Wildcat Statue

Mathematics and Computer Science Department

Return to policies

Mathematics and Computer Science Department

Date Approved:2-2-2012
Last Revision:2-2-2012
Attached form file: Mathematics_CS_Bylaws_2-2-12.pdf

Purpose

To publish the bylaws of the Mathematics and Computer Science Department: Approved by Interim Provost & Vice President, Dr. Paul Lang, February 2, 2012.

Bylaws

BYLAWS

MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTER SCIENCE DEPARTMENT

 

MEMBERSHIP AND VOTING

1.0 The Mathematics and Computer Science Department shall consist of those members of the Bargaining Unit with letters confirming their appointment in the Mathematics and Computer Science Department.

1.1 The department head is an ex officio member of all department committees, except the Evaluation Committee. The department head does not have a vote on any departmental committee.

1.2 A quorum of the Department will be one-half of the Department membership excluding those on leave.

1.3 All matters brought before a departmental meeting for action shall be voted upon immediately or within one (1) week following the meeting at which they are discussed. If voted upon during the meeting, they shall take effect upon the affirmative vote of a simple majority of the Department members present. Alternately, upon consent of a simple majority of the Department members present, voting may occur by ballot during the week following the meeting; in this case the matter will take effect upon the affirmative vote of a simple majority of the Department.

DEPARTMENT HEAD

2.0 The Department Head is the chief executive officer of the Department.

COMMITTEES

3.0 Standing committees for the Mathematics and Computer Science Department will include the Executive Committee, the Evaluation Committee, the Curriculum Committee, the Student Affairs Committee, and the Seminar and Colloquium Committee.

3.1 Faculty members will express their committee preferences by the end of the first week of each fall semester.

3.2 Executive Committee

3.2.1 The Executive Committee will consist of five (5) Department members and the Department Head, who will serve as Chairperson and non-voting member of the Committee. At least one and no more than two elected members of the Executive Committee shall possess a terminal degree in Mathematics or the equivalent; at least one and no more than two elected members shall possess a terminal degree in Computer Science or the equivalent; at least one and no more than two elected members shall possess a terminal degree in Mathematics Education or the equivalent. No faculty member shall serve more than 3 years in any 5 year period.

3.2.2 The Executive Committee will serve as an advisory committee to the Department Head on matters of program, curriculum, staffing needs, equipment and space, budget, and student affairs. It will serve as representative of the Department as a whole, and will not limit its concern merely to those matters referred to it by the Department Head.

3.2.3 Membership of the Executive Committee will be elected by the members of the Department at a departmental meeting in the last month of the winter semester of each year. This meeting will be called by either the Department Head or the existing Executive Committee.

3.2.4 The Executive Committee has the responsibility of assuring the completion of the Scholarly Resources Assessment.

3.2.5 The Executive Committee will serve as a nominating committee to recommend the Department faculty membership on all other standing committees of the Department except for the Evaluation Committee.

3.2.6 Nominations for committee membership will be presented for amendment and approval to the Department at a departmental meeting in the first month of the fall semester each year. This meeting will be called by either the Department Head or the Executive Committee.

3.2.7 The Executive Committee shall review and rank applications for both reassigned time and sabbatical leave.

3.3 Evaluation Committee

3.3.1 The membership of the Evaluation Committee will consist of all members of the Department with the rank of Professor, excluding those who are on leave of absence. In any semester that fewer than one third of the members of the department hold the rank of Professor, then the department will elect additional members from the department with the rank of Associate Professor to the committee to bring the committee membership up to at least one third of the department’s membership. At least two members of the Evaluation Committee shall possess a terminal degree in Mathematics or the equivalent; at least two members shall possess a terminal degree in Computer Science or the equivalent; at least two members shall possess a terminal degree in Mathematics Education or the equivalent. Additional members of the department with the rank of Associate Professor shall be elected to the Evaluation Committee, if necessary, to satisfy this criterion.

3.3.2 The Evaluation Committee is charged with preparing all faculty evaluations and making recommendations on retention, promotion and tenure.

3.3.2.1 For all retention, promotion and tenure deliberations, a quorum will be a simple majority of the voting members of the Evaluation Committee. All eligible members of the Committee will be polled on retention, promotion and tenure recommendations.

