Education, School of - Northern Michigan University

To publish the bylaws of the School of Education: approved by Interim Provost & Vice President, Dr. Paul Lang, November 18, 2011.

BYLAWS OF THE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION

 

1.0 SCHOOL MEMBERSHIP, MEETINGS, AND VOTING PRIVILEGES

1.1 Membership in the School of Education will consist of faculty who are members of the bargaining unit and whose appointments to the School are made in accordance with University policy, the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement, and the School Bylaws.

1.2 Voting privileges are extended to faculty members whose appointment is consistent with Section 1.1 of these Bylaws.

1.2.1 Unless otherwise specified, a simple majority voice vote will be used for deciding all matters at school meetings.

1.3 The first regular meeting of the School will be called no later than the second week of classes each semester. The Executive Committee will recommend to the membership the time, place, and frequency of school meetings.

1.4 A quorum for conducting business will consist of one-half or more of the School faculty.

1.5 At times other than the regular fall and winter semesters, the business of the School will be conducted by a majority of those faculty members on the summer voting list.

1.6 Meetings will be conducted in accordance with the provisions of Roberts Rules of Order Revised. The membership will designate a Parliamentarian.

1.7 Special meetings of the School may be called by the Executive Committee, the School Director, or any member of the faculty.

2.0 OFFICERS

2.1 The School Director will officially represent the School in its relationship with the administration, other academic units in the University, and the larger community.

2.2 The duties and responsibilities of the School Director will be consistent with the provisions of the Master Agreement.

3.0 COMMITTEES

3.1 Standing Committees

3.1.1 The Standing Committees of the School of Education will be the Executive Committee, the Evaluation and
      Personnel Committee, the Undergraduate Review Committee, the Graduate Review Committee and the Student Grievance Committee. Members of all committees will be members of the faculty.

3.1.2 Committees will be elected in the following order: Evaluation and Personnel, Undergraduate Review, Graduate Review, and Student Grievance. See 3.4.1 regarding the election of the Executive Committee. A written list of committee memberships will be given to each School member.

3.1.3 Committee officers are elected annually or until a replacement is elected.

3.1.4 No faculty member will serve as a regular member on more than one of the following Standing Committees: Evaluation and Personnel, Undergraduate Review, and Graduate Review. In the event the number of full-time academic year faculty positions is 16 or below, an exception may be made.

3.1.5 Standing Committees with the exception of the Executive Committee will be elected not later than the second week of classes of the fall semester. With the exception of the Executive Committee, members on Standing Committees will serve three year staggered terms. The Evaluation and Personnel Committee will consist of a minimum of five elected members. All other Standing Committees, with the exception of the Executive Committee, will consist of a minimum of three elected members.

3.1.6 Election of committee members will stem from recommended nominations by the Evaluation and Personnel Committee and nominations from the floor. Elections will be conducted by secret ballot unless the membership votes to suspend the rules.

3.1.6.1 Nominations may not be closed until an opportunity for others to be nominated is offered.

3.1.7 All Committees will establish criteria, policies, guidelines, and procedures necessary for effective implementation of their duties so long as these do not contravene these bylaws or the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

3.2 Ad Hoc Committees

3.2.1 Ad hoc committees may be appointed by the Executive Committee or the School Director. All such committees will expire with the school year unless specifically extended.

3.3 Evaluation and Personnel Committee

3.3.1 Evaluation Issues

3.3.1.1 The Evaluation and Personnel Committee will assume responsibility for making evaluations of faculty members, making classroom visits or other "on the job" visits as the person's job description dictates, acting on requests for tenure and/or promotion, and processing sabbatical leave requests.

3.3.1.2 The Evaluation and Personnel Committee will first evaluate those School members who are eligible for tenure and/or promotion consideration to meet deadlines set forth in the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement. Requests for tenure and/or promotion and sabbatical leaves must be submitted to the Evaluation and Personnel Committee by the dates specified in the Master Agreement.

3.3.1.3 School members seeking tenure and/or promotion may not serve on the Evaluation and Personnel Committee during the year in which they are requesting tenure and/or promotion.

