<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body dir="auto">
<br id="lineBreakAtBeginningOfSignature">
<div dir="ltr">FYI<br>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
Begin forwarded message:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr"><b>From:</b> Leslie Ekpe <Leslie.Ekpe@tamuc.edu><br>
<b>Date:</b> November 13, 2024 at 6:01:11 PM GMT+1<br>
<b>To:</b> Julee Walker DMA <Julee.Walker@tamuc.edu>, Carlos Bertulani <carlos.bertulani@tamuc.edu>, Kelly Featherston <Kelly.Featherston@tamuc.edu><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Josephine Durkin <Josephine.Durkin@tamuc.edu>, Zachary Palmer <Zachary.Palmer@tamuc.edu>, Hunkar Gizem Yesilyurt <HunkarGizem.Yesilyurt@tamuc.edu>, Nikolay Sirakov <Nikolay.Sirakov@tamuc.edu>, Yasemin Atinc <Yasemin.Atinc@tamuc.edu>, Stephen Starnes
<Stephen.Starnes@tamuc.edu>, Stephen Furlich <Stephen.Furlich@tamuc.edu>, Brad Klypchak <Brad.Klypchak@tamuc.edu>, Brandon Randolph-Seng <Brandon.Randolph-Seng@tamuc.edu>, Carrie Klypchak <Carrie.Klypchak@tamuc.edu>, Dongmei Cheng <Dongmei.Cheng@tamuc.edu>,
Hongmei Jia <Hongmei.Jia@tamuc.edu>, Jason Davis <Jason.Davis@tamuc.edu>, Jeanette Vaughan <Jeanette.Vaughan@tamuc.edu>, Jimmy Womack <James.Womack@tamuc.edu>, Julia Ballenger <Julia.Ballenger@tamuc.edu>, Maggie Salem <Maggie.Salem@tamuc.edu>, MaryJo Dondlinger
<MaryJo.Dondlinger@tamuc.edu>, Mei Jiang <Mei.Jiang@tamuc.edu>, Omar Elariss <Omar.El.Ariss@tamuc.edu>, Ozum Yesiltas PhD <Ozum.Yesiltas@tamuc.edu>, Rusty Fox <Rusty.Fox@tamuc.edu>, Tami Morton <Tami.Morton@tamuc.edu>, William Kuracina <William.Kuracina@tamuc.edu>,
Adam Northam <Adam.Northam@tamuc.edu>, Avril Knox <Avril.Knox@tamuc.edu><br>
<b>Subject:</b> <b>Re: Revised T&P Policy</b><br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">More comments from HELT: </div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<p style="text-decoration: none; font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-indent: -54pt; margin: 0px 0px 6pt 54pt; line-height: normal; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<span style="font-size:11pt;line-height:1.5">Sec. 2.1 – I do not understand why the rank of “professor” is not included “to be eligible to receive tenure.” Note that Sec. 3.4 discusses the hiring of a professor without tenure upon initial appointment; thus,
a full professor should be listed “as eligible to receive tenure” in Sec. 2.1.</span></p>
<p style="text-decoration: none; font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-indent: -54pt; margin: 0px 0px 6pt 54pt; line-height: normal; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<span style="font-size:11pt;line-height:1.5">Sec. 2.3 – As there are tenured assistant professors at some universities, the first sentence could simply read “Tenured professors at any rank from ….”</span></p>
<p style="text-decoration: none; font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-indent: -54pt; margin: 0px 0px 6pt 54pt; line-height: normal; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<span style="font-size:11pt;line-height:1.5">Sec. 3.5 – The second and third sentences seem to suggest that Section 4 Evaluation of Progress Toward Tenure of the annual performance evaluation form is only completed in years “one, two, three, and five”; isn’t
this section completed every year (i.e., even in year four)?<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></p>
<p style="text-decoration: none; font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-indent: -54pt; margin: 0px 0px 6pt 54pt; line-height: normal; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<span><span style="font-size:11pt;line-height:1.5">Sec. 6.1.3 – (a) What is meant by a “personal relationship”? I think this language is ambiguous and, thus, problematic. (b) It would be helpful if the role of the external reviewer was more explicit; that is,
will they be asked to make a tenure and/or promotion recommendation<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><i><span style="font-size:11pt;line-height:1.5">based upon the departmental guidelines</span></i><span style="font-size:11pt;line-height:1.5"><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>rather
than their own notions of satisfactory performance? (I have been an external reviewer and have been asked to make a decision based upon whether or not the candidate would be eligible for tenure and/or promotion at<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><u><span style="font-size:11pt;line-height:1.5">my</span></u><span style="font-size:11pt;line-height:1.5"><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>institution;
thus, an external reviewer may need explicit guidance regarding the basis for their recommendation.)</span></span></p>