3.3.2.2 The Evaluation Committee will maintain a file on each faculty member. Each faculty member has the right and the responsibility to submit relevant information for the consideration of the Committee. This may be done in writing or by personal appearance before the Committee at the discretion of the faculty member. Only the individual faculty member and the Committee will have access to his/her file except as explicitly provided in the Master Agreement.

3.3.2.3 All Evaluation Committee meetings that deal with questions of retention, promotion or tenure are closed. Non-members of the Evaluation Committee may attend such meetings only upon invitation of the Committee or as provided for in 3.3.2.2.

3.3.2.4 After deliberation of a faculty member's case by the Evaluation Committee, a written recommendation will be formulated. This recommendation will include the numerical results of the Committee vote. Independently, the department head will form a separate written recommendation for the faculty member. Both recommendations will be forwarded to the Dean as part of the faculty member's file.


3.4 Curriculum Committee

3.4.1 The Curriculum Committee shall consider all matters relating to the curricula of the undergraduate programs and graduate programs offered by the Department. These matters shall include the changing of program requirements; the addition to, modification of, or deletion of courses from the catalog; the revision of the bulletin descriptions of existing courses; and the development of new programs and dissolution of existing programs. The Curriculum Committee shall consider other matters as directed by the Executive Committee. The Curriculum Committee shall forward all recommendations to the Department for further consideration and vote, if applicable.

3.5 Student Affairs Committee

3.5.1 The Student Affairs Committee will be responsible for grade appeals. In affairs concerning student grade appeals, it is encouraged that a student and instructor resolve their difficulties informally. However, if resolution is not reached then procedures should be followed as defined in the student handbook.

3.6 Seminar and Colloquium Committee

3.6.1 The Seminar and Colloquium Committee is responsible for arranging seminars and colloquia conducted for the benefit of both faculty and students.

3.7 Each standing committee in the Department will be responsible for electing a chairperson and establishing its own operating procedures, with the provision that such procedures will be in compliance with these bylaws.

3.8 The responsibilities of committees are not restricted to those specifically stated in these bylaws. All committees shall seek responsibility for those matters that, in the course of time, apparently come under their purview.

FACULTY PERSONNEL POLICIES

4.0 Academic Titles and Minimum Requirements for Initial Academic Appointments:

Special Instructor – Individuals who have special attainments, skills, or experience and for those rare positions in which it is difficult or impossible to find individuals with master’s or doctoral degrees.

Instructor - An earned master's degree from an accredited institution.

Assistant Professor - An earned doctorate from an accredited institution. Exceptions may be made because of unusual scholarly and/or professional achievements.

Associate Professor - An earned doctorate from an accredited institution; normally six (6) years of full-time higher education experience at the rank of Instructor or above; evidence of scholarly contributions and teaching achievements. Exceptions may be made because of unusual scholarly and/or professional achievements.

Professor - An earned doctorate from an accredited institution; normally twelve (12) years of full-time higher education experience at the rank of Instructor or above. Exceptions may be made because of unusual scholarly and/or professional attainment.

Professor Emeritus - The title of "Professor Emeritus" is an honorary title bestowed upon retired members of the faculty deemed worthy of the honor. The Department shall nominate worthy candidates from the Department for this title in a manner consistent with the Master Agreement.

Visiting Appointment - A temporary appointment of an individual holding academic rank at another institution of higher learning, which shall not exceed two (2) consecutive years.

4.1 Role in Support of University's Community College Mission

4.1.1 The Department plays an active part in the University's Community College Mission and, in support of that effort, will make a limited number of probationary appointments to persons whose highest attained degree is at the master's level as specified in the Master Agreement.

4.2 Faculty Appointment Procedure

4.2.1 Pursuant to Section 3.2.2 of these bylaws, the Executive Committee shall assist the Department Head in identifying the staffing needs of the Department, recommend job descriptions for requested positions, and form search committees. The search committees, so formed, shall evaluate applicants in a manner consistent with the Master Agreement and University policy, and shall recommend to the Department and Department Head, normally, no fewer than three applicants to be invited to campus for an interview. After the completion of the interviews, the Department will provide a ranking of the interviewees via departmental vote, with accompanying rationale to the Department Head. The Department Head shall forward this ranking and rationale in a manner consistent with the Master Agreement and University policy.