3.3.2 Personnel Issues

3.3.2.1 The Evaluation and Personnel Committee will make personnel recommendations to the School and School Director.

3.3.2.2 The Evaluation and Personnel Committee will make a continual study of personnel needs in the School in consultation with appropriate committees. It will recommend programmatic priorities for various positions to the School for approval which will constitute a recommendation to the School Director.

3.3.2.3 While keeping the School duly informed, it will screen candidates for any vacancies and forward recommendations for its consideration and vote to the School. School votes to approve such recommendations shall be forwarded to the School Director.

3.3.2.4 In preparation for advertising a position, the Committee will compile, consistent with the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement and in collaboration with the School of Education faculty, a complete and detailed job description based primarily on the skills, academic preparation, and experience necessary to teach specific courses, perform other assigned professional responsibilities, and fulfill Northern Michigan University’s board-approved affirmative action plan. The recommended description will be forwarded to the School Director.

3.3.2.5 The School Director will consult with the Evaluation and Personnel Committee regarding the selection of graduate assistants and their assignments.

3.3.2.6 The Evaluation and Personnel Committee will nominate slates of candidates for Standing Committees at the first full faculty meeting of the fall semester.

3.3.2. 7 The Evaluation and Personnel Committee will be responsible for bringing to the attention of the Executive Committee all vacancies in elective offices.

3.4 Executive Committee

3.4.1 The Executive Committee will consist of the School Director, and one representative from the Evaluation and Personnel Committee, the Undergraduate Review Committee, and Graduate Review Committee elected annually by those committees.

3.4.2 The Executive Committee will freely and responsibly advise the School Director on problems and issues of common interest.

3.4.3 The Executive Committee will advise the School Director in the allocation of school support funds, faculty travel funds and carryover, etc.

3.4.4 The Executive Committee will be responsible for preparing and circulating agendas and necessary study materials in advance of school meetings, reporting to School members on its deliberations and actions, recording actions taken at school meetings and maintaining a record of attendance at these meetings.

3.4.5 The Executive Committee will meet at least once a month during the academic year.

3.5 The Undergraduate Review Committee (URC)

3.5.1 The Undergraduate Review Committee will have the task of making a continuous study of the undergraduate education curricula for the purpose of recommending necessary changes, deletions, or additions as they are needed and establishing implementation guidelines for these changes. They will study and review changes made outside of the School of Education which affect the functioning of personnel and/or the programs of students in the School and communicate their deliberations at School meetings for the purpose of acquiring feedback and direction from the School. They will review all Undergraduate Bulletin revisions. Any member of the School may make recommendations to the Committee. When the Committee has refined its recommendations, these will be scheduled on the agenda for the full voting membership of the School.

3.6 Graduate Review Committee (GRC)

3.6.1 The Graduate Review Committee will have the task of making a continuous study of the graduate education curricula for the purpose of recommending necessary changes, deletions, or additions as they are needed and establishing implementation guidelines for these changes. They will study and review changes made outside the School of Education which affect the functioning of the personnel and/or the programs of students in the School. They will consider all graduate student appeals. They will also review all Graduate bulletin revisions. Any member of the School may make recommendations to the Committee. When the committee has refined its recommendations, these will be scheduled on the agenda for the full voting membership of the School. The membership of the Graduate Review Committee, whenever possible, will consist of at least one member from each of the MAE degree programs in the School.

3.7 Student Grievance Committee

3.7.1 The Student Grievance Committee will be prepared to convene in the event that its services are required to hear student complaints in accordance with established School and University policy. Student grievances are limited to grades and will adhere to the procedures outlined in the Northern Michigan University Student Handbook.

3.8 Individually Elected Offices and Committees 

3.8.1 Procedures for electing persons to fill offices held by a single person (Faculty Senate, Bargaining Council, CAC, etc.) will be as they are for committees except that some of these positions may demand selections at times other than in the fall and may be accommodated as necessary.

3.8.2 The School will recommend faculty for appointment to College and University Committees when required and appropriate. The faculty representative or representatives on the Senate will have at least three years of service in the University, if possible.