<p style="text-decoration: none; font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-indent: -54pt; margin: 0px 0px 6pt 54pt; line-height: normal; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<span style="font-size:11pt;line-height:1.5">Secs. 6.1.6–6.1.9 – In order to ensure that the committee is making a clear recommendation (i.e., majority vote) for or against tenure or promotion, it may be helpful if the department tenure and promotion committee
consists of an odd number of voting (i.e., nonabsent, nonrecused) faculty. For example, if a department has an even number of voting faculty, the department head could designate one additional tenured faculty from a different department as per Sec. 6.1.7.</span></p>
<p style="text-decoration: none; font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-indent: -54pt; margin: 0px 0px 6pt 54pt; line-height: normal; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<span style="font-size:11pt;line-height:1.5">Sec. 6.3 – I think a similar criterion (i.e., odd number of voting faculty) be instituted as well in order to make a clear committee recommendation.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></p>
<p style="text-decoration: none; font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-indent: -54pt; margin: 0px 0px 6pt 54pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<span style="font-size:11pt;line-height:1.5">Sec. 6.3.6 – The section reads “committee members on both the department and college tenure and promotion committees should cast their vote at the college level, recuse at the department committee level but participate
at the Department T&P Committee.” I see no reason why the college committee member should participate in the department committee at all. By so doing, they have the opportunity to influence two voting groups that should be independent. In addition, the last
sentence should indicate that the faculty member should not participate in the college committee based upon this same reason.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></p>
<p style="text-decoration: none; font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-indent: -54pt; margin: 0px 0px 6pt 54pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri, sans-serif;line-height:1.5"><span style="font-family:Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif">General – I assume that the formatting and numbering (including the “XX” in Sec. 7.4.3) will be corrected. Also, why is “dossier”
sometimes used? It seems that the use of “portfolio” is more prevalent and, thus, preferred.</span></span></p>
<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ms-outlook-mobile-signature">
<div><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr" style="">
<div style="direction: ltr;">Leslie Ekpe, PhD</div>
<div style="direction: ltr;" dir="ltr">Assistant Professor of Higher Education </div>
<div style="direction: ltr;" dir="ltr">Department of Higher Education and Learning Technologies </div>
<div style="direction: ltr;" dir="ltr">Texas A&M University-Commerce</div>
<div style="direction: ltr;">Email: Leslie.Ekpe@tamuc.edu | Phone: 214-529-8276</div>
</div>
</div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> Julee Walker DMA <Julee.Walker@tamuc.edu><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, November 11, 2024 8:10:55 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Carlos Bertulani <Carlos.Bertulani@tamuc.edu>; Kelly Featherston <Kelly.Featherston@tamuc.edu><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Josephine Durkin <Josephine.Durkin@tamuc.edu>; Leslie Ekpe <Leslie.Ekpe@tamuc.edu>; Zachary Palmer <Zachary.Palmer@tamuc.edu>; Hunkar Gizem Yesilyurt <HunkarGizem.Yesilyurt@tamuc.edu>; Nikolay Sirakov <Nikolay.Sirakov@tamuc.edu>; Yasemin Atinc <Yasemin.Atinc@tamuc.edu>;
Stephen Starnes <Stephen.Starnes@tamuc.edu>; Stephen Furlich <Stephen.Furlich@tamuc.edu>; Brad Klypchak <Brad.Klypchak@tamuc.edu>; Brandon Randolph-Seng <Brandon.Randolph-Seng@tamuc.edu>; Carrie Klypchak <Carrie.Klypchak@tamuc.edu>; Dongmei Cheng <Dongmei.Cheng@tamuc.edu>;
Hongmei Jia <Hongmei.Jia@tamuc.edu>; Jason Davis <Jason.Davis@tamuc.edu>; Jeanette Vaughan <Jeanette.Vaughan@tamuc.edu>; Jimmy Womack <James.Womack@tamuc.edu>; Julia Ballenger <Julia.Ballenger@tamuc.edu>; Maggie Salem <Maggie.Salem@tamuc.edu>; MaryJo Dondlinger
<MaryJo.Dondlinger@tamuc.edu>; Mei Jiang <Mei.Jiang@tamuc.edu>; Omar Elariss <Omar.El.Ariss@tamuc.edu>; Ozum Yesiltas PhD <Ozum.Yesiltas@tamuc.edu>; Rusty Fox <Rusty.Fox@tamuc.edu>; Tami Morton <Tami.Morton@tamuc.edu>; William Kuracina <William.Kuracina@tamuc.edu>;
Adam Northam <Adam.Northam@tamuc.edu>; Avril Knox <Avril.Knox@tamuc.edu><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: Revised T&P Policy</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<style>.x_EmailQuote { margin-left: 1pt; padding-left: 4pt; border-left-width: 2px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(128, 0, 0); }</style>
