DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY AND ARCHAEOLOGY
BY-LAWS
Adopted April 1, 2008
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
Department of Sociology/Archaeology
Bylaws and Policies
Table of Contents
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
1
I. Bylaws
1.1 Department name and purpose
The official Department name is the Department of Sociology/Archaeology. The central
purpose of the Department of Sociology/Archaeology is to provide the highest quality academic
programs that our resources allow in service to both the hundreds of our own majors as well as to
the multitude of students that we serve through our minors and through our numerous University
Core Curriculum course offerings. Beyond this, the Sociology/Archaeology Department
embraces its further obligation to conduct scholarly activity and to serve the needs of our
surrounding community within the realm of our professional expertise and the availability of our
resources.
The primary objective of the Archaeological Studies major as an academic program is to
provide a sound and broad multi-disciplinary background for students seeking a liberal
arts/humanities degree; to provide academic and professional preparation for students planning
to enter graduate school in archaeology; to provide professional training for students planning
careers in archaeology directly after graduation; and to provide elective and service courses for
other majors.
The primary objective of the Sociology major as an academic program is to provide a
superior educational experience that fosters a comprehension of the discipline’s analytical
perspectives, research methods, and significant portions of sociology’s body of knowledge in our
graduates. Beyond this, the Sociology major is structured to prepare its students for
careers/graduate school related to Sociology or in fields where social science training is essential
or very desirable.
The primary objective of the Interdisciplinary minor in Criminal Justice as an academic
program is to provide students with the opportunity to gain an intellectual understanding of the
United States criminal justice system and assist students planning to enter criminal justice related
careers.
1.2 Membership, meetings, and voting
As it relates to the function of conducting business at regularly scheduled meetings, the
membership of the Department shall consist of all tenured and tenure-track faculty and all full or
part-time instructional academic staff currently under contract with the Department of
Sociology/Archaeology at UW-La Crosse.
The Department will meet on a regular monthly basis. However, as deemed appropriate
by the Chair of the Department, additional meetings may be scheduled and unnecessary meetings
may be canceled.
Voting rights are reserved to all tenured and tenure-track faculty except in the cases
otherwise indicated in this document relating to hiring, promotion, and retention decisions where
voting rights are governed by either a person’s rank or tenure status.
Proxy votes are not permitted in meetings of the Department and its Committees.
1.3 Operating rules including amending procedures
The Bylaws in this document were adopted by the members of the Department of
Sociology/Archaeology in accordance with the University of Wisconsin System and University
of Wisconsin-La Crosse Faculty and Academic Staff Personnel Rules. Meetings of this
Department are conducted in accordance with Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised.
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
2
Amendments or additions to Department bylaws may be adopted at any Department
meeting by a two-thirds vote of the faculty present, following a first reading of the proposed
amendments or additions at a previous Department meeting.
Amendments or additions to Department policies may be adopted at any Department meeting by
a two-thirds vote of the faculty present and such policy changes become effective immediately
1.4 Quorum
For meetings of the Department and its Committees, a quorum is defined as the majority
of the entire membership eligible to participate.
1.5 Department responsibilities
The faculty have the responsibility of carrying out the responsibilities of the department
through their creative and other contributions in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service.
The primary function of the Sociology/Archaeology Department is to teach in its disciplines. In
addition, the Department’s most fundamental responsibilities include:
a. promoting scholarship and creative activities,
b.promoting the continued professional growth and development of its members by
encouraging their participation in sabbatical leaves, developmental leaves,
conferences, professional workshops, and other similar programs, utilizing the
expertise and interest of its members to provide professional service,
c. advising students on academic program requirements and presenting the array of
available career opportunities,
d.providing an internal governance structure in which the functions of the department
can take place, and
e. making personnel decisions.
Instructional academic staff responsibilities
Academic staff lecturers are held to the same teaching expectations as previously
specified for faculty. Since lecturers do not have the full range of faculty responsibilities, the
evaluation of instructional academic staff is based primarily upon the quality of their teaching
record.
1.6 Department committees
In the early part of the Fall semester every year, the members of the Department are
polled for their interest in serving on any of the Department’s standing committees. The
Executive Committee of the Department reviews these requests and then assigns individuals to
serve on the various Department committees after having obtained their consent. The list of the
Department standing committees and their principal functions and duties follow.
A) The Executive Committee
The principal function and duty of the Executive Committee is to deal with urgent
Departmental matters that cannot wait until the next scheduled Department meeting. In
addition, the Executive Committee is responsible for reviewing and updating the Department
Bylaws and Policies on an annual basis and is responsible for making decisions regarding
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
3
part-time instructional academic staff hiring. In addition, the Executive Committee will select
the recipients of department scholarships.
The Executive Committee is composed of the Department chair, the elected coordinator
of the Sociology Section, the elected coordinator of the Archaeology/ Anthropology Section,
and one at-large member elected to this office at the first Department meeting in the Fall
semester.
B) The Merit/Peer Review Committee
The principal function of the Merit/Peer Review Committee is to oversee the integrity of
the annual Merit Review process .
C) The Program Assessment Committees (SOCPAC and ARCPAC)
The principal function of the Program Assessment Committees is to assess how well the
academic programs that we offer meet identified programmatic student learning outcomes.
All members of the Department take turns serving two year terms on the Program
Assessment Committee most appropriate to the faculty member.
D) Retention Committee
The principal function of the retention committee is to determine whether or not to
recommend to the Dean of the College that a probationary faculty be retained in his or her
employment. The Retention Committee consists of all tenured faculty members in the
department. Voting eligibility in all retention decisions is vested with the currently tenured
faculty of the Department.
E) Promotion Committee
The principal function of the promotion committee is to conduct the initial review of the
promotion candidate's qualifications and shall make its promotion recommendation to the
Department as a whole. Voting eligibility in all promotion considerations is restricted to
faculty of the same or higher academic rank as the promotion rank that the candidate is
seeking.
F) Post-Tenure Review Committee
The principal function of the post tenure review committee is to review and evaluate the
cumulative performance of already tenured faculty over intervals of five years beginning from
the year of their first grant of tenure at UW-La Crosse. The areas of teaching, scholarship and
service are all reviewed and evaluated in accordance with the specifications enumerated in
this handbook. Only tenured faculty within the Department are eligible to serve on the posttenure review committee.
In addition to these standing committees the Department also appoints individual
representatives to serve in the following capacities:
External
a. CLS Assessment Committee Representative
b. Disability Resources Liaison
c. Murphy Library Liaison
d. Institute for Latin American Studies Liasion
e. International Studies Liaison
f. Sociology Education Liaison
g. Study Abroad Advisor
h. Wimberly Hall Building Liaison
Internal
i. AKD Advisor
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
4
j.
k.
l.
m.
n.
o.
p.
q.
r.
s.
Archaeology Honors Coordinator
Archaeology Club Advisor
Campus Close-Up Coordinators (Sociology and Archaeology)
Celebrations Committee
Department Newsletter Editor
Department Webmaster
Four-year Graduation Agreement Advisors (Soc and Arc)
Sociology Club Advisor
Sociology Honors Coordinator
Webpage Coordinators (Soc and Arc)
The Department may also form additional Ad Hoc Committees as it deems appropriate.
1.7 Department chairperson
The Chairperson is generally responsible for ensuring that the policies and procedures of
the department are carried out in accordance with the departmental bylaws and that the
department and its members are fulfilling the responsibilities enumerated in the University of
Wisconsin- La Crosse Employee Handbook under Section XII, Faculty Organization and
Policies (http://www.uwlax.edu/hr/F_Handbook.htm).
As specified in this Section the chairperson will assume a prominent role in creating a
professional environment conducive to high morale and productivity in the Department. Specific
Department functions supervised or performed by the chairperson include student registration
and course scheduling, curriculum matters, budget management, textbook rental purchases,
oversight of equipment and facilities, scheduling and chairing Department meetings, personnel
matters, preparing the Department’s Annual Report, and hearing and responding to student
concerns.
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
5
II. Policies
1. Election of Department Chairperson
A. Eligibility Requirements for Voting
1. All members of a department holding at least half-time appointments are eligible
to vote provided they have the status of:
a. Ranked faculty designated as holding appointments or tenure in official
personnel records maintained by the provost/vice chancellor;
b. Academic staff with faculty status holding appointments in a department who
have been granted eligibility by the action of the ranked faculty of the
department;
c. Faculty or academic staff described in a. or b. whose leave of absence from the
university or assignment to duties outside the department will be terminated
within the three-year term of the chair to be elected;
d. Faculty or academic staff who are not in positions of administrative authority
over the department chair with titles of dean, associate dean, assistant
chancellor, assistant vice chancellor, provost/vice chancellor, or chancellor;
e. Faculty or academic staff who have been extended voting privileges by a
majority of the other eligible votes of the department on grounds that their
university appointment is functionally part of the department’s activities.
B.
Eligibility Requirements for Serving as Chair
1. All members of a department shall be eligible to serve as department chair
provided they are:
a. Of the rank of assistant professor or above;
b. On staff of this university at least three full semesters;
c. Not on terminal contract or temporary appointment.
2. Hiring Procedures
A. Tenure-track Faculty (Revised 10-15-2007)
There are 5 steps involved in searching for a faculty position:
Step 1: Approval to Recruit and Advertise
Step 2: Receiving and Processing Applications
Step 3: Screening Applicants and Interviewing Applicants
Step 4: The Hiring Process
Step 5: The Closing of a Search
STEP 1: Approval to Recruit and Advertise
1. Confirmation of FTE (position) and Salary (available resources for the position).
Prior to creation of a SS Committee or SS documents, the dean must have verification
from the PVC of the availability of the position and the replacement salary for the
position. The SS chair (or department), dean, Business Services, PVC, and HR will
utilize the electronic tracking system (FAST) that was developed by HR to improve
tracking in the recruitment process. To initiate the recruitment, the dean will direct the
chair to begin the process.
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
6
The department chair will download a copy of the Authorization to Recruit for Faculty
Position (Form L-1347 – Faculty) and print it on pink paper.
• The chair will request a recruitment number from HR (this is the position
identifier throughout the recruitment process) by sending an email request to
recruit@uwlax.edu or by calling HR.
• The chair will complete sections 1 and 2 (the departmental components) of the
Authorization to Recruit for Faculty Position (Form L-1347). The “pink sheet”
includes a field for the recruitment number provided by HR.
o Directions for completing Authorization to Recruit Form are available at
http://www.uwlax.edu/hr/recruit/Faculty_Recruitment/DIRECTIONS.FOR.AUTH.TO.RECRUIT-FAC2002.htm.
The chair will then record the position and its status in FAST and forward the form to the
dean’s office. Upon initiating the routing of the pink sheet, the chair may initiate the
processes and paperwork associated with #2 and #3 outlined below.
The dean will complete his/her part of the form, record the position status in FAST, and
forward the form to Business Services for review of FTE availability and replacement
salary. Upon verification of FTE and salary, Business Services will sign the original
form, record the position status in FAST, and return the form to the PVC who will
review the form, sign it if appropriate, and forward it to HR. HR will notify the dean and
the chair when the pink sheet has been received by their office and indicate if any
changes have been made on the form.
2.
Organization of Departmental Search and Screen Committee
The Department of Sociology/ Archaeology commences the hiring process for a
tenure-track faculty position by writing a position vacancy advertisement once the Dean
of the College has expressed approval of such action.
The next step is for the Department as a whole to appoint a search and screen
committee of appropriately qualified Department faculty. However, in the case of split
appointments that bridge the Department of Sociology/ Archaeology with some other
organizational unit (as, for example, the Director of MVAC does), the Department may
broaden the base of search and screen committee members to include persons outside of
the Department faculty who are deemed to represent the legitimate interests of the other
affected organizational units. This search and screen committee must be approved by a
majority vote from the Department as a whole. This committee will then proceed to
conduct the search and screen process as a separate deliberative body until it reaches Step
#3 part 3 as specified in the “Screening and Interviewing of Candidates” section that
follows. At this point, the Department as a whole supplants this prior search and screen
committee as the preeminent deliberative body with the authority to make all subsequent
decisions leading to the final recommendations for hiring.
The department will organize a search and screen committee utilizing the following
processes:
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
7
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The SS chair and department chair are responsible for reviewing current UW-L hiring
procedures. The SS chair is responsible for briefing the SS committee on the SS
procedures including the confidentiality requirements.
The chair of the department or a SS committee member designated as the convener will
convene the first meeting. The first meeting will include the selection of a SS chair, a
recorder (if applicable), a review of position description, and discussion of search and
screen process.
By a simple majority vote, the SS committee will elect the SS committee chair
(hereafter “SS chair”). The SS chair will be responsible for posting a notice of
meetings through the Campus Connection (or outside the HR Office if unable to get in
Campus Connection) in compliance with open meetings statutes. Unless a recorder is
elected, the SS chair will be responsible for taking official minutes of meetings for the
record. Minutes must comply with open meeting rules.