4.0 APPOINTMENTS, FACULTY AFFAIRS

4.1 After authorization for an academic appointment to the School of Education is given, it shall be recommended that candidates are required to present evidence of at least three years of relevant full-time K-12 experience. Exceptions will be made only if there is specific departmental need for other types of qualifications. When a position is to be filled in the School of Education, a secret ballot will be conducted among the members of the school and a majority vote is necessary to recommend that a particular person be hired. This recommendation will then be communicated to the School Director.

4.2 Professional Development Funds

4.2.1 Professional Development Funds will be allocated in accordance with the Master Agreement.

4.2.1.1 Professional Development Funds will be allocated to each faculty member by the School Director. Unused professional development funds will automatically be banked for up to three years, with a record of such banking kept by the School Director.

5.0 ANNUAL EVALUATION, PROMOTION, AND TENURE

5.1 Yearly faculty evaluation as well as recommendation for promotion and/or tenure within the School of Education will originate in the Evaluation and Personnel Committee in accordance with pertinent provisions of the current Master Agreement. The committee membership will have access to School personnel files for the purpose of its work.

5.1.1 Annual evaluation materials must be submitted to the Evaluation and Personnel Committee on or before February 1 of each year.

5.1.1.1 In addition to materials specified in the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement, faculty will use the approved School of Education student evaluation forms, and summaries will be included with the annual evaluation materials.

5.1.2 Each semester of the first two years of a new member’s contract requires a visitation. Such visitation will be a classroom visit or other “on-the-job” visit as the person’s job description dictates. Other visitations can be made in accordance with the wishes of the School and/or the Evaluation and Personnel Committee.

The School stipulates visitation as the following:

A pre-visit conference in which the Committee member and faculty member outline the parameters and goals of the visitation;

A classroom or other “on-the-job” visit in which the Committee member observes the staff faculty member; and

A written report of the visit in which the Committee member composes a detailed narrative of the faculty member’s performance in light of the bylaws and the national teaching standards set by the Teacher Education Accreditation Council.

5.1.3 In addition to the regular annual evaluation, a faculty member may request an evaluation at any time specifically for review of promotion potential. Criteria used in this review and evaluation will be the same as those used in the regular annual evaluation.

5.2 Eligibility criteria as they are applied for promotion and tenure will be as indicated in the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

5.2.1 School of Education faculty affected by the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement are eligible for promotion and tenure and will be evaluated under the judgmental criteria in the School of Education Bylaws.

5.3 Faculty applying for promotion to the next rank must provide evidence of achievement commensurate with that rank.

Consistent with the mission of the School of Education to prepare professional educators, teaching is the primary consideration in evaluation. As both educators of teachers and teachers ourselves, each member of the School of Education must demonstrate significant and individually distinct achievement in the area of Assigned Professional Responsibilities. As evaluation is a matter of qualitative judgment rather than quantitative accumulation of things done, the applicant for promotion and/or tenure must demonstrate the significance of her or his accomplishments within the mission of the School of Education. Consistent with this mission of the School of Education, teaching is the primary consideration in evaluation.

5.3.1 The broad outlines of the judgmental criteria for promotion and tenure, focusing on the three judgmental areas of (1) assigned responsibilities, (2) scholarship and/or professional development, and (3) service are in accordance with the Master Agreement. The more specific criteria contained in these bylaws, including the examples used, must be understood to amplify the language in the Master Agreement, not diverge from it. Further, the judgmental criteria were developed in consideration of national accreditation standards.

The following examples are intended to be illustrative, and are not complete, ordered by rank, or exclusive. Other types of activities will be considered. The lists include common types of activities and are meant to establish a norm. Furthermore, where there are lists with optional activities, it is not expected that any individual will be active in all the examples listed. When a promotion is being considered, a history of sustained professional achievements of the types listed or comparable ones will be expected.

The demonstration of achievements for promotion is understood to be cumulative. For those who have received a promotion at NMU or another institution of higher learning, the time period considered for promotion begins at the time of application for the last received promotion. For those without prior service, the time period considered for promotion begins at the time of appointment at NMU. The demonstration for tenure is also understood to be cumulative. When prior service is explicitly granted at the time of appointment, the time period considered for promotion begins with the prior service period.

5.3.2 Faculty applying for tenure must demonstrate effective performance expected for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor.