<div>
<div>A few more comments from Music:<br>
<br>
Thank you for sending this out to us. I only ask that the process for converting non-tenure track positions to tenure-track be outlined in this document so that the process is crystal clear. As it stands, the manner in which the two processes intersect is open
to interpretation. <br>
<br>
Julee Kim Walker, D.M.A. | Professor of Flute<br>
Assistant Head, Music | Texas A&M University-Commerce<br>
Julee.Walker@tamuc.edu<br>
The Texas A&M University System<br>
<hr tabindex="-1" style="display:inline-block; width:98%">
<div id="x_x_divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000" style="font-size:11pt"><b>From:</b> Carlos Bertulani<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, November 8, 2024 11:09:07 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Kelly Featherston<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Josephine Durkin; Leslie Ekpe; Zachary Palmer; Hunkar Gizem Yesilyurt; Nikolay Sirakov; Yasemin Atinc; Stephen Starnes; Stephen Furlich; Brad Klypchak; Brandon Randolph-Seng; Carrie Klypchak; Dongmei Cheng; Hongmei Jia; Jason Davis; Jeanette Vaughan;
Jimmy Womack; Julee Walker DMA; Julia Ballenger; Maggie Salem; MaryJo Dondlinger; Mei Jiang; Omar Elariss; Ozum Yesiltas PhD; Rusty Fox; Tami Morton; William Kuracina; Adam Northam; Avril Knox<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: Revised T&P Policy</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
</div>
<font size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt">
<div class="x_PlainText">I agree with Kelly with regard to early tenure. One should be allowed to apply, be denied, without being provided a letter of non-reappointment. This reads like a punitive administrative act.<br>
Carlos<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Carlos Bertulani<br>
Professor of Physics<br>
Texas A&M University-Commerce<br>
<a href="http://faculty.tamuc.edu/cbertulani/">http://faculty.tamuc.edu/cbertulani/</a><br>
Phone: +1 (517) 214 3953<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
> On Nov 8, 2024, at 9:55 AM, Kelly Featherston <Kelly.Featherston@tamuc.edu> wrote:<br>
> <br>
> Feedback so far from HHP:<br>
> <br>
> I would like FS to comment on the statement in 2.4 which reads: “If a faculty member is denied early tenure, the faculty member will not be allowed another opportunity for application and must be provided a letter of non-reappointment that complies with
the criteria in University Procedure 12.01.99.R1.”. <br>
> To me this policy is a slap in the face to faculty members who are accelerated in their progress. I’m fine with denying the tenure/promotion, but to give the faculty member a letter of non-reappointment completely disincentives the prospect of going up
early. Additionally, within 2.4, the use of the word “significant” is both vague and left completely up to the T/P committees at ALL levels. To provide such a policy that would result in a faculty member being essentially fired by a subjective term seems
to be an unfair procedure. <br>
> <br>
> 6.1.13 & 6.2 – “if the promotion candidate is the Department head” and “if the faculty member … has a joint appointment …. “<br>
> – this conflicts with the earlier statement in 2.5 & 2.6 on not being considered for tenure.<br>
> This may cause some ambiguities on what is considered administrative positions that are not considered. But in section 6, the fact these are listed can read a bit confusing so maybe adding some objective grounds on why they would not be considered so it
is not left to interpretation that may cause issues for some.<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> Kelly Allums Featherston, PhD<br>
> Assistant Professor<br>
> Health & Human Performance, NHS 139<br>
> P: 903.886.5549<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> From: Josephine Durkin<br>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 6, 2024 2:22 PM<br>
> To: Leslie Ekpe; Zachary Palmer; Hunkar Gizem Yesilyurt<br>
> Cc: Nikolay Sirakov; Yasemin Atinc; Stephen Starnes; Stephen Furlich; Brad Klypchak; Brandon Randolph-Seng; Carlos Bertulani; Carrie Klypchak; Dongmei Cheng; Hongmei Jia; Jason Davis; Jeanette Vaughan; Jimmy Womack; Julee Walker DMA; Julia Ballenger; Kelly
Featherston; Maggie Salem; MaryJo Dondlinger; Mei Jiang; Omar Elariss; Ozum Yesiltas PhD; Rusty Fox; Tami Morton; William Kuracina; Adam Northam; Avril Knox<br>
> Subject: Re: Revised T&P Policy<br>
> Hello again,<br>
> <br>
> I sent the T&P draft to our faculty last Spring with little feedback, but will touch base, (re)collect and share more before the 17th.
