the College of Business Bylaws, outline the judgmental criteria for promotion.

5.2.5.3     Promotion to Assistant Professor

5.2.5.3.1 An earned doctorate from an accredited institution.

5.2.5.4     Promotion to Associate Professor

5.2.5.4.1 Sustained performance in the area of Teaching and Assigned Responsibilities as evidenced by the items articulated in the Professional Responsibilities, Section 6, of the Bylaws and outlined in the Master Agreement.  There must be evidence of teaching excellence

5.2.5.4.2 Within the last five (5) years or since the last promotion, whichever is later, three (3) peer-reviewed journal articles (accepted or published) or two (2) peer-reviewed journal articles (accepted or published) in addition to one (1) intellectual contribution from the list contained in the Professional Responsibilities Section 6 of the Bylaws within the last five (5) years or the promotion period, whichever is later. Meeting the minimum guidelines does not guarantee promotion because the committee will consider the quantity, quality, and contribution to the business disciplines of the publication or presentation outlet. Publication in a prestigious journal could reduce the total quantity of scholarly works required. Faculty are required to submit evidence of their scholarship and/or professional development impact.  ResearchGate and Google Scholar are preferred sources of impact evidence.  Faculty must include published peer-reviewed journal articles and evidence of other scholarly and professional development activities.

5.2.5.4.3 Evidence of effective service.

5.2.5.4.4 History and promise of strong contributions to the college, university, and academic discipline.

5.2.5.4.5 Evidence of a history of predominantly positive annual evaluations.

5.2.5.5    Promotion to Professor

5.2.5.5.1 Faculty must be scholarly academic (SA) qualified according to AACSB standards at the time of application to be eligible for promotion to professor.

5.2.5.5.2 Sustained performance in Teaching and Assigned Responsibilities as evidenced by the items articulated in the Professional Responsibilities, Section 6, of the Bylaws and outlined in the Master Agreement.  There must be evidence of teaching excellence.

5.2.5.5.3 Within the last five (5) years or since the last promotion, whichever is later, at least two (2) peer-reviewed journal articles are required (accepted or published) or one (1) peer-reviewed journal article (accepted or published) in addition to one (1) intellectual contribution from the list contained in the Professional Responsibilities Section 6 of the Bylaws.  Meeting the minimum guidelines does not guarantee promotion because the committee will consider the quantity, quality, and contribution to the business disciplines of the publication or presentation outlet. Publication in a prestigious journal could reduce the total quantity of scholarly works required.  Faculty are required to submit evidence of their scholarship and/or professional development impact.  ResearchGate and Google Scholar are preferred sources of impact evidence.  Faculty must include published peer-reviewed journal articles and evidence of other scholarly and professional development activities.

5.2.5.5.4 Sustained evidence of leadership and high achievement in service for the appropriate time period per the Master Agreement.

5.2.5.5.5 History and promise of strong contributions to the college, university, and academic discipline for the appropriate time period per the Master Agreement.

5.2.5.5.6 Evidence of a history of predominantly positive evaluations for the appropriate time period per the Master Agreement.

5.2.6      TENURE REVIEW

5.2.6.1   Judgmental Criteria for Tenure. Evaluative criteria for tenure are the same as those for promotion to Associate Professor.

5.2.7      CONTINUING CONTRACT REVIEW

5.2.7.1   Candidates eligible for continuing contract status will follow procedures outlined in the Master Agreement. They will be assessed on the basis of their teaching and assigned responsibilities, as well as service to the College.  The focus on teaching and assigned responsibilities, and service will not preclude a candidate from including scholarship and/or professional development activities for consideration in the review for continuing contract status.  If the candidate for continuing contract status wishes to apply for promotion, an area of emphasis (scholarship and/or professional development or service) must be identified with the mutual agreement of the Evaluation Committee and the Department head/Dean. The criteria for teaching and assigned responsibility, scholarship and professional development, and/or service must be met for the rank to which the candidate is applying.

5.2.7.1.1 Evidence of effective service.

5.2.7.1.2 History and promise of strong contributions to the College, university, and academic discipline.

5.2.7.1.3 Evidence of a history of predominantly positive annual evaluations.

5.2.8      UNUSUAL SCHOLARLY AND/OR PROFESSIONAL ACHIEVEMENT 

5.2.8.1   Applications for promotion prior to the mandatory year will follow procedures stipulated in the Master Agreement. 

5.2.8.2   The College Evaluation Committee may consult with specialists inside or outside the department to determine the contribution of any achievement defined in the criteria below that the applicant claims is unusual scholarly and/or professional. 

5.2.8.3   Applicants may qualify for promotion prior to the mandatory year by demonstrating unusual scholarly or professional achievement by meeting any one of the following criteria achieved during the evaluation period as defined by the Master Agreement.