In the judgmental criteria for teaching and other assigned responsibilities, the words “emergent professional competence”, “mastery of teaching and advising”, and “unique and individually effective contributions” are used to characterize the respective standards for assistant, associate, and full professor; similarly, for professional development the same differentiating role is played by the words “a record of exploring and defining”, “a record of defining, developing and disseminating”, and “a record of sustained growth in a clearly defined program contributing to the professional discourse community”; for professional service the same role is played by the words “membership”, “performing leadership roles”, and “developing and mentoring educational leaders.” The purpose of the characterizing phrases is to indicate the need for faculty achievements in each area of judgment to meet a higher standard for each rank. The standard needed to be achieved is that of the intellectual community at NMU as embodied in the Master Agreement and in the bylaws of the School of Education. Finally, Section 5 of the Master Agreement requires faculty going for promotion to state whether they choose to emphasize scholarship and/or professional development or service. Concurrence with the faculty member's relative emphasis on "scholarship and/or professional development" or service will be provided by the departmental evaluation committee and be subject to approval of the department head.

5.4 Judgmental Criteria

5.4.1 Achievements in Teaching and Other Assigned Responsibilities

Teaching and other assigned responsibilities include both of the following areas: development of professional practice and student welfare.

Professional Practices that confirms our standards include, but are not limited to:

Emergent professional competence
• positive peer evaluations;
• demonstrating a solid understanding of subject matter taught in undergraduate and/or graduate classes;
• positive student evaluations;
• production of materials and instructional aids for use in classroom, laboratory, or clinic;
• continual development of professional practice by keeping courses current; and/or
• using effective pedagogical principles, practices, instructional techniques, and the continual improvement of courses.

Professional competence
• undergraduate/graduate teaching online;
• designing or developing field, clinic, manuals, guides, and/or equipment;
• fostering a spirit of reflective inquiry into professional practice;
• designing new course or program offerings and/or make substantial revisions to existing courses or programs; and/or
• participation in accreditation (state and national levels).

Unique and individually effective
• facilitating faculty discussion and planning for program review;
• collaborating with other programs on campus for overseas student teaching placements;
• developing professional development for cooperating teachers and university supervisors;
• creation and support of field placements in K-12 classroom settings;
• development, support and supervision of Charter and Private schools;
• supervising student teachers;
• establishing and maintaining relationships with schools and universities at the local, state, national and international level; and/or
• representing the School of Education with school boards, k-12 administration, MDE, superintendents and teachers.

Student Welfare will be demonstrated at all ranks in the School of Education and includes, but is not limited to:
• establishment of an effective rapport with students in the classroom that engages students in the learning process;
• availability for consultation outside the classroom to aid students in their understanding of course content;
• availability for student advisement;
• directing student research projects, theses, or file papers; and/or

• providing educational opportunities that might not otherwise be available, such as directed studies when appropriate.

5.4.1.2 Judgmental Criteria for Assistant Professor

As outlined in 5.4.1, satisfactory performance requires that faculty members demonstrate abilities and accomplishments as evidence of their emergent professional competence in the community of professional practice.

5.4.1.3 Judgmental Criteria for Associate Professor

As outlined in 5.4.1, satisfactory performance requires that faculty members demonstrate mastery of teaching and advising as evidence of their professional competence in the community of professional practice.

5.4.1.4 Judgmental Criteria for Professor

As outlined in 5.4.1, satisfactory performance requires that faculty members show continued growth in professional competence through mastery of teaching and advising and present a record of unique and individually effective contributions to the community of professional practice.

5.4.2 Scholarship and/or Professional Development

As learners ourselves we are committed to an ongoing examination of our vision of the ideal so that we are always in the process of moving our practice and that of our students to excellence. Our participation in scholarship and/or professional development compels us to read and reflect upon the latest research in our fields whereby attendance at conferences, consultations and collaborations with colleagues and students, and reviewing original manuscripts, etc. enables us to work toward a more clear articulation of our own ideas and knowledge in our professional practice, through a variety of professional discourse communities. The nature of teacher education, as such, causes us to conduct research and create reports, materials and activities that further the professional development and personal habits and character of ourselves and our students. Such activities and reports are carried on in peer institutions across the country