<br>
> <br>
> As I voiced yesterday, I want to make sure that all candidates, including those with disabilities, have adequate time and support to access, navigate, organize, upload and troubleshoot documents into the D2L platform. A physical binder is very different than
a layered, digital labyrinth... and presents significant challenges for some. <br>
> <br>
> Thank you,<br>
> <br>
> Josephine<br>
> <br>
> Josephine Durkin<br>
> Associate Professor of ArtTexas A&M University - Commerce<br>
> <a href="http://www.josephinedurkin.com">www.josephinedurkin.com</a><br>
> <a href="http://www.tamuc.edu/art">www.tamuc.edu/art</a><br>
> <br>
> From: Leslie Ekpe<br>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2024 3:58:53 PM<br>
> To: Zachary Palmer; Hunkar Gizem Yesilyurt<br>
> Cc: Nikolay Sirakov; Yasemin Atinc; Stephen Starnes; Stephen Furlich; Brad Klypchak; Brandon Randolph-Seng; Carlos Bertulani; Carrie Klypchak; Dongmei Cheng; Hongmei Jia; Jason Davis; Jeanette Vaughan; Jimmy Womack; Josephine Durkin; Julee Walker DMA; Julia
Ballenger; Kelly Featherston; Maggie Salem; MaryJo Dondlinger; Mei Jiang; Omar Elariss; Ozum Yesiltas PhD; Rusty Fox; Tami Morton; William Kuracina; Adam Northam; Avril Knox<br>
> Subject: Re: Revised T&P Policy<br>
> Please see below:<br>
> <br>
> Regarding the below - is there a possibility that written clarification can be provided on the below. There are many variations regarding in the number of articles/publications across campus. Is it possible for there to be a baseline or some type of more
specific criteria that can be included in the policy? Second, what is the relationship between number of publications and financial research support. As it stands, it just says research, scholarship and creative activities are requirements. We do have departmental
requirements, but are they situated within university requirements?<br>
> <br>
> I hope my feedback is clear (-:<br>
> <br>
> 4.1.2 Research, Scholarship, and Creative Activities (RSCA): Creation and dissemination of new knowledge or other creative activities. For most disciplines, this category consists of research and publication, grants and contracts. Consistent with the mission
of the University, due consideration must be given to peer- reviewed publications or intellectual contributions in the realm of the Scholarship of Teaching and Student Learning and Success. For some disciplines, however, this category of professional performance
may include other forms of peer- reviewed creative activity. Technology, fiction, poetry, painting, music, and sculpture are examples.<br>
> <br>
> I am still collecting feedback but this is what I have so far. <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> Leslie Ekpe, Ph.D. (she/her/hers)<br>
> Assistant Professor<br>
> Department of Higher Education and Learning Technologies<br>
> Frank Young Education North, Room 104EP: 903.886.5518 <br>
> From: Zachary Palmer<br>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2024 2:17:29 PM<br>
> To: Hunkar Gizem Yesilyurt<br>
> Cc: Nikolay Sirakov; Yasemin Atinc; Stephen Starnes; Stephen Furlich; Brad Klypchak; Brandon Randolph-Seng; Carlos Bertulani; Carrie Klypchak; Dongmei Cheng; Hongmei Jia; Jason Davis; Jeanette Vaughan; Jimmy Womack; Josephine Durkin; Julee Walker DMA; Julia
Ballenger; Kelly Featherston; Leslie Ekpe; Maggie Salem; MaryJo Dondlinger; Mei Jiang; Omar Elariss; Ozum Yesiltas PhD; Rusty Fox; Tami Morton; William Kuracina; Adam Northam; Avril Knox<br>
> Subject: Re: Revised T&P Policy<br>
> Hi all,<br>
> <br>
> My department did not offer much feedback but essentially what people said were the following:<br>
> <br>
> -This seems overall very similar to how we already do T&P (CHSSA already does external letters, for instance). No problem with that
<br>
> <br>
> -This makes going up for early tenure more difficult- moving from 3rd year review to 4th year review. Also what does it mean to say there are higher expectations for early tenure? Isn’t it enough to meet the bar early?
