 |
|
|
|
|
September 13, 2002New conduct policy already seeing useby Linda CharlesPeer review is one of the significant policy changes in the new faculty conduct policy, which is being implemented this fall. "A key element of the faculty conduct policy is that allegations of faculty misconduct are reviewed by other faculty," said associate provost Susan Carlson, who has been working to implement the policy. "That's very important because faculty are in the best position to judge other faculty." The new policy provides two avenues to pursue complaints -- informal mediation or a formal process, which can result in minor or major sanctions. "We hope most cases can be resolved through the mediation process and that the formal process is used only for the most serious cases," said Jack Girton, zoology and genetics, and chair of the Faculty Senate committee that wrote the new policy. Minor and major sanctions When a formal complaint is filed, a faculty group will investigate the charges and make recommendations of minor sanctions to the provost or major sanctions to the university president. If the provost or president rejects the recommendations, the official must meet with the faculty group for further discussion before sanctions are imposed. Minor sanctions include probation, suspension without pay for less than a month, minor reassignment of duties, mandatory training, a probationary period, letters of reprimand, restrictions on contact with the person filing the complaint and reparations of less than $2,000. Major sanctions include dismissal, suspension without pay for at least a month, salary reduction, loss of graduate supervision privileges, cancelled graduate college membership, removal of distinguished titles, reparations of $2,000 or more and significant reassignment of duties. Faculty serving on either the review board or sanction committee are selected from a pool compiled by the senate and provost office staff. Appointments to the pool are on a rotating, three-year basis. "A lot of care went into assessing the diversity of the pool," Carlson said, adding the pool of 25 faculty includes representatives from different ethnicities, races, gender and disciplines. It includes both full and associate professors, but not administrators. Countdown to resolution Deadlines for completing the formal process is another important part of the new policy, Girton said. "A great concern of the faculty in the past was timing," Girton said. "They would launch a complaint and then nothing would happen for a long time." Under the new policy, a case that could result in minor sanctions generally should be resolved in about 75 working days from the time the complaint is filed, while a case that could result in major sanctions should take about 135 days from the time the complaint is filed. In both cases, extensions occasionally may be granted. In general, the conduct policy covers:
Currently, two complaints have been filed under the new formal review process, Carlson said. So far, no complaints have gone to mediation. The new policy does not replace other university policies, such as the sexual harassment policy, Carlson noted. And it's not a remedy for all problems, Girton said. For example, disagreements over administrative actions, such as salary adjustments or teaching assignments, should go through the university appeal process. Disagreements over issues such as tenure denial should go to the Faculty Senate Judiciary and Appeals Council. Components of the new faculty conduct policy |
Ames, Iowa 50011, (515) 294-4111 Published by: University Relations, online@iastate.edu Copyright © 1995-2001, Iowa State University. All rights reserved. |