1. Applicant receives the Northern Michigan University (NMU) Excellence in Scholarship Award in addition to one of the following: The Stephen Young & Tricia Kinley Distinguished Faculty Award, the NMU Excellence in Teaching Award, the NMU Faculty Leadership  Award, the NMU Faculty Emerging Leadership Award, the NMU Excellence in Online Teaching Award, or the NMU Technology and Innovation Award for Faculty.
2. Publishes at least two (2) peer-reviewed academic journal articles ranked A or A* by the Australian Business Deans Council, ABDC (https://abdc.edu.au/abdc-journal-quality-list/). 
3. Areas of the College of Business not ranked by the ABDC can justify unusual scholarly or professional achievement by using another ranking system accepted in their discipline.
4. Secures a significant external grant to support scholarship in an area of thought leadership that aligns with the mission of the College of Business and/or University.
5. Attains an unusual scholarly achievement or unusual professional service achievement not otherwise defined in these categories.

6.           PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES

6.1         Teaching and assigned professional responsibilities. Teaching should be the primary responsibility of faculty at all ranks. Teaching responsibilities include:

1. Mastery of the subject matter and ongoing growth in one’s discipline.
2. Effectiveness enabling students to achieve learning objectives.
3. Achieves learning objectives through exercising the appropriate preparation, organization, and use of pedagogy.
4. Engages in and reports direct learning outcomes assessments as per the Master Agreement.
5. Engages in the assurance of learning as necessary to meet the AACSB Standards.
6. Creates a positive learning environment and develops an effective rapport with students.
7. Continuously works toward improvement in existing courses, modifying the course content with their own original contributions and enhancing pedagogy, including utilizing student feedback.
8. Demonstrates respect for and fair treatment of students.
9. Timely and professional in meeting classes and evaluating student work.
10. Demonstrates rigor and transparency in evaluating student work.
11. Receives generally positive student ratings.
12. Receives positive evaluations by peers.
13. Adheres to academic and ethical standards in assessing and dealing with students and colleagues.
14. Available to students for consultation outside of class.
15. Serves as an effective academic and career planning advisor.
16. Works cooperatively to assess and develop curriculum.

6.2         Scholarship and/or Professional Development. Faculty are expected to make incremental progress to receive tenure and promotion as described in the College of Business Bylaws.  According to the College of Business Standards for Scholarly and Practitioner Qualifications, a peer-reviewed journal is considered acceptable if documented on 1) the College approved “list”, 2) Cabell’s Journalytics, 3) Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) Journal Quality List, or 4) another appropriate index.  If a journal is not listed in the College approved “list,” Cabell’s Journalytics, ABDC, or another appropriate index, the article's author may petition the College Leadership Committee and the Department Head/Dean to evaluate the journal. Other forms of intellectual contribution are listed below:

1. Refereed conference proceedings
2. Published book review or article summary
3. Published textbook chapter
4. Published textbook (each chapter of a published textbook is counted separately)
5. Published textbook ancillary
6. Published instructional materials
7. Published case
8. Refereed conference presentation
9. Submitting grant proposal to support scholarly activity
10. Peer review of an academic journal article or significant grant proposals
11. Serving as an editor or member of an editorial board for an academic journal
12. Consulting in the area related to professional discipline
13. Published monograph, i.e., research-based book by an academic press
14. Sharing knowledge with colleagues or students through seminars or other activities or via speeches or other avenues outside the University community

6.3         Minimum Levels of Service Performance. The College of Business consists of several academic disciplines. Although the College of Business has standing or ad hoc committees, much of the service can occur outside the formal committee structure. The minimum service levels are outlined in the Master Agreement.

6.3.1      Performing the minimum level of service may not be sufficient to meet expectations.

6.3.2      Examples of service include, but are not limited to:

1. Service to the Discipline
2. Service to the College of Business or College of Business Committees
3. Service to the University or University Committees
4. Serving as a major officer or staff person contributing to the vitality of one or more committees or writing significant reports, proposals, etc., for those committees
5. Serving as an officer of a professional organization, either local, regional, or national, or performing other noteworthy service for such an organization
6. Directing or organizing workshops, symposia, and seminars
7. Participating in programs with elementary or secondary schools or other elements of the community related to their work at the university
8. Serving in a mentoring capacity with new faculty
9. Serving as an advisor of student organizations, student activity projects and/or other service to the student body
10. Serving as a support person in the recruitment and retention of students (i.e., campus visits, Presidential Scholars Competition interviews, Wildcat Weekend, etc.)
11. Service to the community, state, or nation involving professional contributions to the public, service, and/or non-profit organization.
12. Serving as a reviewer or editor for a professional journal related to their discipline.
13. Other administrative work as assigned by the College of Business.
14. Service that demonstrates positive societal impact through internal and external initiatives and/or activities, consistent with the University and College of Business missions, strategies, and expected outcomes. 

7.      AMENDMENTS

7.1         The Bylaws are subject to change based on the Master Agreement, Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business standards, Higher Learning Commission accreditation standards, U.S. Department of Education, or other regulatory organizations.

7.2         Proposals for Bylaw changes may come from any member of the participating faculty eligible to vote.

7.3         The College of Business Bylaws must be reviewed every five years at a minimum. 

7.4         Any change to the faculty evaluation process or instruments used, such as the Student Ratings survey, should result in a review of the College of Business Bylaws. Changes to AACSB accreditation standards or the Master Agreement should also result in a review of the College of Business Bylaws.