<br>
> <br>
> -Why are only 3 faculty voting on full profs? Does dept not vote? This seems to take power AWAY from faculty since fewer faculty vote for this.
<br>
> <br>
> Zak <br>
> Sent from my iPhone<br>
> <br>
>> On Nov 5, 2024, at 12:23 PM, Hunkar Gizem Yesilyurt <HunkarGizem.Yesilyurt@tamuc.edu> wrote:<br>
>> <br>
>> Hi all,<br>
>> Here are comments from the Biological Sciences faculty (first 2 are more general and the rest are more specific to the clauses in the document):<br>
>> <br>
>> • While having the mid-term review in the 4th year can help tenure-track faculty to establish themselves and show progress, it could also pose challenges, as there might not be enough time after the 4th year to address the recommendations from the T&P
committee. Since this change is dictated by the system policy, we may not have much flexibility. Our recommendation would be to have T&P committee recommendations to be included in the annual APR in addition to DH comments. This means there will be a soft/quick
review by T&P committee every year and an elaborate review on the 4th year. <br>
>> • Generally, we need further clarification regarding the external reviewers, their roles, how they will be picked (I think this is in line with other departments’ feedback).<br>
>> • Contrary to the statement in 2.5, as per 12.99.99.R0.08, DH may not be at will appointment. That should be changed to “and are at will or shared governance appointment”. While the appointment and retention decisions for Department Head is vested in
the Academic Dean with approval from the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, and should consider the view of other stakeholders, the principle of shared governance in the academy requires that the faculty of the departments in their college play
an essential role in the selection of its college department heads<br>
>> • Under 3.5, it is stated the review will be performed by DH in years one, two, three and five. We think that Dept head alone doing this will be problematic, especially when there is DH change or disagreement among stake holders (DH, T&P committee, and
the candidate). <br>
>> • Regarding 3.6, there might be technical issues regarding privacy and user errors. The measures to control these issues need to be stated more clearly.<br>
>> • Regarding 6.1.3, “in the rarest circumstances” clause creates ambiguity and unclarity.<br>
>> • Regarding 6.1.8, Committee members on both the department and college tenure and promotion committees should cast their vote at the college level, recuse at the department committee level but participate at the Department T&P Committee to avoid giving
double power to one person.<br>
>> Looking forward to seeing you all in the meeting today,<br>
>> -- <br>
>> Hunkar Gizem Yesilyurt, PhD<br>
>> Assistant Professor and Faculty Senator<br>
>> Biological & Environmental Sciences | Science Building (STC), 255<br>
>> P: 903.886.5602Texas A&M University-Commerce<br>
>> From: Nikolay Sirakov <Nikolay.Sirakov@tamuc.edu><br>
>> Date: Tuesday, November 5, 2024 at 10:46 AM<br>
>> To: Yasemin Atinc <Yasemin.Atinc@tamuc.edu>, Stephen Starnes <Stephen.Starnes@tamuc.edu>, Stephen Furlich <Stephen.Furlich@tamuc.edu>, Brad Klypchak <Brad.Klypchak@tamuc.edu>, Brandon Randolph-Seng <Brandon.Randolph-Seng@tamuc.edu>, Carlos Bertulani <Carlos.Bertulani@tamuc.edu>,