Boyer (1990) describes four forms of scholarship in Scholarship Reconsidered. Pertinent to the institution and discipline or sub-discipline are the scholarship of integration and the scholarship of application. Integration involves synthesis of information across disciplines, across topics within a discipline, or across time while application goes beyond the service duties of a faculty to those within or outside the University and involves the rigor and application of disciplinary expertise with results that can be shared with and/or evaluated by peers. The relative value or number of such documents, in terms of scholarship, may apply more to their worth to the institution and discipline or sub-discipline. “Scholarship and/or professional development is one category.” The following examples of scholarship and/or professional development are illustrative and not meant to be mandatory, nor is the list exclusive.

The scholarship of discovery involves original production or testing of a theory, principle, knowledge, or artistic creation.
Examples may include but are not limited to:
• a traditional experimental survey;
• quantitative and/or qualitative study and research for professional reports;
• an artistic or literary artifact (such as a fiction or non-fiction writing, art exhibition, musical or theatrical performance).

As confirmed by peer review such as:
• peer-reviewed presentations at various local, regional, state, national and international conferences, colloquia or workshops;
• peer-reviewed articles in educationally related journals and/or periodicals;
• books or chapters in books; and/or
• a book in a subject specialty area.

The scholarship of integration involves using knowledge found within and across disciplines to create an original understanding or insight that reveals larger intellectual patterns. 

Examples may include but are not limited to:
• a textbook or synthesis that summarizes what is known about a topic or process;
• a curated artistic exhibition;
• an edited anthology or a theoretical analysis;
• national accreditation reports for TEAC (these require a proven methodology);
• published reports for the State of Michigan Department of Education (MDE);
• program surveys as required by the MDE;
• publication of evaluation tools for the teacher education program at the individual and institutional level;
• leadership in professionally related focus groups; and/or
• use of theory to teach and reflect on teaching.

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.
Examples may include but are not limited to:
• providing expert testimony to legislative bodies, policy makers, or professional organizations at the local, state, regional, national and/or international level;
• invited presentations from international, national, regional, state and local professional agencies or organizations;
• a competitive grant proposal;
• white paper associated with consultancies or grants; and/or
• writing/preparing comprehensive program evaluations or technical reports to assess the effectiveness of public, private, and charter school programs.

The scholarship of teaching involves proposing and empirically testing a pedagogical procedure that transforms or improves teaching practices.
Examples may include but are not limited to:
• a systematic comparison of learning environments;
• dissemination for peer review of course specific assessment tools to measure teacher candidate content knowledge, skills, and/or dispositions;
• production of materials and instructional aides for use in classroom, laboratory, or clinic;
• an impact analysis for learning activities beyond the classroom (such as academic service learning);
• comprehensive assessment of teaching methodologies or programmatic outcomes related to teacher education and/or K – 12 curriculum; and/or
• writing/preparing peer reviewed pedagogical or K – 12 content material that draws on the professional training, scholarly and creative capability of the faculty member.

Professional Development

As discussed in 5.5.6.b and 3.1.1.1, in addition to and/or separate from scholarship, examples of professional development activities may include but are not limited to:
• attending professional conferences and/or workshops;
• developing a new, or maintaining a current, certification;
• obtaining an additional degree or training related to one’s field;
• engaging in post-doctoral work designed to expand one’s professional competence
• participation in professional organizations; and/or
• participation in professional development opportunities at the School of Education, college, university, local, regional state and international levels.

5.4.2.1 Judgmental Criteria for Assistant Professor

As outlined in 5.4.2, satisfactory performance requires that faculty members demonstrate a record for exploring and defining a program for contributing to the professional discourse community. Examples include, but are not limited to, preparing peer reviewed reports, grant proposals, and presentations and/or publications on at least a local or regional level are expected.

5.4.2.2 Judgmental Criteria for Associate Professor

As outlined in 5.4.2, satisfactory performance requires that faculty members demonstrate a record of defining, developing, and disseminating their contributions to the professional discourse community. Examples of success in presenting or publishing a peer reviewed report, obtaining a competitive grant, completing a peer-reviewed presentation and/or publication of research, or creation of original work is expected.