A simple majority of SS committee members constitute a quorum necessary to conduct
SS committee business. Changes to these procedures require approval of a two-thirds
majority of the SS committee members present and approval of the dean, HR and the
AAO. Members may not vote by proxy but may participate and vote by teleconference
with advance notice to the SS chair. The SS chair is a voting member of the SS
committee. All voting shall be done by show of hands unless a roll-call vote is
requested by any member of the SS committee. The SS chair shall maintain a record of
all votes by indicating the number of yeas, nays, and abstentions. Roll-call votes shall
be used if a member is attending via teleconference.
All deliberations of the SS committee and the names of nominees and applicants are
confidential. Public statements are to be made only by the SS chair, and all questions
relating to the business or progress of the SS committee are to be referred to the SS
chair for reply.
The SS chair, in compliance with open meetings rules, will post notice of all SS
meetings – noting if any meeting will go into a closed session and whether a meeting
that will go into a closed session will subsequently go into an open session.
Evaluation meetings for the purpose of discussing individual applicants shall be closed
by majority vote of those SS members in attendance (taken by roll call and recorded in
the minutes as a roll call). The SS chair will announce s/he will entertain a motion "to
convene in a closed session to consider personal history information about applicants
for the position [list the position title, such as ‘assistant professor in English
Department’] as provided in section 19.85(1)(f) of Wisconsin Statutes." Upon
completing business in a closed session, the SS committee may not reconvene in an
open session within 12 hours, unless notice of the subsequent open session was
included in the original meeting notice.
SS committee members, their spouses, family members, or partners cannot be
applicants for the position, so that there can be no possibility of nepotism.
The SS chair shall be the custodian of all application materials and shall be responsible
for their maintenance and making them available to the SS committee. The SS chair
shall maintain a file of SS committee documents and records as required by the HR
Office. The SS chair will keep a list of all applicants, including those who withdraw at
a later stage. Applicants requesting confidentiality may be identified on such a list by
an applicant number.
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
8
•
During the recruitment, search and screen, and hiring processes, the search and screen
committee members may have access to confidential information including, but not
limited to, personal information, education history and employment history of
applicants. This information and all discussions and voting outcomes conducted in a
closed meeting must remain confidential both during the search and after the
completion of the search process. Search and screen committee members may discuss
this information only with other members of the search committee or with the
authorized ex officio individuals – the dean, the HR director, and the AAO. Members
must not permit any unauthorized person to access documents in their possession that
contain applicant or search and screen information.
3. Submission of Recruitment and Hiring Materials to the Dean
Upon notification that HR has received the Authorization to Recruit for Faculty Position (Form
L-1347) signed by the dean, Business Services, and the PVC, the SS chair will transmit the
following forms to the dean’s Office for approval by the Dean, AAO, and HR.
•
Faculty Recruitment Routing Slip
•
Recruitment Efforts Form L-1747
On the Recruitment Efforts Form, the SS committee will state proposed recruitment
methods including:
(1) Where the position will be advertised (e.g., professional journals, The
Chronicle of Higher Education, the Internet, etc.). One advertisement must be in a
national professional print journal that lists the rank and exact title, a full
description of qualifications, and a full description of duties of the position.
NOTE: An ad that directs applicants to additional information (aka a “pointer ad”)
will not meet this requirement.
(2) Other contacts (e.g., letters to presidents/chancellors, deans, director, alumni).
•
Position Vacancy Form L-1348 (yellow form)
On the Position Vacancy Form, the SS committee will state essential application
information that will be incorporated into the national print ad.
(1) Application deadline: a minimum of four weeks after appearance of the first
ad for a national search,
(2) The application procedure, including what constitutes a complete application,
(3) The name and address of the contact individual at UW-L,
(4) The AA/EEO and accommodation statements.
•
Position Description Form (L-1813)
A position summary with major duties outlined.
•
Selection Criteria
A form indicating the selection criteria identifying how applicants will be evaluated
against the criteria – a sample is available on-line through HR.
•
Search and Screen Committee Procedures (The “UW-L Tenure-Track Faculty
Recruitment & Hiring Policy and Procedures” document represents the accepted
template for search and screen committee procedures. If these procedures are not the
ones used by the SS committee, changes made to the template must to be clearly
identified and then approved by the Dean, HR, and AAO.)
•
A copy of the component of the most current departmental by-laws pertaining to
search & screen procedures (if applicable); i.e., procedures for constituting a within
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
9
department search & screen committee. All department search and screen policies
will be consistent with the body of search and screen guidelines in the “UW-L
Tenure-Track Faculty Recruitment & Hiring Policy and Procedures” document.
4. Dean Review
After reviewing and approving the packet, the Dean’s Office will deliver it to AAO indicating
the transfer in the (FAST) electronic tracking system.
5. AAO Review
Upon approving the packet, AAO will send copies of the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO)
Information Request (FORM L-1353) to the SS chair. AAO will forward the packet of forms to
the HR indicating the transfer in the (FAST) electronic tracking system.
6. HR Review
HR will review the materials and will electronically notify the AAO, the dean, the chair, and the
SS chair that the recruitment has been approved. If changes have been made in the text of the
advertisement form, HR will communicate revisions to the dean and SS chair so advertising can
begin. HR will create the official recruitment file and place the position on the UW-L Vacancy
page.
7. Placing the Advertisement
Upon receipt of the approval notice, the SS chair or department chair will place the faculty
position advertisements promptly and without modification. All of the advertisements
regardless of form must include the official University affirmative action statement: “UW La
Crosse is an affirmative action/equal opportunity employer. Women, persons of color, and
individuals with a disability are encouraged to apply. If you have a special need/accommodation
to aid your participation in our hiring process, please contact the SS chair above to make
appropriate arrangements.” This statement may be modified (expanded or shortened) with
advance approval of AAO.
One advertisement must be in a print professional journal and include the title, duties, and
qualifications in full.
• An electronic version of the complete ad (including all of the information from the
Position Vacancy Form and a complete description of the duties and title) must be sent to
HR at recruit@uwlax.edu.
Advertisements placed in addition to the full advertisement in a print journal may be shortened
(if reviewed and approved by AAO) and placed in discipline-specific journals. These position
descriptions must note that the full description is available on the UW-L at
http://www.uwlax.edu/vacancies.)
Step 2: Receiving and Processing Applications
The SS chair will secure and manage the applicant files throughout the process.
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
10
The SS chair will transmit to each applicant or nominated individual an acknowledgment letter
(samples on the web) that includes the disability accommodation phrase and a statement
regarding mandatory criminal background checks. In addition, the following inserts should be
included – available at http://www.uwlax.edu/hr/fac.recruit.html.
• The Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Information Request form (Form L-1353)
which the SS committee has completed by adding a unique tracking number for each
applicant
• A Confidentiality Statement Form (L-1824)
• An Informational Programs and Disclosure Information Insert – a statement of crime
statistics and drug abuse policy (also referred to as the Cleary Act statement).
Within two (2) working days (Monday through Friday, except legal holidays) after the deadline
for receiving materials (or if there is no deadline, within two working days of the initial review
date listed in the advertisement), the SS chair will complete the List of All Nominees and
Applicants Who Did Not Request Confidentiality (Form L-1737) and deliver it to HR
(electronically to recruit@uwlax.edu) in compliance with Wisconsin law. This is an open record.
If there is no specific deadline, the list must be updated as new applications are received.
Step 3: Screening Applicants and Interviewing Applicants
1. Initial Screening
Each member of the SS committee will review files of the entire pool of applicants and make
an initial assessment (yes/no) of each candidate to determine whether each applicant should
be considered further – this should be based on (1) whether the candidate meets the
selection/qualifications criteria. The committees will then meet and discuss each candidate.
If any committee member believes that a candidate deserves further consideration (based on
the selection/qualifications criteria), that candidate will be placed in the “pool of applicants”
to receive further consideration.
Applicants deemed unacceptable for the position during the initial screening will receive no
further review and will comprise Tier 3 following the process delineated below. The SS
committee should list the individuals in alpha order and assign one of the reason codes for
non-selection (refer to the back of form L-1349) to each Tier 3 applicant.
2. Additional Screening Leading to a Finalist Group
The SS committee may solicit additional material from applicants retained for further
consideration. Applicants may be asked to provide additional materials via written
communication, telephone, or videoconference in support of their application, to respond to
any specific questions developed by the SS committee (and approved by the dean, AAO, and
HR), and/or to provide additional references.
• If telephone or electronic interviews are conducted, a common list of core questions
(samples on the web) will be asked of all persons interviewed. Each member of the
committee should review UW-L’s Brief Guidelines for Contemporary Employment
Interviewing. The use of standard questions does not prevent the SS committee from
asking follow-up questions as may be deemed appropriate.
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
11
•
•
•
If unsolicited materials are received, the SS chair retains the materials and does not
share them with the SS committee until such time (if ever) that similar materials are
required of all candidates.
The SS committee may conduct telephone reference checks on each of the applicants
still under consideration. Calls will be made by one or more SS committee members
as assigned by the SS chair (or SS committee) and will use a standard set of questions
that have been reviewed and approved by the dean, AAO, and HR. For each call, a
written record will be maintained. A sample form is provided (Telephone Reference
Conversation Record L-1827).
The SS committee retains the right to make off-list phone calls. Off-list phone calls
are reference calls to individuals not on the applicant’s list of references. Given that
confidentiality requests by the applicants are still respected during this phase of the
process, all applicants must be informed prior to any off-list phone calls being made,
and a provision must be provided for the applicant to specifically identify any
individuals s/he does not wish to have called. SS committee members making
telephone reference checks shall verbally share the information obtained with the SS
committee. The SS chair or designee may seek further information about each
semifinalist as needed, while respecting the semifinalist’s need for confidentiality. A
written record must be maintained for each call.
3. Determining the Finalist Group
The SS committee shall discuss and vote on each applicant to select those to be moved to finalist
status. A simple majority vote of those present is required to advance an applicant. Applicants
not advanced to finalist status on the initial vote can be brought to a re-vote only once. Any SS
committee member may request a re-vote.
• The SS committee shall vote to cluster the group of finalists into two “tiers” listed
alphabetically in each tier. The top tier (Tier 1) shall include applicants the committee
believes should be invited to interview on campus. [Note: The dean in consultation with
AAO will decide upon the total number of applicants to be interviewed (normally 2-4).]
• The second tier (Tier 2) shall include the remaining applicants who the SS committee
believes would be suitable for the position if the top tier applicants are determined to be
unacceptable after an interview or are unavailable/decline an offer. At this stage any
additional applicants not advanced to Tier 1 or Tier 2 shall be included with the original
Tier 3 applicants and all shall be listed alphabetically and assigned a ‘reason code” on
Form 1349 (Faculty Applicant/Interview List).
• Reason codes should also be assigned to Tier 2 applicants. In most cases Tier 2 applicants
could be assigned the non-selection reason code of E-1 (“Candidate is well qualified for
the position, but the quality of teaching, scholarship, and/or experience is higher in other
candidates”).
The SS committee will present its tiers of applicants with its recommendations for interviews to
the department. At this stage in the recruitment process, the Department as a whole (not the
search and screen committee) proceeds to identify the specific applicants from the pool of
“potential interview candidates” that it wishes to interview and forward this list to the Dean of
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
12
the College. A two-thirds majority vote is required to recommend a campus interview with a job
applicant. If paper ballots are used, each ballot must be signed and stored for 7 years.
4. Authorization to Interview
The department will forward Faculty Applicant/Interview List (Form L-1349) to the dean
requesting approval to interview. This form will have the Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 applicants
listed as indicated in #3 and #4 above. Upon review (possibly resulting in revision after
consultation with the department), the dean will forward the Faculty Applicant/Interview List to
the AAO. Based on returned EEO Forms, the AAO in consultation with the dean will make one
of the following decisions:
(1) approve the existing applicant pool,
(2) require an extension of the application deadline,
(3) cancel the search,
(4) require other appropriate remedies.
The SS chair must receive approval (e-mail) from the dean and the AAO, copied to HR at
recruit@uwlax.edu, before scheduling interviews. If questions arise, the dean and AAO will
consult before e-mailing the SS chair.
• At this time, at the discretion of the SS chair and SS committee, a letter can be sent to the
Tier 3 applicants indicating they are no longer under consideration. Otherwise all
applicants from the original pool will receive correspondence after the position has been
filled (as described below in Step 5).
Within two days after determining the applicants who have accepted an invitation to a campus
interview, the SS chair will forward an Alphabetical Listing, by Last Name, of Finalists (Form L1738—Faculty) as required by Wisconsin Statute 19.36(7) to HR for public release if requested.