4.3 Eligibility Criteria for Promotion

4.3.1 To be eligible to apply for promotion, a faculty member must meet the following requirements:

4.3.1.1 Assistant Professor: An earned doctorate in mathematics, mathematics education, statistics or computer science from an accredited institution. Exceptions may be made because of unusual scholarly achievements or unusual professional service achievements.

4.3.1.2 Associate Professor: An earned doctorate in mathematics, mathematics education, statistics or computer science from an accredited institution; normally five (5) years of full-time higher education experience at the rank of Instructor or above, completed prior to application for the Associate Professor rank. Exceptions may be made because of unusual scholarly achievements or unusual professional service achievements.

4.3.1.3 Professor: An earned doctorate in mathematics, mathematics education, statistics or computer science from an accredited institution; normally, eleven (11) years of full-time higher education experience at the rank of Instructor or above, completed prior to application for the Professor rank. Exceptions may be made because of unusual scholarly achievements or unusual professional service achievement.

4.4 Faculty Evaluation

4.4.1 Faculty who request consideration for tenure or promotion shall present in the evaluation supporting evidence as bearing on the quality of the faculty member's performance since the last promotion in each of the following areas:

a) Teaching and assigned responsibilities,
b) Scholarship and/or professional development,
c) Service.

4.4.2 Teaching and assigned responsibilities. This criterion includes professional responsibilities in such areas as teaching and other assigned responsibilities (e.g. academic advising or curriculum development) as specified in the letter of appointment.

4.4.2.1 With respect to teaching and advising, faculty members are expected to:

a) Demonstrate a solid understanding of the subject matter taught, and of the materials used as part of the courses,
b) Create a positive learning environment through good organization and appropriate use of instructional techniques and instructional technologies,
c) Maintain effective rapport with students in the classroom that engages them in the learning process,
d) Provide competent advising to students about academic programs and career choices,
e) Seek evaluation by students, using procedures in accordance with the Master Agreement and with 4.4.2.3,
f) Continuously work toward improvement in existing courses, modifying the course content, and enhancing pedagogy, including the utilization of student feedback,
g) Produce materials and instructional aids for use in the classroom,
h) Make a consistent effort to verse students in the objectives of each course taught, and to evaluate and grade students fairly and according to their mastery of those course objectives.

In addition, faculty members applying for tenure and/or promotion to associate or full professor are expected to have made significant contributions in one or more of the following ways:

i) Developing a new course offering or redesigning an existing course,
j) Attending teaching workshops or other methodological training programs and subsequently incorporating the material into new or existing course offerings,
k) Providing educational opportunities that would not otherwise be available, such as directed studies in subject matter not typically offered,
l) Directing student research projects, internships, theses, or other papers,
m) Developing and teaching online courses.

4.4.2.2 The Evaluation Committee will consider the following materials in formulating its judgments evaluating teaching and advising:

a) Student evaluations of instruction from all classes of the faculty member being evaluated,
b) Course syllabi from all courses,
c) Sample examinations, written assignments, projects, etc., from all courses,
d) Any other relevant information supplied to the Evaluation Committee by the faculty member,
e) Evidence of competency in advising, e.g., a statement regarding the advising procedure used by the faculty member.

4.4.2.3 The student evaluation of instruction form will include standard questions approved by the Department upon recommendation of the Evaluation Committee. Faculty members may supplement the standard questions with additional ones if they wish.

4.4.2.4 Faculty members who wish to have a record of classroom visit(s) as part of the Evaluation Committee’s assessment of teaching effectiveness may request such visit(s) of the Evaluation Committee. Following these classroom visits, the visitor(s) will meet with the faculty member to provide informal commentary. A written report of the visits will be attached to the Evaluation Committee's statement in the faculty member's evaluation or promotion recommendation. This attachment must be part of the material provided to the faculty member prior to the evaluation materials leaving the Department so that she or he may exercise the right set forth in the Master Agreement to respond to what has been written in the Evaluation Committee's statement or in the Department Head's statement.

4.4.2.5 In cases where concerns about teaching effectiveness regarding a faculty member have come to the Evaluation Committee's attention, the Committee will consult with the faculty member to discuss the concerns and will arrange for classroom visitations. Written reports of such visits will be attached to the Evaluation Committee's statement in the faculty member's evaluation. This attachment must be part of the material provided to the faculty member prior to the evaluation materials' leaving the Department so that she or he may exercise the right set forth in the Master Agreement to respond to what has been written in the Evaluation Committee's statement or in the Department Head's statement.