When scholarship and/or professional development is declared as an emphasis, evidence of at least two peer reviewed artifacts will be presented as described in section 5.4.2. Otherwise, evidence of two artifacts from 5.4.2, one of which must be peer reviewed.

5.4.2.3 Judgmental Criteria for Professor

As outlined in 5.4.2, satisfactory performance requires that faculty members demonstrate a record of sustained growth in a clearly defined program contributing to the professional discourse community. The reference to “a record of sustained growth in a clearly defined program...” is not meant to preclude a faculty member from changing his or her research program in a significant way. While the expectation is that the faculty member will increase participation in peer reviewed work, what is more important in all instances is the quality of the contribution to the professional discourse community.

When scholarship and/or professional development is declared as an emphasis, evidence of at least three peer reviewed artifacts will be presented as described in section 5.4.2. Otherwise, evidence of at least three artifacts from 5.4.2, two of which must be peer reviewed.

5.4.3 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE

The School of Education articulates a vision of the profession imbued with ethical and aesthetic qualities such as collaboration, character, judgment, and understanding that requires its faculty members to “embody these qualities” in all aspects of their work. The professional service area provides numerous opportunities for faculty members to demonstrate effective performance of the ethical and aesthetic qualities inherent in collaborative relationships.

Faculty members with Service as their area of emphasis for tenure and promotion are expected to participate in a significant number of service activities. Examples may include but are not limited to:

Emergent professional competence
• participation in university committees;
• new faculty mentorship
• student recruitment and retention;
• editor of a journal or book;
• grant reviewer;
• mentoring professional educators, colleagues and students; and/or
• professional committee leadership at the regional, national or international level.

Professional competence
• participation in college committees;
• advisement and sponsorship of student organizations or projects;
• planning and implementation of workshops, symposia, or seminars;
• involvement in elementary and secondary schools or other parts of the community;
• professional committee leadership at the local or state level; and/or
• reviewer of conference proposals.

Unique and individually effective
• participation in School committees;
• service to the student body;
• active involvement in local, regional, national, or international professional organizations; and/or
• professionally related community service.

5.4.3.1 Judgmental Criteria for Assistant Professor

Faculty members at the rank of assistant professor demonstrate an ongoing commitment to professional collaboration through participation in service activities, membership on departmental and college-wide committees

5.4.3.2 Judgmental Criteria for Associate Professor

Faculty members at the rank of associate professor demonstrate an ongoing commitment to professional collaboration through performing leadership roles in service activities that require sound habits of judgment and facilitation of understanding.

When service is declared as an emphasis, evidence of service in a leadership capacity within the School of Education and its mission will be provided in accordance with 5.4.3 and faculty will provide evidence for leading change at the departmental level or beyond. Otherwise, evidence for service will be demonstrated through service with at least two departmental, college, university or professional activities as outlined in 5.4.3.

5.4.3.3 Judgmental Criteria for Professor

Faculty members at the rank of Professor must demonstrate an ongoing commitment to professional collaboration through performing leadership roles, developing and mentoring educational leaders in service activities that require sound habits of judgment and facilitation of understanding.

When service is declared as an emphasis, evidence of service in a leadership capacity in two instances within the profession will be provided in accordance with 5.4.3 and faculty will provide evidence for leading change at the university level or beyond. Otherwise, evidence for service will be demonstrated through leadership in at least two departmental, college, university or professional activities as outlined in 5.4.3.

5.5 Recommendations for the award of tenure and/or promotion in the School of Education will be made by the Evaluation and Personnel Committee as specified in the Bylaws of the School of Education and in accordance with those provisions of the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement. Tenure will be awarded for demonstrated effectiveness in the three judgmental areas pertaining to the rank of associate professor and on the evidence contained in the cumulative evaluations including any new evidence in the current evaluation. Evaluations for the entire evaluation period will be considered.

6.0 PROCEDURES FOR APPLICATION FOR PROMOTION OR TENURE

6.1 Request for consideration for promotion or tenure will be initiated by the faculty member by a letter or memo to Chair of the Evaluation and Personnel Committee.

6.2 Request will be confirmed by the Chair of Evaluation and Personnel Committee and appropriate forms and instructions will be transmitted to applicant.