This is an open record to be released by HR upon request.
5. Interviewing
The SS chair and chair will complete a Faculty Pre-Approval for Reimbursement of Interview
Expenses Form (L-1350-Faculty) following the Business Services procedure and deliver it to the
dean for approval of anticipated expenses before extending any invitations to interview on
campus. This form is retained by the dean for audit purposes. This would also be the appropriate
time to ask the applicant if she/he needs accommodations for a disability.
A list of core questions will be prepared and asked of all applicants brought to campus for
interviews. The SS chair will review both lists of questions with AAO and HR and will provide
the final (agreed upon) lists to HR for the official recruitment file. A paper copy of this list of
core questions will also be kept by the SS committee.
• Each member of the department as a whole should review UW-L’s Brief Guidelines for
Contemporary Employment Interviewing and be apprised that interview guidelines
regarding illegal questions apply to all conversation with the interviewee in both formal
and informal settings. The SS committee may also choose to make off-list phone calls
regarding finalists during this part of the process.
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
13
Step 4: The Hiring Process
1. Consulting with the Dean
After gathering information, interviewing, etc., the department shall discuss the applicants and
vote to determine which, if any, of the interviewed candidates are to be recommended to the
dean. A two-thirds majority vote of the department is required for such a recommendation. The
department will provide a non-ranked list of applicants to the dean with supporting information
on strengths and weaknesses (as they relate to the selection criteria). The dean may choose to
make additional reference checks. The department or authorized representative(s) will consult
with the dean to collaboratively agree on recommendation(s) for hire.
2. Making the Offer
Offers for hire must be agreed upon by the department or authorized representative(s) and the
dean. If after appropriate consultation, the dean and the department or authorized
representative(s) do not agree on a hiring decision, the following alternatives may be used: an
additional applicant or applicants from the pool may be interviewed, an extension of the search
may be authorized, or the search may be terminated by the department or authorized
representative(s), or the dean.
The dean will formally request via e-mail approval to hire from the AAO and the PVC
(recruit@uwlax.edu is copied). Once authorization is received, the chair or the Dean will contact
the applicant to extend the job offer. The terms of the offer are developed by the dean after
consultation with the chair.
If the applicant(s) declines to accept the offered position (verbally or in writing), the department
may request permission to offer the position to another interviewed applicant. Alternately, the
department may request permission to interview additional applicants from the identified pool of
qualified applicants, may request an extension of the search, or may close the search.
Step 5: The Closing of a Search
1. Acceptance of the Offer
Upon acceptance of the offer by the applicant, the dean will forward the following
documents to the PVC for review and approval and indicate the transmittal in FAST:
• The completed Faculty Personnel Action Form PAF printed on pink paper.
• Resume/vitae.
• Official transcripts (with university seal or other indication of being an original
document).
If a search ends without hiring an applicant, the dean must formally notify (via e-mail or
hardcopy memorandum) the SS chair, department chair, PVC, AAO, and HR, and the
necessary documentation must be provided to HR for the official search file
2. Issuing the Contract
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
14
After granting approval, the PVC will forward the materials to HR, and HR will issue the
contract letter and a CBC form. HR will enter into FAST the date the letter is sent, the return
deadline, and the date the contact is returned to HR.
3. Receiving the Signed Contract
After the signed contract has been received and the criminal background check has been
completed, HR will notify the dean, AAO, chair, and SS chair. The department chair will
request the SS chair to send letters to the all remaining applicants notifying them that the
position has been filled (sample on the web at the HR website). Within two weeks of this
notice, the SS chair will compile the information necessary to close the file as listed on the
Routing Slip for Completion of Faculty Recruitment (Form L-1828—faculty). The SS chair
will deliver the packet to the department chair for review and signature. The department chair
will deliver the packet to the dean who will review, sign to indicate approval, and deliver the
packet to HR. The flow of this documentation will be tracked on FAST. HR will create an
official employee file for the new hire and will complete the official recruitment file for the
search process. This process should be completed within two weeks after the notice of the
hire.
o Foreign Nationals: If a foreign national is hired, the SS Chair and/or department
chair and the dean will assist HR with the necessary collection of documents to
pursue an authorization to work. HR will submit petitions on behalf of UW-L for
foreign national hires in compliance with federal, state, UW System, and UW-L
rules, regulations, policies, and procedures.
4. Authorized to Work
New hires will be authorized to begin work only after HR has the necessary documents,
including but not limited to I-9, signed contract letter, and a satisfactory CBC. HR will
notify the dean and the department chair via email when the new hire is authorized to begin
work.
5. Storage and Disposal of Search-Related Materials
The SS chair and all SS committee members shall shred any informal notes and/or
worksheets from the search. The department will retain search and screen applicant files in a
secure location for six years. Thereafter, the department should contact HR for verification
that the files can be destroyed. Upon verification, the files may be shredded or burned.
(cf. Faculty Personnel Rules UWS 3.01, 3.02, 3.03 and 3.04, and UWL 3.02, 3.03, and 3.04)
B. Instructional Academic Staff Teaching Appointments and Recruitment
(Approved 9/25/2007)
Academic staff teaching appointments may be either part-time or full-time in nature. The
need for such appointments is generally the result of faculty sabbaticals, leaves of absence, or
special workload releases. On occasion, at the request of the Dean of CLS the Department may
agree to appoint an academic staff instructor to provide some additional sections of University
Core Curriculum courses as well.
In general, the selection of the specific courses to be taught by academic staff lecturers is
decided through the deliberation of the Department as a whole body. However, as regards the
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
15
task of hiring academic staff lecturers, it is the Executive Committee of the Department who
reviews candidates and makes final recommendations to the Dean.
COMMITTEE ORGANIZATION
1. Elect a chair and a secretary. The secretary shall be responsible for posting a notice of
meetings through the Campus Connection (or outside the HR Office if unable to get in Campus
Connection) and taking minutes of meetings.
2. A simple majority of committee members constitute a quorum necessary to conduct committee
business, although a two-thirds majority is required to amend these procedures. Members may
not vote by proxy. The chair is a voting member of the committee.
3. All voting shall be done by show of hands unless a roll-call vote is requested by any member
of the committee. The secretary shall maintain a record of all votes.
4. All deliberations of the committee and the names of nominees and candidates are confidential.
Public statements are to be made only by the chair, and all questions relating to the business or
progress of the committee are to be referred to the chair for reply.
5. The secretary, in compliance with open meeting rules, will post all meetings – noting if any
meeting will go into a closed session and an open session.
6. Evaluation meetings may be closed by majority vote of those in attendance (taken by roll call),
for the purpose of discussing individual candidates. The chair or presiding officer will announce
they will entertain a motion “to convene in a closed session to consider personal history
information about applicants for the position of (enter recruitment number) as provided in
section 19.85 (1)(f) of Wisconsin Statutes.” Upon completing business in a closed session, the
committee may not reconvene in an open session within 12 hours, unless notice of the
subsequent open session was included in the original meeting notice.
7. Committee members shall not be considered for the position.
COMMITTEE RECORD
1. All material concerning individual nominees/applicants is confidential.
2. The chair shall be the custodian of all application materials and shall be responsible for their
maintenance (kept in a locked file cabinet/room) and making them available to the committee.
3. The chair shall maintain a file of committee documents and records as required by the HR
Office.
4. The chair will keep a list of all applicants, including those who withdraw at a later stage. Each
applicant will be assigned a candidate number. Applicants requesting confidentiality may be
identified on such a list by candidate number.
5. The assistant to the chancellor for affirmative action & diversity shall compile summary data
on the sex and racial/ethnic background of the applicant pool from EEO forms returned to the
Affirmative Action & Diversity Office.
SEARCH PROCEDURES
1. Before the position can be advertised, the committee will submit the following
documents for approval/signature to (in this sequence): Dean/Division Officer,
Administration & Finance, Provost, Affirmative Action & Diversity, and Human
Resources.
• Recruitment Efforts Plan (salmon form)
• Position Vacancy (yellow form)
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
16
• Selection Criteria (based on position description and responsibilities listed in Position
Vacancy form)
• Search and Screen Committee Procedures (these procedures)
2. On the Recruitment Efforts form (Section 8), the committee will indicate all proposed
recruitment methods:
•Where the position will be advertised, e.g., the Chronicle, other newspapers,
professional journals and meetings, the Internet
•Other contacts, e.g., letters to Presidents/Chancellors, Deans, Directors, Alumni, etc.
3. On the Position Vacancy form, the committee will indicate the:
•Name(s) of publications where ad(s) will be placed
•Description of position
•Application deadline date (four weeks from the print date of the ad for a
national/regional search and two weeks for a local search). Note: local search would
include La Crosse and/or Winona areas.
•Application procedure: specifying the contents of a complete application and
directions for submission of application (name, address, telephone, fax, email of
committee chair or person designated to accept applications)
•UW-L AA/EEO and special accommodation statement
4. The chair of the committee will work with UW-L Advancement & External Relations
regarding the wording and placement of advertisements.
5. Upon receipt of a written application, the department will assign a candidate number to
the application, and send the applicant an acknowledgment letter, accompanied by an
EEO form (furnished by the AA Office, with the candidate number added by the search
contact person) and a Request for Confidentiality form.
SCREENING
1. Each committee member shall review all complete candidate files.
2. The committee shall use the previously approved selection criteria to develop a pool of
acceptable applicants.
3. After complete discussion of each candidate’s credentials and application materials, the
committee shall vote to (a) interview or (b) remove from further consideration. Identify
appropriate “reason code”, (see list of codes on reverse side of Applicant/Interview List
form). Candidates determined to be unqualified for the position and not retained (tier 3
candidates), will be notified in writing that they are no longer under consideration and
thanked for their interest.
4. After the assistant to the chancellor for affirmative action and diversity approves
candidates for interview, via E-mail, with a copy to Human Resources, the chair shall
contact each approved candidate to schedule a campus interview.
5. Personal interviews will be conducted with legal and identical/similar questions asked of
each candidate, as indicated on the UW-L Academic Staff/Administrative Recruitment
Materials websites: Guidelines on Interview Questions http://perth.uwlax.edu/hr/interview_guidelines.htm, and Organizing and Conducting an
Interview Guidelines
http://perth.uwlax.edu/hr/Academic%20Recruitment/Interview%20Questions.htm.
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
17
6. After gathering information, interviewing, etc., committee members shall vote on the
finalists, one at a time. A two-thirds majority vote of the committee present is required to
move the finalist to the recommendation to hire.
RECOMMENDATION TO HIRE
1. The committee shall deliver its recommendation(s) to hire, with supporting information,
to the department chair, who will notify the Dean. The Dean shall request the
authorization/approval of the Assistant to the Chancellor for Affirmative Action and
Diversity to extend an offer. This communication is to be made via E-mail, with a copy to
recruit@uwlax.edu. More than one candidate may be approved to reduce delay if
first/second candidate decline offer.
2. If the candidate accepts the offered position, the Personnel Action form (back of the pink
sheet) shall be completed and forwarded to the Human Resources Office, along with
materials from the candidate’s file that are needed to draft the contract letter and create
the candidate’s personnel file.
3. After selection has been assured, the chair will notify in writing all remaining candidates
who have been determined qualified for the position, but not selected at this time. The
letter will state that the current vacancy has been filled, but that the candidate will be
considered for future vacancies, and will remain in the recruitment pool until such pool
expires (two years from the date the recruitment pool was approved).
4. The chair will prepare final committee materials and is responsible for the archiving or
other disposition of committee records as required by the Office of Human Resources.
(cf. Academic Staff Policies and Procedures UWS 10.01-10.05, and UWL 10-.01-10.05).
3. Annual Review and Faculty Merit Evaluations
A. Evaluation process and criteria
a. Procedure for Determining Faculty Merit Pay Increases
Merit pay increases are based on the performance of faculty members in three aspects of
their work responsibilities: 1) teaching, 2) scholarly activity, and 3) service. The procedures for
ascertaining and evaluating meritorious work each year involve student evaluation of instruction
and self-reporting other activities, including review and analysis of this information by the
department's Peer Review Committee. As detailed below, the Peer Review Committee reports a
rank order of merit scores to the department without names of faculty associated with such
scores, and the department as a whole (without participation of Peer Review Committee
members) determines the number of merit categories (from the four merit categories:
exceptional, significant, merit, no merit), the cut-off points between categories, and the pay
differential between categories.
b. Peer Review Committee and Collection of Information
At the beginning of each academic year, the department creates a Peer Review
Committee. At the end of each academic year this committee distributes to each faculty member
a "Merit Self-Rating Form" for the calendar year utilized in the merit evaluation. The Merit Selfrating Form (Appendix A) solicits information on work performance in teaching, scholarship,
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
18
and service, and provides criteria for rating each activity. In early Fall of each academic year, the
Peer Review Committee reviews the completed Merit Self-Rating Forms to insure that similar
activities reported by various faculty members are awarded equal merit, and to insure appropriate
documentation is provided when necessary. Faculty members who do not complete forms are
treated as not meritorious.