Carrie Klypchak <Carrie.Klypchak@tamuc.edu>, Dongmei Cheng <Dongmei.Cheng@tamuc.edu>, Hongmei Jia <Hongmei.Jia@tamuc.edu>, Hunkar Gizem Yesilyurt <HunkarGizem.Yesilyurt@tamuc.edu>, Jason Davis <Jason.Davis@tamuc.edu>, Jeanette Vaughan <Jeanette.Vaughan@tamuc.edu>,
Jimmy Womack <James.Womack@tamuc.edu>, Josephine Durkin <Josephine.Durkin@tamuc.edu>, Julee Walker DMA <Julee.Walker@tamuc.edu>, Julia Ballenger <Julia.Ballenger@tamuc.edu>, Kelly Featherston <Kelly.Featherston@tamuc.edu>, Leslie Ekpe <Leslie.Ekpe@tamuc.edu>,
Maggie Salem <Maggie.Salem@tamuc.edu>, MaryJo Dondlinger <MaryJo.Dondlinger@tamuc.edu>, Mei Jiang <Mei.Jiang@tamuc.edu>, Omar Elariss <Omar.El.Ariss@tamuc.edu>, Ozum Yesiltas PhD <Ozum.Yesiltas@tamuc.edu>, Rusty Fox <Rusty.Fox@tamuc.edu>, Tami Morton <Tami.Morton@tamuc.edu>,
William Kuracina <William.Kuracina@tamuc.edu>, Adam Northam <Adam.Northam@tamuc.edu>, Zachary Palmer <Zachary.Palmer@tamuc.edu>, Avril Knox <Avril.Knox@tamuc.edu><br>
>> Subject: RE: Revised T&P Policy<br>
>> Good morning to everyone, thank you President Yasemin for shearing the revised T&P policies. Thanks to Dr. Maggie and Dr. Carlos for sharing opinions.<br>
>> I am still waiting Math Department faculty for their notes but there is the policy 6.1.3 we have discusses sometimes ago. Apropos we discussed this policy in the Faculty Senate as well.<image001.png> If I remember well, the Faculty
Senate reached a decision that the above is unrealistic and puts huge burden on the Dept. Heads and may create problems to the whole process. It holds because there is no outcome if the outer reviewer does not submit the review on time?<br>
>> Hence more appropriate is if the candidate chose her/his outer reviewer OR we scrap this outer reviewer requirement. I think this is what we decided, and if I am wrong, please someone corrects me.<br>
>> Best regards and wishes,<br>
>> Nikolay<br>
>> From: Yasemin Atinc <Yasemin.Atinc@tamuc.edu><br>
>> Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2024 12:41 PM<br>
>> To: Stephen Starnes <Stephen.Starnes@tamuc.edu>; Stephen Furlich <Stephen.Furlich@tamuc.edu>; Brad Klypchak <Brad.Klypchak@tamuc.edu>; Brandon Randolph-Seng <Brandon.Randolph-Seng@tamuc.edu>; Carlos Bertulani <Carlos.Bertulani@tamuc.edu>; Carrie Klypchak
<Carrie.Klypchak@tamuc.edu>; Dongmei Cheng <Dongmei.Cheng@tamuc.edu>; Hongmei Jia <Hongmei.Jia@tamuc.edu>; Hunkar Gizem Yesilyurt <HunkarGizem.Yesilyurt@tamuc.edu>; Jason Davis <Jason.Davis@tamuc.edu>; Jeanette Vaughan <Jeanette.Vaughan@tamuc.edu>; Jimmy Womack
<James.Womack@tamuc.edu>; Josephine Durkin <Josephine.Durkin@tamuc.edu>; Julee Walker DMA <Julee.Walker@tamuc.edu>; Julia Ballenger <Julia.Ballenger@tamuc.edu>; Kelly Featherston <Kelly.Featherston@tamuc.edu>; Leslie Ekpe <Leslie.Ekpe@tamuc.edu>; Maggie Salem
<Maggie.Salem@tamuc.edu>; MaryJo Dondlinger <MaryJo.Dondlinger@tamuc.edu>; Mei Jiang <Mei.Jiang@tamuc.edu>; Nikolay Sirakov <Nikolay.Sirakov@tamuc.edu>; Omar Elariss <Omar.El.Ariss@tamuc.edu>; Ozum Yesiltas PhD <Ozum.Yesiltas@tamuc.edu>; Rusty Fox <Rusty.Fox@tamuc.edu>;
Tami Morton <Tami.Morton@tamuc.edu>; William Kuracina <William.Kuracina@tamuc.edu>; Adam Northam <Adam.Northam@tamuc.edu>; Zachary Palmer <Zachary.Palmer@tamuc.edu>; Avril Knox <Avril.Knox@tamuc.edu><br>
>> Subject: Revised T&P Policy<br>
>> Hello Senators,<br>
>> Please share the attached T&P policy with your respective departments and ask faculty to provide feedback by Nov 17, 2024.
<br>
>> <br>
>> Regards,<br>
>> Yasemin <br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>