4.4.3 Scholarship and/or professional development. "Scholarship and/or professional development" is one category.

Scholarship involves one or more of the four (4) forms of scholarship: the scholarship of discovery; the scholarship of integration; the scholarship of application; the scholarship of teaching. All forms of scholarship must involve the production of a tangible artifact or outcome.

4.4.3.1 The scholarship of discovery involves original production or testing of a theory, principle, knowledge, or artistic creation. It may be algorithmic, derivational, or it may take the form of a traditional experimental, survey, quantitative and/or qualitative study and research.

Examples: A mathematician proves a new theorem in number theory and publishes the result in a professional journal. A computer scientist invents a new algorithm that contributes to the foundations of computer science and publishes it in peer-reviewed conference proceedings. A mathematics education professor develops new insights into student learning and presents them at the American Educational Research Association conference.

4.4.3.2 The scholarship of integration involves using knowledge found within and across disciplines to create an original understanding or insight that reveals larger intellectual patterns. Some possibilities include a textbook or synthesis that summarizes what is known about a topic or process or a theoretical analysis.

Example: A mathematician accumulates a list of best-practice strategies in automated theorem proving and writes a textbook on this topic.

4.4.3.3 The scholarship of application involves bringing knowledge to bear in addressing a significant issue or problem by using existing research or creative activities to influence current or future conditions. Some possibilities include providing expert testimony, production of a technical report, a substantive grant proposal, white paper associated with consultancies or grants, applying theories or technology to real-life practice, public policy analysis or professional presentation.

Examples: A computer scientist develops a software package that is subsequently used by health care professionals. A mathematics education professor applies currently known theories of student learning to assess the future impact of new public education policy.

4.4.3.4 The scholarship of teaching involves proposing and empirically testing a pedagogical procedure that transforms or improves teaching practices. Some possibilities are a systematic comparison of learning environments, an impact analysis for learning activities beyond the classroom (such as academic service learning) or a comprehensive assessment of teaching methodologies. The scholarship of teaching also includes writing/preparing peer reviewed pedagogical material that draws on the professional training and scholarly capability of the faculty member and are evaluated for their effectiveness.

Example: A professor experiments across different sections of the same course in order to determine if the improved student turnout resulting from taking attendance results in a statistically significant difference in mastery of the course material.

4.4.3.5 For most forms of scholarship, peer review is expected consistent with the standards of the identified peer institutions (as referenced in 3.1.1.1 of the Agreement). Common types of peer review include (but are not limited to): publication in a peer reviewed journal, publication in peer reviewed conference proceedings, and presentation of scholarly work as a result of a competitive selection process (as in 4.4.3.7(d)). Peer reviewed artifacts may take the form of a written review of one's research, evaluation of a grant proposal, a peer letter acknowledging scholarly accomplishments, recognition of scholarly activity, an invitation to present scholarly work, receiving a professional award, or obtaining a grant.

4.4.3.6 Professional development includes activities intended to maintain currency in one's discipline, developing new professionally related expertise, or participation in other professionally related activities that don't necessarily result in a scholarly outcome.

4.4.3.7 Examples of Scholarship and/or Professional Development include, but are not limited to:

Scholarship
a) Publishing a paper in a peer reviewed journal,
b) Publishing a book,
c) Publishing a paper through peer reviewed conference proceedings,
d) Presenting at a selective professional conference where acceptance is based on peer review (e.g. American Educational Research Association conference),
e) Presenting at a professional conference or workshop,
f) Submitting a substantive grant proposal to help support one’s research or the mission of the department,
g) Engaging in professional community outreach resulting in a creative work, for example, creating problems and solutions for academic competitions,
h) Developing new tools or technology relevant to one’s discipline or professional duties,
i) Other appropriate Scholarship activities, as judged by the Evaluation Committee in the Department evaluation procedure.

Professional Development
j) Attending a professional conference or workshop,
k) Passing a professional exam or obtaining a certification,
l) Developing new tools or technology relevant to one’s discipline or professional duties,
m) Acquiring new knowledge (i.e. skills, technology, expertise) to create a new academic program, or to enhance an existing program,
n) Other appropriate Professional Development activities, as judged by the Evaluation Committee in the Department evaluation procedure.