Faculty that are on sabbatical leave for two semesters are placed in the merit category
“On Sabbatical”. In the event that merit pay is to be assigned in the same year that an individual
is on sabbatical for the full year, then they are automatically assigned the rank they achieved the
previous year. (Added 12/6/2005)
c. Merit ranking calculation
After reviewing the merit self-rating forms, faculty member are ranked by the
Merit/Peer Review Committee on teaching, scholarship and service according to the following
formula:
d. Merit distribution
Funds from the pool of money available for distribution for merit pay increases are then
distributed according to the following formula (this formula will differ depending on the number
of merit categories awarded in a given year; example provided assumes three merit categories):
aX + b (X + Y) + c (X + 2Y) = merit fund to be distributed
where:
a = number of faculty members in lowest meritorious category
b = number of faculty members in next highest meritorious category
c = number of faculty members in highest (of three, in this example)
meritorious category
X = mean merit salary increase for those in lowest meritorious category
Y = merit pay differential between meritorious categories
Separate merit pay calculations are carried out for each academic rank, with pool to be
distributed determined by faculty in each rank.
(cf. Faculty Personnel Rules UWS 3.05-3L11 and UWL 3.08; and UW-L Employee Handbook)
4. Probationary Faculty Retention and Tenure Recommendation Policy
A. Review process for probationary faculty
a. Faculty Mentoring
During the first academic year of employment in the department, each probationary
faculty member in consultation with departmental colleagues are encouraged to obtain up to
three mentors within the department (if desired, one each focusing on teaching, scholarly
activity, and professional and community service). Each probationary faculty member is
encouraged to obtain a mentor from among faculty members outside the department; the
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
19
department chair will assist in the process of identifying possible external mentors (if desired).
Mentors are to serve as accurate sources of information and perspective on policies and practices
in the department and university, but are not to be held responsible for the performance of the
probationary faculty member(s) with whom they have a mentoring relationship.
It is the intent of the members of the Sociology-Archaeology Department to facilitate the
professional development of nontenured faculty members during their probationary period, while
at the same time maintaining the highest possible standards of excellence in education, scholarly
activity and service. Departmental policy for reviewing the performance of probationary faculty
members emphasizes:
a) Collaboration and open communication between nontenured faculty
b) Members and the department's Retention Committee or designated representatives;
c) A constructive and formative process of setting goals, obtaining and utilizing evidence of
performance, and identifying strengths and areas needing improvement; and
d) Adequate record-keeping to benefit all parties.
b. Retention and Tenure Recommendation Policy
During the first semester of employment in the department, each probationary faculty
member will develop an Individual Professional Development Plan. This plan will indicate the
probationary faculty member's realistic intentions concerning pertinent professional activity for
the upcoming two years, categorized by a) teaching, b) scholarly activity, c) professional and
public service, and d) university service. This plan should include specific statements of intent
and/or more general plans for teaching, scholarship and/or service. [For assistance in developing
this Individual Professional Development Plan, a copy of the department's promotion policy and
a copy of the Merit Evaluation instrument used in conjunction with merit pay determinations are
attached.]
Prior to each retention decision (usually in early November of each year), the Retention
Committee, consisting of all tenured faculty, will review the performance record of the
probationary faculty member in relation to his or her Individual Professional Development Plan.
Only tenured faculty are eligible to vote on retention decisions. A written record of the
conclusions reached by the Retention Committee will be made available to the probationary
faculty member and be placed in his or her personnel file and will also be forwarded to the Dean
of CLS as required by University policy. The Retention Committee will base its recommendation
in large part on the probationary faculty member's performance relative to his or her plan, taking
into account the quality of that plan as well as the probationary faculty member's contributions to
the department as a colleague.
The Individual Professional Development Plan will be reviewed and revised annually by
the probationary faculty member in light of professional decisions, feedback from the Retention
Committee and in consultation with mentors. Each year this revised Professional Development
Plan will be resubmitted by the probationary faculty member to the Department Chair by
September 15th along with a brief rationale for any changes from the preceding plan.
c. Reconsideration
Anyone wishing to appeal a Department retention or tenure decision is required to submit
a written petition to the chairperson of the Department carefully detailing the basis on which this
appeal is being made. This appeal must be filed with the chairperson within two weeks of the
notification of the contested retention/ tenure decision. The Department will then hold a special
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
20
closed session hearing to review all evidence pertinent to this petition in the presence of the
appellant. Subsequent to this hearing of the facts the Department will dismiss the appellant from
the hearing room chambers and will render its final decision on the appeal.
(cf. Faculty Personnel Rules UWS 3.06-3.11 and UWL 3.06-3.08; and UW-L Employee
Handbook)
5. Academic Staff Teaching Reappointments
Academic staff teaching reappointments are made following the same procedures as
previously described under “Academic Staff Hiring Appointments” with the one addition being
that the instructor’s prior year teaching record be evaluated by the Department and weighed
heavily in the deliberations over reappointment. All instructional academic staff are required to
administer the Department’s standard “student evaluation of instruction” forms (See Appendix
??) every semester and to have an observational classroom teaching visit performed by at least
one member of the faculty every year with a written evaluation of this classroom observation to
be filed with the chair. A copy of this evaluation will be given to the instructor being evaluated.
Faculty members will perform these peer evaluations of teaching of instructional academic staff
in alphabetical order beginning with one randomly chosen Department faculty member. (Queue
will be posted with the Annual Departmental Committee Assignment Sheet)
(cf. Academic Staff Policies and Procedures UWS 10.03-10.05 and UWL 10.3 and 10.4; and
UW-L Employee Handbook)
6. Post-Tenure Review of Faculty
The Post-tenure Review and Development Policy of the Sociology Archaeology
Department follows UW-System and UW-La Crosse policy guidelines and builds upon the
Mission of the university and goals of the department.
A departmental Post-tenure Review Committee will be constituted and charged with
implementing the university's policy aimed at contributing to the continuation of faculty
members' growth and development. This committee will be made up of three tenured faculty
members in the department. Only tenured department members are eligible to serve on the Posttenure Review Committees. Assignments will be made for one year by random selection, with
committee membership determined for the up-coming five academic years.
Faculty members will be reviewed in order of seniority, with most senior department
members being reviewed first.
The department will review cumulative faculty performance over a five year period in the
areas of teaching, scholarship and service. Satisfactory performance requirements for each of
these areas are specified below.
Teaching
•
Teaching a full-load (12 credits) except where exempted by Department and
University policy and
•
Participating in course and curriculum review and development and
•
Advising students as directed by Department policy and
•
Participation in student evaluation of instruction.
Recommended:
•
University Outreach programs and/or
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
21
Kim Vogt! 4/1/08 12:02 AM
Comment: Dept. should review these guidelines
for currency
•
•
•
•
•
Graduate student committees and/or
Special lectures and/or
Supervision of Readings and Research Projects and/or
Supervision of internships and/or
Directing Honor's Projects
Scholarly Activity
•
Grant supported research and/or
•
Non-funded research and/or
•
Scholarly and creative publications (e.g., books, monographs, journal articles,
chapters, poetry, short stories, etc.) and/or
•
Unpublished research reports and/or
•
Published reviews and/or
•
Affiliation with research centers/organizations and/or
•
Membership in scholarly/professional organizations and/or
•
Attendance at professional/scholarly conferences or institutes and/or
•
Presenting papers, organizing programs or sessions, serving as discussant and/or
•
Ongoing professional education/continued study and/or
•
Conducting and/or participating in workshops and/or
•
Other activities clearly indicating that the individual is acquiring and advancing
knowledge relevant to the department's mission
Service
•
Professional consultant or advisor to boards, committees, commissions, task
forces, community organizations and governmental agencies businesses and/or
•
Social service to boards, committees, commissions, institutes, task forces,
community agencies organizations and/or
•
Office holding in professional associations and/or
•
Editorial service to professional associations/organizations and/or
•
Evaluating manuscripts for publications and/or
•
Writing guest editorials and granting media interviews and/or
•
Public speaking and/or
•
University and departmental committees and/or
•
Chairperson on boards, commissions, task forces, projects and/or special
assignments in the university or university system
If a significant performance deficiency is identified, the procedures specified in the UWLa Crosse Post-tenure Review and Development policy will be followed. In addition, any
performance weaknesses identified by the Post-tenure Review Committee that fall short of a
performance deficiency, as defined in this document, will be privately communicated to the
faculty person under review without any written record of such being made. The Post-tenure
Review Committee will send a letter copy of its evaluation results to the Faculty members under
review, to the Dean of CLS, and to the Department Chair. (Added 2/1/2000)
(cf. UW-L Employee Handbook)
7. Promotion Recommendations
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
22
A. Review process
Before the end of Spring semester, lists of faculty who will meet the minimum University
eligibility requirements for promotion in the coming academic year are distributed to department
chairs. At this time, the department chair will notify in writing faculty members who are eligible
for promotion and make available departmental regulations on promotion, of the provisions of
the Wisconsin Open Meetings Law, and of the date of the Departmental promotion consideration
meeting (at least 20 days in advance).
A separate Promotion Committee will be nominated by the department Executive
Committee for each promotion candidate and approved by the Department as a whole. It is
possible that one faculty person might serve on more than one promotion committee. Faculty
who are eligible, and wish to be considered, for promotion must submit a completed Faculty
Promotion Evaluation Report form using the electronic portfolio process (Digital Measures) to
the appointed Promotion Committee at least ten days prior to the scheduled date of the
Departmental promotion consideration meeting. The Department Promotion Committee shall be
newly constituted at the start of the Fall semester each year and will consist of a minimum of
three tenure-track or tenured faculty at least one of whom is tenured. There is no maximum
number of faculty who may volunteer to serve on the Department Promotion Committee except
that membership is restricted to all tenure-track or tenured faculty. Furthermore, faculty who are
currently serving on the University Joint Promotion Committee are not eligible to serve on the
Department Promotion Committee concurrently. The Department Promotion Committee is the
body that will conduct the initial review of the promotion candidate’s qualifications and shall
make promotion recommendations to the Department as a whole. The department chair will
make the promotion materials and the candidate’s student evaluation information available for
review by all faculty eligible to vote on the promotion question at least seven days in advance of
the Departmental promotion consideration meeting. The promotion candidate may submit
additional written materials or make an oral presentation at the Departmental promotion
consideration meeting prior to the start of the promotion deliberations. The requirements of the
Wisconsin Open Meeting law shall apply to this meeting.
After hearing a report from the Promotion Committee and having a discussion of a
candidate’s performance with respect to the criteria specified in section b) below, votes will be
cast by signed paper ballots on a separate motion to promote for each candidate. Voting
eligibility in all promotion considerations shall be restricted to only faculty of the same or higher
academic rank as the promotion rank, which the candidate is seeking. Specifically, this means
that all associate and full professors are eligible to vote for faculty seeking promotion to
Associate Professor and only Full Professors are eligible to vote on promotion recommendations
to Full Professor. At least a two-thirds majority is necessary for a positive promotion
recommendation. The results of the vote will be recorded and entered in the appropriate portion
of the Faculty Promotion Evaluation Report form.
Within two days of the promotion consideration meeting, the department chair will orally
notify each candidate of the Department’s recommendation. For positive recommendations, the
Promotion Committee will write the Faculty Promotion Evaluation Report. The Department
Chair may also include a separate letter to provide further clarification of candidate materials.
All materials are uploaded to the E-Portfolio system and a report is drawn. The report is then
electronically forwarded to the Dean for review. A copy of this letter will be provided to the
candidate at least one day prior to the submission of the promotion file to the dean.
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
23
B. Promotion criteria
To be considered for promotion to a higher rank, faculty must meet the minimum
University criteria as stated in the UW-L Faculty Handbook (available at the Human Resources
Website). For the rank of Associate Professor a candidate must provide evidence of teaching
excellence and the establishment of a program of scholarship. Evidence of teaching excellence
will include the results of self, peer and student evaluation of instruction. Scholarship will be
consistent with the department’s definition of scholarly activity (See Appendix ??). To be
promoted to the rank of Professor, a faculty member must show evidence of continued
excellence in teaching, significant scholarly productivity and substantial service activity.
Continued teaching excellence is measured by the results of self, peer and student evaluations.
Significant scholarly productivity is judged by the quality and quantity of presentations,
publications and grant acquisitions. Substantial service activity will include service to the
department, the institution, and the profession
C. Reconsideration
Candidates who are not recommended for promotion may request the reasons for the nonpromotion recommendation. This request must be submitted in writing to the department chair
within seven days of the notice of the Department’s recommendation. Within two weeks of
receiving the written reasons, a candidate may request, by writing to the department chair,
reconsideration by the Department. The faculty member will be allowed an opportunity to
respond to the written reasons using written or oral evidence and witnesses at the reconsideration
meeting. Written notice of the reconsideration decision will be forwarded to the dean within
seven days of the reconsideration meeting.