6.3 Applicant will complete the evaluation form, submit evidence of accomplishments, and transmit the information to the Chair in a timely manner in accordance with the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

6.4 Evaluation and Personnel Committee will review the evidence submitted by applicant for completeness and clarity.

6.5 If necessary, the Evaluation and Personnel Committee will notify the applicant of the need for clarification or submission of additional supporting data.

6.6 Data will be reviewed by the Evaluation and Personnel Committee and a recommendation decision made.

6.7 Recommendation will be transmitted to the applicant who may then, if desired, request a meeting with the Committee to reconsider the Committee's decision prior to forwarding to the School Director.

6.8 Committee will notify applicant of affirmation or modification of recommendation.

6.9 Committee will make an information report to the School.

6.10 Committee will transmit recommendation and supporting documentation to the School Chair for his/her review and recommendation, and then forwarding to the Dean of the College and the CAC.

7.0 EVALUATING SABBATICAL LEAVE APPLICATIONS

7.1 Sabbatical leaves are granted for the purpose of engaging in activities which will enhance the professional growth and effectiveness of the recipients as members of the faculty at Northern Michigan University.

7.2 The Evaluation and Personnel Committee, sitting with the School Director as a voting member, will:

7.2.1 Keep faculty members of the School of Education informed of the dates, rules, and regulations governing the applications for the award of sabbatical leaves.

7.2.2 Accept applications for sabbatical leaves only in accordance with the dates and format as set forth in the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

7.2.3 Acknowledge in writing the receipt of all applications for sabbatical leave.

7.2.4 Act within the time limits as set forth by the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

7.2.5 Reserve the right to request additional supporting materials when deemed necessary to facilitate the review and ranking of applicants for sabbatical leaves.

7.2.6 Rank applicants using the criteria expressed in the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement. The Committee will examine each plan on the basis of its likelihood to succeed in enhancing the professional growth and increasing the effectiveness of the applicant as a member of the School of Education and the N.M.U. faculty. Finally, the implementation and the consistency with which each plan will accomplish the goals set forth by the applicant will be part of the evaluation.

7.2.7 Notify all applicants as to the recommendations made upon completion of the process.

7.2.8 Accept appeals of its recommendations within the time frame specified in the AAUP/NMU Master Agreement.

7.2.9 Forward its recommendations to CAC and the Dean of the College in accordance with applicable rules, regulations, and policies after the completion of the ranking process and the consideration of any appeals.

8.0 BYLAWS

8.1 Review and Amendment of Bylaws

8.1.1 These Bylaws may be reviewed at any time during the academic year. Amendment of the Bylaws may be recommended by any member of the School of Education. Approval of amendments will require a majority vote of the members of the School of Education as well as approval of the parties stipulated in the Master Agreement.

8.2 When problems arise for which procedures are not set forth in these Bylaws or in the Contract any member of the
School may bring them to the attention of the School for Bylaw amendment.

9.0 FACULTY LOAD AND COMPENSATION FOR THE DIRECTION OF GRADUATE RESEARCH, PRACTICUM, AND THESES

9.1 Faculty of record who serve as the director or reader of a graduate thesis, or director of graduate research or graduate practicum, shall be given the opportunity to count the effort as part of the normal teaching assignment as stipulated in the Master Agreement. The relative load credit per thesis for directors and readers shall be stipulated in departmental bylaws provided however that the total load credit per thesis shall not exceed
• Two credits for an MS or MAE thesis. Directors will earn 1.5 credits per thesis and readers will earn .25 credits per thesis.
• Directors of research projects or supervisors of a practicum shall receive a maximum of one half load credit per project or practicum.

 

References

Banks, J. A., & Banks, C. A. M. (2004). Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives. Wiley/Jossey-Bass Education. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.

Eisner, E. W. (1998). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Merrill.

Scheffler, I. (1965). Conditions of knowledge; An introduction to epistemology and education. Chicago: Scott, Foresman.

Scheffler, I. (1976). "Basic mathematics skills: Some philosophical and practical remarks." Teachers College Record, 78(2), 205-212.

Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.

Shulman, L. S., & Wilson, S. M. (2004). The wisdom of practice: Essays on teaching, learning, and learning to teach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.