4.4.3.8 Throughout this document, “peer reviewed publications” are defined as 4.4.3.7(a) through 4.4.3.7(d).

4.4.3.9 Depending on a faculty member’s rank and emphasis, alternate scholarship and/or professional development activities may take the place of peer reviewed publications, peer reviewed artifacts, or professional presentations, in accordance with 4.5.1.2, 4.5.2.2.1, 4.5.3.2.1, and 4.5.3.2.2. Any such substitution must be set out and agreed to by the Evaluation Committee in an annual evaluation prior to applying for promotion or tenure. Examples of activities considered equivalent to a peer reviewed publication include but are not limited to:

a) A mathematician studies for and passes an actuarial exam, for the purpose of contributing to the department’s actuarial science program,
b) A computer scientist writes a software package that is subsequently used by health care professionals,
c) A mathematics education professor attends a week-long workshop on recent developments in online education and incorporates this knowledge into practice.
d) A professor gains extensive knowledge in a new sub-discipline, for the purpose of creating a new academic program.

4.4.4 Service. Common forms of service include serving on committees (departmental, college, or University wide), service to the student body, service through professional organizations, or professionally related community service.

4.4.4.1 Examples of Service include, but are not limited to:
a) Serving a year on a college committee, university committee, the department Executive Committee, the department Evaluation Committee, or ¬a department search committee,
b) Participating in the implementation of a scholarly/academic event, such as an educational trip for students,
c) Recruiting and retention efforts beyond the scope of ordinary professional duties,
d) Serving as an editor, referee, or on the editorial board for a professional journal or conference proceedings,
e) Participating in professional community outreach, e.g. a program that benefits area high school teachers and students,
f) Serving as a mentor for an existing student group such as a future teachers club,
g) Serving as a mentor for a new faculty member,
h) Serving a year as a chair or some other leadership role in a college, university, or significant departmental committee (e.g. subject area committee or search committee),
i) Creating a significant scholarly/academic event or organizing an existing significant event, such as a conference or academic contest,
j) Creating a new academic program, or making significant changes to an existing academic program,
k) Establishing new student internship opportunities or managing existing internships,
l) Organizing professional community outreach, e.g. a program that benefits area high school teachers and students,
m) Starting a major discipline-related student group such as a Math club or ACM group,
n) Organizing a professional conference,
o) Other appropriate Service activities, as judged by the Evaluation Committee in the Department evaluation procedure.

4.4.4.2 Alternate service activities may take the place of those listed in 4.5.1.3, 4.5.2.3, and 4.5.3.3. Any such substitution must be set out and agreed to by the Evaluation Committee in an annual evaluation prior to applying for promotion or tenure.

4.4.5 Sections 4.4.3.7 and 4.4.4.1 shall not be construed to be checklists, nor should each list item be interpreted as having some fixed weight of importance relative to the others. The Evaluation Committee evaluates each individual’s contributions on a case-by-case basis, as detailed in Sections 3.3 and 4.4.

4.4.6 The faculty member being evaluated bears the responsibility of providing full supporting evidence of the caliber, extent, and importance of contributions made in the areas of teaching, service, and professional development and/or scholarship. In particular, if items from 4.4.2.1, 4.4.3.7, or 4.4.4.1 are cited, a case must be made as to the importance of these contributions and, in the case of promotion or tenure applications, that they meet or exceed the relevant requirements in Section 4.5.

4.5 Levels of Achievement for Promotion

4.5.1 To Assistant Professor

4.5.1.1 Assigned Responsibilities as specified in section 4.4.2.1.

4.5.1.2 Scholarship and/or Professional Development as evidenced by at least two presentations at professional meetings in one’s discipline, or an equivalent level of scholarship and/or professional development in accordance with Sections 4.4.3.7 and 4.4.3.9.

4.5.1.3 Service as evidenced by demonstrating at least 2 activities from 4.4.4.1, or an equivalent level of service in accordance with Section 4.4.4.2.

4.5.2 To Associate Professor

4.5.2.1 Assigned Responsibilities as specified in section 4.4.2.1.

4.5.2.2 Scholarship and/or Professional Development

4.5.2.2.1 When an emphasis: at least two peer reviewed publications in one’s discipline. Alternatively, an equivalent level of scholarship and/or professional development, in accordance with Sections 4.4.3.7 and 4.4.3.9, including at least one peer reviewed publication.