(cf. UW-L Employee Handbook)
8. Peer Review of Teaching
All probationary faculty are required to undergo a minimum of one “peer classroom
evaluation of instruction” per academic year. These peer classroom evaluators will be assigned
by the department chair from a randomly generated queue of all tenured faculty within the
department. The class period to be attended and peer-evaluated will be decided by mutual
consent between the probationary and the tenured faculty members involved. All peer
evaluations will be recorded on the standard department form designed for this purpose and a
copy of this peer classroom evaluation will be provided to the College Dean in the retention
portfolio. This peer classroom evaluation will become part of the probationary faculty’s
permanent file and will be consulted, as appropriate, for retention and promotion considerations.
All tenured faculty are also required to conduct annual peer evaluations of classroom
teaching. However, tenured faculty may select from any of the five different classroom
evaluation formats described below. All members of the Department will be responsible for
selecting and organizing their own Peer Review Panel. Which of these formats is employed in a
given year is at the discretion of the tenured faculty being reviewed. These peer assessments are
intended to be formative and are intended for the purpose of course enrichment.
The faculty member being assessed will select a two-member faculty review panel, and
present successful and unsuccessful pedagogical techniques utilized in the range of courses
offered. The presentation will be followed by a peer panel discussion and a written summary
submitted to the faculty being evaluated. All faculty members are expected to participate
annually in the Systematic Performance Evaluation of Faculty, both as the subject assessment
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
24
and as an evaluator for other Department faculty. The Systematic Performance is not within the
purview of functions of the Department’s Peer Review Committee. Copies of written reports of
peer review of teaching are to be filed with the Department Chair by the end of the academic
year.
1. Video/audio recording of the instructor’s classroom dynamics, be evaluated by a twomember peer review panel. The Peer Review Panel will meet with the faculty member
being evaluated prior to the recording session to decide the faculty member’s intentions
and expectations for the session outcome. A written summary of the assessment will be
submitted to the faculty member being evaluated.
2. Classroom visitation by a selected faculty review member(s). The Peer Review Panel will
meet with the faculty member being evaluated prior to the visitation to determine the
faculty member’s intentions and expectations for the class session outcome. The Faculty
Review members will then submit a written summary of the observed class session.
3. Peer Faculty (two member team) interviews, or video/audio recording of some of the
instructor’s students, to be held at a session open to all interested students. A written
summary reflecting the prevailing attitudes of the students interviewed (or taped) will be
submitted by the review panel to the faculty being evaluated.
4. A round-robin discussion/assessment of teaching and classroom dynamics by three
faculty members - two peer evaluators and one instructor. Roles will be rotated until all
three instructors have been evaluated. A written summary of the assessment will be
submitted to the faculty member being evaluated.
9. Course Numbering Policy (11/1995)
100 Level Courses. Sociology, Archaeology and Anthropology courses at the 100 level
entail an overview of the respective disciplines including a basic conceptual framework suitable
for general education courses. Course formats may include lecture, small group discussion and/or
student projects. A goal at this level is to stimulate a fundamental awareness of the scientific
evaluation of human social and cultural systems. Course work may consist of lectures, readings
and the completion of exercises and/or projects. The evaluation of student performance may
include objective examinations and/or applications. There are no pre-requisites for 100 level
courses.
200 Level Courses. 200 level courses in the Department follow a predominantly lecture
format design and may be supplemented with a substantial component of structured small
group discussion. These are designed to develop such student skills as acquiring a professional
vocabulary and perspective. Course formats may include lectures, readings, and written work
[short papers, book reviews, etc.]. The evaluation of student performance is usually based on
examinations, exercises and other forms of written work. Level 200 courses may or may not
specify a pre-requisite, depending on the nature of the course.
300 Level Courses. Courses at the 300 level emphasize the conceptual and theoretical
development of the subject matter. This level focuses on more in-depth analysis of specialized
areas of the discipline. The 300 level may also include an introduction to the development of
research skills and some courses deal exclusively with research techniques and the development
of evaluation and analytical skills. Course formats stress lecture, student presentations and class
discussion. Substantial written work of some variety is generally required and there is the
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
25
expectation of heightened professional commitment on the part of students. Level 300 courses
normally require at least three credits of previous work in the appropriate field. Evaluation of
student performance includes objective exams and/or integrative essays and/or class
presentations.
400 Level Courses. 400 level courses emphasize the ability to apply the subject matter of
the discipline to concrete situations and the development of problem-solving skills. Students are
encouraged to develop a professional commitment and engage in supervised activities involving
the production of professional knowledge. Course formats include lecture and research skill
application [as in internship, thesis and/or supervised original research]. The grading base
stresses demonstration of the ability to independently contribute to the growth of professional
knowledge as may be demonstrated by the production of a thesis, applied work, internships
and/or guided independent research. 400 level courses are normally expected to require at least 6
credits of previous work in the appropriate field.
400/600 ‘Slash’ Courses. Graduate courses at the 600 level stress academic and research
endeavors included and exceeding expectations of undergraduates. In addition to meeting the
course requirements for undergraduates, graduates at the 600 level are expected to demonstrate
creative contribution to professional knowledge as may be displayed by the conduct of original
research and its presentation in oral and/or written form.
10. Procedures for Scheduling Classes (Adopted 4/4/2006) Revised 02/05/08
Scheduling of classes will occur in the last two weeks of the semester two semesters
ahead of the schedule being developed (e.g. in Spring 2006 for Spring 2007). The department
ADA places a call for requests from faculty for large lecture classrooms/ computer labs as early
as is necessary.
1. The queue and timeslot forms are prepared by the ADA in consultation with the Chair.
2. The department Chairperson is at the top the scheduling queue so that the Chair’s
schedule does not conflict with required meeting times (e.g., Chair’s Council).
3. Faculty move up through the queue in groups of three to ensure that people are near the
top of the queue roughly one semester every other year. The top three individuals move
to the bottom of the queue for the next semester.
4. Newly hired tenured/tenure-track faculty or academic staff start at the bottom of the
queue.
5. Adjunct academic staff sign up in each individual sign-up round in the same place in the
queue as the faculty member they are replacing.
6. In all scheduling rounds, Arc/Ant has preference in using room 311, Ant/Arc has
preference in using room 338 and Soc has preference in using room 340.
7. Scheduling occurs in four rounds, rotating through the faculty queue:
1st round, Lab course sign-up for courses needing one of our designated rooms (311/340
CWH) (Currently Ant 102, Arc 332, Arc 499, Soc 416) and/or computer classrooms
(currently Soc 250, Soc 350, Soc 405, Arc 445); 2nd round, Large lecture halls that we
have control over (used the previous fall/spring); 3rd round, University Core Curriculum
courses and other courses with two sections that are being taught instead of University
Core Curriculum courses; 4th round, upper division courses.
8. Lab classes that need a particular classroom that we are in control of such as ANT 102
are scheduled first so that all labs can be held in the appropriate room. Any related/linked
lecture is also scheduled at this time to avoid time/day conflicts. If multiple faculty are
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
26
teaching lab courses, time/day preferences are handled according to the faculty member’s
place in the queue.
9. Lab classes that need computer classrooms are scheduled as soon as requests for
computer rooms are allowed. Any related/linked lecture is also scheduled at this time to
avoid time/day conflicts. If multiple faculty are teaching a computer lab course, time/day
preferences are handled according to the faculty member’s place in the queue (e.g. Soc
250, Soc 350, Arc 445).
10. Faculty that are interested in teaching “double” sections of a class must request a large
lecture classroom, if necessary. A large lecture will typically have a capacity set at an
additional 10 students (currently 90 total) over the traditional lower division general
education section maximum of 40 students per section.
11. If multiple faculty request to teach double sections, time/day preferences are handled
according to the faculty member’s place in the queue. The chair, in conjunction with the
Executive Committee, may restrict a faculty member from offering a double section if the
instructor has historically had difficulty meeting the student credit hour (SCH) objective
for that double section. With the exception of lab classes, SCH targets for double sections
will be adjusted based on the nature of the class to be taught.
11. Student-Related Policies
A. Advising
Each student majoring in either Sociology or Archaeological Studies will be assigned a
faculty advisor appropriate to that student’s major preference. Student requests for a particular
faculty member advisor will generally be honored whenever it is feasible to do so. Students are
expected to meet with their faculty advisor at least once each semester to discuss their academic
progress, career interests, and course schedule. Faculty are expected to keep their posted office
hours throughout the academic semester and are recommended to expand these hours during the
times that students are scheduled for course registration.
B. Student course evaluations (Revised 11/6/2007)
The Department requires that each faculty member administer the standardized student
evaluation of instruction form during at least one semester (Spring or Fall) of each academic year
for at least three sections. SEI’s will be administered during the 12th or 13th week of the semester.
The instructor is responsible for finding another person to administer the SEI’s. All instructors
are expected to assist their colleagues in the administration of SEIs. The instructor and any
teaching assistants shall not participate in the administration of student evaluations of instruction.
Neither shall distribute the SEI forms, be present in the room when the forms are completed, or
collect the forms. Under no circumstances may any student who misses (for whatever reason) the
designated course evaluation period be permitted to add his/her personal evaluation form to the
collective body of forms being used for peer evaluation purposes. Only SEI scores that have a
minimum of ten evaluators may be submitted for peer review.
Under no circumstances may summer session courses or off-campus courses be used for
purposes of peer review (instructors may want to administer course evaluations in these courses
for their own benefit).
C. Course grade appeals
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
27
A student who strongly feels his or her semester grade in a course taught by the
department is demonstrably improper or that the grading was prejudicial or capricious, should
first confer promptly with the instructor[s] of the course.
If the student and the instructor[s] are unable to arrive at a mutually agreeable solution,
the student may appeal the case, within one month after the start of the next semester1, according
to the following procedure:
The student will submit a written statement to the department Chairperson, setting forth
his/her reasons for seeking an appeal and presenting any supporting evidence he/she may have.
The Chair will then give a copy of this grade grievance to the instructor who is the object of this
complaint. The Chair will request that the instructor make a written reply to these allegations.
The student’s written grievance along with the instructor’s written reply to that grievance will
then be forwarded to the grade Appeals Committee after it has been constituted. (Amended
2/20/2001)
The Chairperson will then appoint a three-member ad hoc Appeals Committee to review
this appeal. The members of this committee will be randomly selected from the Department
excluding the instructor[s] teaching the course in which the appeal has been made.
This committee will meet to review the student's appeal within one week of its selection.
If the committee feels that further review is warranted it is strongly encouraged to meet with the
student and, if necessary, to also meet separately with the instructor.
A written decision will be sent to the student by the Appeals Committee. Reasons for the
decision will be included in this letter.
Stipulations:
1. The decision of the Appeals Committee is held to be advisory.
2. The Appeals Committee may report a faculty member who has failed to comply with its
recommendation to the full faculty and request a review.
3. Any faculty member who feels that her/his Appeals Committee has made an unfounded
or biased decision may make such a charge before the full faculty. In the event of such a
charge the committee in question will be required to defend its recommendation before
the full faculty. The department as a whole will then make its recommendation.
4. A student may appeal either an Appeals Committee decision or an instructor's refusal to
abide by the Committee decision to the full department, should he/she elect to do so. In
such an eventuality the Department may elect to hold the hearing in a closed session at its
discretion. The student will be invited to present his/her case before the department at the
department's discretion. Any review must be based solely upon material supplied by the
student to the original Appeals Committee.
5. The decision of the faculty of the Department of Sociology/Archaeology will constitute
the final level of grade appeals within the Departmental jurisdiction. This decision, not
unlike the decision of the Appeals Committee, is also held to be advisory to the faculty
member whose grade is being appealed.
D. Incomplete grades
As a matter of University policy, grades of “Incomplete” are issued to students strictly on
the basis of illness or other unusual causes beyond the student’s control, which have rendered the
1
For the purposes of student appeal the ‘next semester’ applies to Fall, Spring, and Summer Sessions, whichever
follows immediately the semester for which the student grade was received.
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
28
student unable to take the course final exam or to complete some limited amount of coursework.
Incompletes are not to be granted to students who have failed to complete at least some
substantial portion of the required coursework regardless of the reasons. Furthermore, conflicting
student work obligations outside the University do not constitute acceptable grounds for granting
grades of incomplete.
E. Sociology Honors program
The Department offers an Honors Program for Sociology majors as stipulated below.
Students may be encouraged to apply to this Program by the faculty but it is ultimately the
responsibility of the student to express her or his interest in participating in this Program to a
Department faculty member.
1. Admission Requirements
a) Junior Standing
b) Twelve (12) credits in the major
c) A 3.50 cumulative grade point average in the major
d) A 3.25 cumulative grade point average overall
e) Recommendation of two (2) faculty members in the major submitted to the Chair
2. Program Requirements
a) Completion of the regular major program
b) Sociology 410, “Sociology Honors Project” [inclusive of an oral presentation of the
Honors project]
3. Evaluation
a) A grade point average of 3.50 in the major at graduation
b) A grade of “B or higher” in Sociology 410.
F. Non-grade appeals
Non-grade appeals may be lodged by students regarding faculty and staff. Such
complaints should be lodged either orally or in writing with the Department chair or College
dean. The hearing procedure for these non-grade concerns are detailed in the Student Handbook,
Eagle Eye (available on-line).
G. Credit-by-exam course options
XXXXXX Deleted our previously outdated directions for Soc 200
Students are entitled to the opportunity to “test out” of all University Core Curriculum
courses upon request. The specific credit-by-exam is designed to allow the student to
demonstrate the Student’s mastery of the student learning outcomes associated with the course.
Students must score a 75% in order to pass the exam. There is a fee for the administration of the
exam (currently $10). The fee must be paid to the UW-L Cashier’s Office before taking the
exam. Students wishing to take an exam must bring along a receipt from the Cashier’s Office at
the time of the exam.
H. Academic misconduct
Academic dishonesty, sometimes known as “cheating”, is subject to appropriate
punishment as a matter of UW System policy. This is not something to be taken lightly or
ignored as such action works to demean the integrity of the hard-earned grades of all students,
the vast majority of whom never cheat. To ignore “cheating” is to foster it and thereby
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
29
constitutes a dereliction of professional obligation. Appendix ??. clarifies the UW System policy
on “academic misconduct” as it specifically applied to this campus. The Department follows this
policy.
12. Academic Program Assessment
Students in the Sociology Program and Archaeological Studies Program are assessed
based on Student Learning Outcomes developed in each program (See Appendix XXX).
A. Sociology majors (Revised 4/27/2007)
a. Membership and Service
All members of the Sociology Section perform two years of service on the Sociology
Program Assessment Committee: This is not 'voluntary' service but a departmental requirement
(Adopted Spring 1996). The 'queue' for service on this committee is posted in Room 435.
The committee is composed of alternating members, such that as two members complete
their service two new members are added from the 'queue.' The purpose of this system is to
assure that there will always be two 'experienced' members on the committee.
The chair of the committee will be elected from the two second year members of the
committee.
b. Assessment Procedures and Time-Table
The assessment of the sociology program will include three major components: content
analysis, senior options assessment exam, and senior exit survey.
c. Content Analysis
The content analysis component consists of evaluating papers from students enrolled in a
Sociology Senior Options course to determine if the papers contain components that reflect
achieving the goals of the Sociology Program.2 All student papers written in partial fulfillment
of the requirements of the Senior Options Courses are the base for this analysis. Sociology
Senior Options courses include Sociology 405 [Quantitative Sociological Research] and
Sociology 416 [Qualitative Explorations]. A copy of the final paper, with the student’s name
removed will be collected at the end of each semester and a sample of 40 papers will be
evaluated once every three years.
All instructors teaching a senior options course must place copies of the papers for
committee assessment evaluation in the file cabinet in Room 435. This must be done no later
than the last week of the Semester.3 Papers should not have any identifying information.
Retaining these papers is NOT an instructor's option but a requirement of the department.
At the time of evaluation (i.e. every three years) the Chair of the Program Assessment
Committee will randomly distribute ten papers to each member of the committee for evaluation.
2
These goals have been adopted by the department and have been modified to exclude goals that could not be
normally found in Senior Option Papers. The goals are attached to this document.
3
In the event that papers are not due until Finals Week, the instructor will submit the papers to the Chair of said
committee immediately upon completion of grading them.
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
30
Papers will be scored by evaluators on each of the goal dimensions [see attachment] as 'Present,'
'Absent,' or ‘NA’ [Not Applicable]. The evaluator does NOT 'grade' the material; but looks only
for its presence or absence.
The papers and their evaluations are returned to the Chair of the Committee who will
merge the results into a composite. This composite will be presented to the entire committee who
will examine these results as an indicator of the effectiveness in achieving the Sociology
program’s goals.
At this time the committee will also re-evaluate the instrument with suggestions for
changes [to be made on a three-year basis]. These results will be accumulated over a three year
period to allow the collection of a sample size sufficiently large to warrant a report to the
Sociology Section.
Every three years the committee will report its findings of the content analysis to the full
Sociology Section.4 The committee will then institute any changes as suggested from the
Sociology Section.
The committee will retain as a permanent record those recommendations made to and
suggested by the sociology section. The results of the succeeding content analysis will be used in
part to ascertain if any problem(s) and/or strengths have been addressed by the subsequent
assessments. The Assessment Committee will not limit assessments to examining only previous
concerns and/or strengths but will examine the material in order to seek evidence for the future
development of the program.
A copy of these concerns and/or strengths will be filed with the Chair of the Department
as well. Each third year the committee and the Sociology section will review the content analysis
of the assessment process and decide to change, retain or eliminate it.
d. The Senior Options Assessment Exam
Every year the Committee will oversee the collection of data from students in the Senior
Options courses.
All students enrolled in a Senior Options course will be required to take this exam.
Senior Options Course instructors are reminded that administering the exam to enrolled students
is NOT optional but a departmental requirement.
The Senior Options Assessment Exam will be given to all students enrolled in a Senior
Options Course and saved for a three-year period. The purpose of this process is to accumulate a
sufficiently large sample size for statistical analysis.
Analysis of the Senior Option Assessment Exam will be conducted every three years.
This analysis consists of comparing the percentage of correct answers per item in the current
year relative to previous years. Items will be examined individually in order to recommend their
retention, modification, or replacement. The analysis will also examine responses to determine if
poor-performance items seem to be reflective of an area of sociology. The committee can
employ the Goal Statement [appearing in the Handbook as a base for this type of examination].
The Committee Chair will report the findings of the committee - both specific and general
conclusions and its recommendations to the Sociology Section for review, discussion and
Note that the committee can report more often at its discretion. However, it will normally require three [3] years to
accumulate a sufficient sample size to be in possession of an adequate data base to detect notable gaps in goal
attainment.
4
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
31
approval The Sociology Section will adopt such recommendations for action as are deemed
appropriate in the light of assessment findings and their discussion.
Both the findings and recommendations for action will be retained by the Committee
Chair. During the next three-year evaluation, the Committee will seek to determine if any
deficiencies detected in the past have been corrected. This evaluation will be conducted in
addition to the analyses described above [group comparison and item analysis]. The committee
will also look for program strengths as reflected in this assessment.
During the April Section Meeting of each year, the Chair of the Sociology Program
Assessment Committee will distribute a list of the concerns or accolades generated from the
previous Assessment to all Sociology faculty. The purpose of this distribution is to continually
remind faculty of areas of concern and strengths that impact their classroom environment.
The Assessment Process cycle now repeats itself.
e. Senior Exit Survey
Every year the Committee will oversee the collection of data from students in the Senior
Options courses.
All students enrolled in a Senior Options course will be required to complete the survey.
Senior Options Course instructors are reminded that administering the survey to enrolled
students is NOT optional on their part but a departmental requirement.
The Senior Exit Survey will be given to all students enrolled in the Senior Options
Courses and saved for a three-year period. Analysis of the Senior Exit Survey will be conducted
every three years. The survey responses will be entered into SPSS and analyzed. The analysis
consists of finding patterns of student sentiment for the given year as well as changes in those
sentiments from previous years. The Committee Chair will report the findings of the committee both specific and general conclusions and its recommendations to the Sociology Section for
review, discussion and approval.
Members of the Sociology Program Assessment Committee will prepare an annual report
on assessment activities, results/findings, and section actions regarding assessment. The annual
SOCPAC report will be reported to the department and forwarded to the Dean of the College of
Liberal Studies
B. Archaeology majors
Archaeological Studies Program Assessment ARC SECTION Please Revise and add
student learning outcomes
Introduction
The UW-L Archaeological Studies Program employs two instructional approaches. The
first is the traditional classroom emphasis on content, concepts and ideas. The second is the
experiential approach where the student role is more along the line of an apprentice and the
instructor the mentor. This hands-on approach includes both field and laboratory experiences,
which may be included as, part of classes and/or outside of classes. The hands-on approach is
only possible because of the large staff at MVAC who include students in on all aspects of their
research, including coauthoring papers at professional meetings and publications in scientific
journals.
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
32
a. Assessment
The capstone course for the program, and the vehicle that we propose to use as our
official assessment process, is the Senior Thesis (ARC 499). This course, usually taken in the last
semester of the senior year requires that the student combine both of the kinds of skills derived
from the two pedagogical approaches briefly described above. That is, the senior thesis must
show evidence of knowledge of the concepts and the craft of the science.
Since students are encouraged to choose a project in which they can display both their
knowledge of archaeology and their skills in doing archaeology, the quality of the theses can
serve as a reflection of the effectiveness of the educational process. The following describes the
ARC 499 process.
During the semester prior to taking the senior thesis course, students are given a set of
guidelines and an approval form (attached). Students are required to select a topic, discuss the
topic with their thesis advisor, select two faculty readers, and complete the approval form prior
to registering for the course. Usually students will spend time during this semester to gather
background information on their topic either informally or formally by signing up for an
Independent Reading and Research class (ARC 409).
During the semester that the student is enrolled in the ARC 499 he or she meets regularly
with an advisor who works with the students on the project, usually in a collaborative way. At
mid-semester there is a meeting of all participating students and their advisors to discuss topics
and progress. The final product consists of written manuscript of not more than 30 pages in
length and a presentation of the findings at a senior thesis colloquium attended by students and
faculty of the program. The written version is read by the faculty advisor (who has already seen
multiple drafts) and the two faculty readers. These theses provide a much better and more direct
indication of the ability of the program to move students toward both understanding the concepts
and ideas of archaeology and how to apply them than any questionnaire (or other process) that
we know of.
b. Implementation of Formal Assessment
Each year the Archaeological Studies Program will select an Assessment Committee. At
the end of every semester this committee will gather all of that year’s senior theses and review
them. Each of the documents will be evaluated using the assessment review guidelines described
below. The results of this assessment review will then be analyzed, in particular to determine
problem areas and how curricular changes might rectify weaknesses that have been identified.
The committee will then make its report to the Archaeology/Anthropology section describing
weaknesses discovered and proposing curricular improvements for consideration.
c. Assessment review guidelines
ll criteria should be ranked on a 1-5 scale.
1=very strong, 5=very weak, NA= not applicable
Criteria Score
Paper organization and format.
The evaluation of this section is intended primarily on the students writing skills, and also on
their ability to organize scientific information and data.
The Abstract should be one paragraph long and contain a succinct summary of the paper.
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
33
The Introductory section should clearly state research goals and objectives including
research questions and/or hypotheses. The Historical background of the project should be
included.
The Methodology section should clearly describe all procedures used in data collection,
processing, and analysis, and justification as to why they were chosen.
The Results section should describe the data and how the research methods were actually applied
to the data.
The Discussion section should review the data and methods in light of the research
questions/hypotheses.
The Conclusions section should summarize the research and describe the Conclusions
drawn from it in relation to the research. questions/hypotheses
The References Cited section should be complete and follow standard format for
archaeological publications.
Paper content
Shows understanding of scientific method.
Shows understanding of archaeological theory and its application.
Exhibits evidence of utilization of standard archaeological procedures and methods
whether laboratory, field, or analytical procedures. Special attention should be paid to data
collection techniques, sample size, data processing, and data analysis to ensure proper
procedures have been followed.
Does the paper show and understanding of the concept of culture and the relationship
between culture and environment?
Do the papers show an understanding of the basic literature on the topic?
Does the paper demonstrate an understanding of basic archaeological concepts such as
cultural change, classification, analogy, context, association, chronology, research design, ethics,
transformational and behavioral processes, and spatial and temporal analysis?
Do the conclusions show or lead to enhanced understanding of human culture/behavior.
Other (informal) assessment procedures
In addition to the formal means of assessment there is an informal parallel process.
Although this process is probably too informal to count toward the required assessment process it
is very important and helpful to the Archaeology faculty in our assessment of the program. Most
advanced students in the program become directly involved in research work in the field or lab
with archaeology staff. In these kinds of environments it is relatively easy after a short time to
understand whether or not the students understand the concepts and/or techniques. In a situation
where you are working one-on-one with a student over an extended period of time it is difficult
for the student to bluff their way through, as it sometimes is in the classroom. The progress of
theses advanced students is regularly discussed by faculty and staff and provides valuable
feedback on program effectiveness.