4.5.2.2.2 Otherwise: at least one peer reviewed artifact.

4.5.2.3 Service

4.5.2.3.1 When an emphasis: at least 6 activities from 4.4.4.1, with at least 2 of these being from items (h) through (n). Alternatively, an equivalent level of service in accordance with Section 4.4.4.2.

4.5.2.3.2 Otherwise: at least 3 activities from 4.4.4.1, or an equivalent level of service in accordance with Section 4.4.4.2.

4.5.3 To Professor

4.5.3.1 Assigned Responsibilities as specified in section 4.4.2.1.

4.5.3.2 Scholarship and/or Professional Development

4.5.3.2.1 When an emphasis: at least three peer reviewed publications in one’s discipline. Alternatively, an equivalent level of scholarship and/or professional development in accordance with Sections 4.4.3.7 and 4.4.3.9, including at least one peer reviewed publication.

4.5.3.2.2 Otherwise: at least two peer reviewed artifacts. Alternatively, an equivalent level of scholarship and/or professional development in accordance with Sections 4.4.3.7 and 4.4.3.9, including at least one peer reviewed artifact.

4.5.3.3 Service

4.5.3.3.1 When an emphasis: at least 8 activities from 4.4.4.1, with at least 4 of these being from items (h) through (n). Alternatively, an equivalent level of service in accordance with Section 4.4.4.2.

4.5.3.3.2 Otherwise: at least 4 activities from 4.4.4.1, with at least 1 of these being from items (h) through (n). Alternatively, an equivalent level of service in accordance with Section 4.4.4.2.

4.6 Tenure

4.6.1 Applicants for tenure are ordinarily expected to fulfill the judgmental standards for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor. Persons who have been appointed according to the provisions of Section 4.1.1 (as specified in their letters of appointment) and who have met the judgmental requirements for promotion to Assistant Professor will be recommended for tenure.

AMENDMENT PROCEDURES

5.0 Petitions to amend these bylaws may be initiated at any time by at least two members of the Department. Such petitions shall be submitted in writing to the Executive Committee, who shall then call a meeting of the Department for their consideration.

5.1 The petitioners for amendment shall supply to all members of the Department written copies of the proposed amendments at least one week prior to the meeting at which they will be considered.

5.2 Amendments to these bylaws shall take effect immediately upon their approval by the Department and subsequent approvals in a manner consistent with the Master Agreement.

ELECTION OF DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVES

6.0 The Department shall elect Union and Senate representatives. Academic Senate members shall have at least three (3) years service at NMU, if possible. Only dues-paying members of NMU-AAUP may vote for the Bargaining Council representative. The Bargaining Council representative must be a dues-paying member of NMU-AAUP.

TEACHING ASSIGNMENTS

7.0 Teaching assignments shall be made by the Department Head, in consultation with each departmental faculty member.

7.1 In accordance with Master Agreement, greater consideration for overload or summer assignments will be given to those faculty members who have had an overload or summer assignment least recently.

7.2 Plans for using reassigned time must be approved by the Department Head in consultation with the Executive Committee, and must satisfy any additional criteria specified in the Master Agreement.

SUGGESTED CLASS SIZE

8.0 It is suggested that departmental courses shall consist of at most thirty-five (35) students.

FACULTY TRAVEL

9.0 Funds for travel and professional development shall be made available to each AAUP faculty member in the department in the amount and conditions specified in the Master Agreement.

9.1 Members of the department may submit a request to the Executive Committee asking for supplemental funds for professional development as described in the Agreement. These requests are for professional activity not yet completed.

9.1.1 Requests for supplemental funds must be submitted to the Executive Committee no later than the end of the fourth week of the fall and winter semesters. Reminders concerning these deadlines will be provided by the Department Head at the beginning of each semester.

9.1.2 The Executive Committee will consider requests which, due to unforeseen circumstances, are submitted after the deadline. Such late requests will necessarily be limited by the undisbursed amount remaining in the account at that time.

9.1.3 The recommendations of the Executive Committee regarding such requests will be communicated to the Department Head for approval.

9.1.4 All members requesting such funds will be given notice of the outcome of the request.