In addition, we are able to frequently keep in touch with many of our graduates. In some
cases they are employed by MVAC or continue collaborative work with a staff person here while
in graduate school or professional work elsewhere. This informal communication also provides
good feedback on our program’s strength and weaknesses.
The informal and formal assessment information is now used by faculty to evaluate the
program. For example, the Archaeology Program is currently conducting a search and screen
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
34
process for a new faculty position. On the basis of feedback we received from our graduates we
were able to identify two areas of curricular weakness: Archaeological Method and Theory and
the History of Archaeology. Our position description for this new position specifically focuses
on these two areas as a result of this informal input from our graduates.
13. Miscellaneous Policies
A. Salary equity recommendations
The salary equity policy of the Department of Sociology/Archaeology is intended to be
consistent with and implement the salary equity policy of the university. The three criteria
specified in university policy to be taken into account in making salary equity adjustments are 1)
recent acquisition of Ph.D.; 2) gender or racial inequity; and 3) “inversion” and “compression”.
In addition, salary comparisons (within academic disciplines) with other universities are
informative. The procedures for recommending faculty members of the Department of
Sociology/Archaeology for salary equity adjustments depend on the criterion being utilized.
Equity adjustment should not be made which negate past merit adjustments.
A) Recent Acquisition of Ph.D. If a faculty member acquires the Ph.D. after being hired by
the department, the Department Chair will compare that person’s salary to that of other
members of the department of similar rank, similar years of service and similar record of
merit evaluations, and in consultation with the departmental Executive Committee make
a recommendation to the Dean for an appropriate salary adjustment to equalize that
person’s salary.
B) Gender or Racial Inequity. The Department Chair will make the appropriate salary
comparisons, and if gender or racial inequalities exist that are not accounted for by
records of merit evaluations, years of service or rank, the Department Chair in
consultation with the departmental Executive Committee will make a recommendation to
the Dean for appropriate salary adjustments. Members of the department may request that
the Chair determine if their salary qualifies them for a recommendation for a salary
equity adjustment based on the criterion of gender or racial inequity.
C) Inversion. Inversion exists when a faculty member in the department receives a
significantly lower salary than a departmental colleague with fewer years of credited
service, and that difference is not accounted for by a record of merit evaluation or rank.
Inversion is not automatically or necessarily indicated when a person newly promoted to
a higher rank has a somewhat lower salary than someone with numerous years of
experience at the next lower rank. The Department Chair will annually scrutinize salaries
for inversion, and if any are identified, in consultation with the departmental Executive
Committee, make a recommendation to the Dean for an appropriate salary adjustment to
equalize that person’s salary. Members of the department may request that the Chair
determine if their salary qualifies them for a recommendation for a salary equity
adjustment based on criterion on inversion.
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
35
D) Compression. A faculty member is eligible to be considered for a salary equity
adjustment if his or her salary is lower than comparable salaries at other institutions as
ascertained by comparison with appropriate data sources. For faculty eligible by this
criterion, salary compression will be measured by transforming the departmental
distribution of salaries and years of service into z-scores (rounded to the nearest first
decimal), and subtracting each faculty member’s z-core on years of experience from their
z-score on salary. The greater the negative number, the greater the salary compression.
Years of service within rank will be used as a “tie breaker” for those who are indicated to
be equally compressed. Faculty members will be ranked from most compressed to least
compressed and recommended to the Dean for salary equity adjustments in that order.
The Chair will provide each department member with a matrix showing the data and
calculations on salary compression for the entire department (without names), on which
will be indicated his or her position with regard to salary compression.
B. Intersession policies
a. Instructional Services
The primary purpose of the Intersession (J-term and Summer Terms) is to provide
instructional services. Instructors given Intersession classroom assignments should be those best
qualified to teach the courses offered.
b. Professional Development
The summer period also provides opportunity for further study and professional
development at a time when many instructors are not on regular assignments.
c. The Determination of teaching Assignments
All members of the department who have completed one academic year (August-May) as
a full-time staff member and who will be appointed for the following year, both faculty and
academic staff, are eligible to receive Intersession course assignments, regardless of rank or
earned degrees.
Each eligible member as defined above will receive a priority designation as follows:
1) Priority I. Includes all members of the department who are declared retirees, or who have
completed the first year as a full- time staff member. If multiple new staff members enter
the queue in any given year, they enter the queue by earliest signed contract date.
2) Priority II. Includes all members of the department not included in Priority I who did not
teach in the previous calendar year’s Intersessions.
3) Priority III. All members of the department who taught in the previous calendar year’s
Intersessions.
The Intersession course queues are determined upon a request from the Registrar to
schedule for the upcoming session. In general, January schedules are determined in the spring of
the prior academic year and the summer schedules are determined in the fall.
Intersession course assignments will be made as follows:
1. Each member of the department will inform the chairperson if he or she is available for a
course assignment for Intersession.
2. Persons in Priority I will be ranked with the member who has not taught for the longest
amount of time ranked the highest, and with ties broken by lottery. However, the First
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
36
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Priority persons within this group are those faculty who have declared their intent to
retire imminently.
Any remaining Intersession positions will be filled with Priority II and then Priority III
persons, starting at the top of the Intersession rotation queue.
Starting at the top of the Priority list, faculty who are assigned an Intersession teaching
position will claim a teaching time and course preference.
The Chairperson of the department will automatically receive a one course classroom
assignment for the Intersession if so desired.
Members of the department who are assigned an Intersession but whose course is
canceled due to insufficient enrollment, move to the bottom of the Intersession rotation
queue.
Arc 402, Archaeological Field Methods, will be offered each summer session. Arc 402
teaching is not counted in the maximum number of courses offered during Intersession by
the Sociology/Archaeology department or in the Intersession rotation queue. (Revised
October 2002)
C. Leaves of absence Executive Committee- Check compliance with university policy
and FMLA
A formal leave of absence without pay is a leave that exceeds 30 calendar days. Formal
leaves require written approval of Human Resources & Diversity and the employing department.
Leave without pay for a complete pay period or up to 30 days requires written approval from the
supervisor and notification to Human Resources & Diversity. Leaves without pay are granted for
illness, care of a child, spouse, or parent with a serious health condition, education, military and
exceptional personal reasons. Maternity/paternity leaves will be granted for birth or adoption of a
child for up to, but not exceeding, six months. Upon request of the employer, maternity leave of
absence may be extended for another period of time, not to exceed six months. For more
information on leaves, contact Human Resources & Diversity and review the appropriate union
contract. The Department may approve a leave of absence request that extends beyond a twelvemonth period only under extraordinary circumstances and then only when the Department
determines that such an extension of the leave of absence is in the Department’s best interests.
D. Travel allocation procedures
The Department strongly encourages and supports faculty travel to conferences,
seminars, and/or other venues for professional enrichment. Faculty are required to submit their
initial requests for travel funds at the earliest possible date to the Department chairperson who
then reviews these requests. The chairperson then allocates whatever sum of money is deemed
appropriate in support of these initial travel request(s), however this amount will not exceed the
budgeted mean allotment per faculty for that academic year (currently this sum is $300). This
allocated sum is then earmarked as the Department contribution by the chairperson and
forwarded to the Dean of CLS who in turn reviews this same travel request form. Following the
travel support priorities indicated on the form and subject to the availability of funds, the Dean
determines how much additional support will be given from the College and notifies the
applicant of the determination via personal letter.
At some later point in the academic year, the Department chairperson assesses how much
travel money remains unallocated and awards such money to any pending travel requests as
deemed appropriate.
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
37
Kim Vogt! 4/1/08 12:02 AM
Comment: Check Compliance with current policy
The criteria employed here for allocating residual travel funds are essentially the same as
those employed by the Dean’s office. So, paper presentations of original research generally have
the highest priority.
E. Workload policies Executive Committee needs to revise this according to the new
university IAS workload policy
The standard full-time teaching workload for tenured, tenure-track, and academic staff
faculty members in the Department of Sociology/Archaeology is twelve credits in both the
Spring and Fall semesters. Summer and interim session teaching is optional. This workload
should involve not more than three different course preparations per semester, unless the faculty
member agrees to exceed this number of course preparations. Variations in this workload
formula are permitted under special circumstances, subject to review by the Department, and the
approval of the Department chairperson.
Kim Vogt! 4/1/08 12:02 AM
Comment: Devise policy
F. Final exams
The Department final exam policy is as follows:
1. Final exams are required to take place as scheduled during the final exam week. The one
accepted variation of this University rule is that instructors may opt to give students the
choice of taking their course final on the last official class day of that semester or during
the officially scheduled exam time [i.e., within the officially designated closure period].
Under any and all circumstances the student must be given the latter option of taking the
final during the closure week.
2. Any exceptions to the afore stated rule must be filed with and approved by the Provost.
3. These exceptions should also be filed with the College Dean.
G. Office Assignment Policy
Order of preference for all vacated faculty offices (excepting Room 435A which is
reserved for the acting chair of the Department) is determined by the simple rule of seniority.
Seniority in this case is measured strictly in terms of initial date of hire at UW-L.
Kim Vogt! 4/1/08 12:02 AM
H. Department Course Staffing Policy (Passed 3/3/1998)
Comment: Clarification needed here- Initial date
of hire into the tenure track position or initial date of
hire at UW-L?
1. No faculty or academic staff should be required to teach more than three different course
preparations in a single semester (which, of course, excludes voluntary overloads).
2. In the general interest of curricular diversity within the Department, no faculty or staff
will be allowed to choose to teach more than two sections of the same course within a
single semester.
3. Exceptions to the preceding two guidelines may be made only with the approval of the
Department Executive Committee.
Kim Vogt! 4/1/08 12:02 AM
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
38
Comment: How is this different from E above?
Executive Committee needs to revise according to
new university IAS policy.
Appendices
Appendix A
Merit evaluation form (Revised AY 2005-06)
MERIT SELF-RATING FORM FOR July 1, 2__ - June 30, 2__
Name
2__- PEER REVIEW
I. TEACHING ACTIVITY
PART 1. SEI SCORE
Weighted SEI Score
Course
A(SEI Score)
B(N of Evaluators)
C(A x B)
1.
2.
3.
D) (Sum Col. C/Sum Col. B) =
Final Weighted SEI Score ________
Part 2. INSTRUCTIONAL ACTIVITIES
Program Development
8
Reorganize existing course (substantive
changes in course)
1-4
Overload course (without pay)
6
Directing or advising undergraduate
research for publication (in-house 1,
outside 2)
1-2
Seminar course/ Teaching excellence
award
5
Course Administrative activity (UCC)
1-2
New Course Prep
4
On going course work (blackboard, web
pages, etc.)
1
Workshop organizer/ Supervise 5+
students
3
Teaching Load Bonus (Awarded by
Committee based on student enrollment)
1-2
Attend a Workshop / Supervise 2,3,4
2
Writing emphasis/ Supervise 1 student
1
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
39
students
Master's Thesis Committee (2 for
member, 3-4 for chair)
2-4
ACTIVITY
Teaching extra course during semester
off-campus or on-line in your field
PTS.
1
SUPPORTING COMMENTS
TOTAL
RESEARCH ACTIVITY
Publish refereed book
8
One Chapter in non-ref. Book/ Editor
Non-ref. Book
Paper presentation (or publication) at
non-ref. Conference (or Journal)
Research grant proposal (proposed(1),
accepted(2) / percentage contribution)
points given after notification of
acceptance or rejection
Book Review
Ongoing research
2
Publish a monograph/ non-ref
7
Editor refereed book
6
One Chapter in refereed book
Service-Oriented Community
Research
Article in refereed journal
Paper presentation at professional
Conference
3
.5-4
4
3
Reprint of previous paper
1
ACTIVITY
PTS.
SUPPORTING COMMENTS
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
2
1-2
1
1
40
TOTAL
SERVICE ACTIVITY
Organize a conference
1-4
Radio/T.V. interviews
Officeholder professional
organization (national, regional,
state)
Director of a professional
organization
Session organizer
Consultant
Discussant
Editor of professional journal (per
year based on level of effort)
7,6,5
(respectively)
Off campus lecture
3
3
Review a manuscript
3
Community-based research (points
based on level of effort)
Participant in professional
workshop/ symposium
Member professional organization
Attend professional conference
Community Organization Board
(in related field)
2-4
2
Senate member (Select either
Member or Officer)
Senate office holder (per year)
Department chair
Budget preparation (per year)
Department (college or university)
representative or committee member
(per year)
Directing or supervision graduate
student research
Department, college, or university
committee chair
Section coordinator
1
1
1-2
Organizing a speaker event
Recruitment activity (authorized)
Attend UW-L Commencement
1
1
.5
ACTIVITY
1-2
1-3
1-2
1-8
PTS.
.51
1-2
4-6
6
2-4
1-3
1-4
4
2
SUPPORTING COMMENTS
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
41
TOTAL
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
42
Appendix B
Standards and Procedures for Promotion
a. Eligibility and Recommendation
1. The Sociology/Archaeology Department accepts the minimum standards of promotion, as
published in the Faculty Handbook, which will be applied in cases of individual
promotion considerations.
2. The Sociology/Archaeology Department holds that the three categories (i.e., (a) teaching,
(b) scholarly activity, (c) professional and public, and university service), by which
promotion is to be evaluated at the university level, be addressed by Departmental
Promotion Committees as equally meritorious, important, and worthy of our acclaim.
Members of the Promotion Committee will review the record and examples of the
relevant work that are submitted by any individual eligible for and seeking promotion,
and compare that work with the specifications of promotion criteria noted below. A
teacher/scholar worthy of promotion can manifest their teaching, scholarship and service
in a variety of ways and combinations of activities. All three categories of activity should
be demonstrated in the individual's work.
3. The Department Promotion Committee will include at least the following activities when
deliberating on candidates.
1) TEACHING:
a) curriculum and course development
b) advising and counseling students
c) University Outreach programs
d) graduate student committees
e) special lectures
f) student evaluation index
g) supervision of Readings and Research projects
h) supervision of Internships
i) other valid indicators of teaching skills
2) SCHOLARLY ACTIVITY:
a) Scholarly Activity is understood as the process of acquiring and advancing knowledge,
and embracing the following:
b) grant supported research
c) non-funded research
d) scholarly and creative publications (e.g., books, monographs, journal articles, chapters,
poetry, short stories, etc.)
e) unpublished reviews
f) published reviews
g) affiliation with research centers/organizations
h) membership in scholarly/professional organizations
i) attendance at professional/scholarly conferences or institutes
j) presenting papers, organizing programs or sessions
k) serving as discussant
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
43
l) ongoing professional education/continued study
m) conducting and/or participating in workshops
n) other activities clearly indicating that the individual is acquiring and advancing
knowledge relevant to the department's mission
3) PROFESSIONAL/PUBLIC SERVICE AND CONTRIBUTION TO THE UNIVERSITY:
a) professional consultant or advisor to boards, committees, commissions, task forces,
community organizations and governmental agencies, businesses
b) social service to boards, committees, commissions, institutes, task forces, community
agencies and organizations
c) office holding in professional associations
d) editorial service to professional associations/organizations
e) evaluating manuscripts for publications
f) writing guest editorials and granting media interviews
g) public speaking
h) other service activities of obvious worth
i) university and/or departmental committees and/or centers
j) chairperson, director and/or leadership activities in the department or the university
k) membership on boards, commissions, task forces, projects and/or special assignments in
the university or university system
l) other contributions of clear value to the university
The Sociology/Archaeology Department will retain procedures for promotion
consideration and recommendation. The department will conform to the guidelines in the Faculty
Handbook. The Promotion Committees will consist of all Assistant Professors, Associate
Professors, and Professors assigned to the department. Committees will meet when called upon
by the chairperson at the request of the Dean. Recommendations for promotion require a
majority (i.e., at least 51%) vote on the committee. The committee will review the activities of
the person under consideration, including evidence submitted by the candidate. Procedures for
notification of the candidate and the Dean are stated in the Faculty Handbook.
Adopted, January 18, 1977
Revised, October 16, 1990
Revised, November 30, 1990
Revised, November 6, 2001
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
44
AppendixC
Student Evaluation of Instruction Form (Revised 11/6/2007)
SOCIOLOGY\ARCHAEOLOGY DEPARTMENT
STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTION
PLEASE do not put your name or student ID/social security number on the scanner sheet, but
DO fill in the instructor's name, department, course number and section number. USE A #2
PENCIL FOR ALL RESPONSES.
This course evaluation is an important means for you to express your view of your
classroom experience. Although we assess the quality of instruction in many ways, we place
great value on student input because of the unique perspective you have on what occurs in the
classroom throughout the semester. Thus you are important partners in the process of making
the course more effective, the instructor more attuned to his or her strengths and weaknesses,
and the university a better place to learn. As such we ask you to treat the process
professionally, seriously, sensitively, and collegially. Carefully consider the questions and
answer truthfully. Your responses are one important factor in decisions affecting the career of
your instructor. Instructors will not have access to course evaluations until after grades have
been posted. We will treat the evaluation forms as the confidential documents that they
are. These general guidelines also should be followed:
1. You should be given a minimum of 10 minutes to complete the evaluation.
2. The instructor, as well as any teaching assistants, should not be present when you are
completing the evaluation.
3. The designated representative should deliver completed evaluations promptly to the
proper office.
Please use the following scale for your responses:
Strongly
Agree
a
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Agree
b
Disagree
c
d
Strongly
Disagree
e
I was looking forward to taking this class.
The instructor was helpful to students.
The instructor was well prepared.
The instructor communicated the subject matter clearly.
I learned a great deal from this instructor.
Overall, this instructor was excellent.
This section is for University Core Curriculum (General Education) Courses ONLY (Ant
101, Ant 102, Ant/Soc 202, Arc 100, Soc 110, Soc 120, Soc 225).
Please use the following scale for your responses:
Far Above
Somewhat
Average
Somewhat
Far Below
Average
Above Average
Amount
Below Average
Average
a
b
c
d
e
7. To what extent did the course stimulate your interest in learning more about the subject?
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
45
8. To what extent did the course help you gain a deeper insight into the subject matter?
9. To what extent has the course provided you with important information and/or skills?
10. To what extent has the course helped you see connections between its subject matter
and the subject matter from other courses?
TURN PAGE OVER
ALL STUDENTS
Please respond to the questions below.
1. Please comment on what your instructor did to make the course worthwhile. Please be as
specific as you can.
2. Please comment on what your instructor might do to improve the course, for the benefit of
future students. Please be as specific as you can.
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
46
Appendix D
Academic Misconduct Policy
Cheating technically refers to “academic misconduct” as defined in UWS 14.03 as an act in
which a student:
1) seeks to claim credit for the work or efforts of another without authorization or citation;
2) uses unauthorized materials or fabricated data in any academic exercise;
3) forges or falsifies academic documents or records;
4) intentionally impedes or damages the academic work of others;
5) engages in conduct aimed at making false representation of a student’s academic
performance; or
6) assists other students in any of these acts.
In its most common forms “cheating” is transparent and obvious to all. It frequently
involves copying answers from another student’s exam or from a crib sheet that is concealed
from the instructor’s view. The purpose of these acts is to get credit for having learned
something that in reality the student has not learned. This type of “cheating” involves deliberate
deception and misrepresentation.
However, there are other types of “cheating” that are less transparent and warrant
clarification. Generally, these types of cheating fall under the broad umbrella of “plagiarism.”
This type of “cheating” is more subtle with the exception of the instance where the student
copies verbatim the work of another and presents it without any citation as one’s own original
work. This case of “cheating” is directly analogous to copying another student’s answers during
an examination. Both involve deliberate deception and misrepresentation.
Regarding the other forms of more subtle “plagiarism,” it would be appropriate for the
instructor to clarify exactly what is expected in terms of citation protocol. This is very important
because what may legitimately be defined as “cheating” in one class may not be so defined in
another. Examples here would involve different footnoting requirements in different courses as
well as different regulations governing student collaboration in fulfilling required coursework. In
short, the instructor has the legitimate right to define exactly what is permitted and what is not
permitted within a particular course but these regulations should be communicated to the
students to whom they will apply as they are by no means uniform across the campus or even
within a single discipline.
In summary, it is probably true that some part of the confusion regarding “cheating” is
the result of different instructors having different standards about which forms of student
collaboration are acceptable. For example, students may be encouraged to work together on takehome assignments or they may be strictly prohibited from doing so just as open-book
examinations may be legitimate in some instances and yet strictly prohibited in others. Which
regulation applies is determined by the instructor and must be clearly communicated to the
students who are obligated to follow these regulations.
What choice does the instructor have about recommending a sanction for an instance of
academic misconduct?
The full range of legitimate sanctions for “academic misconduct” available to the instructor are
provided in UWS 14.04 as follows:
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
47
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
j)
an oral reprimand;
a written reprimand presented only to the student;
an assignment to repeat the work, to e graded on its merits;
a lower or failing grade on the particular assignment or test;
a lower grade in the course;
a failing grade in the course;
removal of the student from the course in progress;
a written reprimand to be included in the student’s disciplinary file;
disciplinary probation; or
suspension or expulsion from the university.
Any one or any combination of these sanctions may be imposed for an incident of
academic misconduct at the discretion of the instructor. However, the sanctions with the asterisk
(“g” through “j” listed above do require a hearing and the Student Affairs Officer is responsible
for convening the academic misconduct hearing in such instances. Students do have the right to
challenge any allegations of “academic dishonesty” made against them and/or the severity of
sanctions recommended by the instructor.
What process must be followed to enforce the aforementioned sanctions against cheating?
Given that UW System policy recognizes a spectrum of academic misconduct sanctions,
an instructor may want to indicate to his or her students the types of sanctions they might
anticipate. One way of dealing with this obligation would be to simply encourage students to
read their Eagle Eye or another would be to include such information in the course syllabus. Of
course, alternate means of communicating this information are also possible.
Whichever penalty an instructor chooses to enforce, it is important to note that “no
disciplinary sanction may be imposed ...unless the instructor promptly informs the student of the
bases for the instructor’s belief that the student has engaged in academic misconduct and
[affords] the student an opportunity to respond” (UWS 14.05). This is basic due process
protection (i.e., the right to confront your accuser).
If after notifying the student of the alleged “academic misconduct,” the instructor desires
to impose a lowered or failing grade in the course (or any more serious sanction), then the
instructor is required to notify the student about this in writing. This written notification must
include the following:
1. a description of the observed misconduct;
2. specification of the sanction the instructor is recommending; and
3. notice of the student’s right to request q hearing before the academic misconduct hearing
committee (the composition of this committee is stipulated in UWS 14.15).
This written notification must be delivered personally or be mailed to the student. In
addition, a copy of the notification must be provided to the campus Student Affairs Officer. Any
questions regarding the implementation of “academic misconduct” proceedings should also be
referred to the Student Affairs Officer.
If the student requests an academic misconduct hearing, he or she must file a written
request within 10 days of the instructor’s written notification. If the student does not request a
hearing within this specified time, the instructor’s recommended sanction(s) will be imposed.
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
48
However, the more serious variety of academic misconduct sanctions (“g” through “j”) always
require a hearing before sanctions are administered.
Whenever a hearing is requested, the Student Affairs Officer will convene the academic
misconduct hearing committee within 10 days and assumes the responsibility of seeing that due
process procedures are followed from this point to the final disposition of the case. Copies of
UWS 14 which enumerate these due process procedures are readily available at the Office of
Student Life, 149 Main Hall. The UW-La Crosse Eagle Eye publication also details the
procedures germane to the pursuance of an “academic misconduct” allegation. Finally, any
questions regarding any aspect of “academic misconduct” policies at UW-L may be referred to
Student Affairs Officer and Assistant Dean of Students.
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
49
APPENDIX E
Sociology Program Student Learning Outcomes
1. Acquiring Core Disciplinary Knowledge
a. Comprehension and use of core sociological concepts
b. Comprehension and use of the major theoretical perspectives in sociology
c. Apply different levels of analysis in explaining social phenomena
d. Demonstrate an ability to identify the importance of differences among groups
regarding cultural and social variables
2. Cultivating Historical and Comparative Analysis Skills
a. Achieving awareness of the historical roots of contemporary social practices and
social problems
b. Demonstrate an awareness of social structural and cultural differences among
world societies
3.
Instilling Quantitative and Qualitative Sociological Research Skills
a. Understanding basic philosophical, ethical and methodological principles
underpinning social science
b. Demonstrating basic qualitative research skills or
c. Demonstrating basic quantitative research skills
d. Showing ability to critically evaluate published research.
4.
Building Strong Communication Skills
a. Being proficient in the use and evaluation of appropriate social science-related
resources, such as library and electronic sources
b. Communicating effectively in written and oral forms as part of required
coursework
c. Writing cogent sociological papers with proper grammar, spelling and ASA-style
citations and references
5.
Promoting the Use and Application of Sociological Skills and Concepts
a. Demonstrate an ability to pursue a graduate career
b. Application of sociological research and analytical skills to private, public and
non-profit agencies
c. Demonstrating intervention skills such as consulting, organizational development,
mediation, administration, supervision, and policy implementation as these skills
are course-relevant, or part of internship experiences.
(REVISED 11/18/03 accepted by the sociology section)
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
50
Archaeological Studies Program Student Learning Outcomes
Sociology and Archaeology Bylaws and Policies 10/15/2008
51